Does high quality digital cables matter?
Comments
-
Deleted - duplicate post.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country!
-
DarqueKnight wrote: »First you said this:
Then, when I pointed out that you misunderstood and my analogy could not be used for your cause, you said this:
So, "resorting" to analogies is a "welcome point" when you think it agrees with you, but it's a bad thing when it disagrees with you. Seems like sour grapes to me.
I'll just stick to answering your response where it fits into the over all conversation about Ethernet and Packetized data
It was a welcome point because it proved you have zero idea what you are talking about.
As soon as I took your poorly thought out analog and pointed out to your chagrin that the customer driving the car didn't know two ships showed up 4 hours apart you then SWITCH analogies to baking cakes of all things.
Speaking of baking: You can't have your cake and eat it too.DarqueKnight wrote: »You think that digitizing a wideband multi-frequency signal no longer makes it a wideband multi-frequency signal. The digitized form is still wideband and multi-frequency, it is just converted to discrete components.
I think as far as Ethernet is concerned it's data. It will become Wideband and multi-frequency when the computer gets it. The computer reconstructs it.
Let me know when I can come to your place with a Server/Client/Switch. I have $1600 says you can't tell 13/15 times which direction the arrows are facing on the Audioquest Vodka 1.5 meter cable if you aren't staring at it.
Put up or shut up about it already. -
Habanero Monk wrote: »Put up or shut up about it already.
Your Internet tough guy routine is very amusing.Habanero Monk wrote: »It was a welcome point because it proved you have zero idea what you are talking about.
You didn't say that I proved that I didn't know what I was talking about. You said my analogy was welcome because it supported your point:Habanero Monk wrote: »DK's welcome point about transporting car parts via ship makes my point:
You have two different ships show up 4 hours apart, they could have even come by different routes. They all get parts offloaded next day, cars assembled, trucked to show room.
The consumer purchasing the car is none the wiser for knowing that the parts came by two different routes and 4 hours apart.Habanero Monk wrote: »As soon as I took your poorly thought out analog and pointed out to your chagrin that the customer driving the car didn't know two ships showed up 4 hours apart you then SWITCH analogies to baking cakes of all things.
I was definitely not chagrined. I was amused. My analogy had nothing to do with what you said. It seems that you were the one who was disappointed when I pointed out your error in understanding.Habanero Monk wrote: »I think as far as Ethernet is concerned it's data. It will become Wideband and multi-frequency when the computer gets it. The computer reconstructs it.
You think, but you don't know. You still have much to learn. The wideband and multi-frequency aspects of the signal must be preserved in digital form in order for the D/A converter to accurately construct analog signals.Habanero Monk wrote: »Let me know when I can come to your place with a Server/Client/Switch. I have $1600 says you can't tell 13/15 times which direction the arrows are facing on the Audioquest Vodka 1.5 meter cable if you aren't staring at it.
Well, I'm not one of the people claiming to be able to hear differences in Ethernet cables. I don't have a network audio rig, therefore I am not sure why you think administering such a test to me would be of general interest. I did point you to others who claim to be able to hear differences in Ethernet cables and I would expect you to take your challenge to them.
Although I am not currently interested I computer audio, I expect that it is something I will be of interest to me in the near future. Hence, my interest in the topic. It would actually be to my economic benefit if I cannot hear differences in Ethernet cables.
In this thread, I posted a link to an exercise that demonstrated that I could not hear or see a difference in HDMI cables. I also said I have never heard a difference in any of the digital coax or optical cables I have used. However, I realize that my failure to perceive differences in digital cable performance does not mean that others cannot.
For the third time, can you provide a citation to the article where the AQ or MIT sales reps could not pick out their own company's cables in a blind test?
No comment on your hero's claim to have invented something that already existed and his insistence on using a test for stereo that is scientifically invalid?Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
YawnToo many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo.
-
Yawn
Why are you even here? Have you contributed anything? All I've see is you jumping on the cable debates. Move along.... -
Habanero Monk wrote: »Ok, how do I know you don't suck at terminating data cable? Was the cable used for Ethernet data or other?
It was used for both "Ethernet data" and DSD "data".
As I said, if "you guys" listen as well as you read, it's no wonder you cannot hear differences in cables (not withstanding if your system is mid to low resolution).
As pointed out in the orignial post (from page 2) and the post you quoted, the exact same cable was used to transmit computer "data" from from a router to a computer, transmitting images and colors. It was also used to transmit a DSD signal from an RJ45 jack installed in my Denon DVD-1920 modified player to my self built DAC. The connections and cabling in both the DSD transport and DAC function(ed) perfectly. the only change was the Ethernet cable. In the computer router transmitting computer "data" it functioned semmingly "unaffected". When used from the DSD transport to the DAC, transmitting a DSD "data" signal, the Ethernet cable failed to transmit the "data".
This is proof positive that what is being sent through an ethernet cable is as important as the cable itself and that not all "data" is the same.
Taken from a recent Audioholics reply regarding "Club Polk" and Polk speakers:
"I'm yet to hear a Polk speaker that merits more than a sentence and 60 seconds discussion."![:\](https://forum.polkaudio.com/resources/emoji/confused.png ":\")
My response is: If you need 60 seconds to respond in one sentence, you probably should't be evaluating Polk speakers.....
"Green leaves reveal the heart spoken Khatru"- Jon Anderson
"Have A Little Faith! And Everything You'll Face, Will Jump From Out Right On Into Place! Yeah! Take A Little Time! And Everything You'll Find, Will Move From Gloom Right On Into Shine!"- Arthur Lee -
Your entire post is made on the assumption of error (And a lot of it at that). Can you please explain to me how many digital signal errors are generally observed in a Cat6 cable meeting spec?
I think that what you'll find is the error rate is far less than anything that can cause a discernible difference in performance. It would take an insane amount of error to justify directional digital cables. This whole notion of "certain signals are easier for cables to transport than others" is a bunch of hogwash. A cable doesn't care about strain. It either transports the signal or it doesn't. Sure, hundreds of variables impact that ability to transport a data signal, but, none make it "Easier" or "Harder" for that cable to transport said signal. It either does or it doesn't. With the same error rate regardless.
Please point out how my post is in error, specifically.
Have you seen high powered photographic pictures of the crystal grain structure of TPC (Tough Pitch Copper) verses PCOCC (Pure Copper Ohno Continuous Cast)? The difference in grain structure is astounding.
Also, a cross section of PCOCC (top) and TPC (bottom)
As you can see, due to the structure of the PCOCC, the "data signal" has much less resistance (interference) due to a purer copper cable. This, in turn leads to less induced error in the "data" signal because the signal moves more effectively through the PCOCC cable. With less induced error inthe "data" signal, you gain higer fidelity audio. For your level of understanding, the picture below may make it more straightforward to you.
You may think that the error rate is lower than what humans can hear, but is this because you cannot detect it with a measuring device (meter, etc.)? That is a faulty assumption.
Also, the idea of one "data" signal being easier to transport is absolutely fact. AGAIN, I will refer you to my post on page 2 regarding using the same ethernet cable transporting a computer "data" signal and a DSD "data" signal transported from my modified "DSD transport" to my DAC via the same ethernet cable. This clearly shows how one "data" signal (computer producing images and colors) and another (DSD producing high resolution audio) can make a difference in the success (or failure) of the "data" signal transportation. A cable obviously does cair about "strain".
You are absolutely 100% wrong about the idea of a cable "either transports a signal or it doesn't" and you are using faulty logic. Error is introduced to an electric signal in wiring regardless of whether it's digital or analog. the amount of error is dependent on many many things, but part of the error comes from the cable (see above for further explanation in case you didn't get it the first time) So, would you like to re-think this "hogwash" thought?
Taken from a recent Audioholics reply regarding "Club Polk" and Polk speakers:
"I'm yet to hear a Polk speaker that merits more than a sentence and 60 seconds discussion."
My response is: If you need 60 seconds to respond in one sentence, you probably should't be evaluating Polk speakers.....
"Green leaves reveal the heart spoken Khatru"- Jon Anderson
"Have A Little Faith! And Everything You'll Face, Will Jump From Out Right On Into Place! Yeah! Take A Little Time! And Everything You'll Find, Will Move From Gloom Right On Into Shine!"- Arthur Lee -
It was used for both "Ethernet data" and DSD "data".
As I said, if "you guys" listen as well as you read, it's no wonder you cannot hear differences in cables (not withstanding if your system is mid to low resolution).
As pointed out in the orignial post (from page 2) and the post you quoted, the exact same cable was used to transmit computer "data" from from a router to a computer, transmitting images and colors. It was also used to transmit a DSD signal from an RJ45 jack installed in my Denon DVD-1920 modified player to my self built DAC. The connections and cabling in both the DSD transport and DAC function(ed) perfectly. the only change was the Ethernet cable. In the computer router transmitting computer "data" it functioned semmingly "unaffected". When used from the DSD transport to the DAC, transmitting a DSD "data" signal, the Ethernet cable failed to transmit the "data".
This is proof positive that what is being sent through an ethernet cable is as important as the cable itself and that not all "data" is the same.
You listen about as well as you read also. I've been talking solely about Ethernet. Not DSD.
It's entirely possible that they cable you made is sub optimal but due to the nature of TCP and other protocols higher in the OSI stack that it actually passed data on an Ethernet network and you where blissfully unaware. That when you used it for DSD that it's not designed to do the same thing as a mechanism like TCP and failed.
This possibility didn't cross your mind? I'm not interested in your use for DSD transport. It isn't what we are discussing. -
Please point out how my post is in error, specifically.
Have you seen high powered photographic pictures of the crystal grain structure of TPC (Tough Pitch Copper) verses PCOCC (Pure Copper Ohno Continuous Cast)? The difference in grain structure is astounding.
Also, a cross section of PCOCC (top) and TPC (bottom)
As you can see, due to the structure of the PCOCC, the "data signal" has much less resistance (interference) due to a purer copper cable. This, in turn leads to less induced error in the "data" signal because the signal moves more effectively through the PCOCC cable. With less induced error inthe "data" signal, you gain higer fidelity audio. For your level of understanding, the picture below may make it more straightforward to you.
You may think that the error rate is lower than what humans can hear, but is this because you cannot detect it with a measuring device (meter, etc.)? That is a faulty assumption.
So are the copper PCB traces, solder joints, leads on the IC package all PCOCC in your system? -
Habanero Monk wrote: »So are the copper PCB traces, solder joints, leads on the IC package all PCOCC in your system?
This ranks right up there with the "premium power cords with high grade copper (or silver) make no sense because the power travels through miles and miles of "ordinary" copper and the wiring in the wall is ordinary copper". It is the same nonsense as saying water filters are useless because the water travels trough miles and miles of ordinary pipe and the pipe in the walls is ordinary pipe. Filtering power cords can reject environmental noise and can reduce noise in the power signal.
If you are performance oriented, you do what you can to preserve signal integrity once the signal leaves a component. Everything the signal passes through changes it in some way. Any cable is going to affect the signal in some detrimental way. That detriment may or may not be audibly or visibly perceptible. It makes sense to be aware that environmental noise and the noise characteristics of a cable might have some perceptible effect on signal integrity. With that in mind, evaluating the performance of different cable options is a good idea.
We usually don't have any control over the type of copper and grade of solder used in our audio and video components. However, if we are performance oriented, that does not mean we should not take measures to preserve signal integrity between components by selecting cables that do the least amount of harm.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DarqueKnight wrote: »This ranks right up there with the "premium power cords with high grade copper (or silver) make no sense because the power travels through miles and miles of "ordinary" copper and the wiring in the wall is ordinary copper". It is the same nonsense as saying water filters are useless because the water travels trough miles and miles of ordinary pipe and the pipe in the walls is ordinary pipe. Filtering power cords can reject environmental noise and can reduce noise in the power signal.
If you are performance oriented, you do what you can to preserve signal integrity once the signal leaves a component. Everything the signal passes through changes it in some way. Any cable is going to affect the signal in some detrimental way. That detriment may or may not be audibly or visibly perceptible. It makes sense to be aware that environmental noise and the noise characteristics of a cable might have some perceptible effect on signal integrity. With that in mind, evaluating the performance of different cable options is a good idea.
We usually don't have any control over the type of copper and grade of solder used in our audio and video components. However, if we are performance oriented, that does not mean we should not take measures to preserve signal integrity between components by selecting cables that do the least amount of harm.
That certainly brings the question of Wireless and WISA into the spot light.
For the costs of some of the power cables I've seen I would rather get a fully balanced -60 to +60 power.
http://www.furmansound.com/product.php?div=01&id=P-2400IT -
As pointed out in the orignial post (from page 2) and the post you quoted, the exact same cable was used to transmit computer "data" from from a router to a computer, transmitting images and colors.
Technically the data transmitted contained no images or colors. But, that's splitting hairs.It was also used to transmit a DSD signal from an RJ45 jack installed in my Denon DVD-1920 modified player to my self built DAC. The connections and cabling in both the DSD transport and DAC function(ed) perfectly. the only change was the Ethernet cable. In the computer router transmitting computer "data" it functioned semmingly "unaffected". When used from the DSD transport to the DAC, transmitting a DSD "data" signal, the Ethernet cable failed to transmit the "data".
What makes you think that NO data was being sent? Have you verified this? Who's to say that the data wasn't transmitted, but that you self built DAC couldn't properly decode the data stream for whatever reason? Consumer Electronics go through countless hours of testing just to uncover things like that.This is proof positive that what is being sent through an ethernet cable is as important as the cable itself and that not all "data" is the same.
Wrong again. All data is the same when it passes through an ethernet cable. The only difference is the amount of data.Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
Please point out how my post is in error, specifically.
Have you seen high powered photographic pictures of the crystal grain structure of TPC (Tough Pitch Copper) verses PCOCC (Pure Copper Ohno Continuous Cast)? The difference in grain structure is astounding.
Also, a cross section of PCOCC (top) and TPC (bottom)
As you can see, due to the structure of the PCOCC, the "data signal" has much less resistance (interference) due to a purer copper cable. This, in turn leads to less induced error in the "data" signal because the signal moves more effectively through the PCOCC cable. With less induced error inthe "data" signal, you gain higer fidelity audio. For your level of understanding, the picture below may make it more straightforward to you.
You may think that the error rate is lower than what humans can hear, but is this because you cannot detect it with a measuring device (meter, etc.)? That is a faulty assumption.
Also, the idea of one "data" signal being easier to transport is absolutely fact. AGAIN, I will refer you to my post on page 2 regarding using the same ethernet cable transporting a computer "data" signal and a DSD "data" signal transported from my modified "DSD transport" to my DAC via the same ethernet cable. This clearly shows how one "data" signal (computer producing images and colors) and another (DSD producing high resolution audio) can make a difference in the success (or failure) of the "data" signal transportation. A cable obviously does cair about "strain".
You are absolutely 100% wrong about the idea of a cable "either transports a signal or it doesn't" and you are using faulty logic. Error is introduced to an electric signal in wiring regardless of whether it's digital or analog. the amount of error is dependent on many many things, but part of the error comes from the cable (see above for further explanation in case you didn't get it the first time) So, would you like to re-think this "hogwash" thought?
I never said that YOUR post was in error, I was talking about the error rate of a digital signal being transmitted and how everyone seems to think that it's a super high error percentage, when in reality its super low. Therefore cables meant to lower the error rate are themselves erroneous.Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
DarqueKnight wrote: »This ranks right up there with the "premium power cords with high grade copper (or silver) make no sense because the power travels through miles and miles of "ordinary" copper and the wiring in the wall is ordinary copper". It is the same nonsense as saying water filters are useless because the water travels trough miles and miles of ordinary pipe and the pipe in the walls is ordinary pipe.
Nonsense? Technically most consumer "Water Filters" are useless when it comes to filtration or treatment of water. They simply make water more palatable (Changing the taste and odor). They do nothing to filter or treat the water, and can in fact cause lower quality water to be output than what was input. The things they do remove, while sounding great on paper (Heavy metals, calcium, etc) are not really all that inclusive considering the big picture, and are often times desired. Water stripped of all outside content is unhealthy, and impossible to obtain in a home environment. That is unless you happen to have a home RO rig, which I very much doubt is the case for 99% of Americans.
Amazing what you find when you look beyond the advertising stickers..Isn't it?Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
Nonsense? Technically most consumer "Water Filters" are useless when it comes to filtration or treatment of water. They simply make water more palatable (Changing the taste and odor). They do nothing to filter or treat the water, and can in fact cause lower quality water to be output than what was input. The things they do remove, while sounding great on paper (Heavy metals, calcium, etc) are not really all that inclusive considering the big picture, and are often times desired. Water stripped of all outside content is unhealthy, and impossible to obtain in a home environment. That is unless you happen to have a home RO rig, which I very much doubt is the case for 99% of Americans.
Amazing what you find when you look beyond the advertising stickers..Isn't it?
No, what is amazing is the fact that water filters can change the taste and odor of the water without actually... filtering anything.
I am sure you will spout off a lengthy explanation of how that is accomplished. Magic pebbles maybe?
And by heavy metals, do you mean lead and mercury?
Sorry, but I can still see the post where you tell me to take my trolling elsewhere. Hmm.So, are you willing to put forth a little effort or are you happy sitting in your skeptical poo pile?
http://audiomilitia.proboards.com/ -
Habanero Monk wrote: »That certainly brings the question of Wireless and WISA into the spot light.
Going wireless only trades one set of problems for another. There is still environmental electrical noise to contend with and the noise characteristics of the transmitters and receivers.Habanero Monk wrote: »For the costs of some of the power cables I've seen I would rather get a fully balanced -60 to +60 power.
http://www.furmansound.com/product.php?div=01&id=P-2400IT
Any reasonable person understands that power cords are just one part of a comprehensive system of power quality management that should consist of high quality power cords, dedicated AC circuits, active and passive power filters, and AC regenerators. No one with any sense will say that an expensive power cord should be used in place of a good power conditioner, power filter, or AC regenerator.
Given a choice between a dedicated AC circuit or a power cord of equal price, the dedicated circuit will usually provide the most benefit.Nonsense? Technically most consumer "Water Filters" are useless when it comes to filtration or treatment of water.
Then we must hope that those interested in improving their water quality will choose a filter not included in your "most" category.Amazing what you find when you look beyond the advertising stickers..Isn't it?
It is. That is why I am a huge advocate of doing your own research and investigation rather than just relying on what you read and copy and paste from the Internet.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
I would be interested in your source/data that supports this statement.Water stripped of all outside content is unhealthy. -
DarqueKnight wrote: »Going wireless only trades one set of problems for another. There is still environmental electrical noise to contend with and the noise characteristics of the transmitters and receivers.
Agreed, it opens up a lot of questions. This could also be tested in some instances.DarqueKnight wrote: »Any reasonable person understands that power cords are just one part of a comprehensive system of power quality management that should consist of high quality power cords, dedicated AC circuits, active and passive power filters, and AC regenerators. No one with any sense will say that an expensive power cord should be used in place of a good power conditioner, power filter, or AC regenerator.
Given a choice between a dedicated AC circuit or a power cord of equal price, the dedicated circuit will usually provide the most benefit.
That would be an interesting Poll. I've seen people shove their expensive PC right into the wall outlet.
Unlike a power cable I know what I would be getting with that Furman balanced supply.
Not sure where a dedicated AC circuit and power cord is in relation to 'equal of price'. It would be interesting to take a system that has ground loop hum and try and rid it of ground loop hum with properly built (IEC) $1000 PC vs paying $250 for an electrician to drop a 4 outlet 20 amp service (It's what it cost me anyway) so the difference in ground reference is re-mediated the proper way. -
Habanero Monk wrote: »Agreed, it opens up a lot of questions. This could also be tested in some instances.
That would be an interesting Poll. I've seen people shove their expensive PC right into the wall outlet.
Unlike a power cable I know what I would be getting with that Furman balanced supply.
Not sure where a dedicated AC circuit and power cord is in relation to 'equal of price'. It would be interesting to take a system that has ground loop hum and try and rid it of ground loop hum with properly built (IEC) $1000 PC vs paying $250 for an electrician to drop a 4 outlet 20 amp service (It's what it cost me anyway) so the difference in ground reference is re-mediated the proper way.
See, this is where I get confused about some of your posts.
Unlike a power cable, you "know" what you would be getting with that Furman power supply. Assuming you've seen the inside of it and understand what the internal components are and how they function (maybe even how they're designed? I have no idea what the extent of your knowledge is, honestly), until you hear it in your own system how do you know it will be of any sonic benefit for you?
No sarcasm here, I really want to understand this.So, are you willing to put forth a little effort or are you happy sitting in your skeptical poo pile?
http://audiomilitia.proboards.com/ -
See, this is where I get confused about some of your posts.
Unlike a power cable, you "know" what you would be getting with that Furman power supply. Assuming you've seen the inside of it and understand what the internal components are and how they function (maybe even how they're designed? I have no idea what the extent of your knowledge is, honestly), until you hear it in your own system how do you know it will be of any sonic benefit for you?
No sarcasm here, I really want to understand this.
From specification standpoint, from an application of technology standpoint, I know what the product does. I didn't say that it would improve my setup. I know what the unit does, I don't know if it would do anything for my setup. My first smart move was to install a dedicated circuit were ground is all referenced from.
As example: I KNOW for a fact *just like the earth revolves around the sun* that +60/0/-60 is noise canceling (CMNR) by design vs 0 / 120v.
I would really like to listen to a setup where a $2300 PC makes more of a positive difference than the $2300 Furman Unit. I'll be open minded but skeptical at the same time. Those two states of mind don't have to be exclusive.
People are putting in these power cords to either do the least amount of damage or fix something about their system.
A power cable, no matter the cost, isn't going to fix how archaic unbalanced 120V AC is. A properly wired power cable isn't going to fix ground loop hum. -
No, what is amazing is the fact that water filters can change the taste and odor of the water without actually... filtering anything.
I am sure you will spout off a lengthy explanation of how that is accomplished. Magic pebbles maybe?
No, a carbon filter. The same thing bars use to make their lower shelf liquor smoother for refilling the top shelf bottles with
Carbon filters are a pre-treatment filter. Kinda like a water softener. Changes taste and odor, and removes a few select chemicals..but not much else. It's not magic, it's science and you don't have to agree with it to be wrong.Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
Habanero Monk wrote: »I've seen people shove their expensive PC right into the wall outlet.
I've seen people put expensive tires and rims on junk cars. I've seen guys spend millions of dollars on whores. Just because some people do stupid things and spend money foolishly is no reason to generalize that to the mainstream.Habanero Monk wrote: »Unlike a power cable I know what I would be getting with that Furman balanced supply.
Well, a wise consumer should know what they are getting with a power cord and the expected benefits. Every aftermarket power cord I have purchased had manufacturer supplied information on its construction and capabilities. They also offered a full refund return policy if the cords did not perform favorably in my system. PS Audio went even further by providing return shipping.Habanero Monk wrote: »Not sure where a dedicated AC circuit and power cord is in relation to 'equal of price'.
An electrician charged me $425 to install my dedicated AC circuits. There are aftermarket power cords at, above, and below, that price point.Habanero Monk wrote: »It would be interesting to take a system that has ground loop hum and try and rid it of ground loop hum with properly built (IEC) $1000 PC vs paying $250 for an electrician to drop a 4 outlet 20 amp service (It's what it cost me anyway) so the difference in ground reference is re-mediated the proper way.Habanero Monk wrote: »I would really like to listen to a setup where a $2300 PC makes more of a positive difference than the $2300 Furman Unit. I'll be open minded but skeptical at the same time. Those two states of mind don't have to be exclusive.
People are putting in these power cords to either do the least amount of damage or fix something about their system.
A power cable, no matter the cost, isn't going to fix how archaic unbalanced 120V AC is. A properly wired power cable isn't going to fix ground loop hum.
I am not sure why you keep going off on these tangents about power cords being able to fix all types of power quality problems. No knowledgeable person believes such. Again:DarqueKnight wrote: »Any reasonable person understands that power cords are just one part of a comprehensive system of power quality management that should consist of high quality power cords, dedicated AC circuits, active and passive power filters, and AC regenerators. No one with any sense will say that an expensive power cord should be used in place of a good power conditioner, power filter, or AC regenerator.Habanero Monk wrote: »I would really like to listen to a setup where a $2300 PC makes more of a positive difference than the $2300 Furman Unit. I'll be open minded but skeptical at the same time. Those two states of mind don't have to be exclusive.
I'm not even sure that a $2300 PC will always make more of a positive difference than a $1000, or cheaper, PC. A person who has taken the time to educate themselves on power quality basics would never think that a power cord would be more effective in reducing line noise than a good power conditioning unit.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DarqueKnight wrote: »Then we must hope that those interested in improving their water quality will choose a filter not included in your "most" category.
Exactly, and that includes every filter sold at every big box store in the world (Brita, Pure, etc). The only one that you can buy in a kit like that which actually filters out disolved solids are the "Zero Water" brand filters. They remove all total dissolved solids, but they still do not remove small particle chemicals (IE: Most pharmaceuticals, etc) or gaseous contaminants (Radon, etc). It also fails to treat (As does everything but Chlorine) any organic matter that may exist (IE: Bacteria).I would be interested in your source/data that supports this statement.
All water you drink (Except pure distilled water) has minerals added to it to benefit your health. Google it if you want the full story, but here's a quick article that's worth reading. The filtration processes used worldwide to produce municiple and bottled water or any other clean source water strips out virtually all disolved solids and chemicals.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/550898-what-minerals-should-you-add-to-distilled-water-before-drinking/Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
People are putting in these power cords to either do the least amount of damage or fix something about their system.
No, they put them in to lower the noise floor, which is the main goal of all the power treatments.A properly wired power cable isn't going to fix ground loop hum.
Power cords with a removable ground pin will and for some is all they need.
Side note: I see by some quotes that villian is still nothing more than a common troll. :rolleyes:Political Correctness'.........defined
"A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a t-u-r-d by the clean end."
President of Club Polk -
DarqueKnight wrote: »Then he should say that rather than running all over the Internet saying "I invented ABX". ABX methods for evaluating monophonic telephone signals were used by Bell Laboratories scientists decades before Arny came up with his ABX switchbox. In the sensory science literature, the ABX test is referred to as the "duo trio-balanced reference" test. It was invented by D.R. Peryam and V.W. Swartz and published in 1950. (Citation: D. R. Peryam and V. W. Swartz, "Measurement of Sensory Differences," Food Technology, Vol. 5, 1950, pp. 207-210).
The citation above should have read:
D. R. Peryam and V. W. Swartz, "Measurement of Sensory Differences," Food Technology, Vol. 4, No. 10, 1950, pp. 390-395.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
Thanks for the reply and the article. It helps further shed light on your ability to reason.All water you drink (Except pure distilled water) has minerals added to it to benefit your health. Google it if you want the full story, but here's a quick article that's worth reading. The filtration processes used worldwide to produce municiple and bottled water or any other clean source water strips out virtually all disolved solids and chemicals.
http://www.livestrong.com/article/550898-what-minerals-should-you-add-to-distilled-water-before-drinking/ -
Habanero Monk wrote: »You listen about as well as you read also. I've been talking solely about Ethernet. Not DSD.
It's entirely possible that they cable you made is sub optimal but due to the nature of TCP and other protocols higher in the OSI stack that it actually passed data on an Ethernet network and you where blissfully unaware. That when you used it for DSD that it's not designed to do the same thing as a mechanism like TCP and failed.
This possibility didn't cross your mind? I'm not interested in your use for DSD transport. It isn't what we are discussing.Habanero Monk wrote: »You listen about as well as you read also. I've been talking solely about Ethernet. Not DSD.
It's entirely possible that they cable you made is sub optimal but due to the nature of TCP and other protocols higher in the OSI stack that it actually passed data on an Ethernet network and you where blissfully unaware. That when you used it for DSD that it's not designed to do the same thing as a mechanism like TCP and failed.
This possibility didn't cross your mind? I'm not interested in your use for DSD transport. It isn't what we are discussing.
Haha! You guys are absolutely rediculous! So, once again because something pointed out to you doesn't fit your agenda and so you don't want to discuss it! Too Funny!!
If you remember correctly, we are not talking about TCP protocols, computer data transmissions, wireless routers, DSD transmissions, or anything else but digital cables correct? An ethernet cable is a digital cable is it not? After answering "yes" in your mind please read below......
You brought up the idea that it doesn't matter what is sent through the ethernet cable because it is "just data", and that it doesn't matter what the transmission consists of, it is all "just data" and it either get's there or it doesn't regardless of what type of "data" is sent through the ethernet cable. This is the same ideoloy that villian holds.
I then re-posted my post from page 2 to point out that it absolutely does matter what is sent through the ethernet cable and showed you why. It also matters what the cable consists of (what it's is comprised of) that will make a difference on the success or failure of the "data" tranmission as shown by my example. I switched from my self made cable to the Acoustic Revive Ethernet cable and the DSD signal transferred successfully and sounded better than any other ethernet cable I have used before or since.
Taken from a recent Audioholics reply regarding "Club Polk" and Polk speakers:
"I'm yet to hear a Polk speaker that merits more than a sentence and 60 seconds discussion."
My response is: If you need 60 seconds to respond in one sentence, you probably should't be evaluating Polk speakers.....
"Green leaves reveal the heart spoken Khatru"- Jon Anderson
"Have A Little Faith! And Everything You'll Face, Will Jump From Out Right On Into Place! Yeah! Take A Little Time! And Everything You'll Find, Will Move From Gloom Right On Into Shine!"- Arthur Lee -
Lately I've been drinking more water than listening to my stereo system
Lately I've been drinking more beer while listening to my stereo system. --Gary--
Onkyo Integra M504, Bottlehead Foreplay III, Denon SACD, Thiel CS2.3, NHT VT-2, VT-3 and Evolution T6, Infinity RSIIIa, SDA1C and a few dozen other speakers around the house I change in and out. -
Technically the data transmitted contained no images or colors. But, that's splitting hairs.
Not true, the "data" transmitted does contain electrical signals that comprise the images and colors you see on your computer screen so in fact the "data" does contain images and colors.What makes you think that NO data was being sent? Have you verified this? Who's to say that the data wasn't transmitted, but that you self built DAC couldn't properly decode the data stream for whatever reason? Consumer Electronics go through countless hours of testing just to uncover things like that.
Do you guys actually read and understand what is posted?? I am to say that the data was not transmitted accurately enough by the ethernet cable to pass the DSD signal. I know this for a fact because I then switched to the Acoustic Revive Ethernet cable and the DSD signal was successfully transitted from my modified denon player to my same (unaltered) self-built DAC.Wrong again. All data is the same when it passes through an ethernet cable. The only difference is the amount of data.
No, not all data is the same that passes through an ethernet cable. Otherwise, no matter what you transmit through the resulting analog signal would all sound exactly the same and look the same. What you stated is rediculous.
I do agree that the amount of data does vary depending on what is transmitted.
Taken from a recent Audioholics reply regarding "Club Polk" and Polk speakers:
"I'm yet to hear a Polk speaker that merits more than a sentence and 60 seconds discussion."
My response is: If you need 60 seconds to respond in one sentence, you probably should't be evaluating Polk speakers.....
"Green leaves reveal the heart spoken Khatru"- Jon Anderson
"Have A Little Faith! And Everything You'll Face, Will Jump From Out Right On Into Place! Yeah! Take A Little Time! And Everything You'll Find, Will Move From Gloom Right On Into Shine!"- Arthur Lee -
I never said that YOUR post was in error, I was talking about the error rate of a digital signal being transmitted and how everyone seems to think that it's a super high error percentage, when in reality its super low. Therefore cables meant to lower the error rate are themselves erroneous.
No one has said it is a "super high error percentage" that I know of. If you lower error rates (no matter how low or high) you will gain higher fidelity audio. The closer you get to 0% error, the higher the fidelity. That is fact. Some of us are stating that lowering the error rate (despite already being low) as well as a number of other aspects in ethernet cables improves the audio.
Taken from a recent Audioholics reply regarding "Club Polk" and Polk speakers:
"I'm yet to hear a Polk speaker that merits more than a sentence and 60 seconds discussion."
My response is: If you need 60 seconds to respond in one sentence, you probably should't be evaluating Polk speakers.....
"Green leaves reveal the heart spoken Khatru"- Jon Anderson
"Have A Little Faith! And Everything You'll Face, Will Jump From Out Right On Into Place! Yeah! Take A Little Time! And Everything You'll Find, Will Move From Gloom Right On Into Shine!"- Arthur Lee
This discussion has been closed.