Some simple truths:
You don’t always get what you pay for but you never get what you don’t pay for.
You can hear what you measure but you can’t always measure what you hear.
Bud
1 Like
Very interesting talk
1 Like
Frankly, I’m surprised you didn’t get flamed for that…
.
1 Like
Honestly I never even thought of replacing the cat5 or cat5e cables that provide the internet connection to my streamer. I’m not even sure what type of cable I’m using I just pulled a couple out from the big box I have in the garage! I am reading this thread with fascination wondering if upgrading my cables might be a way to extract a bit more from my Muso 2. I’m not disappointed; it’s an amazing player as is and I’m very happy with it. I’m not even sure if the Muso 2 has any untapped potential but I think I’d like to try. The Muso is hard wired to a switch which also provides internet to my TV. The switch is connected to a MOCA adapter. The MOCA technology allows me to use my home COAX wiring to provide internet. The cable modem and router are in another location. I think I will replace both the cable to my Muso and the cable from the MOCA adapter to the switch. My question is do I go with Blue Jeans 5e, 6 or 6a cable? I’m looking for some advice. Thanks.
I didn’t think a screen would help, indeed thought it could be detrimental, but in my system the BJC Cat6a definitely offers more detail, clarity and bass extension than the Cat6. Worth mentioning I have a 5m run from switch to streamer. Keeping the switch away from the black boxes works best for me.
1 Like
Isn’t it time you went back to the designacable 5e, the comparison isn’t complete. Oh and give it a chance to settle, you never know.
Yes it is. I’ve done a little of that, including trying the DesignaCable with a ferrite choke, which levels things a bit, but I’m going to wait and prat around with the different Cisco boxes with and without external power supply first and singly and in piggy back. Then I’ll be off for a few weeks and will do the final comparisons fresh when I return.
I bought BJC 6a because I thought a screen would help overall as there’s what I consider to be a lot of ways that EM noise could enter my 2 ethernet cables from other wires and devices.
It sounds great and much better than the Cat5e and very cheap 6a cables it replaced.
I’ve not compared it the other BJC cables.
But my impression from the other extremely long current thread on this is that the 6a has worked well for a lot of people - but there’s no clear better cable overall.
1 Like
The 6a works perfectly in my set-up.
G
1 Like
6a can be either STP or UTP.
1 Like
Cable type is supposed to depend on the electrical environment it’s used in. With Blue Jeans their Cat6a has a passive (unconnected) screen, the Cat6 has no screen.
Cat6 is the preferred cable on other forums that have gotten into this, but this forum has evolved into mixed choices that TBH does not appear to have been firmed up other than by a stab in the dark.
My concern with a screen is that its not really needed in a very low RF/EM area that is a domestic environment. Does a screen when used in such a low RF/EM environment do anything over & above what the twisted pair configuration does for RF/EM rejection, or does the screen add an unwanted element ??
I use Cat6.
3 Likes
That’s the argument from the BJC CEO as well and it makes sense. Which is why I didn’t bother with the Cat6a initially, and only tried their Cat5e and Cat6 (preferring the latter). Fortunately mu curiosity was piqued to then try the Cat6a and it works much better in my system.
1 Like
Your test of BJC Cat 6 vs 6a is one of the only ones that I’m aware of, and therefore is very useful in deciding which to buy.
(The usual caveats obviously apply).
My guess is that the BJC CEO will be sticking to the idea of ‘this cable is on spec whereas many others are not in our fluke tests’.
He is therefore not likely to make any claims about what effect his cables might have if used in a very senstive hifi system.
As the effects of these cables on sq is more about noise reduction than data transmission, then screening may be more important than it would be in computing applications.
Indeed that is their USP. Moreover, they consistently state that their is no difference in sound quality between their ethernet cables…
1 Like
I really don’t buy into hifi being ‘very sensitive’, whats sensitive ?? It might carry an extra element that we perceive that is sound, but its no more sensitive than any other network devise.
I also wonder why there’s nothing like the heated endless discussions & arguments on the A/V forums about ethernet cable vision & sound differences that we have, on this forum in particular & notably less on the other audio forums.
I believe BJC’s CEO is very aware of the ongoing hifi forum debates & the cable brand claims about how a cable ‘sounds’, the fact that he has not made any claims is probably indicative of the possibility it might not be factual and/or proven.
Re the Fluke test, its one of BJC’s USP, although not completely unique as MeiCord do the same. The test doesn’t indicate a betterment in audio streaming sound quality, perceived or actual, its just giving the buyer assurance that you’re getting what you’re buying, something few manage to do its claimed by BJC.
2 Likes
yes I have read about folks who have put fancy ethernet cables on their tellys and have reported richer more vibrant colours and deeper blacks and other such twaddle
1 Like
Well, I find a huge difference in my photographs depending upon the ethernet cable. Some cables seem to mute the blues especially, others enhance the reds. Some improve the resolution of the photos quite noticeably compared with others.
Similarly with Word documents. BJC seem to produce the best-shaped letters - “w” especially comes out more rounded and nicer, while “I” is much straighter and narrower with AQ Vodka cables. The more expensive cables seem to improve the spacing between the letters - with better kerning in some cases.
It’s difficult to decide which is best.
4 Likes
Well, sensitivity applies to the construction and design of mics that record the instruments in gigs and studios.
It applies to hi res files - the higher sampling rate, the more that the signal may be able to encode tiny differences of tone etc.
The hifi system is designed to amplify these subtle differences and then uses speakers that are specifically designed to respond sensitively to the the precise signals arriving from the power amp.
the way the speakers are arranged within the room is senstive to room modes etc.
all of these processes are highly senstive to electrical noise, and to timing as it’s audio
Hardly any of these senstivities applies to or are as important in the computing app where data is crunched and sent by, say, a phone system or pc to a router or a mainframe - where all that often matters is whether the data packets arrive and can be reconstructed in the right order.