https://www.asa.org.uk/rulings/the-chord-company-ltd-a14-274211.html#.VLaZ1UyCOrU
Strangely, here’s one I found for none other than an Ethernet cable. Someone complained that The Chord Company’s advertising claims in relation to its “Sarum Tuned ARAY streaming cable” were misleading. The Chord Company could not substantiate its claims and the ASA upheld the complaint.
Despite the ASA’s ruling, it seems The Chord Company is still walking a very fine line:
£500 for a patch lead? 
I took the same approach to the subject of being run over by a car.
All the technical facts and proofs seemed to support my belief that it would hurt and damage my body. However, having a curious mind, I thought I’d engage in exploration and research. I decided to go to the road that my hi-fi dealer was on and step in front of a car. F**k me it hurt - the technical facts and proofs were right.
To add insult to injury, they wouldn’t lend me one of their expensive cables. Bad day all round.
The DSD512 fans will be up in arms!
I suppose in your world everything beyond 16/44.1 is a waste…
Here’s one I made earlier, and what’s more it’s TIA 568 compliant. Bit-perfect transmission guaranteed. Who’ll start the bidding at £250 for a 2 metre length? 
How much earlier? In other words, is it tuned for 1.8 or is it an old 1.7 tuning?
Definitely tuned and tested under Roon 1.8!
I never part with more money until I see a Hi-Fi dealer tapping his foot more enthusiastically as the prices go up. When he starts nodding his head to the beat is when I know it’s coming home with me! Sorry…only joking.
Interesting if not somewhat philosphical discussion folks. In that spirit… I question how relevant scientific proof really is. Our theory “that ethernet noise makes/doesn’t make difference to the sound” is only scientific if it can be falsified (karl poppers philosophy of science) and even if it can’t (the subjectivists) its still potentially an important contribution to the ‘audiophile’ body of knowledge. Plenty of scientific theories start out as ‘unscientific’ theories. Copernicus’ sun centred universe couldn’t initially be proven ‘scientifically’ and look how that turned out. On the other hand freuds id, ego and superego cant be proven scientifically and dont predict behaviour but youd be hard pressed to dismiss his theory’s relevance/impact.
Copernicus’ sun centred universe theory couldn’t be proven at the time as the technology and mathematics weren’t sufficiently developed. The invention of the telescope and Galileo’s observation of the 4 largest moons orbiting Jupiter gave further credence to his theory.
We have all of the instrumentational technology available to prove that “noise” on ethernet doesn’t manifest as audible changes in the analogue output of a DAC. The noise can be measured where it exists, however it is so far below the threshold of human hearing as to be completely inaudible.
I don’t believe this is a philosophical discussion at all. It’s one of science and commerce. Science says there is no need for audiophile ethernet cables. Provided a cable meets the long established and recognised TIA/EIA/ANSI-568 standards, it’s more than sufficient.
Audiophile ethernet cables didn’t exist until commerce driven companies simultaneously invented the problem and the expensive solution.
They don’t have to prove these cables work (as long as they choose their advertising words carefully, see above), they merely have a to cast sufficient seeds of doubt for susceptible individuals to be convinced enough to buy their products. And of course, continued support from the audiophile press just perpetuates the myth.
It always amazes me how manufacturers use adjectives like “dramatically” when any difference is barely there. If you challenge that, your system is not “resolute” enough.
Any engineer can prove that ethernet cables don’t make a difference if he/she/it knows how buffering works. You can try to go around that through noise induced in the ground plane… but guess what? Ethernet is differential and doesn’t have a ground per se. It is galvanically isolated (learned that the hard way when I tested a connector for continuity in my younger days :)))
Apologies for the lengthy reply all - exec sum - don’t let science shut down the conversation.
If you are still reading:
According to OP we have arrived at the ‘absolute truth’ about audibility of ‘ethernet’ noise thanks to science (or at least the science cited in this thread - grin)
Let us be thankful old Copernicus wasn’t constrained by any such ‘black and white’ thinking in the face of the ‘instrumental technology’ available in the renaissance.
Innovation - our scientist friend/OP (and I) both understand the importance of commercial/scientific collaboration. Universities (& science) exist symbiotically - practicing scientists right now know this better than most post COVID - they get the impact of the loss of OS student fees (mostly chinese nationals which have funded research for a long time lets be honest) will impact research and innovation in Aus NEXT year; come 2022 research output will be impacted and so the advancement of knowledge - think beyond the studies quoted in this thread re audible differences in network transport media and topologies - what about viral research ?! you reckon we’d have a vaccine collaborations like Oxford/AstraZeneca and their marketing engine?
Pivot - and my point: Let’s continue this thread in the spirit of Copernicus’ ‘curious mind’ (OP’s words) ; embracing commercial innovation and unthrottled by the science and convention of our times (thank god for those new telescopes in the 1400s - probably developed and sold by an emerging commercial entity lead by some smart scientist ??? just saying)
Meantime - lie the vaccines - buyer beware - just as it was for those poor folks that bought the first telescopes which revealed a new solar system - just because you can’t hear it doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. Just because you can’t measure it - sorry science - same same - it may still exist. As OP points out history teaches us to be careful of absolutes defined by our common and/or ‘scientific’ understanding in the here and now.
Make your own judgement about what you hear and long live the conversation, the debate - I’m an old man with a finite self defined budget - my reality is that I can’t hear the difference between my RPI 4 (seperate eth/usb bus) plus hugo2 and an ultra rendu with DAC. No way i’ll go down the fibre rabbit hole. Probably cant even hear the diff if I swap in an RPI 3 (eth/usb same bus) - but who cares.
and anyway as an ex computer scientist from many years ago and I’m also inherently biased against any arguments re audibility of differences in networking media and topology (token ring ? vv funny).
Nevertheless we should encourage the debate no matter how ‘unscientific’ (whatever that actually means in the context of a roon thread) & refrain from dismissing out of court opinions based on subjective experience (yes, yes, yes… even if its influenced potentially by evil marketing engines)
good bye soap box - sorry folks (if you are still reading) - I hope its with a glass of vino or similar and a healthy dash of good humour
go well
Tim
Tim
And repeated and amplified on many online forums.
The invention of the telescope did not suddenly make Saturn’s moons visible to the naked human eye just as “hearing” noise on measuring equipment does not make it audible to the human ear.
By the way I believe that it has been acknowledged that noise does exist:
And finally quantum mechanics! - the last refuse of the subjectivists. It took 33 posts but it has finally been mentioned.
Hi Tim, I read your reply with interest. I fear there are many longer term effects from the current pandemic that have yet to be felt and those effects will no doubt continue long after COVID-19 is under control.
As you say (thank you), I do very much appreciate the need for collaboration between commerce and science. A problem presents and a collaborative approach is needed to invent a solution.
The issue I have with the topic of my post is that on the face of it, the “problem” has been invented by those seeking to profit from its solution. The problem didn’t exist until someone wanted to sell an overpriced cable to solve it.
If a cable manufacturer claims a cable makes an audible difference, I’d like to see scientific evidence of the effect, not just hyperbolic oratory describing it’s “audibility”.
The science cited in this thread was but one example - there are others.
I didn’t deny the existence of noise over ethernet - Johnson–Nyquist noise is inherent in electronic circuitry, what I deny is it’s audibility when measurement techniques place the effects of it in the analogue domain orders of magnitude below the threshold of human hearing.
Even those making equipment for recording industry eschew fancy cabling for ethernet audio:
I have no objection to intellectual debate, however, it is pointless debating science with those whose pseudoreligious beliefs prevent them from even listening to the scientific arguments.
As L. Ron Hubbard so famously said “You don’t get rich writing science fiction. If you want to get rich, you start a religion.” You could equally substitute many other businesses or occupations in place of “writing science fiction” - it was merely his chosen occupation prior to founding Scientology.
The audio accessory industry has started its own religion and it has no shortage of willing believers/financial supporters.
Haha, thanks, but it’s still only Tuesday. It will no doubt run out before the end of the week! 
My two “go to” sources:
1] Audio Science Review (Articles, Reviews and Measurements of Audio Products | Audio Science Review (ASR) Forum); and,
2] Archimago’s Musings (https://archimago.blogspot.com/).
Straight goods versus inflated puffery.
Careful, I’m sure there’s a special notification filter on here for ASR haters! The hoardes will be along to attack you within a femto-clock cycle…
Love it. Can I use that in future?
People talking about what they hear is not a debate, and hardly even a conversation – it’s just idle chatter.
I couldn’t care less about opinions – everybody has one – particularly opinions based on the highly fallible human perception system. What I want are theories. Copernicus’s theory about the Sun being at the center of things permitted various folks to come up with tests that could either lend credence to the theory, or disprove it. It had the ability to predict certain things. That’s what’s missing in all this idle chatter about unmeasurable effects.
I’ll keep an eye out for torches. As to “inflated puffery” it’s yours. Use it in good health!
