That’s very true, up to a point. However I would hope that whoever is doing these ‘comparisons’ (they are not really tests) that each cable or whatever is first checked to be sure of its specifications or if not available that it actually complies to a standard of some sort.
The ethernet ‘Cat’ number is irrelevant as all thats needed for audio streaming is Cat5e ‘Fast-Ethernet’ (100Mbits/s) so anything with a higher spec is surplus to requirements.
How and why these cables might sound (different or otherwise) on each & every different system is nothing to do with the cables specification - ethernet data protocol is robust (yes bits are bits), so other considerations as yet to be identified & the research documented by anyone has to be the cause.
What does concern me is some of the extreme power cable ideas we see on www, the power sockets & plugs will be made to a standard but some of the cable hook ups - insane.
I include some of the cables we see that are not normal 3-core or similar, the woven & Litz types, do they have any safety related stress testing. (only a question)
Frankly, everything you know about a hifi component is going to be a source of expectation bias.
Where you bought it, how much it cost, your relationship with the seller, the tech spec, the colour, the size, what the reviewers said…
And if SiS said, ‘the serial bus interconnect on the PHYS layer clock circuit measurements gave a lower LGBT snooping vector compared to a normal consumer switch’ - and you replied - ‘yeah, that makes sense’ then you’re definitely going to love it.
Why do we care what others think of our preferred choices in hifi? Why do we (some) feel the need to justify our choices in hifi? Why do some argue endlessly over the sonic merits of a particular bit of kit, be it a black box or a bit of wire? Some even argue over how a bit of kit should (must) be assessed!
If individually we have convinced ourselves to buy a bit of wire say and subsequenly have justified the purchase to ourselves through expectation bias and improper (?) testing, so bl**dy what? As long as we are happy with our purchase and we ‘believe’ we have a sonic gain that is VFM (?), then great.
We are all big enough and ugly enough to look out for snake oil!
I have a great deal of sympathy for that view. But at the same time I feel a certain amount of dislike for those companies who (presumably knowingly) take advantage of our predilection to believe. For instance (and maybe I’m going out on a limb here) I remember adverts for wooden cones in various types of wood, which were to be placed, pointing upwards, on the top four corners of you loudspeakers. These, apparently, would provide the most amazing improvement in your sound.
I think that it is good that we should debate which miracle products work, and which don’t. It’s not easy, because we are easily persuaded by persuasive sales people.
One thing is sure with expensive tweaks : you will probably never found them on a beach 
I doubt many audio companies continue to succeed by selling pure snake oil, as they are eventually found out. But there are ‘controversial’ purveyors of HiFi gear out there, so it is not exactly black and white.
I agree that the charlatans should be exposed. However, many of us would disagree over the merits (technical and sonic) of AudioQuest products for example, particularly their streaming cables. I own two Vodka and three Cinnamon cables and ‘believe’ they make a worthwhile (VFM) contribution to SQ (although Cinnamon was awful between my Cisco switches, so care is needed). Others would (and have) brushed these (Vodka) cables off, stating they don’t even meet spec and are sold using gobbledygook marketing hype.
I couldn’t care less what others think about AudioQuest cables, why should I when I am enjoying the music so much.
It would be nice, though, if you found that you could enjoy your music just as much at a significantly lower cost, wouldn’t it?
Yes, I am such a sucker, and my hobby is wasting money on hifi.
Beachcomber,..It’s not that kind of products,that we exchange experiences about in this thread,.or how..!!!
Beachcomber,..I have responded and explained this before,.but may not be to you personally.
But since you “like” such a mocking post to me and us Swedes (see below),.so I refrain from answering you.
YNWA250505,..Hope you had a nice moment,.when you looked for that picture,to illustrate us Swedes.
Otherwise,.I don’t comment on this kind of..Pointless Nonsense.!!
/Peder😡
Same here. I try to avoid buying the more egregious examples.
Glad your pleased with. I am also finally feeling I have got everything together as I would like.
Sounds a great unexpected benefit!
I’m pleased you like them. They’ve done exactly what I was hoping for.
Are you sure? What, qualitatively, is the difference between such things, and extremely expensive and exotic cables or cable lifters or anything else? Have you tried these cones? If not, why not?
I must have missed those answers.
Gosh, you are sensitive, aren’t you? Yet you say that Swedes commonly explain and justify the statements that you make, with the implication that non-Swedes do not.
Well, if you are not willing to explain and justify your testing methods, then I will not ask again.
There’s always been that bigger’s/smaller’s better in the audio world, though, you need only think back to some of the truly potty ultra-high-mass turntables there used to be around.
As for posh specs and what you expect to hear, I still remember my astonishment at comparing the bees-knees just-released, super-spec Technics direct drive fitted with the top arm+ cartridge combo of the time, the SME III and Sure V15III, tracking at just under a gram to the primitive Linn Sondek fitted with Keith Monks arm and Decca London cartridge tracking at a Neanderthal 2 grams. I was expecting to laugh myself silly at the latter, but no… Comparing it to master tapes on a two-track Revox later only showed slight compression. The assertion one hears what one wants is tosh.
Me too, I don’t recall anywhere that Peder has indicated what players/streamers & servers/NAS (endpoints) let alone amps & speakers or even the music that he or his ‘friends’ have used in these comparisons
I assume you realised I was being sarcastic.
I always start at the bottom of equipment hierarchy and work my way up, whether it is a black box, cable or ancillary kit. As an example I have owned 202, 282, 252 and (now) 552 pre-amps. If I do have any regrets it is not leap-frogging certain steps along the way. For any significant spend, I both demo at the dealer and at home, at length. I only buy pre-loved or ex-dem black boxes from dealers now and will demo the actual example at home before committing.
So no, I don’t believe I could get better for significantly less money and I am extremely careful to demo at length before I buy.
Me too. Every other one I’ve tried gave something but took other bits away. These really work well in my system.
Mike-B,..Have you done that,.I don’t think so..!!
Start first by doing this yourself,.instead of constantly sitting and complaining about,and attacking others.
Those who have followed me and my posts here,.during these more than 3.5 years on this forum.
From when we revealed the scandal of the…
LP12-Radikal Problem…and forward.
They probably have a fairly clear picture of my experience and knowledge,.as well as what systems who exist within our group.
Here you have some of our systems…
In addition,.I put in a lot of pictures of products that we have,do you do it..No,.you don’t..!!
Mike-B,..Of course it’s amazing,.that you’re the expert who all the truth is based on.
But for the rest of us,.in our group for over 26-years,so we use the method that Linn use.
This method has Linn used since at least in the early 1980s,.when they testing and developing their high-end products.
SO,.if it’s good enough for Linn,.then it is also good enough for us.
But Mike-B,.feel free to use your own possible test-method,.but think about this.
I’ve NEVER started criticizing you and your possible test-method,.but you’re constantly criticizing me,our..and other people’s test-methods.
Think About It For A While.
Otherwise,.I see no reason to continue this discussion.
But feel free to add some more pictures you too,.as I do.
/Peder🙂
Interesting photos. Some pretty expensive equipment there. It tells us nothing, of course, about your testing/experimenting procedures. Without that information it is very hard to judge the value of these tests.
I know that you don’t like to be questioned or criticised - but this is something that happens in scientific circles, I’m afraid. I know that this is not a scientific circle (and there are those who object to science for some reason), but that’s how these things go. If you make pronouncements on what you should do to get the best out of your equipment, or what equipment is best or better, then you should expect to be questioned.