Monkeyboi Posted March 19, 2022 Posted March 19, 2022 11 minutes ago, Niktech said: If an allegation is made one would need to prove the nature and extent of the misrepresentation. if the cable does in fact meet spec and no misrepresentation is proved, a claim for defamation can be made against the person making the allegation because the maker/manufacturers reputation has been harmed, including damages for the loss of sales IMHO it would be somewhat foolish of a person or organisation to make an allegation of non-compliance or misrepresentation if they hadn't done the tests themselves and had the results peer reviewed or better still verified by a third party qualified and equipped to conduct the testing to the required standard. I was brought in to compliance audit a structured cabling installation where the LAN manager had complained about poor network speed performance. The contractor who had done the installation had submitted his TCA1 form and attached his certification testing results for the Cat6 installation. All looked good initially on paper but the subsequent compliance testing and inspection proved otherwise. Only a few of the runs tested to Cat6 standards. Most were below par. On further investigation some TOs were fitted off with Cat5e sockets and two of the patch panels were Cat5 not Cat6. So even though the contractor had used Cat6 cable he fitted off some of the links with the lower standard sockets. So howcome printouts of his own tests showed his installation was compliant to Cat6 standard when it didn't meet subsequent testing by a third party? Simple, on closer examination of his test results he had his tester set to Cat5 measuring standard and not Cat6. Easy mistake but it doesn't forgive the use of the Cat5 sockets and Cat5 patch panels in a so called Cat6 installation.
Assisi Posted March 19, 2022 Posted March 19, 2022 How important is the matter of compliance in the context of the home network as the digital front end. I have cables, cables and then more cables. I have had and still have numerous switches. Every single cable and all the switches I use and have used all worked. No problems at all ever. It seems to me that some of the recent discussion may be of technical interest to some posters but it does not seem to me to be overly relevant or useful in this thread. John
Niktech Posted March 19, 2022 Posted March 19, 2022 33 minutes ago, davewantsmoore said: Some years ago there were a few sellers claim to have Cat8 cables... when such a category didn't even exist. Now apparently the same is happening with 9. Yes, I do recall that regarding Cat 8. I’ve not as yet heard of any cases in relation to Cat 9. If it’s occurring in Australia , and a complaint has been made, it may well be that both ACMA and the ACCC are preparing to commence proceedings.
bob_m_54 Posted March 19, 2022 Posted March 19, 2022 (edited) 5 hours ago, davewantsmoore said: I said it was more difficult than people might assume to make a cable which passes higher cat tests. ... yes. "it just has to comply with the requirements". What's your point? What did I say that was wrong? I appears I have misconstrued your meaning/intent, in your quoting of my statement, in context the of your reply.. I apologise.. Also, I agree that it isn't as simple or straight forward as people might think, to make higher compliant cables. But please don't use a quote, unless it is actually a quote.. 6 hours ago, bob_m_54 said: Actually no, it just has to meet and be certified to comply with the requirements.. Edited March 19, 2022 by bob_m_54
bob_m_54 Posted March 19, 2022 Posted March 19, 2022 5 hours ago, Assisi said: How important is the matter of compliance in the context of the home network as the digital front end. I have cables, cables and then more cables. I have had and still have numerous switches. Every single cable and all the switches I use and have used all worked. No problems at all ever. It seems to me that some of the recent discussion may be of technical interest to some posters but it does not seem to me to be overly relevant or useful in this thread. John Probably not very important at all, given the relatively low criticality of the task. But if a cable is marketed as CatX, then manufacturer is warranting that the is cable certified, and can be used in any situation where that CatX is appropriate, not just you home stereo system. It's about honesty in advertising claims. Something that seems to be a very loose concept in the audiophile cable world. 1
davewantsmoore Posted March 19, 2022 Posted March 19, 2022 5 hours ago, Assisi said: How important is the matter of compliance in the context of the home network as the digital front end. If you were to think that any of the improvements to higher cat cables would make any difference to the equipment (eg. through better sheilding, less crosstalk, lower inducatance, etc.) ... then you would want to know that the cable actually tested correctly to that spec. But for a typical home network ... almost zero. A cat 5 cable (100mhz) will work for gigabit ethernet... and typical music streaming uses around 0.1% of this bandwidth. Cat 5 cables were depreciated 20 years ago. 5 hours ago, Assisi said: It seems to me that some of the recent discussion may be of technical interest to some posters but it does not seem to me to be overly relevant or useful in this thread. As I said, it depends if you would think / expect that any of the higher cat specs would / could make a difference in the operation of your ethernet connected audio equipment. Most audiophile forums seem to be full of people who think they do, or would, have some benefit.
dbastin Posted March 19, 2022 Posted March 19, 2022 Home audio ethernet cable lengths (eg. 1m, 2m) and data rates are so small the Cat is pretty much irrelevant I pay no attention to what Cat and audio ethernet cable it, quoting the Cat is probably motivated my marketing rather than its contribution to the cable performance. I am far more interested in it transmitting the data and shaking off hitch hiking noise before arrival at the endpoint. This does interest me though ... 12 hours ago, Monkeyboi said: insufficient spacing between the cable and other services (mains wiring, switch-mode PSUs in ceilings, transformers etc) What spacing is recommended? How is performance affected if there is insufficient spacing? In a typical hifi the ethernet could pass close to a myriad of high power devices and cables including digital/computer things. Furthermore, the nbn box, router etc may be in a poor locations ... eg. my nbn is near a Iridge, and may share the same power circuit as the fridge. Well, at least its not the microwave. 1
davewantsmoore Posted March 19, 2022 Posted March 19, 2022 5 hours ago, dbastin said: Home audio ethernet cable lengths (eg. 1m, 2m) and data rates are so small the Cat is pretty much irrelevant There are threads on this site all about network equipment with upgraded power supplies and clocks, and about 'fancy' ethernet cables. If any of this sort of stuff is going to make a difference in your system, then I think the actual performance specs of the cable (pair shielding, crosstalk, loss, inductance, etc.) would be unlikely to be irrelevant. 5 hours ago, dbastin said: I pay no attention to what Cat and audio ethernet cable it, quoting the Cat is probably motivated my marketing rather than its contribution to the cable performance. What do you mean by "cable performance"..... all of the relevant things about a cables properties are part of the category specs. 5 hours ago, dbastin said: what spacing is recommended? How is performance affected if there is insufficient spacing? Signals or noise could get from one cable to another... either in a low level "background" kind of way.... or via "large loud spikes" kinda of way.
aussievintage Posted March 19, 2022 Posted March 19, 2022 2 hours ago, davewantsmoore said: There are threads on this site all about network equipment with upgraded power supplies and clocks, and about 'fancy' ethernet cables. If any of this sort of stuff is going to make a difference in your system, then I think the actual performance specs of the cable (pair shielding, crosstalk, loss, inductance, etc.) would be unlikely to be irrelevant. It is quite befuddling that they can come up with all sorts of home brew theory tweaks and improvements, but mention actual parameters used by the industry, admittedly some of them things they don't understand, and they dismiss those things out of hand as irrelevant. Basic logic should to start with the known and if that proves insufficient for explanation, then move onto the more esoteric guessing. 2 1
davewantsmoore Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 44 minutes ago, aussievintage said: It is quite befuddling that they can come up with all sorts of home brew theory tweaks and improvements, but mention actual parameters used by the industry, admittedly some of them things they don't understand, and they dismiss those things out of hand as irrelevant. Basic logic should to start with the known and if that proves insufficient for explanation, then move onto the more esoteric guessing. I personally think this is an extremely important line of thinking for audiophiles. These are not in general "stupid" people (Im speaking super generally here, lest anybody might take offence) ... so why do they do that? At some level, they have realised that such "specs" don't explain either their own experience, or the reported expereince of others. .... so a leap of logic is made, which says that there is "something else".... perhaps something not typically quantified, or something "un-quantifiable" that is important to the audio performance. So now all manner of theories and tweaks, etc. etc. are on the table. But, it isn't the "solutions" which are poorly quantified..... it's the problem. This is why sometimes it makes no difference ... and why different people report different results, etc. etc..... because not everybody is having the same specific issues, and often they're not having any specific issue at all. It's the same for "do all amplifiers sounds the same" .... or "do cables matter". People saying "they always do" ... or "they always don't" .... are missing the actual issue as much as the other side. .... the reality is at that almost all of these things are more likely to NOT make any difference (within some important caveats). Yes, amplifiers are likely to sound the same, unless they're shite and/or being misused.... Yes, cables should perform the same, etc. etc. etc. Sometimes they don't, but that's because of a specific problem....not because of a sliding scale of audio equipment performance that goes up forever (except for perhaps speakers). Manufacturers and audio publications will almost never tell you this, for obvious reasons. That isn't to try and throw shade on what anybody is doing either..... people have fun doing all sorts of things, and that's great..... it's just that this stuff is fun to think about, and if people are super serious about building a high performance playback system, it's reallyt worth thinking about (IMVHO). Just now, davewantsmoore said: IMVHO Off topic?! Nah... what better thread for it?! LOL 1
dbastin Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 22 hours ago, davewantsmoore said: I've put a lot more thought into others, that didn't get such a nice reaction, so cheers. Mr wantsmoore, I enjoy all your posts on this subject thoroughly. When I have time I try to remember to give you likes, etc. I particularly enjoy your objective approach to analysing this stuff. As I don't have endless time, energy and patience, I give up on careful analysis, take some risks, short cuts and assumptions are applied to cut to the chase, and no doubt mistakes are made. In some ways this gives some thrills, and spills ... it's all part if the fun.
dbastin Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 (edited) 6 hours ago, davewantsmoore said: What do you mean by "cable performance"..... all of the relevant things about a cables properties are part of the category specs Hmm, this is true, let me unpack that. Ultimately the goal is achieving best audio sound quality. So that is what I mean by performance ... how well something achieves the goal. After all we are in a hifi hubby discussing this in a hifi forum. If a given spec (Cat X) will do a job of transmitting data without any impact on audio sound quality, then we'd all just use that. No doubt many network experts would agree ... I hear you all nodding already. Let's use Cat 6 UTP for example, as it is commonly recommended. If I were in the cable making business, my first question would be, can I improve the achievement of the goal using Cat 6 UTP? Then comes a myriad of experiments ... conductors, dielectrics, layers, sheaths and so on. I have seen Cat 6 UTP wrapped many times around a doughnut magnet ... argh, what about the radius?! And of course I'd try techniques proven to be effective with my other cables. Eventually, this approach leads to doing likewise with STP, S/FTP and Cat 6a and 7. And the process starts to narrow down on what works best in what combinations. And other cable makers may do similar experiments, so eventually a variety of cables across the industry are invented. And then consumers go through a similar process of experimenting to choose what works best for them in their situation. 3 hours ago, aussievintage said: they dismiss those things out of hand as irrelevant. Some people may, others will be drawing on their experience that is not consistent with the standards/parameters 2 hours ago, davewantsmoore said: the problem So, we return to this subject. What really is the problem? (I don't expect an answer) Well, first issue is, are we achieving the goal? If yes, no problem. In my experience, the answer is not yes. Its seems to me the problem presently is we dont understand enough about the unquantifiable impacts networks have on audio sound quality. In other words, we dont know for sure what the problem is. In the meantime, we experiment, discover almost accidentally solutions which suggest what the problem is ... and it appears to me to be mostly noise, from various sources with various impacts depending on the situation. 6 hours ago, davewantsmoore said: Signals or noise could get from one cable to another. So my questions to those who know ... How far apart should Cat 6 UTP be? And STP? And Cat 6a and 7? What things interfere with how these cables function/perform? Do they matter in a home network (short cables, low data throughput, etc)? In audio terms, what are the consequences? How far should the cables be from those things? Edited March 20, 2022 by dbastin
Monkeyboi Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 (edited) 12 hours ago, dbastin said: This does interest me though ... What spacing is recommended? If you are referring to non-concealed cabling (e.g. patch cables) there is no minimum standard as such, however just as you would physically space your low level audio cables from your mains cables the same principle applies. That is, try to avoid parallel runs and close proximity to mains cables. Unfortunately there can be a lot of electrical noise outside the 50Hz mains frequency in a modern home from things like the switch-mode power supplies commonly used in LED lighting, small and large appliances etc. So keeping your patch leads well away from these is desirable if it is practical to do so. If your cabling is concealed (that is running inside a wall cavity, inside the ceiling / roof space, underfloor space or in a duct) you should already know the answer to that question as only a licensed cabler with the S endorsement can legally run and fit-off these cables or at minimum fully supervise and check the work if it's performed by an unlicensed person or licensed cabler that doesn't yet have their S endorsement. 12 hours ago, dbastin said: This does interest me though ... How is performance affected if there is insufficient spacing? In a typical hifi the ethernet could pass close to a myriad of high power devices and cables including digital/computer things. Mutual induction of interfering signals from running cables in close proximity or in parallel with other cables or devices. As explained above. If the interfering signal is within the same frequency spectrum and of sufficient level it's possible that the data packets might become corrupted. The relevant AS/NZ standards apply to mitigate these issues. Things a licensed cabler with a S endorsement would know. 12 hours ago, dbastin said: Furthermore, the nbn box, router etc may be in a poor locations ... eg. my nbn is near a Iridge, and may share the same power circuit as the fridge. Well, at least its not the microwave. Whilst most NBN NTDs are built to a price and not a particularly high "audiophile" standard the power supplies have adequate filtering to reject most mains borne interference. Putting a ferrite slug over the d.c. cable powering the NTD will further reduce noise in the RF region of frequencies. I assume from your post that your NBN NTD is located in the kitchen??? Were you the requestor of your NBN service or was it in-situ when you occupied the premises? What type of NBN do you have? FTTP, FTTN, FTTC, FW? The question is relevant as it determines where the NTD can be reasonably located. Whilst modern microwave ovens using switch-mode power supplies have the potential to create a lot of interference into the mains, it's not the main concern with ethernet cabling provided the cabling separations are observed. Most mains borne interference by microwave ovens extends from a fault in the power filtering on the mains side of the power supply. Some faults aren't apparent to the user of the applicance as it doesn't often affect the normal operation of the appliance per se. A leaky microwave oven often causes interference to the 2.4GHz wi-fi when it's in operation. Edited March 20, 2022 by Monkeyboi
Monkeyboi Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 3 hours ago, aussievintage said: It is quite befuddling that they can come up with all sorts of home brew theory tweaks and improvements, but mention actual parameters used by the industry, admittedly some of them things they don't understand, and they dismiss those things out of hand as irrelevant. Basic logic should to start with the known and if that proves insufficient for explanation, then move onto the more esoteric guessing. Glad you mentioned it @aussievintage. Something worthy of further comment. Whilst I'm not adverse to experimenting myself I try to explain the findings in a way that is objective and is at least supported by some scientific merit or basis. The "audiophile" industry and some "audiophile" enthusiasts embark on "quests" to find audio nirvana but in doing so IMHO engage in audio alchemy. Not referring to the brand name here, but more on the lines of ancient alchemists seeking to turn lead into gold or finding the elixir to eternal life. IMHO for a tweak to be valid to needs to be repeatable and applicable to a range of similar situations. If it's not repeatable it's not IMO valid. That's possibly why we read a lot of suggestions and comments in these here 4rums (and others) that praise the merits of certain products that simply don't work as advertised in other people's systems. The typical retort to this is often things like "your system just isn't good enough to realise the improvements"; "your system doesn't have the resolution"; "you haven't burnt in the XXXXX long enough"; "you've got cloth ears" and a myriad of other personally attacking comments like "are you deaf?" not worth repeating here. There's a small and very vocal faction on SNA that expect others to just blindly believe in what they say. (I don't have any problem with anyone expressing an opinion as I'm doing just that right now), but presenting stuff as fact without bothering to explain or qualify their assertions when questioned is IMO just plain bad form. I have discovered in the past that some of these individuals will be butt hurt on reading some of my comments and I half expect them to go running off to a moderator in an attempt to get me put in the sin bin or even banned. Well that's their choice. But doesn't the general membership think that that approach is somewhat childish and petty? I for the most part enjoy reading the posts here. Some are very informative and actually prompt me to do further research and experimenting. In audio as with other hobby pursuits everyone is going to have an opinion or three..... BTW, just to make it crystal clear this reply isn't aimed at anyone in particular. 5
Stereophilus Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 8 hours ago, davewantsmoore said: Signals or noise could get from one cable to another... either in a low level "background" kind of way.... or via "large loud spikes" kinda of way. 2 hours ago, Monkeyboi said: If you are referring to non-concealed cabling (e.g. patch cables) there is no minimum standard as such, however just as you would physically space your low level audio cables from your mains cables the same principle applies. That is, try to avoid parallel runs and close proximity to mains cables. Unfortunately there can be a lot of electrical noise outside the 50Hz mains frequency in a modern home from things like the switch-mode power supplies commonly used in LED lighting, small and large appliances etc. So keeping your patch leads well away from these is desirable if it is practical to do so. Mutual induction of interfering signals from running cables in close proximity or in parallel with other cables or devices. As explained above. If the interfering signal is within the same frequency spectrum and of sufficient level it's possible that the data packets might become corrupted. The relevant AS/NZ standards apply to mitigate these issues. Things a licensed cabler with a S endorsement would know. I would like to seek clarification regarding the above quotes from @davewantsmoore and @Monkeyboi. My understanding from earlier in this thread, courtesy of @El Tel, was that issues of noise and signal interference in Ethernet transmission are actually a non-issue in situations where the transmitter and receiver are not connected by a (ground) shielded cable. The only practical effect of noise or signal interference in unshielded Ethernet transmission is packet loss, which (when it happens) results in resending of the data. So if the issue is significant enough to result in large scale packet loss, the data stream may be interrupted or slowed enough to notice the issue with real-time operations such as music streaming. On this extreme end of the scale, the issue would be noticeable, but not as a change in sound quality.
Niktech Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 21 minutes ago, Stereophilus said: I would like to seek clarification regarding the above quotes from @davewantsmoore and @Monkeyboi. My understanding from earlier in this thread, courtesy of @El Tel, was that issues of noise and signal interference in Ethernet transmission are actually a non-issue in situations where the transmitter and receiver are not connected by a (ground) shielded cable. The only practical effect of noise or signal interference in unshielded Ethernet transmission is packet loss, which (when it happens) results in resending of the data. So if the issue is significant enough to result in large scale packet loss, the data stream may be interrupted or slowed enough to notice the issue with real-time operations such as music streaming. On this extreme end of the scale, the issue would be noticeable, but not as a change in sound quality. You might find this an interesting read: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7270768
Stereophilus Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 45 minutes ago, Niktech said: You might find this an interesting read: https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/7270768 I might, but it does sit behind a paywall… Also, it seems to be discussing (judging by the abstract) packet loss as the issue. As far as I can tell, packet loss (at worst) only has the potential to interrupt the data stream once the receiving buffer is empty. Now, if this is the extent of the issue in the home HiFi application, it should be a relatively simple task to track down the culprit cable and run, for instance, something more robust (such as optical) for that length. What I am asking is whether the quoted “noise” and “signals” are affecting anything more than the integrity of the packets?
Niktech Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 (edited) 47 minutes ago, Stereophilus said: I might, but it does sit behind a paywall… Also, it seems to be discussing (judging by the abstract) packet loss as the issue. As far as I can tell, packet loss (at worst) only has the potential to interrupt the data stream once the receiving buffer is empty. Now, if this is the extent of the issue in the home HiFi application, it should be a relatively simple task to track down the culprit cable and run, for instance, something more robust (such as optical) for that length. What I am asking is whether the quoted “noise” and “signals” are affecting anything more than the integrity of the packets? Ok, I didn’t get that from what you wrote. UDP packets are lost, they are not resent. And, it’s not necessarily the cable that is the problem. Edited March 20, 2022 by Niktech 1
aussievintage Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 14 minutes ago, Niktech said: Ok, I didn’t get that from what you wrote. UDP packets are lost, they are not resent. From the abstract Quote In many non-realtime applications, transport protocols such as transmission control protocol (TCP) or reliable user datagram protocol (UDP) can be used to retransmit lost packets. Often protocols are layered with UDP ( e.g. RTP/RTSP) to give it features it does not natively have. I was under the impression most non-time-critical streaming uses TCP anyway.
Niktech Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 3 minutes ago, aussievintage said: From the abstract Often protocols are layered with UDP ( e.g. RTP/RTSP) to give it features it does not natively have. I was under the impression most non-time-critical streaming uses TCP anyway. As for as I’m aware most music streaming services are using UDP in real time, with the exception of Spotify IIRC that is using TCP
aussievintage Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 6 minutes ago, Niktech said: As for as I’m aware most music streaming services are using UDP in real time, with the exception of Spotify IIRC that is using TCP Do you know what other protocols are layered with it? For example RTCP (real time control protocol) https://networkencyclopedia.com/real-time-transport-protocol-rtp/#rtp-control-protocol Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) Written by Editorin Letter R,Network Protocols The Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) is a network protocol that provides end-to-end network transport functions suitable for applications transmitting real-time data, such as audio, video, or simulation data, over multicast or unicast network services.
Niktech Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 1 minute ago, aussievintage said: Do you know what other protocols are layered with it? For example RTCP (real time control protocol) https://networkencyclopedia.com/real-time-transport-protocol-rtp/#rtp-control-protocol Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) Written by Editorin Letter R,Network Protocols The Real-time Transport Protocol (RTP) is a network protocol that provides end-to-end network transport functions suitable for applications transmitting real-time data, such as audio, video, or simulation data, over multicast or unicast network services. No and I doubt they would divulge that information.
aussievintage Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 Just now, Niktech said: No and I doubt they would divulge that information. I only ask because people will see UDP and assume no control/reporting of lost packets etc, but I don't think it's quite that simple 1
BugPowderDust Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 20 minutes ago, Niktech said: As for as I’m aware most music streaming services are using UDP in real time, with the exception of Spotify IIRC that is using TCP That’s total bullshit. Most are tcp. Fire up wire shark and you can see it for yourself. 1
aussievintage Posted March 20, 2022 Posted March 20, 2022 4 minutes ago, BugPowderDust said: That’s total bullshit. Most are tcp. Fire up wire shark and you can see it for yourself. I am not really surprised, as playing a music track is hardly a real time application. Small delay after you press play isn't a problem, and buffering means it's only the average data speed over the time of the stream that matters.
Recommended Posts