Apparently it’s not the case. Wadax ( 400 k streamer dac ), MSB ( 100k), DCS Apex …owners use high quality switches and boutique Ethernet cables. Many elsewhere discussions easy to find.
Or fiber optic.
People spending tgat much money might be persuaded by the cost of boutique cables and switches that they must soundbetter…
It is also not inconceivable that that DAC might be the best in some ways, but not necessarily best RF rejection.
I havd no knowledge or view, but people’s behaviour alone isn’t enought to convince me.
2 Likes
Hi @frenchrooster , thanks for the compliments - I think you also have a fantastic system!
I have not yet tried to undertake a thorough comparison of WiFi connection for my streamer vs a direct wired connection with ethernet cable. However I can confidently state that “for my system, in my environment with my ears” I have not yet percived a difference between the following equipment arrangements:-
- Cheap ethernet cable directly from rear port on streamer to Router,
- Cheap ethernet cable to Netgear GS105 switch & cheap ethernet cable from GS105 to Router,
- No electrical data connection whatsoever - using WiFi from streamer to Router.
I perhaps will undertake such a comparison in the future. But if I do, it will include some objective (hopefully repeatable) measurements as well as any subjective listening comparisons.
PS: My HiFi dealer has a number of employees, one of whom is really persuaded by HiFi grade products such as high end loudspeker cables, analogue and digital interconnects, power conditioning units and power cables etc etc. He and I have a very good relationship (I think) and he knows that if I ask to borrow somthing - I WILL TEST IT.
BTW, I dont know if you have looked into my one and only thread? Very recently I posted a question to see if anyone was interested in some cable testing measurements:-
There have been two expresions of interest so far. Perhaps you would like to express interest?
PPS: For my first foray into ‘cable testing’ I have decided to start with the loudspeaker cable question as that is most likely to show differences in measurement.
Take a look and let me know your thoughts?
3 Likes
I know that finally you choosed Linn Klimax Solo. But you are also interested by Soulution.
It’s not my kind of sound. Hopefully we are all different.
I feel you would have a lot of sharings with Thomas, who was involved a lot in acoustic treatment and bought Soulutions and Magico.
I have never heard Emm Labs electronics, only the Meitner streamer.
My dream gear is more Aries Cerat or VAC today. Naim Statements too.
1 Like
Hi FR. Indeed it is good that everyone is able to bring their own personal perspective to HiFi - that, to me, is what keeps the whole thing interesting - covering topics from equipment types, setup and perhaps most impotantly …the music!
Personally I try to stay ‘neutral’ on equipment selection (although I don’t always present information on this forum in that way 
) and I also try hard not to be influenced by ‘brands’ and their associated marketing. So “my kind of sound” is one where the selected equipment or arrangement ‘does no harm’ to the recording/signal being presented - when measured at the listening position.
As an aside, owing to the presence of some very low level noise in some of my measurement plots, I recently asked the HiFi dealer to bring over some special (cf expensive) Shunyata power cables and Power Distribution isolators to try to locate the source of this noise.
The outcome - I was able to eliminate the noise - but not perhaps in the way readers might assume. After a series of focused investigations the noise is/was acoustically generated by two LED spot lights (with internal very small switched mode power supplies) and the microphone was picking up the acoustic emission as one of the lights was barely 1.3m away from the mic head capsule. So the solution is to make measurements with these two LED lights turned off!
Now if you ask me - can I personally hear the difference playing music with these LED lights ON vs OFF? - the answer is NO.
But that is my point I guess, I personally have yet to find an ‘audible improvement’ using ‘ears’ based judgements that DO NOT readilly show up using the appropriate technical acoustic measurements in the appropriate conditions.
So I expect I will eventually get round to testing fancy HiFi grade network products and cables, but it will be a while and a long journey as I am starting with the loudspeaker cable evaluations first.
PS: Re the lights comment - if anybody is using old style flourescent tubes in listening spaces -you might want to measure (at the listening position) the acoustic emissions from those things (both tube and starter circuits)!
3 Likes
On acoustic emissions from lights, my sons can hear the faint noise from some light fittings with LED bulbs, where I can’t. But yes it is an important point when making acoustic measurements to ensure correct interpretation.
Regarding this:
I think the final part is critical: measurements must be appropriate both in what is measured and sensitivity, and one consideration where my understanding is that the human ear is very sensitive to changes is phase, which is often ignored when people apply acoustic measurements, often focusing solely on frequency response and decay time
2 Likes
Thanks for pointing this (phase thing) out IB, but give me a chance, I have yet to get enough momentum and interest from the forum members in the information and measurements I have already posted on my own thread 
.
For a laugh I decided to research some measuring devices. AI gave me this reply when I Googled “Aural pleasure meter”.
An “aural pleasure meter” isn’t a standard, universally recognized term or device. It likely refers toa subjective assessment of how much one enjoys listening to something, perhaps using a scale or rating system for enjoyment. There are tools like audiometers and calibration systems used for measuring sound and hearing, but these are for objective assessments of sound and not for measuring subjective pleasure.
Here’s a breakdown of why that term isn’t used and what similar concepts exist:
Why “Aural Pleasure Meter” Isn’t Standard:
*** Subjectivity:**
Pleasure is subjective. What one person finds pleasurable, another might not. There’s no objective way to measure that.
*** Lack of Standardized Measurement:**
There isn’t a universally accepted scale or instrument for quantifying “aural pleasure.”
*** Focus on Objective Measurement:**
The field of acoustics and audiology focuses on objective measurements of sound and hearing, using tools like audiometers to measure hearing thresholds, frequencies, and other parameters.
It went on to describe the other obvious means of measuring. At that stage I got bored.
If you try this at home, please search “Aural pleasure meter” and not “Oral pleasure meter” , which I am sure may render some more spicy content.
Forgive my thread drift, it’s Friday, I’ve cut the garden hedge and at a loss for something to do!
1 Like
I think you will find most dac manufacturers won’t say much or anything about swiches and cable’s.
dCS for instance just say a normal unshielded cat 5 (i think) is all that they say you need, nothing fancy needed as far as ethernet goes at all.
As owners some just go with this and some don’t.
1 Like
It was by no means a dig or prod, rather a reinforcing note!
1 Like
Now in series. Working really well with this change. Slightly preferred over the ‘linked’ configuration here. More coherent either way. Nice, with some wonderful Georgie Benson & a Mermaid Gin, one cube & a slim FT. Quick boogie, the flares are a wafting, feet are a tapping. Wonderful stuff.
5 Likes
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.