Hi-fi Ethernet cable - does it help with network streamer?

[antcollinet]

Literally no one was arguing that data loss was the issue they were trying to solve,

Look at post #7 in the thread.

On the noise issue, I probably agree with your analysis, except apparently some amplifiers can be provoked into some strange oscillations by noise not within the audio band, and also tweeters can be damaged so it’s not a definitive argument.

I don't think that is either what audiophiles are talking about or what the cable manufacturers are claiming is mitigated - does that make this statement a straw-man?

Plus, I'd suggest that is more an issue of a faulty amp design than a specific noise problem - nor is it likey to be noise you can mitigate with a cable.

 

[ChrisCables]

And have failed to provide any objective evidence - either of an actual improvement in rejection of interference, or, still less, of any chance that rejection (if present) results in audible improvements.

I'm not actually obligated to you or anyone else to provide any 'objective evidence'.

The principles of Common Mode Rejection for which is applied to my braided cables are well-documented, understood and proven.
The efficacy of this principle can be further quantified and measured and to that end I have been totally open to supplying both power and balanced signal cables to Amir for him to examine, here.
Amir has replied privately and it is now a decision for him to decide if he wants to, or not. I can imagine however that he has higher priorities. Hence my offer remains open.

 

[antcollinet]

I'm not actually obligated to you or anyone else to provide any 'objective evidence'.

No, you are not obligated. But you came here claiming not to be a snake oil vendor because you don't make claims of audible improvements from your cables.

I'd like to make clear that like many of you here I'm also of the opinion that cables do NOT make a huge difference to the resultant audible 'sound' and I do not make any outrageous claims

And then we find the outrageous claims on your store at the same time as using the outrageous claims of a..... let's just say person of dubious reputation on these shores, to back them up.

Perhaps we just have a different definition of what an outrageous claim is - but at the moment, and in the absence of any objective evidence, you are coming across as just another "audiophile cable vendor" with the same lack of credibility as all the rest.

 

[ChrisCables]

Perhaps we just have a different definition of what an outrageous claim is - but at the moment, and in the absence of any objective evidence, you are coming across as just another "audiophile cable vendor" with the same lack of credibility as all the rest.

I'm sorry that you consider documented and proven theories should be classified as outrageous claims.

 

[Ken1951]

Dude is just a cable seller. Going onto ignore now.

 

[tmtomh]

I'm sorry that you consider documented and proven theories should be classified as outrageous claims.

As you know, I've been vocal in defending you in the thread you started about your cable company. But your statement here misses the point of what @antcollinet is saying.

No one is disputing that common-mode rejection is an established thing, or that your braided cables are based on that concept.

But objective evidence is absolutely, positively needed for claims that follow from these basic facts:

• If you claim that your cables provide better common-mode rejection than other cables, then your cables must be measured against those other cables, and your claim must be evaluated based on the results.
• If you claim that your cables' rejection capabilities produce audible differences in the signal that we hear, then your cables likewise must be measured against other cables so that your claim can be evaluated.

In this regard, Ethan Winer published an excellent video a few years ago, using a custom-designed null tester to examine how different cables compared. The beauty of a null tester is that it can test the performance of cables against any and all types of issues: external EMI, external RFI, internal cable capacitance, and so on. Here's the video:

If you want to jump to the live-comparison part, it starts around 18:25.

To be clear, I understand that you are not necessarily saying that your cables produce audible effects, or that "hi-fi" ethernet cables produce audible effects. But it's crucial to understand that "these cables make the sound better" is not the only way of making evidence-free claims. There is also the very common approach it appears you are taking in this thread: "the theoretical principle says these cables might make the sound better, and I want to leave that possibility open indefinitely," regardless of what evidence might already be out there to suggest - or prove - that these cables do not in fact make the sound better.

That, as far as I can tell, is the issue Anthony is raising, and if I understand his point correctly, I agree with him.

 

[antcollinet]

I'm sorry that you consider documented and proven theories should be classified as outrageous claims.

Now there is a straw-man for you.

Here is an outrageous claim, related to one of your braided power cables - and it has no relation to documented and proven theories, especially when applied to power cables.

a super-quiet cable with an incredibly dark noise floor.

Amir has shown repeatedly that power cables do not audibly influence the output of audio electronics.


Here is another about an analogue interconnect

The Indigo.y' handmade by myself, sounds amazing....
...
The result is an extremely musical and clear presentation with a supremely dark noise floor - important for quiet passages in music. Both a high-end system and more modest systems will certainly benefit from this cable!

Audio cables don't have a sound, and again Amir has similarly demonstrated that high end cables don't perform audibly any different from the basic cables included in the box of audio equipment.

You see, to justify these statements you don't only have to show you are using construction techniques known to reduce susceptibility to EMI, you have to show that the EMI rejected by that construction actually makes a difference to the audio in typical home audio applications at all. And then in addition demonstrate an improvement compared to basic cables using basic mitigation against EMI.

The fact that you make those statements without even having done the tests beforehand to prove they are valid says something.

 

[JSmith]

What I have primarily taken from this thread is some search for the slimmest of openings in the door to potentially justify a new 'audiophile' product.

Dude is just a cable seller.

Yeah, looks like Chris is about to launch a range of "audiophool" network cables.


JSmith

 

[audio_tony]

The speed rating of a cable is usually determined by the physical construction.

A $10 CAT7 cable will perform better than a $100 CAT6 cable.

That's like saying that a 1.3L car will go faster in a straight line, than a 2.5L BMW around a twisty track. You need to specify under what conditions.

A cat 6 cable will provide the same performance levels as a cat 7 cable at 1Gbit, and depending on cable length, even at 10Gbit.

It was often claimed that one needed Cat 5E or better cable to run at 1Gbit - however people quickly found out that standard Cat 5 cable worked just as well in most situations - this was obviously length dependant, however I have worked with older Cat5 installations and had them running reliably at 1Gbit over distances of around 50M.

Reliability can also depend on the quality of cable runs, as many older installations didn't pay much attention to sharp bends in the cable for example.

 

[ChrisCables]

All very interesting. However, as I think we have all wasted far too much time on this subject and that this thread has partially turned its attention towards me, here's my final position;
An open offer has been made to Amir to measure the efficacy of EMI/RFI mitigation via the CMR principle as applied to my braided cables. He has responded. It is up to him if/when he decides to accept that offer. I would hope this would serve as conclusive evidence for the claim of whether or not EMI/RFI mitigation can be quantified within braided cables and if it has a residual or significant value.

Taking suggestions that I am making outrageous claims within my ads into account, it should be noted that somebody in my introduction thread actually alluded to a suggestion that I should in fact be less ethical and more inclined to 'sell a story' to clients, otherwise I will 'go bust in a year like Steve Eddy'.
Here's the post.

Quote: 'Out of business in a year. The reality was that people who wanted exotic cables wanted to buy a story. People who didn't need a story didn't buy exotic cables. Too bad for Steve, he was selling cables, not a story.'

It may also be significant to note that Amir gave this post a like.
Hence, that puts me in a position of being damned if I do and I'm damned if I don't, depending on which side of the ethical selling fence you stand on.
Do I feed customers a line of BS re. EMI/RFI and hope they buy my cables on that basis or do I make sure that every single word, phrase and paragraph I use is totally ethical, verified and squeaky clean...... and then fail commercially a year later?
What a dilemma eh?

The simple answer is neither.
I leave it to the customer to ultimately decide whether a purchase is justified or not.
Irrespective of ANY verified technical claims or fanciful 'stories' is the fact that customers are invited to form their own decisions by appraising the cables in their own systems first with NO obligations whatsoever! None.
So whether the claim of EMI/RFI mitigation has a component value or not is totally irrelevant in any case - you can take the claim on board or dismiss it entirely. It's ultimately your choice!

Here's an example of how I operate as an ethical seller. It's on my Dutch platform. Some of you will recognise it and I hope this doesn't break any forum privacy rules. Handily enough, it's from a guy who contacted me today asking to order some of my 'Braided One' IC's.
I advise him to first appraise them before deciding to purchase.

I presume many of you do not speak Dutch so here's the translation:

Hello Chris, I would like to order 2 interconnections between my record player and preamplifier.
With a length of 80 cm.
These should be another upgrade for my set.
Gr Peet

Hello Pete
Thanks for your order.
But your motivation for an upgrade must be justified first, I would suggest. Have you considered using my loaner cable service? Link as previously provided.
Gr Chris

This applies to how I operate for every enquiry on my EU selling platforms.
It would be nice to offer this on a worldwide basis but postage costs make it unfeasible, unless for large orders perhaps. But even then some people just opt to make a purchase without testing.

Hence any accusation of 'making outrageous claims' within my ads are practically null and void when people are offered the opportunity to decide and appraise for themselves. Is there anything wrong or deceiful about this? I'm sure some are still going to find fault with it.

So, in conclusion yes, I'd be interested to get a verification of the EMI/RFI claim in place - but it would make NO difference to me commercially with respect to my ethical selling method. Customers will still make a purchase based on their own merits and appraisal!

 

[Greenman]

Look at post #7 in the thread.



I don't think that is either what audiophiles are talking about or what the cable manufacturers are claiming is mitigated - does that make this statement a straw-man?

Plus, I'd suggest that is more an issue of a faulty amp design than a specific noise problem - nor is it likey to be noise you can mitigate with a cable.

aka Post7 - as clear from reading that post and as explained earlier by that poster it is clearly a question not a claim of any sort, so dont try to misrepresent others to support your argument.

Maybe you should actually read some audiophile based forums before you suggest what they are talking about. You would find it pretty amusing I expect . It certainly is what some of them think is an issue. In addition it is directly related to what the cable manufacturers do in fact claim….I.e. reduced susceptibility to high frequency noise.

 

[voodooless]

The ethical thing would be to say: “Hey Pete, my cables would only be a visual upgrade. Don’t expect any audible improvements. You are however free to check them out for free and make up your own mind”

 

[ChrisCables]

The ethical thing would be to say: “Hey Pete, my cables would only be a visual upgrade. Don’t expect any audible improvements. You are however free to check them out for free and make up your own mind”

You seriously think I should add some negative bias or aspects and demotivation, to qualify as an ethical seller?

 

[voodooless]

You seriously think I should add some negative bias or aspects and demotivation, to qualify as an ethical seller?

It’s not negative, it’s reality. And if your goal is to really eliminate bias, you should provide your test cables with an abx switch box and a test protocol manual…

 

[ChrisCables]

It’s not negative, it’s reality. And if your goal is to really eliminate bias, you should provide your test cables with an abx switch box and a test protocol manual…

....and maybe travel to his location to set it all up for him too? Make sure conditions are optimum etc. Maybe take a masseuse to give him a rub down so he's all relaxed and ready for a listening test?
I think you might be onto something there.
Thx.

 

[Beave]

I'm reminded of the phrase, jaqing off, which I first saw when j_j referenced it here on ASR:

https://rationalwiki.org/wiki/Just_asking_questions

We're all being asked to prove a negative.

Just asking questions eh? Uh huh.

 

[teched58]

The Dutch are perhaps the most direct people in the world. They do not take kindly to bullspit.

I guess there's an exception to every rule

 

[RayDunzl]

I presume many of you do not speak Dutch

It's not that we don't, we can't!

 

[amirm]

I have an audioquest ethernet cable I could test.

 

[Galliardist]

All very interesting. However, as I think we have all wasted far too much time on this subject and that this thread has partially turned its attention towards me, here's my final position;
An open offer has been made to Amir to measure the efficacy of EMI/RFI mitigation via the CMR principle as applied to my braided cables. He has responded. It is up to him if/when he decides to accept that offer. I would hope this would serve as conclusive evidence for the claim of whether or not EMI/RFI mitigation can be quantified within braided cables and if it has a residual or significant value.

Taking suggestions that I am making outrageous claims within my ads into account, it should be noted that somebody in my introduction thread actually alluded to a suggestion that I should in fact be less ethical and more inclined to 'sell a story' to clients, otherwise I will 'go bust in a year like Steve Eddy'.
Here's the post.

Quote: 'Out of business in a year. The reality was that people who wanted exotic cables wanted to buy a story. People who didn't need a story didn't buy exotic cables. Too bad for Steve, he was selling cables, not a story.'

It may also be significant to note that Amir gave this post a like.
Hence, that puts me in a position of being damned if I do and I'm damned if I don't, depending on which side of the ethical selling fence you stand on.
Do I feed customers a line of BS re. EMI/RFI and hope they buy my cables on that basis or do I make sure that every single word, phrase and paragraph I use is totally ethical, verified and squeaky clean...... and then fail commercially a year later?
What a dilemma eh?

The simple answer is neither.
I leave it to the customer to ultimately decide whether a purchase is justified or not.
Irrespective of ANY verified technical claims or fanciful 'stories' is the fact that customers are invited to form their own decisions by appraising the cables in their own systems first with NO obligations whatsoever! None.
So whether the claim of EMI/RFI mitigation has a component value or not is totally irrelevant in any case - you can take the claim on board or dismiss it entirely. It's ultimately your choice!

Here's an example of how I operate as an ethical seller. It's on my Dutch platform. Some of you will recognise it and I hope this doesn't break any forum privacy rules. Handily enough, it's from a guy who contacted me today asking to order some of my 'Braided One' IC's.
I advise him to first appraise them before deciding to purchase.

View attachment 319080

I presume many of you do not speak Dutch so here's the translation:

Hello Chris, I would like to order 2 interconnections between my record player and preamplifier.
With a length of 80 cm.
These should be another upgrade for my set.
Gr Peet

Hello Pete
Thanks for your order.
But your motivation for an upgrade must be justified first, I would suggest. Have you considered using my loaner cable service? Link as previously provided.
Gr Chris

This applies to how I operate for every enquiry on my EU selling platforms.
It would be nice to offer this on a worldwide basis but postage costs make it unfeasible, unless for large orders perhaps. But even then some people just opt to make a purchase without testing.

Hence any accusation of 'making outrageous claims' within my ads are practically null and void when people are offered the opportunity to decide and appraise for themselves. Is there anything wrong or deceiful about this? I'm sure some are still going to find fault with it.

So, in conclusion yes, I'd be interested to get a verification of the EMI/RFI claim in place - but it would make NO difference to me commercially with respect to my ethical selling method. Customers will still make a purchase based on their own merits and appraisal!

That doesn't work though. We all know that there need be no change in the sound waves from the speakers, for an expensive cable with no benefit to "sound better" in a sighted test with a loan cable. It's the sighted listening effect that you will see mentioned on this site, again and again.

At the end of the day, you've still sold a customer an expensive cable with no proven benefit: and there is a reasonable chance that the "better sound" will disappear in a few months for that listener, because it was never really there in the first place.

It's the difference between "trying to be ethical" and actually selling something of genuine benefit, I'm afraid: and that is where many here will absolutely disagree with that selling method.

As for "practically null and void"? No. Not even slightly. You are making an unqualified claim that the cable does a specific thing and that it results in a change in the sound waves in the room, and handwaving about a theory does not prove it. Note that I am not actually denying your claim for your cables as I did for the Ethernet ones: I'm questioning your claim. It is not for your customers, for me, for Amir to prove that they work as described - it's for you. Issuing a challenge yourself doesn't let you off the hook, either.

Moreover, you've done exactly what I talked about - pseudoscience. You asked yourself the question whether there are audible RFI/EMI benefits from a cable construction, answered yourself yes, and started selling cables based on that answer, without evidence that the cables work as described. Then you ask for quantification of claims by other manufacturers, in effect: don't be surprised if you get called out.

I know we're a hard act here, but that's because many of us have already choked on the snake oil at least once, quite often with dealer loans, 30 day return guarantees and such.

I notice also that you have not addressed my initial comment about your cables - are your mains cables certified for use in the countries where you are selling them? That seems to me to be a pretty basic thing for someone claiming to be ethical.