Ethernet Cables, do they make a difference?


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.

Thanks!
grm
grm
“....descrime the noise, distortion, etc.” 

Excellent Freudian slip.
clearthink - And you want me to compare this cheap inferior wire not made to audio purposed for $25K USD to what cable another one from your Home Depot store?

@clearthink -

I understand you are now attempting to "save face" by pretending you have misunderstood what it is you and I have been discussing.

Ask yourself why have I insisted on lawyers, a contract and an escrow account. It is to avoid any misunderstanding by clarifying the details in writing and be in a position to enforce the release of funds (if and when we arrive at that point).

That said, the answer to your question is "no". The idea is not to compare the ordinary wire to something else. It is to compare it to itself, once its orientation has been changed. You know, reversed. This means plus/minus polarity is the same, however, the ends of the wire that are on the amp in test "a" are subsequently attached to the speaker terminals in test "b". Also, the ends of the same wire that are on the speaker in test "a" are attached to the amp terminals in test "b". Therefore, whatever the wire, there can be only one spool of it involved. From the spool we shall derive the rest of whatever wiring is required (likely 6 sets).

Your mission, should you choose to accept it, is to *reliably* determine that you are hearing a difference between test "a" and test "b" (i.e. know whether or not the wire orientation is/was or is/was not reversed).

See the following response to Geoff, which addresses *reliably*.
geoffkait - 25 trials? Are you crazy? That’s a lot more trials than even The Amazing Randi demanded. And he never lost a blind test challenge. Why? Because nobody can sit there and pay close attention for 25 trials. Not even for ten trials. Gimme a break. What a ripoff! If the differences are of the subtle variety nobody can pick the correct one many times in a row. That’s the scam. Capish?

@geoffkait

I agree in principal that listener fatigue can influence the test. The wiki article I’ve indicated indicates "QSC recommended that no more than 25 trials be performed". Twenty five is fair. There needs to be a high enough number (25) and high enough confidence level (95%) to ensure the person under test is not simply "guessing" their way through it. Please forgive me for not wanting to give my money away.

Keep in mind, it remains theoretically possible that regardless of however many tests are involved, the person under test can guess them all correctly. Also, as I’ve pointed out many times, I can tell the difference between Amy > Bob regardless of however many times you play them, regardless of how quickly or slowly the duration between the songs are, regardless of the test type, regardless of time of day, temperature and ANY other circumstance. Therefore, those who claim a "major" and "not so subtle" difference when the impossible is stated, realistically should also be able to demonstrate such claim under any condition. Further, because it is conceivable the person under test can guess correctly or in fact can demonstrate the impossible, there is a chance I would loose. This is a chance I am willing to take. Capiche?

EDIT:

I forgot to mention that if anyone is unhappy with the terms, they are at liberty to decline and write "no thank you". I do recall my writing on more than one occasion, "there is no obligation" to prove anything.
Anyone who agrees to your terms would have to be even more naive than you appear to be. I bet you have never done a blind test in your life.
geoffkait - Anyone who agrees to your terms would have to be even more naive than you appear to be. I bet you have never done a blind test in your life.

Actually I have performed blind testing. It really isn’t as overly complicated as you make it out to be, especially if the goal is merely to be honest with oneself. By this I mean there really is no need to prove anything. A simple "demonstration" of your hearing ability (or lack thereof) is sufficient.

Besides, I’m not one who claims the impossible. 😂

EDIT:

@geoffkait

You didn't write "no thank you". 😏