Does high quality digital cables matter?
Comments
-
DK, I don't know if you are familiar with this umbilical for your pre, but I have one on order. It should be here tomorrow, or Thursday. I read about it on another forum where the poster was very happy with it. I figured what-the-heck, why not try it.
http://www.revelationaudiolabs.com/cables-power/#PassageDB-25
This is the response I received from Pass Labs:
"We played with a few different DB25 cables but never noticed much of a difference. The only signals that travel over those cables are DC voltages and logic signals for the relays.
I don't remember trying the cables you are looking at so who knows they may make a difference. This is audio and the only way to know for sure it to listen."Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DarqueKnight wrote: ». This is audio and the only way to know for sure it to listen."[/I][/COLOR]
......and here we have it yet again.HT SYSTEM-
Sony 850c 4k
Pioneer elite vhx 21
Sony 4k BRP
SVS SB-2000
Polk Sig. 20's
Polk FX500 surrounds
Cables-
Acoustic zen Satori speaker cables
Acoustic zen Matrix 2 IC's
Wireworld eclipse 7 ic's
Audio metallurgy ga-o digital cable
Kitchen
Sonos zp90
Grant Fidelity tube dac
B&k 1420
lsi 9's -
DarqueKnight wrote: »This is the response I received from Pass Labs:
"We played with a few different DB25 cables but never noticed much of a difference. The only signals that travel over those cables are DC voltages and logic signals for the relays.
I don't remember trying the cables you are looking at so who knows they may make a difference. This is audio and the only way to know for sure it to listen."
Well, "much of a difference" implies a difference. Cleaning up the voltages has the potential to improve the sound. Rather than listening, I think I will just quote somebody from the Internet that says 5 volts is 5 volts.
It arrived right as I was leaving for work, so I hooked it up to make sure the pre didn't go up in flames. Since the pre is always on it will get a bit of settle time during the day, and I will be able to listen tonight. However, I can't get critical until this weekend. It is very nice and rugged with Mil-Spec DB25 metal connectors, and a solid cable as compared to the cheapo plastic Pass cable and connectors. Whether it makes a difference or not, time will tell. I wish it had the thumb screw type screws Pass uses, versus the little screws that require a screwdriver, but it wasn't too hard to move it around to be able to see the screws and use a screwdriver.
This is the thread where I found out about it. Sorry for the off-topic derail, but, then again, this thread went off topic a while ago.
http://audioshark.org/pass-labs-71/pass-labs-xp-20-a-4987.htmlLumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes
Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables
Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
Three 20 amp circuits. -
Nothing is being ignored. As has been pointed out many times, and in the referenced links, every link in the digital audio path has the potential to introduce jitter into the file being transferred. Whether it does or does not is another story, most likely dependent on the equipment and network topology. For whatever reason, you and your buddy simply quote sentences out of context in order to try and prove your point.
I'm a fan of merit based debate. So I want to discuss this part of your post:
and in the referenced links, every link in the digital audio path has the potential to introduce jitter into the file being transferred
Lets frame a unique question to a computer that is the client media device outputting to a USB, S/PDIF, FireWire, PCIe device:
You use a popular media streamer. You have the buffer set to 6/10/20 seconds. (JRiver is 6 seconds as default) for WASAPI/ASIO.
You start your play back for a few seconds and then pause it, pull the Ethernet connection . You leave the Ethernet cable unplugged and you hit the play button. It plays for a second, you pause it. You hit the play button it plays, you pause it. You hit the play button, you pause it.
Where is the jitter?
There is no cable based Jitter 'introduced' into the file being transferred. You seem to be disregarding the possibilities of absolutes.
Now I know you don't like this next part and undeservedly think it unfair. This is a quote direct from a supporting document that you linked to. One that you thought you were going to tie together and put around my neck:
Because of the packet-transfer protocol of Ethernet and data buffering at the end-point, the jitter of the clock in the computer is a non-issue.
Now lets see what the same author says in issue 22:
When the computer sends the audio stream to an output port, such as USB, the CPU first reads the data in a "burst" fashion from the hard disk and caches blocks of the data in memory. It is then spooled from memory to the output port in a continuous stream. Successive disk accesses are made to keep the memory cache buffer full and the stream running without interruption. The player and driver software often have options to select the cache buffer sizes.
It doesn't matter if this disk access is local or on a server somewhere. It's played back out of cache.
And
In an outboard USB converter, the data is received from the sending computer and precise timing information is added. The jitter from the computer clock can be effectively eliminated.
Another point of distinction that he makes:
All synchronous digital systems have both data and timing attributes. In certain systems, such as computers where most transactions require only that the data arrive intact, jitter in the clock is actually not important, assuming that the timing requirements of the chips are met. The clock is only used to move the data from point A to point B, and the arrival time of each individual data word can vary to some extent without impacting the function. This is described as non-real-time.
And this provides the distinction he is making:
Digital audio systems however are different because they use both the data and the timing of the clock to reproduce the original recording. The data stream is transferred "real-time." The timing must match the original sample-rate used when the recording was made to accurately re-create the analog signal. The data words are clocked into the D/A converter at this constant rate. Both the frequency and the jitter of the clock can affect the accuracy of the reproduction.
So we go back to my example of playing a music selection, pausing the play, pulling the Ethernet cable and the repeatedly being able to play and pause with no network connectivity present.
The buffer is static at that point until some software event flushes it.every link in the digital chain has the potential to introduce jitter into the data.
Impossibilities do exist. No jitter is being introduced into the data. It's buffered, complete, data lacking any jitter.
You have to consider in the light of both Amir and Steven that static data can contain no jitter.
You have to consider that the packet data rate of GB Ethernet, which is in common usage is ~400-450 times quicker than actual audio data in human time.All that has been written is simply to propose some possible scenarios or reasons where this is technically possible, even if unlikely. ... If so then it is also possible a different Ethernet cable can result in a different audible sound.
'has been written' By whom? Steven Nugent? Amir?
If so is a conditional statement. It doesn't preclude the realm of 'not possible'Why you have this irrational obsession with always being right
So it's irrational to seek out knowledge, to understand how Ethernet standards work and packet data is sent and processed?
It's irrational to have a fullness in understanding?, and anybody else is wrong is beyond me.
Some one doesn't have to be wrong for me to be right or correct. You are projecting.After a while when dealing with zealots it does become pointless in trying to have a discussion.
Feeling is mutual but I'm a zealot that has beyond any doubt presented facts pertinent to the matter. I have asked again and again for a merit based approach that backs your premise that there is 'Jitter in the data'.
You have dug in so deep that you can't even acknowledge Mr. Nugents and Amir's points as it pertains to computer data and no jitter being contain therein.
That is not a sign of an open mind. It is a sign of someone too prideful to come to terms with what has been presented and re-align their thinking on the matter.There simply is not enough data to outright dismiss those claims.
There isn't any accepted data to support those claims. And in light of that missing data I have to rely on how packet data works. That it's not real time. That audio isn't stream off the Ethernet cable but that it played out of a computers data buffer that has no associated audio clock attached to it. It's hurry up and then wait.
While it takes the DAC 20 seconds to deplete a computers buffer Ethernet can replenish it in ~0.047 seconds. And then it sits there and waits. -
and in the referenced links, every link in the digital audio path has the potential to introduce jitter into the file being transferred.
Something we can agree on the digital audio path. Can you agree to these points made in the articles you brought to the table:
Because of the packet-transfer protocol of Ethernet and data buffering at the end-point, the jitter of the clock in the computer is a non-issue.
And
The only clock that is important is the one in the end-point device
Can you agree that there is a difference in the digital computer data path (Ethernet) and the digital audio path?
Can you agree that Mr Nugent has made an effort to make a distinction?
I agree with your assessment about the digital audio path. Amir's write up confirms this is a possibility, especially with synchronous clocked systems vs a-sync, to introduce re-clocking induced errors where cost and little engineering effort is concerned. -
Habanero Monk wrote: »Because of the packet-transfer protocol of Ethernet and data buffering at the end-point, the jitter of the clock in the computer is a non-issue.
And
The only clock that is important is the one in the end-point device
I've made this point several times now, along with you...but DK and Bluefox simply choose to ignore it and press on with more internet ball swinging and fruitless talk. DK and Bluefox do not seem to understand that at every END point where digital data enters non-real time ANY and ALL jitter introduced is ELIMINATED by re-entry to non-real time (Hence the reason that most things along that line do NOT attempt to specifically correct jitter..there is no need). Therefore, the final Digital to Analog conversion is the ONLY one that can introduce jitter.Nothing is being ignored.
Really? Then why am I asking this question for the 5th time? I have yet to receive any answer. Not even an evasive one! Lets hear it Mr. Nothing is being ignored! Enlighten us misguided fools with whom you know nothing about! I could have a degree from MIT for all you know!
And so we ask again...
(For the 5th time now, yes or no answers will suffice)
Q: Where does jitter (Or any audio distortion that varies from the original recording) exist in a digital music file? Can you provide an example of a binary code showing this?
Q: Does exist (Other than the original recording jitter) in a digital file with a matching CRC?
Q: Does jitter exist on a file in RAM or in a buffer?
Q: Does jitter exist in a file within any computer storage device (Storage medium)?
Q: Does jitter exist in a stored file?Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
It arrived right as I was leaving for work, so I hooked it up to make sure the pre didn't go up in flames. Since the pre is always on it will get a bit of settle time during the day, and I will be able to listen tonight. However, I can't get critical until this weekend. It is very nice and rugged with Mil-Spec DB25 metal connectors, and a solid cable as compared to the cheapo plastic Pass cable and connectors. Whether it makes a difference or not, time will tell. I wish it had the thumb screw type screws Pass uses, versus the little screws that require a screwdriver, but it wasn't too hard to move it around to be able to see the screws and use a screwdriver.
I will need three 1 meter power cords, two for the XP-30 preamp and one for the XP-25 phono stage. Revelation audio offers a 30 day trial, so all I will be out of is shipping and evaluation time if they don't work out. Previous tweaks (PS Audio AC-12 power cords, HiFi Tuning power line fuses, and Dynamat Xtreme vibration damping) on the XP-30 and XP-25 brought some improvements, so this is worth a try.Sorry for the off-topic derail, but, then again, this thread went off topic a while ago.
The Pass DB25 umbilicals pass digital control signals and this is a digital cable thread, so we are not off topic.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
Still waiting for an answer from DarqueKnight and Bluefox to post #813..which was the 5th time I had asked a question that they are intentionally ignoring..even though they are the ones who made unsubstantiated claims about what is being questioned (That jitter exists in a file within some storage mediums..IE: RAM, buffers, etc).Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo.
-
So you, DK, and fox will all call people out for making claims and not substantiating them. Yet, you all refuse to do the same. How hard can a few yes or no answers be..unless you know you're wrong?
Back to my original point of you being a complete and total hypocrite. Prove me wrong and answer the questions.Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
^^^^^^^
Man, I get your post above, but to paraphrase Star Trek, only a fool fights in a burning house.So, are you willing to put forth a little effort or are you happy sitting in your skeptical poo pile?
http://audiomilitia.proboards.com/ -
Who wants to wager how many days we have left in this thread.....
I think its the longest running cable debate that hasn't been locked.....
:biggrin:"....not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." William Bruce Cameron, Informal Sociology: A Casual Introduction to Sociological Thinking (1963) -
It will go for awhile most have been very civil from what I've seen and there has actually been some great stuff coming out of it.
Agree it has been the longest I have seen while I've been a member. -
So, I guess what I am saying is that you claim that DK or bluefox are ignoring you but you seem to be doing the exact same thing. So who's the hypocrite here?
Well, at least the TROLL has the mental capacity to recognize being ignored. I realized he was just trolling when I answered his question if anyone heard a difference with fiber, and his response was along the line of something like this, "The next question is what is the sound of light." (Search this thread for the exact context).
In regard to his "questions", I answered that in post 726.Not speaking for DK, but nobody ever said the stored file has jitter.Actually you did, in post 700 of this thread.
# 726If I did then I was wrong. It is easy to make mistakes in these conversations.
Wait. I just reread that post, and I was specifically referring to the transfer of the data. So, at least in that post, I did not say that a file on a hard drive has jitter.
In this entire thread, I have been talking about the transfer of a file from point A to point B, and postulated that each link has the potential to introduce jitter. Potential, not does. Nowhere have I said a stored file has jitter. Again, if I did say that somewhere in this long thread it was inadvertent, and wrong.
All the TROLL is doing is taking sentences out of context, and trying to make a non-existent case. Of course, he is failing miserably, as he does on other threads.Lumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes
Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables
Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
Three 20 amp circuits. -
wrong thread.."....not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." William Bruce Cameron, Informal Sociology: A Casual Introduction to Sociological Thinking (1963)
-
In this entire thread, I have been talking about the transfer of a file from point A to point B, and postulated that each link has the potential to introduce jitter. Potential, not does. Nowhere have I said a stored file has jitter. Again, if I did say that somewhere in this long thread it was inadvertent, and wrong.
So now you're using the word "potential" to get around what you've previously said? Wow, you'll go lower than I thought to avoid admitting that you simply don't know what you are talking about. Just read my signature. That clearly shows what you have, and haven't said or laid claim to.
PS - There is NO "Potential" for jitter to be introduced outside of real-time processing in a packet driven digital transfer. There simply is no jitter introduced, nor the potential for it in that environment (Jitter doesn't exist outside of real time). It's a black and white matter, there is NO grey area so the sooner you'll simply admit that you're wrong, the sooner we can close this chapter.
Oh, and seeing as how myself and Habanero have tried to answer at least all reasonable questions you've asked, I am asking for the same in return. Please answer the following questions. Yes or no answers will suffice. This is the 6th time I've asked you to answer this, for those counting...
Q: Where does jitter (Or any audio distortion as you call it..that varies from the original recording) exist in a digital music file? Can you provide an example of a binary code showing this?
Q: Where does jitter exist (Other than the original recording jitter) in a digital file with a CRC matching the original file?
Q: Does jitter exist within a file in RAM or in a buffer?
Q: Does jitter exist in a file within any computer storage device (Storage medium)?Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
Perhaps you missed the part where I haven't called anybody out on anything in this thread. The conversation between Monk and I revolves around me claiming I can hear a difference between Ethernet cables and him claiming I can't.
Show me where I posted anything that is in defense of or against something someone else said short of me saying I will go with what the PhD electrical engineer says over what *you* say.
Since I hinted at my credentials at one point I'll ask you this rhetorical question..
Who has the PhD in electrical engineering? This guy..or that guy? Or is this a trick question Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
Since I hinted at my credentials at one point I'll ask you this rhetorical question..
Who has the PhD in electrical engineering? This guy..or that guy? Or is this a trick question
Dude, I like cat and mouse games sometimes, but at this point I'm over "hinting" around crap. Man up and a just be straight up honest and transparent. What credentials if any do you have. Its not like those are going to reveal your "identity", however it would provide a baseline what what knowledge you should or should not have.
Hell I'll start.
Hi My name is Dan. I attended an local engineering school and graduated with a bachelors of science from the School of Engineering with a degree in Spatial Graphics and a focus on Animation."....not everything that can be counted counts, and not everything that counts can be counted." William Bruce Cameron, Informal Sociology: A Casual Introduction to Sociological Thinking (1963) -
It will go for awhile most have been very civil from what I've seen and there has actually been some great stuff coming out of it.
I think it deserves a sticky with all the great research that has been put forth.Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
Who has the PhD in electrical engineering?
it is not a trick question. you have been arguing with him for several pages. He is well respected in his field and teaches (i believe) at a very well respected school.....And has been published if I remember right.
Good god man you can't be THAT DENSE... -
Personally, if I were you guys I wouldn't waste anymore time with the troll. He has been mocked, ridiculed, humiliated, and scorned on so many threads that he is becoming psychopathic, or maybe more psychopathic.
Anyway, this isn't a contest as to who has what credentials. It is simply basic reading comprehension, and it appears his reading comprehension skills are non-existent. This appears to be a common theme amongst those who are so desperate for always being right that they end up being wrong.
The latest example of his abysmal reading skills is from post 825 where he references his sig.
From post 825:So now you're using the word "potential" to get around what you've previously said? Wow, you'll go lower than I thought to avoid admitting that you simply don't know what you are talking about. Just read my signature. That clearly shows what you have, and haven't said or laid claim to.
From his sig:Originally Posted by BlueFox
..any link used in the transfer of a digital musical file has the potential to introduce audible distortion into that file, even while the CRC remains correct.Lumin X1 file player, Westminster Labs interconnect cable
Sony XA-5400ES SACD; Pass XP-22 pre; X600.5 amps
Magico S5 MKII Mcast Rose speakers; SPOD spikes
Shunyata Triton v3/Typhon QR on source, Denali 2000 (2) on amps
Shunyata Sigma XLR analog ICs, Sigma speaker cables
Shunyata Sigma HC (2), Sigma Analog, Sigma Digital, Z Anaconda (3) power cables
Mapleshade Samson V.3 four shelf solid maple rack, Micropoint brass footers
Three 20 amp circuits. -
In this entire thread, I have been talking about the transfer of a file from point A to point B, and postulated that each link has the potential to introduce jitter. Potential, not does. Nowhere have I said a stored file has jitter. Again, if I did say that somewhere in this long thread it was inadvertent, and wrong.
All you need to come to terms with: There is, in absolute terms in regards to how packet driven computer networks operate, zero audio jitter. It is jitter free. There isn't even any Ethernet cable jitter after the buffer has filled and the network cable has went quiet until the next pull request comes.
Even if the buffer is incrementally filling while playing you are playing off the top of the buffer and the bottom is being filled. If the buffer fails to get filled in time you will have no audio.
I posted prior:
Open up JRiver and even run it as it's default (6 second pre-buffer). Start the playback of a file for a few seconds. The buffer will fill up in the first ~0.047 second using 16/44.1 full bit rate audio (1411kbps). Click pause.
Disable either physically or in the network CP the adapter. Go back to JRiver and click play. This is A-synchronous. There is absolutely ZERO jitter. There isn't even a possibility.
BTW the default buffer in a lot of applications that give no control is 20ms. You simply can't hit play/pause/play quick enough
Jitter will become an issue next when it hit's the S/PDIF or USB or Firewire cable. Use an A-synchronous DAC with independently verified low jitter (under 1NS) full bandwidth. If you want go ahead get it in the 250 pico second range. That is if you want to chase particular #'s. -
..any link used in the transfer of a digital musical file has the potential to introduce audible distortion into that file, even while the CRC remains correct.:
It doesn't matter if you used the word potential or not. The manner of Computer Networking over Ethernet preclude this possibility.
I'm trying to find a Windows or OSX Ethernet connected box that doesn't buffer the pulled data. They are A-sync, non-realtime, systems. -
Raife, aka DarqueKnight is a PhD in Electrical Engineering. He also happens to be a professor of electrical engineering.
Professor, Electrical Engineering
Ph.D. Electrical Engineering, Tulane University
Teaching and research interests are in the areas of Communications Signals and Systems, Broadband Telecommunications Network Design and Optimization, and Stochastic Modeling. Dr. Smith's consulting interests are in enterprise network and public switched network modeling, design and optimization.
As for my credentials, well aside from enough IT certifications to joke a maggot along with pending certs, I have a bachelors in Graphic Design (Grandview University), a bachelors in Computer Science with a minor in computer hardware engineering (Iowa State University) and am currently working on my masters in Comp Sci with the hopes of eventually working towards a PhD in Hardware Engineering.
I am currently a senior systems administrator for the Food Safety and Inspection Service of the USDA as a member of their engineering team. We handle all server administration and a lot of the network administration for the ~8500 employees of the FSIS. I am also currently the technical lead on the departmental AD migration as I have the most experience of the team with AD architecture.
Outside of work, my 3 primary hobbies are computers/networking (grandpa said do what you love and you never work a day in your life), home audio and motorcycles from dirt to road-racing.
As for your credentials, none of your posts hint at any of them, so feel free to nut up and throw em down.EndersShadow wrote: »Hi My name is Dan. I attended an local engineering school and graduated with a bachelors of science from the School of Engineering with a degree in Spatial Graphics and a focus on Animation.
Well then, my name is Shaun and I attended Technische Universitat Kaiserslautern and graduated with a Master of Science in Electrical and Computer Engineering with an emphasis in communication systems. I am continuining my education and have no desire to ever stop. Much like (And ironically) ZLTFUL I also have a degree in Graphic Design, and would include computers/networking, home audio, and motorcycles as my top 3 hobbies..although in reverse order. I ride nearly 10k a year, and the only thing that ever slows down my frantic mileage pace is maintainence. Granted I may not have the time or means to make publicly available in-depth write ups on my research in the way that DarqueKnight does, but I think I'm more than qualified to state what can and cannot be transmitted across a packet switched network..without rebuke. Especially when the things I'm stating are simple facts that have either been proven many times over, or are not possible in any other way (Like jitter existing in a non-real time environment...it simply cannot exist in that environment. There is no debate to be had). Bluefox still has yet to answer the questions I've posed to him, and I do eventually expect an answer. They're not hard questions to answer, ego aside.Too many good quotes to list..waiting for some fresh ammo. -
Well then, my name is Shaun and I attended Technische Universitat Kaiserslautern and graduated with a Master of Science in Electrical and Computer Engineering with an emphasis in communication systems. I am continuining my education and have no desire to ever stop. Much like (And ironically) ZLTFUL I also have a degree in Graphic Design, and would include computers/networking, home audio, and motorcycles as my top 3 hobbies..although in reverse order. I ride nearly 10k a year, and the only thing that ever slows down my frantic mileage pace is maintainence. Granted I may not have the time or means to make publicly available in-depth write ups on my research in the way that DarqueKnight does, but I think I'm more than qualified to state what can and cannot be transmitted across a packet switched network..without rebuke. Especially when the things I'm stating are simple facts that have either been proven many times over, or are not possible in any other way (Like jitter existing in a non-real time environment...it simply cannot exist in that environment. There is no debate to be had). Bluefox still has yet to answer the questions I've posed to him, and I do eventually expect an answer. They're not hard questions to answer, ego aside.
Well now, some of that's more in line with what we would call acceptable (Polk family) here. Too bad you can't make this one of your first posts instead of your most recent. You can, however, rethink what is in your sig. Just sayin'.
I also saw you posted in the Polkfest thread. I am sure many of the attendees would welcome new people.So, are you willing to put forth a little effort or are you happy sitting in your skeptical poo pile?
http://audiomilitia.proboards.com/ -
Here is a link to thread on an audio/video forum in India where a forum member did blind tests of Cat 7 Ethernet cables in a computer audio system.
Evaluation of CAT 7 - Ethernet Cable - Revelation Audio Labs - USA
The thread is 26 pages long, so I will only list the posts where the investigator discusses listening results:
Post #155, Page 16,
Post #159, Page 16,
Post #167, Page 17,
Post #168, Page 17,
Post #171, Page 18,
Post #172, Page 18,
Post #176, Page 18,
Post #178, Page 18,
Post #186, Page 19,
Post #222, Page 23,
Post #253, Page 26.
Introduction and pictures of RAL Cat 7 cable: Post #1, Page 1.
Pictures of other Cat 5/6/7 cables tested: Post #23, Page 3.
Summary:
The thread author wanted to see if there was a any difference between the expensive (over $300) RAL Cat 7 Ethernet cable and generic Cat 5/6/7 Ethernet cables.
The author evaluated the cables by himself using sighted subjective testing. He mentioned in post #37 that he gave up blind testing 7+ years ago.
However, he did blind test a panel of experienced listeners who did not know the specifics of the Ethernet cables under evaluation.
The author mentioned (post #1) that he actually wanted AudioQuest Diamond Ethernet cable, but the $700 price was a deterrent.
Summary of results:
Neither the author nor the blind tested panel members chose the much more expensive RAL cable as the best sounding. The author and the panel members could discern sonic differences among all of the Ethernet cables.Proud and loyal citizen of the Digital Domain and Solid State Country! -
DarqueKnight wrote: »Summary of results:
Neither the author nor the blind tested panel members chose the much more expensive RAL cable as the best sounding. The author and the panel members could discern sonic differences among all of the Ethernet cables.
You must be really desperate. He describes the test in post 176. They didn't identify any cables, they just listened to 5 cables twice, and stated which they preferred. Then repeated it with 3 cables. Not surprisingly, the preferences were completely random. He never even states if each listener proffered the same cable each time they listened. Just that they claimed to hear a difference.
How does this even come close to demonstrating they heard any difference at all? -
Then I saw this oddity by the OP:
1 thing is for sure - as of today the result is 4/0 [# of people that can / could hear a difference in the 5 cables]
What is 4/0 as related to can/could ?
4 people can hear a difference
4 people could hear a difference
Post 172 gets into how he did this but it's so poorly fleshed out. No where near what I am proposing as a protocol. He even mentioned some could see him changing out cables which invalidates a blind study if the changing out of cables is to be kept from view. Which I believe was his goal by context of his post.
I am looking into audience participation apps for iPhone/Android.
I want to work up another protocol for groups of people (3-4 at a time). Protocol would be Certified CAT6 UTP at ~$15 ~$350.
1 hour of music selected on merit of it's being regarded as well mastered. In that one hour 10 changes are made and the participants indicate the change and indicate Cable A or Cable B. Audience will know which cable started the session.
The change order and interval would be randomly selected before each session.
My goal would be 50-60 participants as to have a large enough N to be able to reliably run statistical analysis as it relates to a population of Audiophiles.
This population could be anyone that thinks their is a difference of such a nature that it is a 'tell' (night and day difference). -
You must be really desperate. He describes the test in post 176. They didn't identify any cables, they just listened to 5 cables twice, and stated which they preferred. Then repeated it with 3 cables. Not surprisingly, the preferences were completely random. He never even states if each listener proffered the same cable each time they listened. Just that they claimed to hear a difference.
How does this even come close to demonstrating they heard any difference at all?
His post 172 is even more egregious... -
Monk both have histories of being aggressively argumentative on many topics. In every one, it seems to become a vendetta against one or another member on this forum. I know.... I've been the target of this before.
I think you are out of line.
There are still, up to this post, questions asked that Darque Knight and Bluefox have either tried deflection of (a paper discussing running Ethernet along with high voltage power on Navy ships) or outright just non-responsive.
1. If you download a file from HD Tracks with Cable A and then again with Cable B and play them back and switch between them (as I am now made aware Foobar can do) can there be a difference?
2. If you queue up a file start playing it. Pause it, pull the network cable, play it/pause it/play it. Are you listening to the cable?
3. If you queue up a file start playing it. Pause it, pull the network cable, play it/pause it/play it. Is there Ethernet Jitter?
This is a debate pure and simple. I've now used Amir's write up of PLL induced jitter and Steven Nugents write ups about computer audio both provided by BlueFox.
4. Is the buffer on the S/PDIF cable (using the context of Amir's writeup) the same as a buffer in RAM on a computer that packet data is fed to when streaming audio?
My questions are valid. My questions are actually based on documentation brought by one of my counterparts in this debate. -
Back up? Sorry, you still stand as the only person on this forum I've asked the mods to ban. You've gone as far as to harrass members on this forum via PM's. Your attitude and behavior have frequently been well on the other side of acceptable. I've chosen not to say anything publicly about this because it wasn't worth airing that laundry.
Feel free to back anything you just posted about... You'll find if it's happened it's a two way street. Those are some serious accusations. I forget is it libel or slander when it's written?
This discussion has been closed.