zoom25

Torus. Stock cables.

It's good to see manufacturers giving the option for fiber inputs. Since Lumin will have total control for the downstream fiber implementation, I'd now be curious to test out the hypothesis regarding noise in different domains. I'd be interested in hearing comments from the manufacturers and users whether changing the power supply of the upstream FMC can make a difference or not or if the length of cables make any difference, or on the clocks of those upstream FMC. Of course, the power supplies of those upstream FMC should be on other circuits and you could furthermore put the Lumin on a good isolation transformer to get separation, so one can't claim that it's the power supply interaction rather than the signal at hand. Batteries can be used for isolation as well if needed for true isolation. If there is no difference heard, then problem solved, everything works as expected. End of discussion. However, if there are differences...

Hard drives, especially portable 2.5" drives, like from Western Digital that are 5400 RPM are what I use for music storage. They stay silent, cool, and have been reliable for me. I have multiple of them and a few over a decade old. None failed on me. As far as sound goes, it can vary on the device/preference. With my BDP-1, I do hear subtle differences between the portable hard drives, external 3.5 WD hard drives and their various power supplies, and flash drives along with the use of AQ Jitterbugs for these combinations. Ethernet yet again sounds different from these. I would try each method out if possible. Things haven't always sounded the way I expected them to or which I thought would come ahead in SQ.

I'd invest majority of it into the room. Room makes the biggest difference. I know it's said so often, but it cannot be overstated. Once you hear the difference, you won't want to spend it on anything else.

Yup. The other thing I tried with the Torus and downstream of the Torus was using stock shielded cables and I did find that they changed the sound, but didn't ultimately like them long term, even though they initially gave the impression of better sound. I did later find out that it had the shield drain wire connected on both ends. So my results and dislike for the shielded cable made sense. On the other hand, most 'audiophile' cables are typically shielded. However, they rarely mention which end(s) the shields are connected. I've seen recommendations of connecting the shield on the wall end only to drain the noise from reaching the component. On the other hand, I've seen recommendation of connecting the shield to the component end only as to restrict the noise from leaving the cable that is generated by the cable itself. How does one know which shielding method to apply for which component? Nobody's answered that question for me. Further compound that with the use of Torus which should be cleaning the power. I don't question that some cable designs may be changing the sound, but is it actually for the better, even if it appeals (initially) to some listeners. For example, I still see lots of people liking shielded ethernet cables that are grounded on the audio player side and introducing the noise into the component.

Yup, agreed on the treble response. This is why I actually like the Audeze's. I find majority of the headphones are too bright stock. Even with calibrated EQ, they still don't respond quite well. The Audeze's are the easiest to go back and forth with speakers for me. With HD 800, it'd take several minutes getting adjusted tonally, even with Sonarworks. Being phase accurate is definitely a huge part on both headphones and speakers. Good monitors in a good room can really make things so much more relaxed on the brain. I enjoy ATC and Amphion for that reason. You don't feel like you're missing out on detail, tonality, transients, or phase response.

An isolation transformer (such as Torus/Bryston BIT) will be a much better investment. Plug all audio gear into it. I use stock unshielded power cables.

I prefer both of my speaker setups over the headphones I had in the past and currently have: LCD-2.2, LCD-3, LCD-2C, HE-500, HD 800, Denon AH-D2000, KRK KNS 8400, HD 598. Comfort always goes to speakers. Speakers are just more easier to listen to and make sense of. The one thing that headphones struggle with is the presentation of the plane and soundstage. It never quite translates like with speakers. I can still enjoy headphones, however, if given the choice without worrying about noise or privacy, I'll go with speakers.

For ethernet cables, I'd try putting LONG Cat6 UTP ethernet cables for each link. Think 10-15 meters for each individual link. Shielded cables that are grounded might make things sound better initially, like more resolution/details or smoother sounding, but it's messing with the sound. In contrast, the UTP may initially sound grainier in quick comparison. Do a blind test with material that has lot of percussions and drums and pay attention to the air and impact of drums and not which one sounds better/worse, but which one sounds more lifelike and natural. You can still use shielded cables with floating on both ends, but a well made CAT 6 UTP (like Belden bonded) will be better for signal integrity over their shielded counterparts, especially in home environments. This comes from experience with over 30+ ethernet cables of Cat5e, 6, 6a, 6a S/STP (various shield grounding) and on multiple switches, routers, bridged connections without routers/switches, and various power supplies for the devices. I've used gigabit and 10/100 network devices. The cables were as short as 1 feet to as long as 60 feet. I was not fond of short ethernet cables, especially in long-term listening. In short-term listening, it's easy to get tricked. The longer cables sound more relaxed and fluid and not muddy, which initially may be thought as grainy, lacking impact, or lacking in detail when comparing with short cables or using shielded cables that are grounded. In the end, I prefer my Fast ethernet switch (D-LINK DES-1005) powered by Teradak LPS with long Cat6 UTP cables. I have my router, iMac, and network player (Bryston BDP-1) connected to this switch.

@JohnSwenson @Superdad I forgot to tag above.

Dear Alex & John, I was wondering if you guys were going to include or recommend particular ethernet cables for use with this unit? I'm also curious if in your investigation you guys have looked at the length of ethernet cables as a variable/factor? Ideally it'd be a good cable like a Cat6 Belden bonded that has been terminated and sold by Belden (that way you'd know it's authentic). Belden bonded is a good candidate as it's more likely to maintain the same structure throughout its entire length, especially after coiling. So perhaps comparing that cable above in lengths such as: less than 1m, 1-2m, 3m, 10m, 20m. You can do this for not only the final 'clean' run, but also for the cables connecting to this switch. If you had done this sort of test with other switches in the past or your own switch, I would love to compare notes and see if you guys noticed any differences and which way the results went. Thanks!

Interesting. I tried to use some of the UPNP/DLNA on Mac, but found it troublesome. I gave Minimserver and Linsky a shot, but it was problematic for me. Audirvana Plus worked better for me, but it wasn't perfect either. I didn't get much time with DLNA. On the other hand, Roon is a lot more stable. It just works so well. No hiccups. I did find Roon in my setup with my endpoint to be sensitive to the cabling, power supplies, and/or routers vs. switch vs. bridged connections. Although, I don't think the cables themselves are creating any problems, aside from any shielded cables that are grounded which is another issue. But as far as any double floating shielded cables or any Fluke tested and passed UTP cable from any manufacturer sounding different from another, I don't think it's the cable itself influencing the sound by picking up more noise or letting more noise out. Rather, I think the cable and it's electrical properties (impedance, return loss), while especially focusing on length, may be influencing the behaviour in the PHY (which may be sub par) in some of these devices. Varying the cable might result in a different or better sound as it can perhaps make it easier for the PHY. I seriously think length should be more looked at among people who hear differences due to ethernet cables. Aside from a host of Fluke tested Cat5e, Cat6, Cat6a S/STP from many manufacturers, I had a lot of Belden bonded cables that were terminated and tested by Belden. These cables remain very uniform throughout it's length. I had the Belden at varying lengths, and I had multiple versions at each length. This way it could eliminate possibility that there was some fault within one cable vs. the rest. The results with the Belden matched the results from the non Belden as well. I had lengths as short as 1 feet and lengths as long as 60 feet. Based on my own experience, I am not surprised that some people may hear difference between cables, especially at short lengths with particular networking components.

For ethernet cables, try using Cat6 UTP (anything generic that's been Fluke tested and passed or even something like Belden bonded Cat6 UTP) for each link and to keep each link LONG, not short. You can get 10 meters Cat 6 UTP for around $10. Even if the length is not required, simply coil it and keep it on the ground. If some of the runs are naturally long, don't worry about changing those. However, if you have a switch that you keep nearby that you keep in the listening room beside the rack with a 1-2 meter cable, try changing that for a 10+ish meter Cat6 UTP. Do that before spending something crazy on expensive cables or if you find ethernet cables sound different in your system. Keep each chain long, and try to get used to the sound over a week. Initially, with the longer cables, you might think they are losing detail or things are dull/grainy or even too relaxed sounding. Pay attention to the image and what's happening to the plane of the music. Go back a week later and throw in the previous cables. Of course, any shielded cable that is grounded on either end will be modulating the ground plane. Pick any cable that is UTP or shielded (Cat 6a S/STP or Cat7) that is floating on both ends or even a floating Audioquest or whatever at short lengths and then compare to a standard well made Cat6 UTP 10m+ in long-term listening.

I spent the past few months looking at this area and meticulously experimenting with lots of devices (10) and cables (30+) and testing out the various assumptions that people seem to have and what is already established. Some things worked as expected, and results were in favour with the established knowledge. In other cases, I found why some people might even like some things are not good, especially in short-term listening. In some cases, my own results went against what most audiophiles think, but does agree with networking specialists. It's good to systematically experiment and see if you are actually affecting the variable that you THINK you are affecting. Noise is often discussed as a 'problem'...it's either noise that's coming IN, or noise going OUT, or noise already on the cable. You can make up logical experiments at home to test for this. Other things like signal integrity and cable reflections becomes hard to experiment on like with noise above, aside from blind testing. You need measurements to really test these things. After all this time, some things make sense, while others still don't. I know how things sound in my rig and what patterns emerged. So when I see any devices or solutions being offered by manufacturers, I do question the merits and whether they are actually correctly tackling a problem, or are even aware of what the problem might be. I wonder if they might be actually making things worse or just making things different and just taking a shot in the dark.

Before finding "a or THE" solution, shouldn't it be important to correctly identify the problem(s).