Sorry if I “trolled” a little bit the community.
Since I’m a Ph.D. in Theoretical Physics, I know perfectly that the ether doesn’t exist.
I guess that the only one that realized that I was fooling you is Henry_McLeod, with its suggestion. But, the others ?
More: since I’m currently working in the IT let me endorse the comments of Mike_Plugge.
The rest of the people, the people that “hear” any difference, is the people having spent thousands of $ for some “snake oil” and that are self-convincing thar they have not thrown all that money out of the window.
3 Likes
It’s the noisy wifi radios that are an issue. However we have lots of clients sending RAAT over wifi to a switch with fiber outputs then to our streamer. This isolates any noise from the radios.
What noise from the radios? Are we talking the 2.4GIG or 5GIG? What about the opto isolator that gets the optics into electrical impulses on copper traces. You need to realize they make their own noise.
They emit EMI that can get into the system. You don’t want to locate them in the same box. Worse yet is those powerline Ethernet units. But all fine if you isolate with fiber.
Yes the transceiver’s can make noise as well. That’s why you need to choose low noise units made for very sensitive applications.
Belief in the ether is so 19th century physics. 
Please read !
So sorry, just a joke. Saw your addendum after I replied. Take a breath, no one’s doubting your Ph.D.
I would say the same for WiFi adapters. I’m willing to put $$ where my mouth is and say blinded you couldn’t tell the difference between well implemented WiFi and Optical. I have 12 pieces of Cisco gear with both Wireless and SFP…
Yes if the wifi is located upstream of the fiber I agree as long as you have enough throughput, the sound will be identical.
Wondering, since we have all the experts gathered in one place, how people feel about other ‘audiophile’ cables.
How about the wisdom of buying audiophile USB (both single and double headed), RCA, high priced speaker wire, power cables, etc… Also those little thingies that raise the cables off a surface.
Anything else one might imagine. I guess ‘audiophile’ Ethernet is a big ripoff, but what’s the next biggest ripoff? Third, fourth place ripoff?
troll much…
Why do you think this is a troll? Serious question, I’m sure people have different opinions.
In modern systems circa 2017 and beyond, the only cables one should need is fiber optic and mains. Nobody is ever going to hear a difference between fiber cables. And if you hear a difference between mains cables, it’s only due to a poor power supply design.
For digital signals (USB, HDMI, Ethernet)
It either works or it doesn’t work. The cables will not make a difference.
For analog signals (RCA, speaker wire, power wire):
It depends.
- Resistance and capacitance variables will drop the power of the signal going through. Too small a wire gauge means not enough power, and the sound volumes drop.
- Chemical make up of the cable can affect the signal itself. And this is demonstrable with objective testing equipment. Theoretically, this means that variations in the chemical make up of a cable could affect the sound.
Realistically, these differences are very hard to hear. And if money is tight, upgrades to other parts of your set up will be more readily noticeable.
General guidelines:
- Power cords - use as short as possible with a large enough gauge to safely carry the amperage.
- RCA cables - use as short as possible of a quality brand. None of that Radio Shack garbage.
- Speaker cables - use as short as possible of a quality brand. Once again, none of that Radio Shack garbage. Should be least 14 gauge if not a smaller number/larger wire.
- In all cases - avoid running power cables in parallel to other analog cables (inductance will affect signal quality). If they HAVE to cross, cross at right angles, but avoid that where ever possible.
Incidentally - I found this read about speaker cables to be quite informative: http://thewirecutter.com/reviews/the-best-speaker-cable/
1 Like
The most effective way of determining if there’s any difference between cables and noise transmitted from the switches/server into the DAC, is by taking phase noise tests from the I2S bitclock output on the digital interface. For that you’ll need something like the Microsemi 5125A, or Keysight 5052B.
Anyone who hasn’t performed such tests isn’t in a position to claim there’s no difference objectively. Having knowledge about the theory of how Ethernet works isn’t enough to win this battle.
Not being able to afford such gear doesn’t make it any less valid to the reality of the outcome. MRI machines are also expensive. But they can see things a simple X-ray can’t, yet can be felt by the patient being tested. If the X-ray machine can’t pick it up, it doesnt mean it’s not real if your hospital doesn’t have an MRI machine.
1 Like
Is a measureable difference an audible difference?
2 Likes
Thanks for the reply, in spite of the attempt by @evand to poison the waters.
As I’ve stated elsewhere, my old ears can’t hear any differences that may exist between cables, etc…
I’ve been permanently banned (oh, no!) from LaVorgna’s forum because I accused him of being one of those who have $500 cables. This was in the context of his effusive review of a $5000 network device that was little more than an ARM board (as in RPi), an SSD, a DVD drive, and some tweaked audio daemons on a probably under-licensed Linux fork. That outrageously priced streamer was my pet peeve.
The other pet peeves I have are for those $600 small gauge speaker wires, the super-duper binding posts, and the $900 DC cables. Not to mention those $100 little thingies that keep the various cables raised up.
Be that as it may, I guess what you and many others have said is that Audioquest, Kimber, Pangea, et. al. are snake oil selling hucksters and should be run out of town on a rail for taking advantage of the weak minded.
The message is received. Too bad it had to be delivered, by some posters, with such vitriol and sarcasm.
Peace, brother.
Aha, and now we come to the real question.
The quality of what one hears is a subjective experience that can not, by its nature, be measured thru objective means. If one’s listening pleasure is increased by the inclusion of an expensive component then that has to be taken at face value, or rather, auricular value. It makes little difference as to whether their pleasure is increased by the awareness of the presence of this equipment or by the presence alone of this equipment.
In this discussion, subjective experience is as valid as any measurable object.
I don’t understand many of the impassioned criticisms of the proponents of ‘audiophile’ cables. It seemed impossible for many people to state the objective case without descending into insults and mutually congratulatory back patting.
Some people see – or believe that they see – demons. The demons are very real to them and their “subjective experience.” But should those people go unchallenged if they make public pronouncements that “demons are real”? Or, when challenged, is it perfectly reasonable for those people to respond, “No, you’re wrong. Demons are real”?
If people wish to be crazy in their own little world and are no danger to themselves or others, let them be. However, when they start claiming that their “subjective experience” is equivalent to fact and/or proselytizing to the body politic about their “subjective experience,” then problems arise, problems that need to be addressed.
AJ
4 Likes
Really, your analogy is strained. Are you equating demons with ‘audiophile’ cables? C’mon, I specifically said -
-[quote=“Slim_Fishguttz, post:140, topic:26874”]
In this discussion
[/quote]
BTW - If people say they see demons, then they ‘see’ demons.