I stream music via TIDAL and the only cable in my system that is not an "Audiophile" cable is the one going from my Gateway to my PC, it is a CAT6 cable. Question is, do "Audiophile" Ethernet cables make any difference/ improvement in sound quality?
Any and all feedback is most appreciated, especially if you noted improvements in your streaming audio SQ with a High-End Ethernet cable.
@cleeds one chooses to believe or not for him/herself. If you here/feel the difference or better say improvement - keep that cable in your system. I offered blind test for thous who are in doubt. Prove to yourself it is better - good, keep the cable.
When I have an opportunity to run the test - I'll happily post my results but they will be MY results in MY system and may not apply to your system. (Too many variables in this equation)
Sorry, but upfront payment was demanded, along with other prerequisites. The posts were deleted by the moderators. The promoter of the scheme is quite persistent, so it’s likely you’ll see what he calls an "opportunity" promoted again. Just stay tuned.
Upfront payment wasn't demanded. It was also loser pays expenses. This would all be handled after the evaluation.
If you here/feel the difference or better say improvement - keep that cable in your system.
Well, of course. I don't use the forum for validation of what I hear, or for validation of the equipment I've chosen for my system. It's just odd that some do indeed come here insisting that we validate our choices to them. If we demur, the accusations follow: We're deluded; we should be prescribed psychiatric medication; we are peddling in "snake oil" for the purposes of getting rich; we are idiots. And other such silliness.
If "advocates" of blind testing were serious, they would submit the protocol for advance review here, and the test would be performed in public, which would allow witnesses and an opportunity for others to participate. This could be done at an audio store or audiophile club. But the "advocates" haven’t shown any interest in that; their call for scientific testing is just a red herring.
It's been offered to be done at a show. I've posted a video of the setup in action and it lists all the components and demonstrates the LACP dynamic LAG.
It's also been offered to train someone (random pick) to do the cable swap.
Upfront payment wasn’t demanded. It was also loser pays expenses. This would all be handled after the evaluation.
Perhaps that was your offer. The proposal to which I refer required a $25,000 advance payment and agreement crafted by an attorney for the supposed "protection" of the listener.
By the way, there is no "loser" in a listening test. A listening test doesn’t really test the listener at all - that’s a misnomer. Rather, it’s an evaluation by the listener of the equipment that is under test. To suggest otherwise shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of a scientific listening test.
My offer, as it was for William, was to do this in the listeners setup. No money involved. Seems way more than fair to the claimant.
It looks like you've made all kinds of "offers." In any event, a scientific listening test doesn't include a "claimant" - you're compromising the validity of the test itself with that kind of notion. Remember, a listening test doesn't test the listener - it tests the equipment that is the subject of the test. Regardless of the result, it can only be strictly applied to that equipment, under those circumstances, and with that listener. That's why, if you want a scientifically valid test, you'll want a large number of samples, and that usually means a large number of listeners.
If the testing isn't scientific, it's of no value at all.
When it comes to scientifically valid double-blind listening tests, you clearly don’t know what you’re talking about. You don’t even understand what it is that you’re testing.
In fact, the ideal listener involved in such a test has no "claim" and no preference whatsoever. Your notion that you’re testing the listener and his "claim" explains why you think the test will have a "loser" and why he should pay your "expenses."
Your extreme bias here is exactly why a valid test has to be double-blind. Your mere presence in the room would have the potential to taint any listening test.
Consider this: if a scientific test of a new drug has no effect on an individual, what "failed" the test? The human? Or the drug? If after two years the drug still has no effect on that individual, does it mean the drug is not effective? Or, does it mean it was not effective with that individual?
If you state that you can jump 10’ straight up from a standstill and either I bring a 10’ high bar or we use your 10’ high bar.
What
are we exactly testing, why isn’t the 10’ high bar valid, and why do we
need 49 other people to attempt to jump over a 10’ high bar?
Behold everyone where simple questions somehow can't be answered
There is a mountain of information about how to conduct scientifically
valid listening tests, going back at least as far as Munson’s
presentations to the AES in the late ’50s. (Yes, that Munson, the guy
from Bell Labs who worked with Fletcher.)
It's been followed by other work by Floyd Toole, Harman and many others. If you're serious about valid listening tests - and I suspect you aren't - you'll want to review some of their work. It will reveal that this matter is nowhere near as simple as you suggest. If you're not serious, or if you have some ulterior motives, you'll just continue arguing here with your nonsense.
Your latest argument here includes the logical fallacy of the excluded middle, so you might want to learn a bit about logic and reason, too.
I have the sighted subjectivist crowd DEMANDING scientifically rigorous testing. Oh this is a hoot.
If you can find a single post where I was maintaining that this was supposed to be AES worthy let me know. I'm simply out to test an individuals claim. Nothing less or more.
Also let me know of ANY AES papers that have accepted sighted evaluation.
Q You say AES doesn’t accept sighted tests. Do they even care one way or the Other? Are there AES Papers accepting or defining blind tests? Or anything related to blind tests? I’d be curious to know and surprised if there are, even though I know the dude from Harmon Kardon who’s high on blind tests is or was the head of AES. I have the impression and I could be wrong that AES is a little bit too conservative to believe in Cable differences or wire directionality or fancy fuses or controversial tweaks. So why would they support or accept blind tests? It doesn’t make sense.
Just scroll up, silly - you’ve been doing your best here to defend the validity of your testing protocol. If you now recognize that your methods haven’t been scientific - good for you. We can move on.
If you wish to engage in semantic argument, I’m not interested.
I for one say thet yes they do make a difference, I have just replaced a 30 foot ethernet cable with one made with better materials and rfi and other screens. and I have to say I am very pleased with the results, the treble especially is less pronounced and altogether much more believable. Yes I do know some of you will say i am imagining it but what I say is this the person who changes a cheap fairly long cable and replaces it with a very wll made shielded cable and dosn't hear a differense is needing their ears cleaned out
kosst_amojan Irony... Snake oilers demanding "scientific" listening evaluations. I hate to break it to you, but nothing I’ve seen here remotely resembles what would pass as a scientific evaluation.
>>>>Let me break it to you, Mr. Kownitall. There is no such thing as a scientifically valid listening test. Full stop. If you think there is you’re simply mistaken or misinformed, whatever. We’ve been over all of this before so I’ll leave it to the student to search the archives. I did testing, you know, professionally. Not in my mother’s basement. So you can stop putting on airs.
jinjuku Again if someone says they can jump up 10’ from a stand it’s TRIVIAL to test this claim. This doesn’t need a science lab with interns, tons of diagnostic equipment and dissertation.
>>>>Uh, but nobody’s making that claim. No one is claiming he can fly or that UFOs are real, either. That’s what we call a Strawman Argument. People can think up all kinds of absurd cases that have no relevance to the actual issue at hand.
Costco, you haven’t been following. If he heard it it doesn’t matter if the test was “scientifically valid” or not. And it does not matter if there were mistakes somewhere in his system or if the system was not the ultimate in resolution or if he had issues with hearing or if the weather wasn’t the best. He had positive results *in spite* of all that. Hel-loo!
Positive results are much more important and interesting than negative results, which don’t mean anything taken as a single test, don’t you think? Nothing succeeds like success. And failure is no success at all. I suggest you go back to one of my posts where I explain everything and memorize it.
The level of abject ignorance here proudly displayed by forum users such as jinjuku and kosst are a striking demonstration of the American education system that such level of scientific illiteracy could prevail among a population such as is found here that would pretend to be knowledgeable and explains why the USA has for years been in state of steady decline compared to the substantial advancements that much of the rest of the modern world has made during the same time period. Your future is not bright if the solution to your ignorance is to insult degrade and seek to publically embarrass and chastise a person who has tried to enlighten you even by some small measure do not misunderstand me I think cleeds is worse than a winkly dinkler and it is readily apparent from reading multiple of his posts that he is not what he acts like he is and in fact I am not even sure that he has an audio system at all but he has been correct in his assessments evaluation and presentation of valid listening tests and that there are those who argue so boisterously against such simple facts is a public indictment of the status of the US which of course his few loud critics will not be able to recognize themselves except perhaps with the assistance of they're parents and even in that case I am not sure.
@geoffkait Looks like you forgot the question. Do Ethernet cables make a difference? No, they don’t. That’s a proven fact. Does your imagination make the difference? Yes, it does, and we can prove that all day long too.
kosst_amojan"And Clearthink, how did you come up with that name...you can't tell the difference between being challenged or being insulted."
Do you want me to apologize to you for causing you a headscratcher over my choice of screenname maybe you will give the matter some serious consideration and with the passage of sufficient time arrive at a reasonable conclusion if you are fortunate because it seems to trouble you deeply and as for not knowing when it is that you think you are insulting me that is most amusing it is not likely that a middle school student such as yourself is capable of insulting me you obviously have too high of an opinion of yourself which is understandable it is what is expected from children they are egocentric in their little world.
>>>>Uh, but nobody’s making that claim. No one is claiming
he can fly or that UFOs are real, either. That’s what we call a Strawman
Argument. People can think up all kinds of absurd cases that have no
relevance to the actual issue at hand
What? All sorts of zero evidence based claims are in this very thread.
I view a claim of a improved bass response due to a change in Ethernet cabling is just as specious as a claim you can flap your arms and fly.
I've only seen one person have the intellectual honesty to go ears only.
Talking about just using my ears, isn't that what we are supposed to be doing in this hobby of ours. Can anyone say that they have listened to say three ethernet cables and one is made of copper, one of silver and one a cheap bit of wire and say there is no difference in quality from each. That is utter codswollop because there is going to be a difference in the copper and the silver straight away and if your ears are clean you will definitely hear it. If not save yourself a lot of money and buy a boombox.
@rhg88 you won’t believe how much fun it is to read this thread on the long boring meeting. Way more fun than doing high throughput network architecture itself. I wish I had a budget for the data centre cables like these guys, buying butique Ethernet cables.
Do you have an open mind or is your mind made up before you do any listening ? I don’t have the money to splash out on unnecesary pieces of wire so if I didn’t hear a difference I wouldn’t be buying it just to salve my imagination as you put it.
I think the argument is if your are happy to spend the money on cables or componentry because YOU feel there is a difference in your listening environment, be free to do so because IMHO THAT is what HiFi is about. Yes there is the physics, chemistry and quantum.... but each of us is different and appreciate changes differently. The micro arguments and opinions are worthless really. Just ego chest pumping.
I have used CAT5e cable from my router from NAS to Amplifier, from streamer to Amplifier, then changed to Cat8. The sound was palpably cleaner. I put this to the superior cable insulation of Cat8 (each pair insulated). It is the quality of the signal, not the speed. Its how many packet rejects there is for the message stream not speed. Quality of the cable shielding makes 10GBs/100GBs/1000GBs irrelevant if the continuity of the message packets are interrupted. Quality of cable does mean quality to my ears. Maybe not to yours. I am not debating your hearing to mine. I like what I hear. I am not telling you what you need to hear from my experience. Get it?
Oh. I could not help my self. I posted. I just love this hobby. Lets not spoil it with egos and insults. We each experience individual changes and nuances in the sound we hear. Isn't that why we have different components that make up our systems to our liking?
There
appears to be two basic sides to this debate. Those who don't buy that
Ethernet cables make a difference, and their opinion is buttressed by
reams of facts. Then you have those who think they do make a difference,
and they have no facts at all to buttress their claim. Their claims
don't even make sense in light of how the technology works
This is mistaken. There is a third position in this discussion - it needn't be a "debate" - and that's the one of an undecided skeptic. I certainly understand those who reason that there should be no audible differences at all between competent Ethernet cables. The very nature of digital transmission suggests that if the signal can be transferred without error, the output should be identical to the input and the sound should be the same. That's not difficult to understand.
Yet multiple audiophiles here using a variety of systems attest to substantial differences between these cables. Because in the past I've been quite surprised at what can make an audible difference in a sound system, I'm reluctant to dismiss those reports with a wave of the hand.
Complicating this discussion - again, it needn't be a "debate" - is the remarkable vitriol from the "nay-sayers." Those who report differences are often vilified as delusional, or "snake-oilers" getting rich while perpetrating some sort of fraud, or worse. Those claims come from just a few of the forum's contributors, and are repeated with regularity at anyone who won't accept their position ... including myself. This nastiness is often combined with illogic, most commonly the errors of circular reasoning, the excluded middle and ad hominem attacks, which of course undermines their position. And I'm trying to be kind here. Oddly, those posters who argue that science is on their side readily abandon it when asked if there's any valid scientific listening tests to support their claim. Indeed, it has become apparent that some of them have no familiarity with the science of such tests, which has been pretty well established, and which I've referenced previously.
I'm not a big fan of scientific listening tests, which I think are mostly a waste of an audiophile's time. I've participated in a few and the results were interesting, and I've proposed that perhaps as a group we could design a test that could be conducted in public to test the Ethernet claims. But who opposes such tests? Those who claim science is on their side! This seemingly intractable position only ensures that the "scientists" will continue their attacks against those who are simply reporting what they hear.
Of course, there are those who have offered to participate in such tests provided money is at stake and agreements made with attorneys to "protect" participants, or who have required other preconditions to testing, such as following an unscientific protocol. Those forum contributors can't be taken seriously.
@amg56 I think the argument is if your are happy to spend the money on cables
or componentry because YOU feel there is a difference in your listening
environment, be free to do so because IMHO THAT is what HiFi is about.
Yes there is the physics, chemistry and quantum.... but each of us is
different and appreciate changes differently. The micro arguments and
opinions are worthless really. Just ego chest pumping
I agree with you 100% that is why I am not going to waste my time and precious listening time with this thread so game over for me. I am fed up with ludites who will not even let someone else have a say without even having the good manners to have their say without resorting to fasehoods. Seemingly it is all in my imagination and that to a man that went through up till he was in his 30s playing classical guitar at a level where I was giving concerts regularly. When family comitments changed and my wife became ill I had to give it all up and care for her but do remember I still have my ears , they are quite perceptive yet and I do know what I am looking for so it is not all in my imagination.
gochurchgo Digital cables can’t possibly improve anything. It’s just funneling 1’s and 0’s.
Analog cables do influence the sound and I am a believer however.
>>>>Read my lips. 💋 It’s not (rpt not) the information contained in the signal that determines the outcome. It’s the electromagnetic wave photons) that carries the signal. Repeating the 1s and 0s mantra doesn’t mean anything. The reason digital and analog cables sound different is because of the physical and electrical differences between/among cables and their influence on the electromagnetic wave.
You must have a verified phone number and physical address in order to post in the Audiogon Forums. Please return to Audiogon.com and complete this step. If you have any questions please contact Support.
