Ethernet Cables - Yes I'm going there... I was a skeptic and I was wrong

I was surprised too. Perhaps AQ doesn’t like my Synergistic Core speaker cables and interconnects… or that combination with the AC-5 power cords. Or maybe the Wireworld Silver Starlight USB doesn’t mesh with AQ? Maybe I’ve created the perfect storm against an AQ cable? Who knows.

The WW sounds like Synergy to me and the AQ is the complete opposite. I don’t believe they have to be extreme opposites in all cases. You could try the WW and find either a minor benefit or loss for all we know.

Did the Cable Company confirm that the three burned in before your test? HDMI cables need burnin too.

Some maybe remember a few years (maybe 5 or 6) back. We started this discussions on the forum. Some were skeptics and some were believers. Today i think most of us are believers. I have tried many many cables in the past and found out several differences in the sound with ethernet cabletypes. Even after 5 or 6 years I never found a cable that I realy liked over time. Al the cables had their own signature and brought something good and something less good to the sound, but they were never realy neutral to the sound. Today I think expensive ethernet cables are old news. Please don’t loose me here… the ethernet protocol is the only protocol that I know, that is not charged with a clock signal. The way to realy solve your trouble with the influence of noise to the signal is a galvanic isolation plug connected directly into your dac. The signal was already proven to be bit perfect, there’s no clock signal in the stream so there’s only noise comming from computers etc that has to be stopt and taken out of the signal. The result is perfect and I have never doubted the signal again.

Galvanic isolation directly in your dac is the way to solve ethernet noise. Galvanic isolation on other protocols like spdif (coax, AES-EBU), i2s, usb etc is great but with these protocols cabling is still important due to the clock signal, but again not for ethernet.

the ethernet protocol is the only protocol that I know, that is not charged with a clock signal.
Maybe I am misinterpreting the comment here but ethernet data transmission does rely on clocking. And with clocks, come jitter and ethernet is not immune to jitter. You will find an oscillator on every network interface card as well as in any router/switch. Whether or not jitter degrades the signal to the point of affecting sound quality is another discussion, but it is present.

I do agree with your comments on galvanic isolation and feel that addressing it has had a positive influence on sound quality in my system. I replaced my standard off-the-shelf switch with an AQVOX AQ-Switch-SE and without doubt, noticed the improvement.

Hi Jeff,

You are right, actualy there are clocks everywere in computers and networks. But they are not yet dealing with an audiofile but just with data. The timing for the audio file is for later concern. The data is indeed done by several clocks on the mainboard, the ethernet adapter etc. The data must first arive in the dac from there the dac must see if the data is ready to play or else it will be converted to playable data and from there the audioclock comes in sight.

This is different for other protocols for example spdif or I2s is dealing with the audiofile and the timing of the audiofile, from there it is transported to the dac. For these protocols you will still need good cabling besides galvanic isolation.

I’m certainly not an expert, but an experienced hobbyist. So I hope this helps!

Some thoughts:

The real clock issue is which end is in charge of the data rate or is controlling how fast data is being consumed. USB and Ethernet (and technically I2S) are the bidirectional connections and both (all three) support the DAC being in charge of how fast the data is consumed and hence support the DAC having the master clock. USB supports either end being in charge but with most DACs having the DAC in charge is noticeably better - that’s a part of what Asynchronous USB Audio is about. Tho I2S is defined to support either end providing the master clock, but the master clock isn’t typically used that way for audiophile box to box connections.

I’d claim that, at least with the DS DACs, that these issues aren’t really relevant to the final sound of the DAC. The real issue appears to be dealing with noise, ground loops and potentially interference via power. Technically both USB and Ethernet can be providing power, but since most DACs don’t need this power and it’s not required in Ethernet that needn’t be a problem.

How various cables are grounded and if shielded, how the shield is grounded can affect both possible groundloops and how much noise is possibly transmitted from the source to the DAC, radiated to the rest of the system or received from the environment.

At least with the DS DAC, somewhat ironically people tend to forget that TOSLink wins big time on these theoretical issues, it only looses in terms of available bandwidth. Also FWIW the simpler protocols, S/PDIF and AES/EBU are easier to isolate than the bidirectional protocols (Ethernet and USB) They are also a little limited in terms of bandwidth compared to Ethernet and USB, but this isn’t all bad - the more bandwidth the more radiation for the rest of the audio system to deal with.

In the practical world all of this doesn’t really matter much - people should use whichever connection they find convenient (or believe in if they intend to have fun optimizing.) They all can be used to get great sound.

5 Likes

Once again, thanks to Ted, I feel smarter for having read his post. At least until I forget what he said, which will be in approximately 20 minutes!

I get regular e-mails from Blue Coast, which I assume others here do too, and the one I received today had a short piece on Ethernet cables. Bottom line, Cookie Marenco noticed a difference. You can read about it here

I don’t know how a high-end ethernet cable improves the sound. I use “low-end” Audioquest ethernet cables, but have a fiber optical bridge between the router and Melco N1A server (having I guess more than 50 feet builder-grade ethernet cable between them in the wall), which definitely improves the situation, e.g., lower noise. Did anyone compare the “low-end” ethernet cable with fiber optical bridge vs high-end ethernet cable?

Still a work in progress, but I have been listening with Ghent Audio Ethernet cables that utilize the “JSSG” shielding technique to address RF.

In combination with the “JSGT” SMPS negative shunt ground technique for high impedance AC leakage.

Along with insertion of Net Gear FS105 switches to deal with low impedance AC leakage.

All FMCs and isolation devices have been removed and not missed, I feel that even with the best power supply available, the FMCs had a negative influence.

This is after all of the previously mentioned techniques.

Previously, except for the ethernet connection to the WiFi bridge, all of my ethernet was via FMC.

With Blue Jeans unshielded Ethernet, the RFI emitted by the FMCs was easily noticeable as it was picked up by the cables.

Currently I am listening to the best sound that I have ever had.

1 Like

If it’s any help - my experience from playing in this area is that:

  • I got immense improvement from upgrading the wall wort on the modem/router combo

  • The SOtM DBL-CAT7 cable was the best sounding of the bunch in a test my buddy did on my system. He brought over a bunch of cables he was reviewing and that came out on top.

  • Incrementally, their ISO-CAT6 LAN Isolator had incremental improvements too but was not as big of a jump as just having their ethernet cables in itself.

  • The Supra Cat8 was the best value winner at about $50/cable.

Siao

1 Like

Hi Siao,

I’m curious about what wall wort you purchased for your modem and router? Also for what modem and router?

I’ve got an Audioquest Vodka and Supra Cat8 that I will be auditioning as soon as my DSJ arrives.

Shahram

I got the SOtM SPS-500 for my TP-Link modem router CR1900. Hope that clarifies! I played around with the power cable to the SPS and got even more gain with it. Currently using a Vovox textura cable for that too.

1 Like

How close is the modem router to your stuff?

They’re all pretty close…

Even when my modem/router wireless was turned off it was polluting everything with a harsh character.

Replaced with a modified switch from SoTM with all linear internals. That itself was transformative. I reconfigured my network and moved the modem router two rooms down.

that’s awesome. Yeah - so I’ve looked into some higher end modified switch and router solutions where they’ve upgraded the caps, clocks, etc. Definitely tempted by that, and the LPS was a way of dabbling into it. From a topology perspective, I ended up going this route partially for simplicity rather than having a separate set of LPSes, power cables, and etc gear for a cable modem, modified router, modified switch, etc.

What was the process to get SOtM to modify all the internals? I’m def curious about a modified modem/router combo.

Siao

Siao,

Do you write for Audio Bacon? If so, I’ve very much enjoyed the articles on the site. Particularly regarding interconnects and digital cables.

I do - thank you for the compliments. Jay is one of my best buds and started the site. I’ve been more in the background in the past helping with the 2 channel stereo testing. But I’ve recently gotten more involved in writing my own pieces (Synergistic Ground Block).

Siao

I don’t believe you need every switch modem/router in your system to have fancy power supplies. I’m not aware of any vendor who modifies routers.

(1) I would move your router out of the room and just use Ethernet in the wall to connect.
(2) SoTM will modify a Dlink gigabit switch for $180 including shipping, this will include all linear internals and upgraded caps.
(3) Optional - use modified FMC’s from SoTM, these are about $200 I believe for the pair.

By using the FMC’s you negate power supply effects upstream. But for the switch and FMC’s make sure to use linear power supplies. I use Jameco 5V linear wall warts and the sound is phenomenal all with Belden cat6 cabling. Put your best supply on the last component. If you just want to do switch, put it there, if you have FMC’s too, put it on the last FMC. The modified components will reduce the RF contamination in your listening area.

I am growing increasingly suspicious that shielded ethernet is merely adding noise to the delivery chain. Your router is not grounded, so if there is a shield guess where the noise picked up is going… you got it - straight into your DAC. If you run a ground wire separately from switch or router then this is another story but this is not at all common practice and is conveniently not talked about by high end Ethernet cable manufacturers. By using non-shielded Ethernet you prevent (1) contamination from upstream router/switch into your DAC (at least from shield/ground draining into your DAC), (2) don’t introduce a ground loop.