Most Important, Unloved Cable...

Birds of a feather flock together. 🦃 🦃 🦃

Apparently someone objected to Chord’s use of hyperbole. Well, La Dee Dah! Judge Judy calls that puffing. Completely legal. I once had coffee at a diner in NYC that boasted World’s Best Coffee. Does that justify a lawsuit? Only in a naysayer’s cute little daydream. 🍦 If we had lawsuits for every time some naysayer objected to what he perceived as hyperbole or too expensive or preposterous the courts would be backed up from here to next Tuesday. That’s what is known over here as a nothing burger. 🍔

jinjuku
Here’s another video where I debunk WireWorlds Q/A.

Directly address their Triboelectric B.S.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8pWvJwQOPiY

I hate to judge before all the facts are in but jinjuku’s argument is the same ridiculous argument that naysayers have been using for years attempting to explain why power cords cannot influence the sound, and why there can be no audible difference among power cords, since the last four feet of cable can’t correct the problems in the miles of cable from the power company to the transformer or from the transformer to the wall outlet. We get the same sort of naysayer argument for CDs too - I.e., that nothing can change the sound on the CD because the data is physical and error correction fixes any errors that occur while the laser reads the data. So, it appears jinjuku just tossed up another nothing burger. 🍔

One assumes jinjuku would attempt to debunk wire directionality by claiming that data transfer is not corrupted or changed when the cables are reversed so therefore wire directionality doesn't exist. 😄

Eggs ackly! So are sweetness, presence, air and venue recognition. ⛪️

Geoffkait: "One assumes jinjuku would attempt to debunk wire directionality by claiming that data transfer is not corrupted or changed when the cables are reversed so therefore wire directionality doesn’t exist."

To which jinjuku replied,

"Ethernet cables aren’t directional though... And before you go talking about STP cabling, don’t talk about it in a vacuum, because how the shield is tied is dependent on the installation environment.

You really have no clue what you are talking about."

Whoa! Easy, big fella. I’m not talking about shielded cables, Mr. Smarty Pants. Obviously you didn’t get the memo. This is what happens when some pseudo skeptic from somewhere out of the blue pops in and pops off. 🍾 This is going to be fun but I’m not saying for whom. 😬

 

Geoffkait: Whoa! Easy, big fella. I’m not talking about shielded cables.

to which jujitsu replied,

"If it's not about the shield on a STP Ethernet cable, then it's not going to be anything else.

Ethernet is either wired TIA586A or TIA586B straight through, or 586A on one end 586B on the other end for cross over.

Most horizontal run will be CCA, patch is stranded (for better strain resistance and flexibility). Save yourself the laughable argument with grain structure, crystalline structure, etc...

Ethernet is bidirectional."

>>>>>>All wire is bidirectional inasmuch as one can send voice and data over it in either direction. But as fate would have it wire is audibly better in one direction than the other. Even shielded cable that is "directional" sonically according to the shield terminations points is also "directional" sonically according to the direction of the copper conductor. So, it would help to keep track of both aspects of the cable construction. Follow?

He who laughs last laughs best. 😄

shadorne
Since there is no audio clock timing information conveyed over an ethernet cable it can’t make any difference at all UNLESS your gear is crap (something extraneous affected by the cable used like grounding or load or digital noise related crosstalk on to the audio signal). Same for an identical file streamed on the internet halfway across the world or one from your local server.

Why can’t folks understand this?

>>>>Uh, there is no clock timing information conveyed over a fuse that is located right where the AC comes into the amplifier, either. Yet the fuse is directional. Imagine that! 😳
So much for that theory. Next!

Ouch! That hurts, Shadorne! That’s really interesting but did you know that the digital cable between the CD player and the amp, you know, the one that carries digital data is directional? Bet ya didn’t. 😄 Digital, schmigital. The signal propagates just like an analog signal. You know, at near light speed. Since it is made up of photons. Have you been sleeping in class again, Shadrack?

shadorne
@geoffkait

Sigh! Yes of course digital propagates as an analog signal. The key is to understand that the threshold between a 1 or a Zero is so large and that checksum and other additional packet error checking information allows a packet of digital data to arrive in the memory of downstream devices perfectly.

If digital was not such an incredibly robust method of data storage and transmission then internet and computers and software would not function at all. What errors we do encounter are down to hardware or programming errors in the devices and switches themselves and not the ethernet wires which work to spec or don't work (in which case a dropout can occur).

>>>>That's pretty much the same ridiculous argument the CD industry has been cramming down our throats for the past 35 years. Perfect Sound Forever. But obviously the error detection/correction for CD is not perfect. That's why you can improve CD playback so much. Why should I believe any digital device is perfect just because it's digital? 

Geoffkait: "I once had coffee at a diner in NYC that boasted World’s Best Coffee."

To which jujitsu replied,

"For a purported expert of what constitutes valid testing you sure don’t understand the difference between an entirely subjective claim (taste) with objective ones like increased sound stage, stereo separation, more defined highs etc..."

>>>>>As someone pointed out already those audio characteristics are not objective. I already addressed subjective characteristics in two posts. To clarify what I am referring to, and avoid confusion, the parameters I described included separation of instruments which of course is not to be confused with channel separation. I also included musicality, presence, air and sweetness. No one would dispute that some audio parameters CAN be measured, channel separation, frequency response, dynamic range to name three.

Now if Chord simply said "The world’s best sounding cable" they would have been fine.

I feel like the Ben Shapiro of Audio.

>>>>>You might feel like the Ben Shapiro of Audio but you sound like the Ben Stiller of Audio.

Whoa! Chill out! What we have here is really just an excellent example of an appeal to authority. You know, an illogical argument. "I know how networked audio works (therefore you should believe my test and my conclusion that there can be no difference among Ethernet cables)." 

The problem for jujitsu is all the evidence from folks who have actually heard the differences among Ethernet cables. We are familiar with the refrain, "my test showed no differences and I’m an expert in such and such, therefore my results must be right!"

Exhibit A, these 3 random reports gleaned from cyberspace,

1. With my set-up of a Aurender N10 and Bricasti M1 I originally had from the router to the Aurender used a Cat 5e that my home was wired with and it was OK when I did only Sonos connect. But when I moved up to the Aurender and Bricasti it was not so moved to AQ vodka - Nordost at the time did not come out with there network cables yet so I went with AQ (also the diamond AQ is beyond ridiculous in $$’s). That was good until I got a demo with the new Nordost Heimdall 2 network cable that blew them all away. Bass was much better and controlled and the stream just generally sounded better overall. I would certainly say that the network cable does make a difference. I know many will say it does not but I know what I heard and smile.

2. I use Supra cat 8. To my ears it ’sounds’ infinitely better than plain vanilla Ethernet cable of any cat, and much better than an Audioquest Cinnamon I had been using. And it’s only $47 for a 1.0 m. run. Clean, clear, lots of ’air.’

3. So I purchased a couple of Surpa Cat 8 Ethernet cables. Used them to replace the generic Cat 8 and Cat 7 I was using. To my surprise, I heard an immediate difference. I was shocked. But it was evident. Clarity. sharpness in vocals. better resolution. tighter bottom. Although they might have been a bit bright. Not sure yet. I can’t figure it out. I wish I didn’t hear it. It’s doubtful I’ll go out and start listening to other Ethernet cables, but at $47 the Supra seemed to be a good investment. I won’t be returning them.

dynaquest wrote,

"Geoff chastises for "appealing to authority" and then he immediately turns around and "appeals" the the "authority" of three, random, unidentified cable reviewers. Who, since they said the cable made a huge difference, it must therefore be true. Baloney."

>>>>>>You don’t even know what an appeal to authority is, do you? You don’t know what empirical evidence is either as we shall see below.

Then dynaquest wrote,

""Appeals to authority are not valid arguments, but nor is it reasonable to disregard the claims of experts who have a demonstrated depth of knowledge unless one has a similar level of understanding and/or access to empirical evidence." Which Geoff does not."

>>>>But I do have access to empirical evidence. I just provided it. Hel-loo! You know, the 3 guys without impaired hearing. Duh! You apparently don’t know what empirical evidence is, either. That's two strikes. ⚾️ ⚾️ I can throw them slower for you, just let me know.

""I don't see, nor have seen any credible hypothesis promoted, how a $700 cable with 8 metal conductors and shield (either floated, full/partial tied) would mitigate this noise vs another like built, 8 metal conductors and shield (either floated, full/partial tied) where they both pass what the standards body deems as in spec. "

So, you haven't seen one. Who cares?

Yeah, high end audio equipment that is not well made. That makes a whole lot of sense. 😳

shadorne wrote,

"All of the anecdotal reports are pure placebo (result of parting with $700) effect but many others are actual equipment issues that happen to be identified or brought to a users attention when swapping out cables."

You say placebo. I say evidence. I win. Take two placebos and see me in the morning.

shadorne wrote,

"I was totally unable to hear any differences on any of the digital inputs on my DAC (USB, optical, coax) with or without an audio bridge (Singxer SU 1)."

You don't say? 😄

shadorne

@geoffkait

Just a heads up you misquoted me.

I said "Some" not "All"

Whatever. You cannot prove it, in any case, either some or all are explained by placebos. You also claimed many of the rest of the positive results were probably equipment issues, which you can’t prove, either. It’s just the usual ridiculous crap naysayers come up with to try to save face. One assumes you would agree, however, that the remaining positive results, subtracting the ones you claim are placebos and the ones you claim are equipment issues, are real positive results. Well, now we’re getting somewhere! 😄

Gosh, that's fascinating.

dynaquest4
Just to remind what this discussion is about and why "we" disagree with esoteric, expensive Ethernet cable being able to actually IMPROVE the sound quality of a streamed audio program over a basic spec cable...it is this.

When you have spent (for example) $40,000 on your speakers and another $50,000 on playback delivery and amplification equipment, you have already demonstrated that you are compulsive in this hobby. Perhaps you have no other interests or entertainment outlets. Like the auto-geek squeezing a few more horsepower out of a high performance engine, you seek any avenue (like expensive cables) to ”make it better." It is in this audio zone (where true performance cannot be measured) that expectation bias rules. Those that understand it, temper their follow on purchases with good judgement. Those that do not, bleed from their wallet and refuse to accept that there are product manufactures that understand you, know you are an easy mark and take advantage of your naivety.

>>>>>If you object to the high cost of some peoples' systems go on Dr. Phil. This debate has nothing to do with the cost of systems. If you had been following the thread you would have seen that many, if not most systems, on which folks actually heard differences for Ethernet cables were not expensive ones. So that’s only a Strawman argument, a logical fallacy. Expectation bias can be controlled through careful testing. So that argument can be thrown out as well. Looks like you struck out again. Better luck next time, Slugger!

shadorne

@jinjuku

"All you will ever get here is evasiveness.

It is exactly the same that Randi found.

When challenged hucksters are full of bravado and then they get even louder and louder about how confident they are."

>>>>Whoa! What? Are you insane? I was the subject of Randi’s trolling in five count em five of his weekly blogs. He went after me for the clock, he went after me for the Intelligent Chip and he went after me for the Teleportation Tweak. Randi was only interested in one thing. Getting attention. As a former Las Vegas magician he was skilled in drumming up an audience. But Randi had no interest whatsoever in high end audio, or low end audio for that matter. Except if it got him some attention. One assumes the business of going after dowsers and spoon benders was rapidly drying up. His whole James Randi Education Foundation schtick was founded on the idea of going after the paranormal. That’s why Johnny Carson left him a million bucks, to found the "education foundation." To go after charlatans and ghost busters. Not to go after audiophiles. Hel-loo! But, as they say in Paree, any port in a storm. ⛈ ⛈

How anyone can equate high end audio with the paranormal is just plane crazy. I even had one of Randi’s goons threaten to kick my you know what. I even had one of his goon’s challenge me to a karate fight on board the Randi yatch down in the Caribbean. I declined the offer as I did not wish to hurt the poor fellow. The trouble with pseudo skeptics is they’re not equipped to deal with reality. It’s all about attention, you know, like the YouTube video currently under discussion. 😛

Did someone forget to put out the Roach Motels last night? 

Jujitsu wrote,

"Have me out and I’ll help you regurgitate them if it already isn’t terminal :-)"

Good comeback. Cough, cough. By the way, congrats on the almost complete sentence. 😛

I don’t know anything about yellow paint but can I suggest someone has been sneaking from the bottle of stupid pills? 💊

shadorne wrote,

"My setup isn’t affected audibly by cables but I believe others have encountered this phenomenon."

Too funny!! 😀 That deserves the Laughing Goat Award for the funniest post of the week. 🐐

willemj, you mentioned on some thread here you had a second system in your study. Can I suggest you might have been better off if you had not listened to quite so much music there and had used that particular room for the purpose it was intended? You might consider adding Little Miss Manners to the library in your study.

Would it be presumptuous of us to expect an apology from jujitsu after his little get together? 😛

90% of "Einstein quotes" he never actually said, maybe especially the one quoted. The reason I say that is because it wouldn’t make sense to have the sign wrong in his famous equation since the equation represented the equivalency of mass and energy. It would be analogous to saying I got the sign wrong for the expression,

a box of rocks = fire

and wrote,

a box of rocks = - fire

It’s still the same idea.

Also, I probably wouldn’t call electrons that move at the snail’s pace of 1 cm/hour "flowing." Nor would I say they were "emerging" from anywhere. They are already there.

Carry on. Smoke if ya got em.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. One test means nothing. Blind test, ABA, AB, what have you. A test cannot prove anything, but it certainly cannot prove that there are no differences among cables if the results are negative. Too many things can go wrong, even when everyone is on the up and up and trying to be thorough, etc. Geez, even disrupting the connections when unplugging and plugging cables during testing changes the whole playing field. Come on, people! No offense to anyone testing but don’t try to pull the wool over anyone’s eyes.

The test has no value for the claimant either.but you are free to believe whatever you want to.

Geez, that’s the best you guys can come up with? Expectation bias? 😬 Give me a break. I can give you at least five reasons off the top of my head why negative results don’t mean anything. I was the Government witness for the testing and evaluator of test results for a multi billion dollar critical communications project. Cables are merely child’s play. Cut me some slack, Jack.

Anyone who believes negative results can be used to prove anything is a ____________. If negative results meant anything every Yahoo in the world would be claiming this cable is a scam, that fuse is a scam, this tweak is a scam, that tweak is a scam, etc. Follow? I mean, they already do that, now they’re trying to dress up their statements in some sort of scientific finery. You can paint a turkey different colors, it’s still a turkey. 🦃 When someone wants to join the debate and get noticed but doesn't have a real argument that's usually when the name calling starts. 😄

shadorne
Geoff,

The onus is on the person making wild claims to provide proof. If someone else says it is a scam then those making the wild claim should simply provide proof to the contrary.

That is how science works. Jinjuku should have been challenged and easily proved wrong a long time ago( if any of the wild cable claims were the least bit true).

Those who are justifiably skeptical do not have to provide proof that the wildest claims are indeed bogus. Every significant leap in technology comes with a repeatible demonstration to convince others of the new scientific discovery.

>>>>>>Uh, give me a break. This is a hobby, not some pretend science project or peer review or any such thing. There is no audio Oversight Committee and we don't follow AES rules or any such thing. I'm afraid we are on our own. There is no onus on anyone for anything. Not for the claimants not for the naysayers. That’s in your head. That’s what naysayers have been using for decades trying to win the same argument. No one has to prove anything or back up claims. They don't even have make claims or provide explanations. Those are all old wives' tales. maybe some people are skeptical in the real sense of the word, you know, they actually investigate things and are curious about things, but most here are just pretending to be skeptics. They're actually pseudo skeptics. No offense intended.

jinjuku
Why Pink? Quite offensive, I’d say. : )
Don’t color shame my Invisible Pink Unicorn Buddy. He’s having a hard enough time with the naysayers that would like some evidence other then my and a few 100 thousand other peoples say so.

>>>>>>Yeah, right. Voting is real scientific. 😀 On the other hand I would not be surprised if there were 100 thousand who are somewhat hearing impaired 👂🏻and/or all thumbs. 👎🏻

Jujistu
I can leap tall buildings in a single bound but it wouldn’t be scientifically significant even if you asked me to prove it to so I don’t bother with it. Need a rather large N of people jumping buildings for my claim to be even relevant.

>>>>>>That’s quite a silly argument. Kind of what I’ve come to expect from naysayers, if I can speak frankly. 😁

Cut me some slack, Jack. I know that's what you said. And I responded by pointing out....oh, never mind!

Ouch! Another name caller with no real argument enters the fray. Let's get it together, people. Heck, I don’t even use cables. Is that wrong? And does that mean I can’t post on this thread? 😀 Should I ban myself?

Wow, I guess I didn’t realize there were so many Crusader Rabbits on this forum. Let the Crusades begin! 🐇🐇🐇🐇. Look out for the rabbit droppings!