I notice some of the stickers on the chips should be moved to the left a bit 
I think youâll find thatâs where they are supposed to be - they provide special tweezers, donât you knowâŚ
1 Like
They are the modern version of Peter Belt (who is now sadly deceased).
1 Like
Hilarious! You beat me to itâŚ
Reef knots, a twist and a half of tape on batteries - and pieces of paper to make odd numbers - back in the days when twin-and-earth was a viable option 
I lost interest with the âElvis photoâ in a bag - ridiculous*
The rest of it mindâŚ
- to be honest - I didnât know where to get one
Iâm not a statistician but I can see neither are you. Your sampling of one persons perception is always going to be limiting in interpreting the data. A larger sampling size is needed. Additionally this is barely an arms length single blinding if you are using a friend. The person switching the cables should not know if they are actually changing the input. And of course there are system variations in terms of being able to state differences, and it is likely in some systems no change is happening or audible.
Until you can do a study like that in a large number of systems it is not fair to say there are not differences. Until then, the information at hand is subjective but that doesnât make it wrong or inaccurate. Itâs just not statistically validated. So itâs always your choice to believe it or not.
While itâs fine to state your beliefs, it is always wrong to tell others what to believe.
1 Like
Hear hear (see what I did there?).
I believe.
I donât wish to disagree with your sentiment - itâs rooted in good intentions - but as DP Moynihan famously stated, âEveryone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own factsâ. In this case I think the naysayers would state that there are facts about the physical properties of networks and switches that preclude any explanation other than expectation bias.
4 Likes
They would do though wouldnât they? The yaysayers then explain why it makes a difference -
and off we go again. Personally Iâm far from convinced by âfactsâ from the 0 or 1 brigade, more swayed by my ears and people like Swenson.
1 Like
Well, the Cable Company are apparently happy to sell you a box of 25 stickers for the knock-down price of $100.
Just a couple of brief pointsâŚ
-Correct, not a statistician
-20 samples with 1 listener may not provide a enough data, it was not meant to lay out perfect conditions for such a test. I do however think that 20 samples of switching would have value and give a good indication if differences could be heard.
-However, attempting to do something like this would provide more information to confirm or not confirm if the device is providing any benefit. Confirmation bias is very strong and very real. We often fool ourelves into thinking (incorrectly) that a change in a piece of gear has made difference⌠only to find out that when doing a simple test(the best you can do) shows you only thought a difference was heard.
-Sorry if this offended anyone. I just hate to see people possibly wasting money fixing problems that may in fact not be a problem at all or are not audible.
-Just my 2 cents and opinion. YMMV of course.
Mine certainly does. I hate to see people missing out on SQ gains because the 0-1 brigade say itâs all illusory because there are only 0s and 1s. Itâs not that simple.
1 Like
No worries. I donât feel like a brigade 
Just like to have some degree of certainty there is a benefit. Has anyone done a double blind test with one an audiophile network switch? I would be interested if anyone has and found any degree of certainty they can tell the difference from a well designed regular switch when listening to music. It seems unlikely to me but who knows!
Wow, here we go again. Anyone who thinks a switch can make an audible difference to the analog conversion of a digital datastream clearly has no understanding of TCP/IP and how switches function.
A switch which is working properly, i.e. not dropping packets cannot affect the sound of the analog conversion of the digital data. Itâs not possible.
Anyone who says he can âhearâ the difference between two network switches is deluded. Human senses are nefariously unreliable. We add a new component to a hi-fi system, expecting to hear a difference. Lo and behold, we do hear a difference. Our brain interprets what our ears are hearing differently because weâre filtering it via our expectation bias.
Audiophile network switches are rip-off products peddled by snake-oil vendors, marketed using pseudo-scientific hyperbole.
Switches are designed to not corrupt the data they transmit. They employ numerous techniques to verify the integrity of the data being transmitted. Digital âmusicâ transmitted by switches is simply data. The switch cannot affect the analog conversion of the data
because it cannot affect the data.
Anyone who says itâs not about the 1s and 0s simply doesnât get it. Wake up, smell the coffee. Stop being ripped off and spend your money on some room treatment. Thatâs where you can really make a difference to the sound of your system!
10 Likes
Yeah, I get what your saying. There are lots of facts out there, some more factual than others. Trying to relate facts about network properties to auditory effects of network equipment is tricky and the two are likely unrelated in the way you are trying to conclude.
Of course there is expectation bias, but it is not going to universally apply to every situation where a benefit is perceived.
Iâm OK with you believing expectation bias, it just a bit sad you will never know what your missing.
Yes, they use this sort of snake oil : https://www.cisco.com/c/dam/global/en_ca/solutions/strategy/healthcare/assets/docs/09CS2124-MGN.pdf
Youâre confusing bricks with architecture. That pdf references a medical grade architecture. The individual network components are predominately standard, off-the-shelf products.
2 Likes
That whole site is a p*ss take, I think. I canât explain it in any other wayâŚ
That whitepaper references âstandard off the shelf productsâ like these: https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/products/collateral/switches/catalyst-6500-series-switches/data_sheet_c78-708665.html
The point I was responding to was the claim that medical installations use ânormal routersâ. Since we are talking about domestic scenarios, that claim is wrong as a ânormal routerâ in a domestic scenario is not an âoff the shelfâ component that would be used in a mission critical sector.
So I read the paper a few months ago, and again today. There is a major flaw in the authors logic. The paper clearly states that their main goal is eliminating Ground Plane Noise, regardless of cause, and that their differential circuitry is what eliminates this noise, but they fail to acknowledge that ethernet transmitters and receivers are by definition differential, and are highly resistant to these âproblemsâ by design. Add in the multi level data buffering done in the higher levels of the ethernet protocol stack, and its clear that they are solving a problem that does not exist.
An easy way to verify this is to have someone pull the ethernet cable out of their streamer and see if the sound changes before the buffer runs dry. My system will play for the better part of 10 seconds before going silent, but there is no discernable difference in the sound when the cable is disconnected. Iâd challenge anyone to try this and tell me otherwise. (Of course not all streamers will have a big enough buffer in them to do this test)
On the other hand, its important to recognize that ground plane noise can wreak havoc on single ended digital signals, so Iâd never apply this argument to USB and SPDIF âcleanerâ devices. They can make a dramatic difference in the sound coming out of a DAC that does not do a good job rejecting phase noise to begin with.
My DAC has ethernet and spdif inputs. It definitely sounds different with spdif inputs if I insert an spdif âcleanerâ between the source and the DAC, but there is no difference in sound when I modify the source on the ethernet input, either by removing the cable briefly, using different ethernet cables, or using different switches.
4 Likes