Yes, which we know is nonsense.
1 Like
That of course depends what is being considered. In terms of receiving the data stream and confirming it is error free, then yes, no more sensitive than sending a text document to a word processor, but whether anything like RF superimposed on the datastream is then able to reach and adversely affect, say, the DAC’s performance is quite different from the digital data being assembled into, say, a document file where RF may have have no effect.
To take an example, Hugo DAC has no galvanic isolation of its ekectrical inputs I don’t know what RF filtering it might have otherwise, but Hugo is sensitive to RF noise superimposed on the digital music stream, causing a deterioration in sound quality at the output, possibly as a result of modulation effects, and steps must therefore be taken to block the RF. Other DACs may be less sensitive to RF than Hugo. but even even ones with great attention to eliminating this potential source of sound degradation might have some rsidual sensitivity.
That said, I have no idea if RF picked up through the ethernet connection while streaming has any chance of getting through the rendering process to the DAC…
Yes I know all that, I spent some time in recording & my background is not too far from that, but its not what I’m asking. My question is specifically about what you think is ‘very sensitive’ with audio streamers & its relationship with an ethernet LAN.
Well, the hifi system as a whole is specifically designed to code tiny differences in electrical voltages and to amplify tiny signal differences and resolve those differences with very sensitive speaker drivers.
So the system is as sensitive as possible to all its parts - which is why hifi buffs pay attnetion to every detail.
Ethernet cables are no different.
They don’t just transfer data - they also bring electromagnetic noise into the streamer and DAC, which also gets amplified and changes the sound quality of the music.
That’s why some ethernet cables ‘sound’ better than others - because they also act as aeriels and convey noise from switches and routers.
The system picks up and amplifies those small differences which might not matter in a less sensitive eqiipment e.g. watching a youtube clip that arrived via ethernet cable into a laptop. The pc has a much less senstive audio system.
This means nothing, whatever you may or may not believe is happening in the data stream in relation to an ethernet cable, & whatever sonic effects you believe may result is not proven, although it seems some believe sonic variables exist, me included, I have yet to find any paper or scientific document from a credible source that tells me why.
I fully accept a PC used for viewing YouTube does not have the ability to differentiate any subtle changes that may exist.
I had in mind is the sensitivity difference with an audio streamer compared to an AV streamer system as an example of home applications, I also had in mind recording & broadcasting studio network installations & equipment.
Whatever, an audio streamer isn’t any more sensitive than other equipment, but if others like yourself think they are, OK, I was just inquisitive why you had than opinion
I work in the broadcast / high-end post production industry, we use a lot of very high spec kit, both audio and 4K video. Fancy ethernet cables never enter the conversation or are specified by the various manufacturers. Likewise, if a piece of kit requires a certain level of power supply to operate optimally then it comes with that power supply built in by design - we dont need to buy a super duper additional psu to get best results - everything just works and meets very high specifications by design.
1 Like
But if you look at my post that we are discussing, which you quoted and disagreed with, I said:
“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.”
I didn’t say that the sensitivity was only due to the streaming section of a hifi system.
That’s why I keep saying that the hifi system as a whole is designed to be very senstive.
And it’s this extreme overall senstiivity to em noise (as well as electrically coded signals) that means the ethernet cables make a significant difference in hifi.
So hifi equipment is much more sensitive to small differences in noise than IT equipment - because hifi systems amplify it and play it thru extremely high quality speakers and you can hear it.
And Mike - I’m not just debating this to score points or be pedantic.
I think it really matters because to me it explains why the cable spec from a fluke test is not enough to explain the effect on hifi SQ of these cables.
Yes, the fluke test results are good to have and help us know that the data will be dleivered and it’s a sound data cable.
But they don’t tell us everything we need to know about the cable’s influence on SQ - becuase that’s also down to it’s noise transmission effects.
1 Like
best result for studio purposes are not best results for hifi purposes
2 Likes
Are the broadcast and recording industries quality critical beyond a certain point? It’s only idiots like us who aspire to better than good enough.
2 Likes
yes, that’s why they use studio monitors, which no sane hifi person would have in their house (light fuse and wait for disagreements…)
JimDog, as I said in my previous post. I have yet to find any paper or scientific document from a credible source that tells me why. The cause of any perceived changes in sound is unknown & unproven & until that scientific evidence is published I treat all the many & various ‘opinions’ we read on this forum & other places as nothing more than just that.
Meanwhile I will keep & open mind & experiment as I feel appropriate.
2 Likes
I wonder about this as well. I have my SU placed a few feet away (around a corner) from modem, router, switch, and QNAP with all power chords separate from data cables. It’s a pretty simple set up. So I wonder what amount of RF is interfering with/accompanying my data cables.
…they only recorded the music in the first place!
Yes - this is my pet theory.
It’s not been scientifically tested as far as I know.
But I think it stands up logically and fits with a lot of the amateur tests reported here.
I did wonder if anyone else had noticed this.
I also found when I looked at the Ecotricity site, my electic bill was cheaper with a better cable or maybe I just imagined it.
Best I just say these amateur “tests” don’t carry any logic whatsoever, they might agree to agree, but that is countered by others who disagree.
I don’t think you understand what JimDog refers to,.you’re talking about two completely different worlds.
I am not going to take part in this discussion more than to say.
That all music-systems are sensitive to the slightest change in practical terms.
And if you have a lot of experience with system-installation,.so you know.
That if you make a certain change,.you will get a certain result,this regardless of the brand of the system.
I am not going to take any example,.but merely say this.
/Peder🙂
1 Like
There’s too much variability in system set ups and subjectivity in preference for these tests to be very useful on a large scale it seems.
1 Like
Mike-B,…Since I tested more or less professionally since 1994.
With this statement above…
Answer concretely,.how you would test an Interconnect-cable according to your “requirement image”.
/Peder 
All the “testing” I have read on this forum that you have reported on is not testing, its just you expressing your opinion on what you hear, in my book that is not a test but an opinion, its like a review in a magazine & as such its the readers choice to believe it or not.
The only tests that I have done, or read & understand the process, and are actual tests, relate to connectivity & electrical performance according to TIA/ISO standards.
These do not (they cannot) report on human perception of sound variances, we just have to believe, or reject, what people on forums & magazines write about.
2 Likes