[cpurdy]

I disagree strongly, due to my experiences that clearly demonstrate otherwise. It seems your opinion is simply uninformed.

I'm open minded, and I actually enjoy learning from being proved wrong. I'm not religious about my technical understanding and beliefs. (I'm just religious about my religious beliefs. God bless you.)

So if you have an explanation or even a theory about how an Ethernet cable can impact the "width of the sound stage" or "warmth of tone" or "instrument separation", I really want to understand. (The last time I said this, a mod deleted the message, so make sure to respond quickly.)

 

[audiobomber]

I'm open minded, and I actually enjoy learning from being proved wrong. I'm not religious about my technical understanding and beliefs. (I'm just religious about my religious beliefs. God bless you.)

Thank you, but I believe in a non-interventionist God.

So if you have an explanation or even a theory about how an Ethernet cable can impact the "width of the sound stage" or "warmth of tone" or "instrument separation", I really want to understand. (The last time I said this, a mod deleted the message, so make sure to respond quickly.)

I am not qualified to explain, but here are a couple of references that might:

Twisted-pair Ethernet cabling is considered a mature and reliable technology that has been trusted with 10Base-T and 100Base-T data rates for many years. However, as high-speed Ethernet traffic reaches 1 gigabit per second (Gbit/s) and higher, designers have to deal with the reality that signals are less forgiving of cable inconsistencies and become more susceptible to interference, crosstalk, impedance loss, return loss due to reflected signals, and attenuation. The issues are exacerbated as cable lengths increase...
https://www.digikey.ca/en/articles/...pedance is 100,conductors in the twisted pair

I would say that a finely tuned audio system and a discriminating audiophile are "less forgiving" than general ethernet uses.

Leakage current can flow through power cables, audio interconnects, digital cables, including Ethernet and
USB cables. The leakage will flow from a power supply, through a cable to another device or component,
then through that device or component’s respective power supply back to the AC mains. Alternatively it can
flow through a cable to another box and then through a safety ground (the “third pin” of an AC plug) and
return back to the AC mains.
All copper Ethernet connections have transformers in each device port, and these transformers will block DC
and low-source-impedance leakage. However, they DO NOT block high-source-impedance AC leakage. This is
particularly important for digital networks used for audio.
https://uptoneaudio.com/pages/j-swenson-tech-corner

By implementing shielding, Ethernet cables are able to maintain a high signal integrity, ensuring that data transmission is accurate and free from errors. The shielding acts as a barrier, preventing external signals from penetrating the cable and interfering with the data being transmitted. This is particularly important in environments where there are numerous electronic devices or high levels of electromagnetic activity.
https://www.genuinemodules.com/what-does-shielding-do-on-ethernet-cable_a1929

IME, shielded and/or foil-shielded cables outperform UTP cables. I have tried many generic ethernet cables, along with many used by audiophiles, i.e. Supra CAT8, Melco C100, Furutech LAN-8 NCF, Sablon 2020, and a few from Audio Sensibility; Supra Super, Signature and Signature I2S. I use Furutech (modified), Audio Sensibility Signature and Signature I2S in my main system, because this combo sounds best. I did not like the Supra, Sablon or Melco ethernet cables.

I am careful about using shield-tied cables appropriately. as explained in this WBF post:
https://www.whatsbestforum.com/threads/ethernet-cables-to-and-from-your-switch.36882/#post-880698

If you truly are not dogmatic, try my favourite inexpensive Amazon cables: Tera Grand CAT7 and/or Yauhody CAT8. The Tera Grand leans to brighter, more detailed, the Yauhody is warmer, darker. I use them in my secondary systems to affect tonality. Both are good, both are sonically compromised compared to my best cables. If you need cables that don't have grounded shields, BJC CAT6a is ok, quite dark sounding, with a slightly compressed soundstage. I recently bought a Tera Grand CAT6 cable but I haven't done any critical listening yet.

 

[cpurdy]

Leakage current can flow through power cables, audio interconnects, digital cables, including Ethernet and
USB cables. The leakage will flow from a power supply, through a cable to another device or component,
then through that device or component’s respective power supply back to the AC mains. Alternatively it can
flow through a cable to another box and then through a safety ground (the “third pin” of an AC plug) and
return back to the AC mains.
All copper Ethernet connections have transformers in each device port, and these transformers will block DC
and low-source-impedance leakage. However, they DO NOT block high-source-impedance AC leakage. This is
particularly important for digital networks used for audio.

To me, this is the only one that could impact sound. Allowing electrical noise through from one point on the network to the DAC would allow for theoretical degradation of the output from the DAC. This is supposed to be impossible ("galvanic isolation" is supposed to preclude this), and even if theoretically possible it should still be incredibly difficult to even create such a situation, but in my mind this would be the area to look at. And if the network DAC is running on Power Over Ethernet (POE) -- which I've never seen but is theoretically possible -- I'd be even more concerned, since the twisted pairs with power should be able to pick up some noise, and since noise in the power is something that we want to avoid, the concern here is pretty obvious.

I would say that a finely tuned audio system and a discriminating audiophile are "less forgiving" than general ethernet uses.

Definitely not! I've worked with SWIFT (European financial transfers), NYSE, NASD, LSX, FSX, etc., and even one bit of information being wrong could cost them millions of dollars (and possibly more). One of my banking customers on (the actual) Wall Street had a back hoe accidentally sever not one but both of their "redundant HA fiber" cables, and there was significant pain from that.

Like I said, on a modern network, you can transfer an entire hour of CD quality music (e.g. FLAC, or just the entire CD image as-is as an ISO) in 1/2 a second, 100% bit perfect guaranteed.

 

[bfreedma]

To me, this is the only one that could impact sound. Allowing electrical noise through from one point on the network to the DAC would allow for theoretical degradation of the output from the DAC. This is supposed to be impossible ("galvanic isolation" is supposed to preclude this), and even if theoretically possible it should still be incredibly difficult to even create such a situation, but in my mind this would be the area to look at. And if the network DAC is running on Power Over Ethernet (POE) -- which I've never seen but is theoretically possible -- I'd be even more concerned, since the twisted pairs with power should be able to pick up some noise, and since noise in the power is something that we want to avoid, the concern here is pretty obvious.


Definitely not! I've worked with SWIFT (European financial transfers), NYSE, NASD, LSX, FSX, etc., and even one bit of information being wrong could cost them millions of dollars (and possibly more). One of my banking customers on (the actual) Wall Street had a back hoe accidentally sever not one but both of their "redundant HA fiber" cables, and there was significant pain from that.

Like I said, on a modern network, you can transfer an entire hour of CD quality music (e.g. FLAC, or just the entire CD image as-is as an ISO) in 1/2 a second, 100% bit perfect guaranteed.

Exactly. Add to that the public sector nuclear industry, medical, and various government agencies. None of them use "special" Ethernet cabling/routing and I'd say the need for accuracy and the penalties for failure (measured in $ and lives) are far more significant than anything an "audiophile" could ever need.

Packetized Data - Could contain the cure for cancer, could be a signal to shut down an out of operating spec nuclear reactor, or it could be music in any packet. Fortunately, all ethernet transmissions follow the same robust standards for data and electrical interference.

 

[audiobomber]

Exactly. Add to that the public sector nuclear industry, medical, and various government agencies. None of them use "special" Ethernet cabling/routing and I'd say the need for accuracy and the penalties for failure (measured in $ and lives) are far more significant than anything an "audiophile" could ever need.

Packetized Data - Could contain the cure for cancer, could be a signal to shut down an out of operating spec nuclear reactor, or it could be music in any packet. Fortunately, all ethernet transmissions follow the same robust standards for data and electrical interference.

Network gear can't affect the sound from a DAC, because blah, blah, blah. And yet I can quite clearly hear improvements. That's all I really care about. Throughout my decades as an audiophile, techies have said "similarly specified amps all sound the same, all competently designed DAC's sound the same, wires don't matter, etc." Your post is just another of those arguments.

This thread is for audiophiles to share listening experiences with network gear. There are 130 pages worth, with a few interruptions from the Sound Science types. You and your cohorts have no listening experiences to share, so why do you keep coming back? As a reminder, here's the thread title:
"Ethernet cables, Switches and Network related. Based on listening is it worth to buy more expensive ones? Share your listening experience."

 

[bfreedma]

Network gear can't affect the sound from a DAC, because blah, blah, blah. And yet I can quite clearly hear improvements. That's all I really care about. Throughout my decades as an audiophile, techies have said "similarly specified amps all amps sound the same, all competently designed DAC's sound the same, wires don't matter, etc." Your post is just another of those arguments.

This thread is for audiophiles to share listening experiences with network gear. There are 130 pages worth, with a few interruptions from the Sound Science types. You and your cohorts have no listening experiences to share, so why do you keep coming back? As a reminder, here's the thread title:
"Ethernet cables, Switches and Network related. Based on listening is it worth to buy more expensive ones? Share your listening experience."

And my answer, based on both controlled listening and the fact based operating model, is that it is not worth it to buy more expensive cables.

But in reality, you aren't interested in my POV or hard data/facts, you just want to shut down any part of the discussion that doesn't align with your beliefs. I wonder why?

 

[OCC7N]

Need some advice

I have now for listening following.

Cisco CBS220
Linksys LGS 108
Router.

I plan to put one of these switches before the router but which one.

I am assuming CBS220 will do the best job. The Linksys after the router

Chain:

ISP -> CBS220 ->Router -> LGS108 ->Afterdark X1 Ethernet card(source)

Something tells me CBS220 is not safe before a firewall possible security risks etc. I should have a the router/firewall right after the ISP:

ISP -> firewall/router ->

 

[teknorob23]

Need some advice

I have now for listening following.

Cisco CBS220
Linksys LGS 108
Router.

I plan to put one of these switches before the router but which one.

I am assuming CBS220 will do the best job. The Linksys after the router

Chain:

ISP -> CBS220 ->Router -> LGS108 ->Afterdark X1 Ethernet card(source)

Something tells me CBS220 is not safe before a firewall possible security risks etc. I should have a the router/firewall right after the ISP:

ISP -> firewall/router ->

There’s no real benefit to running a switch before your router. Running one or even daisy chaining two after the router would be worthwhile.

 

[kingoftown1]

Has anyone tried any of the Synergistic Research Ethernet cables? Tempted to try one to compare to my current Furutech.

 

[endless402]

There’s no real benefit to running a switch before your router. Running one or even daisy chaining two after the router would be worthwhile.

so what's this prototype network switch you're running

 

[Progisus]

Has anyone tried any of the Synergistic Research Ethernet cables? Tempted to try one to compare to my current Furutech.

Personally I would stay away from SR ethernet cables. It has been reported of connection problems with them and some other boutique cables. I use cat 5e utp cables that I have made and tested. If an ethernet cable is made to the spec it will provide great sound. Audio is in no way a challenge to ethernet cabling/devices built to spec.

 

[kingoftown1]

@Progisus thanks for the input, but I'm more interested in firsthand observations & experience.

 

[bluenight]

This thread is for audiophiles to share listening experiences with network gear. There are 130 pages worth, with a few interruptions from the Sound Science types. You and your cohorts have no listening experiences to share, so why do you keep coming back? As a reminder, here's the thread title:
"Ethernet cables, Switches and Network related. Based on listening is it worth to buy more expensive ones? Share your listening experience."

I am going to change the thread title. Let's not try to repeat our selfs shall we.

Hopefully we only post when we have something new to add that we have experienced. So that we dont waste people's time.

 

[teknorob23]

so what's this prototype network switch you're running

Sorry, I’ve not updated my kit list in a while. The switch is a live product which is on our website. This is my personal account on head fi that I set up before we started network acoustics, so I’m conscious of not using it to talk about our stuff on here.

 

[audiobomber]

@kingoftown1 I saw a request from you for any listening experience with Synergistic Research vs. Furutech ethernet cable. I had a few premium ethernet cables in-house for a week. Here are my subjective rankings for sound quality, worst to best, used between an EtherRegen B-side (100Mbps) and an exaSound PlayPoint:
Sablon 2020 (1.0 meter) - The Sablon had a warm and weighty sound that was impressive initially, but dulled transients in an unacceptable way. I could not abide this cable in my system.
Furutech LAN-8 NCF (0.6 meter) - This cable is very good value. It has good weight, soundstage and detail. High frequencies are slightly repressed, which may actually benefit some systems.
Audio Sensibility Signature I2S (0.5 meter) - More bass power and more detailed than the Furutech, especially in the high frequencies. I can't find any compromise with the AS cable, but if your system leans too bright, this cable could push it over the edge
Synergistic Research Atmosphere (1 meter) - I could not hear any difference at all between the AS Signature I2S and SR Atmosphere, however I was not equipped to test it with the SR tuning bullets or fancy grounding system.

Other considerations: The Sablon and SR are annoyingly stiff cables. The Furutech locking clips on the RJ45 connectors are cheap plastic, like those on a $10 Amazon cable. Be careful when plugging and unplugging.

All of these cables except the Furutech were owned by a friend of mine and were for sale. I purchased the AS Signature I2S, as the offered price was lower and the flexibility and shorter length suited my system.