My system has only ethernet cables. I have three alternatives installed:
25m CAT 5e (generic installed by cable company) from modem to server
25m CAT 6a (AQ Pearl from modem to server
25m Fibre optic, with 1m CAT6a (BJC) at either end. TPLink media converters with 9v battery power.
I currently use 1. for an access point, 2. for AV and 3. for audio (to music server)
The one that goes to the music server does not go through a Netgear switch. The ones for AV and wifi are switched.
Data then goes from server to streamer by 1m CAT6a (BJC)
Iâve swapped the cables round and used them all for audio and never heard any difference. I was asking if there is any possible reason why I should.
I donât know what your cable cost, some ethernet cables cost $500, some quite possibly a lot more. I just googled Incustic and the first one was $500.
All my audio grade ethernet cables are short. 2 meters or less. I canât remember the cost of the CAT 6 Inakustik. I ordered all of them at various sites but they all shipped from Inakustik. The Referenz ones were about twice the cosr. But they offer more space between performers and fidelity but are thinner like BJC cable but BJC offers no separation and small soundstage. I tried various cat5. They all disappointed. The Inakustik CAT 6 is the price per performance leader with silver plate copper and is about twice the diameter with a soft braid. It seems like it would better dampen vibration. If you can try a short one they do impact sound noticeably. If I had to buy 25 M length count me out with experimentation unless I heard itfi first. The BJC is just plain stiff.
I had issues where the devices connected via the BJC cables would lose their connection. I would replace the BJC cable with another brand and the issue would not re-occur. I would put the BJC cable in another place and similar things would happen. It makes zero sense to me, but the solution was always the same, replace the BJC cable and all problems would cease. I am pretty much done trying different brand Ethernet cables. Bah.
According to @rower30, it doesnât matter if the cable is 1m or 1,000m. Thatâs ethernet cables for you. I use fibre optic that can be miles long.
What gets me is that we are talking ones and zeros that do not know what frequency of sound they are ultimately coding. You could in theory change the coding so the ones and zeros coded different frequencies. If the cable was affecting the signal, which I consider 0% likely, then different coding would affect different frequencies. Saying a cable affects bass is attributing analogue characteristics to digital signals.
Again, as @rower30 says, you can have all sorts of issues with DACs introducing electrical noise into the analogue signal, but thatâs nothing to do with the cable.
Yeah but the DAC is two or three digital cables downstream from the ethernet cables separated by HDMI and USB digital that is untouched.
I would love not to hear swaps. Be it noise or jitter. Something is changing perceived frequency on analog outs of my DAC. The DSP of the room os not done with ethernet. Yet fix bass and the ethernet cable bass balance changes.
Ethernet uses a frame based transmission protocol. The data is sent in discrete packets embedded in routing and control information. On receipt the data is checked to see that it matches the CRC check code, and if not the packet is rejected and a resend requested. Only the data from good packets is moved to a buffer in the receiver, from which it can then be clocked out. It is only at this point that jitter could become an issue. Apart from the cable acting as an antenna outside its data transmission role, or the processing in the receiver generating slightly different RF patterns, it is difficult to see how a cable change could affect sound quality.
This reminds me of the Paul McGowan John Darko Podcast. First Talking USB cables then ethernet cables come up. Paul states he doesnât want to try to hear differences because it upsets his engineering knowledge on the subject and he will not be able to ignore the fact the ethernet cable sounds different.
Same used to be said about power cables, speaker cables and USB cables. Some people still believe it is impossible and they all sound the same.
I sish I could understand it. Bit unfortunately I hear it. I do agree with some of the postulations that LOS throughout the digital chain makes sound different. I changed from fiber optic inty provider and heard streaming differences.
This was Audio Bacon last review of a cable. He gets called every adjective thought of in comments. But i have heard same type differences even in cheap cables. I am not ready for 1 K cable yet. Likely I might want, two each after I heard one. His claim that ithe cable before DAC is most important seems plausible but I have heard just as dramatic changes before the router.
I do think there is lots not understood on why sound is different. Maybe it is dropped packet errors and the reassembled data or noise. I get all systems are different as are peoples hearing. Even room acoustics changes make my ethernet cable preferences change.
Now that I have P20 regenerator and better LPSs. I hear more of the ethernet cable differences.
I make and sell CAT8 Ethernet cables as a hobby. Iâve never had one returned even though I offer a full refund if unsatisfied. Ethernet cables can and do make a difference. Itâs counter intuitive, as I come from 25 years in the IT industry. But they do affect the successful transmission of data that affects the sound of audio systems. Part of the benefit comes from the use of Telegartner Connectors that are impedance matched and the use of 10% silver solid core 22 gauge wiring. How this works is for the engineers but it does work.
Silver core not plate? Do you use Supra cable? Could you source silver cable lines like in the JCAT 1K cable ?
They use the telegaertner connector.
The Inakustik ethernet are there proprietary connector. They are much more solid feeling and lock in tighter. A better connection under vibration might be a reason
My theory isâŚ
If youâre hearing differences between ethernet cables its because of poor implementation of the Ethernet PHY at the receiving end. A proper implementation shall be immune from what is being described as changing because of different cables. Now, Iâm not about to start ripping components off the board in that area and hope I can identify and correct a poor implementation so the only thing I can do is find better performance by swapping cables or upgrading the transmit side so reduce impact at the poor receiver.
Anyway⌠Iâm not going to do anything other than theorize about this. I donât have the resources, or ambition, to go get a bunch of kit and test gear and prove this out. I just hope manufacturers are paying attention to this on their circuit layouts so I donât need 4 figures in cabling to make the electronics better.
Jcat is using the older âleverâ style instead of the CAT8.1 that I now use. These are just the best on the market.
Shunyata, Siltech and CrystalConnect use this very connector on their $1000 +++ cables.
My cables are designed for the audiophile market and they work extremely well. I used the Supra prior and itâs a good cable but the silver cable is 22 gauge and not 24 or 26 gauge like most other CAT8 cables.
After extensive reading of this and other threads on the effect of ethernet cables on sound quality Iâve completed some comparative auditions of my own. I swopped around 5 cables in the 3 legs of the ethernet LAN section connecting my music player to a wireless bridge via an optical leg and switch. On the other end of the wireless bridge is a remote LAN section comprising Modem, router, switch and a NAS holding the music library. The cables covered a wide price range, two (the SOtM & Chord) were loaned on sale-or-return, and the others Iâve had in use for from months to years. Rather than write a long description of what I did and the results, Iâve created the attached spreadsheet (youâll need to zoom in to see the details).
To summarise I decided to keep the SOtM dCBL CAT7 cable. In my system, dCS Bridge > PS Audio DirestStream DAC > Primare A.60 amp > Harbeth SHL5 Anniversary model, I found this cable clearly sounds better than the Chord Signature Super ARAY cable. Compared with the Chord cable it conveys more space, with richer tones. Sounds are more natural, particularly on piano & voices. Strings have more warmth and detail. Transients have greater impact with better bass definition (attack, solidity & decay). Overall it improved the illusion of being present at a performance. Most of my music library consists of acoustic classical music and jazz so this is important to me.
Other conclusions I came to were (1) swopping two of the better cables between the first and last legs made only a small difference to sound quality with placement of the better cable in last leg giving marginally better SQ, (2) there was little to choose between the Meicord and the CatSnake cables: the Meicord had more clarity while the CatSnake had more bass but was slightly woolly in comparison.
I must admit I did not expect to hear such a significant variations in sound quality from swopping around ethernet cables - it is of the same order as I heard when I replaced the Netgear switch with the EE 8Switch, so I guess I will need to repeat the exercise for the cables in other parts of the LAN. Of course I should add the caveat that these results are for for my system, in my listening room, with my music and my ears.
One clarification question: Am I correct in understanding that in the context of the swapping and listening you did that the âlast legâ of Ethernet cable (i.e, the length of cable that feeds the DAC) was most susceptible to the impacts of a âbetterâ cable?
Thanks again.
[Edit: Missed the âconclusionsâ fields in your table the first time through, so, in the words of Roseanne Roseannadanna, never mind]
PS
Were you ever a PS Audio Bridge (I or II) user before or after acquiring the dCS bridge? I would be interested in how you might be able to recall your comparative experience with the two devices.
âWere you ever a PS Audio Bridge (I or II) user before or after acquiring the dCS bridge? I would be interested in how you might be able to recall your comparative experience with the two devices.â
Yes I used Bridge II. The change to the dCS Network Bridge gave a significant improvement in sound quality with greater transparency, better PRAT and more realistic tone. Furthermore when I subsequently removed the Bridge II board from the DAC I got an additional, smaller, improvement in sound quality and this was apparent for all the DAC inputs I use (I2S, SPDIF, & Optical). I guess the Bridge board was generating noise.
The dCS Bridge sells like sweets over here and Iâve heard it loads of times. Amazed I havenât got one. Used one on my speaker demo a couple of weeks ago. Preferred connection is AES/EBU. dCS does not consider usb or optical out good enough and donât provide them. It has the other advantage that you donât have to waste money at the other end and can just plug in a standard network cable connecting to a QNAP or similar. It has a usb input, very handy for a demo or you can attach a local library. Has Roon etc. It uses dual AES/EBU as well - canât remember what thatâs about, some high def stuff.
I donât âdoâ USB, as my current preference is to transport my 0âs and 1âs via Wi-Fi to my router and from my router to the DS/Bridge II. I would be (at least initially and subject to some compelling reason to do otherwise) connecting the dCS to my network via Ethernet/Router; and dCS to the DS via the âbestâ sounding dCS output/DS input combination. I guess that would be AES (balanced) in this case(?).
