Nordost Heimdall 2 Ethernet Cable Review

[jabbr]

13 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

That isn't entirely strict however. In part I'm testing the claims reviewers like Lavorgna and Darko have made about 'readily apparent' and 'easy to discern' differences.

 

These claims go way beyond discriminating minute changes and part of this is seeing if this type of claim is reproducible. This has been no small effort to put together but I am having fun with it and helping a neighbor set up their recording studio for his band so it's not effort without some payoff for someone. 

Entirely understand ... you had nothing better to spend your casino winnings on than a new audiophile Ethernet cable ...

 

Seriously though @STC or anyone else shouldn't be surprised if either they hear a difference in two identical recordings or conversely can't hear the difference between a Strad and a cheap student violin because rigorous testing takes work.

 

Personally I'd probably have bought yet another spectrum analyzer or signal generator or 40g fiber switch off of ebay (for that price!!) not that I need another one but not that you need another ethernet cable either, eh?  

 

(this should all be interpreted with the largest  

[plissken]

I purchased from a place with a 30 day return policy. Audacity does spectrum analysis and the DAC can output test tones.

 

I have no idea what I would do with 10 or 40GBe. 1Gbe is plenty fast.

 

I think the one thing absolutely busted is the claims of noise rejection. Even with 250 foot of the cable piled up in a huge mess directly underneath a 1200 watt microwave just nothing going on.

 

Just like the T.I. and Seimons papers stated.

[STC]

I asked my son to copy the tracks randomly to make 10 tracks. Just say, I didn't get 10/10 correct. not even 7/10. So i guess no difference. But then I have taken too many tests and it is possible my brain is no longer perceiving the sound as the first time I hear them. It is scientifically proven

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/killing-song-science-magic-lost-listen-too-much-sound-good-michael-bonshor-a7728156.html

[plissken]

51 minutes ago, STC said:

I asked my son to copy the tracks randomly to make 10 tracks. Just say, I didn't get 10/10 correct. not even 7/10. So i guess no difference. But then I have taken too many tests and it is possible my brain is no longer perceiving the sound as the first time I hear them. It is scientifically proven

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/killing-song-science-magic-lost-listen-too-much-sound-good-michael-bonshor-a7728156.html

 

Thanks for that. The process has been fun and helped me dial out the edit suite but they'll be wanting their mastering interface back soon. I did DAW / DVE suites for 7 years for living but it has been a loooong time ago. 

 

I'll get a few more tracks through. AIX records has three distinct style of sample tracks available that I want to put through in addition to 2L. 

[plissken]

54 minutes ago, STC said:

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/killing-song-science-magic-lost-listen-too-much-sound-good-michael-bonshor-a7728156.html

 

That is a good read. I think it explains quite well why classical, orchestral, music is still in vogue today as it ever was. 

[STC]

ABX results....and...

 

Total: 7/16
Probability that you were guessing: 77.3%

 

[plissken]

7/16 is just coin flips :-)

 

I'm going to say this is a nail in the coffin of people that review Ethernet cables. It's proof of either delusion or collusion (they are simply making shit up). 

 

So any reviewer where they have reviewed Ethernet cabling you can be sure, 100%, they are liars. 

 

 

[plissken]

FYI the streamer being used was the Cary Audio DMS-500.

[mbain]

As is usually the case with posts here on CA, rarely are firm conclusions ever reached that provide a reader with info they can hang their hats on.  The frustration with the audio hobby continues to mount.

[STC]

On 6/1/2017 at 0:24 AM, mbain said:

As is usually the case with posts here on CA, rarely are firm conclusions ever reached that provide a reader with info they can hang their hats on.  The frustration with the audio hobby continues to mount.

 

It is hard to draw a conclusion because like all the tests posted in this forum receives very little feedback. This is a very simple test that anyone could take part and share their results and yet hardly anyone want to. I wonder why?

[plissken]

On 5/31/2017 at 0:24 PM, mbain said:

As is usually the case with posts here on CA, rarely are firm conclusions ever reached that provide a reader with info they can hang their hats on.  The frustration with the audio hobby continues to mount.

I think the download links are still alive. Knock yourself out. 

 

You miss the entire point: The tracks are made available for self evaluation. If you don't participate then I'm baffled as to why you are complaining about the lack of outcomes. 

[m@ver1ck]

Hi there,

In a closed loop ecosystem, with audiophile grade equipment, I'm not super surprised that you couldn't hear much of a difference.

I do have an expensive audioquest vodka cable. I am using this in a most unlikely spot - between the comcast cable modem and a wireless router. I can only guess it's rejecting some noise into my LAN that was being pushed into it by the switch.

Now - there are two more switches between the wireless router and my streamer....

[plissken]

12 hours ago, m@ver1ck said:

Hi there,

In a closed loop ecosystem, with audiophile grade equipment, I'm not super surprised that you couldn't hear much of a difference.

I do have an expensive audioquest vodka cable. I am using this in a most unlikely spot - between the comcast cable modem and a wireless router. I can only guess it's rejecting some noise into my LAN that was being pushed into it by the switch.

Now - there are two more switches between the wireless router and my streamer....

 

Is there an open air (i.e. wireless) between your streamer and the Cable Modem/WiFi Router?

[mbain]

17 hours ago, plissken said:

I think the download links are still alive. Knock yourself out. 

 

You miss the entire point: The tracks are made available for self evaluation. If you don't participate then I'm baffled as to why you are complaining about the lack of outcomes. 

 

I am not complaining re. The lack of outcomes as it relates to this particular thread.  I was complaining about the lack of significant outcomes generally when reading audio related commentary.  Most of it is all opinion based on"personal preference."  Very little significantly factual information ever emerges. I have been closely involved with this hobby since the 70's and only occasionally have I experienced relevatory posting/ threads.  I keep reading with the hope that I will experience another such moment before I pass on.

[mbain]

14 minutes ago, mbain said:

 

I am not complaining re. The lack of outcomes as it relates to this particular thread.  I was complaining about the lack of significant outcomes generally when reading audio related commentary.  Most of it is all opinion based on"personal preference."  Very little significantly factual information ever emerges. I have been closely involved with this hobby since the 70's and only occasionally have I experienced relevatory posting/ threads.  I keep reading with the hope that I will experience another such moment before I pass on.

In response to my own post I realize that I have not expressed my position properly.  For those of you who are techies I am happy that you have sources such as this where you can expand your knowledge and enjoy your avocation.  For me and those like me, who only want guidance as to how to find to the best sound possible, most of what is posted on CA is inconsequential.  I should probably find another forum to which I am more suited and stop complaining.  Sorry to divert the thread.

[STC]

The guidance is always there but usually not well received when it contradicts the general perception of audiophiles. 

 

When I joined the forums, I was expecting high fidelity. I was curious to know how to improve the playback. 

 

The first thing I learned is room acoustics is the most important of all. Unfortunately, there are very few who take room acoustics seriously due to other factors. Without getting your room acoustics correct, rest of your upgrades are compromised. 

 

Slowly, it emerges to me that the high end hobby is not about high fidelity but more of a club of lifestyle. It is a hobby of what we have, how we arrange, how cool is your room look. Isn't the most important thing is how well it sounds? 

 

Take examples of a guitar or photography or painting forums. The object is to create a "product" using the  available tools of the hobby. You can see users posting/sharing their paintings, photographs or music. No one there values the picture of a guitar or camera or brush or canvas. This allowed others to comment and value the end result. 

 

Likewise, most of what is posted in CA is just how different people look at this hobby. I usually value all contributions even if it wrong or irrelevant. Sometimes, they offer a different perspective of what others think or want. 

 

 

 

[debt_collector]

On 2017-5-12 at 10:05 PM, plissken said:

I've had this setup for 3 days now and the conclusion is: Not a scintilla of difference between the cabling

Sorry if this is a daft question, are you saying that capturing the output of you system/chain of components is identical with the standard cat5 cable Vs the nordost cable? How did you compare the two?

[plissken]

On 6/21/2017 at 3:02 PM, debt_collector said:

Sorry if this is a daft question, are you saying that capturing the output of you system/chain of components is identical with the standard cat5 cable Vs the nordost cable? How did you compare the two?

 

I captured two ways:

 

1. Cable in for entire track with the player set on repeat. When track was on it's lead out I would swap the cable with no interruption in playback.

 

2. I would swap cables randomly during playback with out interrupting playback.

 

The point being is that with open air on the connection, music was somehow still playing (buffer), and that either listening to my speakers or the ADC capture output there was no difference.

 

No one here at CA that has tried the randomly labeled tracks have been able to tell the difference between 3 foot of cable costing $233 a foot and 315 foot of cable costing $0.30 a foot.

[realhifi]

5 hours ago, plissken said:

 

I captured two ways:

 

1. Cable in for entire track with the player set on repeat. When track was on it's lead out I would swap the cable with no interruption in playback.

 

2. I would swap cables randomly during playback with out interrupting playback.

 

The point being is that with open air on the connection, music was somehow still playing (buffer), and that either listening to my speakers or the ADC capture output there was no difference.

 

No one here at CA that has tried the randomly labeled tracks have been able to tell the difference between 3 foot of cable costing $233 a foot and 315 foot of cable costing $0.30 a foot.

So you did or did not purchase Nordost cable?

[plissken]

1 hour ago, realhifi said:

So you did or did not purchase Nordost cable?

 

I'm looking for the hidden camera in my office... As in those candid camera shows.

[debt_collector]

On 2017-6-23 at 5:53 PM, plissken said:

No one here at CA that has tried the randomly labeled tracks have been able to tell the difference between 3 foot of cable costing $233 a foot and 315 foot of cable costing $0.30 a foot.

Thanks, that's really good to know.

[jolon]

I did a comparison using an oscilloscope two years ago on the output of a Linn Sneaky DS network streamer (their bottom of the range). The noise on the RCA outputs appeared to be different depending on the ethernet cable feeding the Sneaky (pictures attached).

 

However at the time I wasn't as aware of the benefits of switches, cable layout, power supplies, etc. I'm not sure what interference would've been around the equipment. I may have had a plasma TV in stand by directly above the streamer.

 

Something that is worth considering is that upstream upgrades may benefit poorer quality streamers. My two streamers are basically the bottom of the range. A Yamaha R-N602 and Linn Sneaky DS. The Yamaha seems to benefit quite a bit from upstream changes. For example, feeding the Yamaha with a 5 metre shielded Cat6a cable into a Netgear switch and then 1.5m AudioQuest Pearl into ethernet to USB adaptor, USB to USB-C adaptor, into 12" MacBook sitting on a glass table, I can hear the difference if I put a mouse pad under the laptop, or if I put the laptop on the floor.

 

A more expensive network streamer will hopefully be less sensitive to network noise. I also question whether a microwave is the best noise test. Microwave radiation is relatively easy to block. A thin foil will block it. But frequencies in the audible range (below 20kHz) are much more difficult to block.

 

Some food for thought.

 

 

[barrows]

On 7/8/2017 at 4:16 PM, jolon said:

I did a comparison using an oscilloscope two years ago on the output of a Linn Sneaky DS network streamer (their bottom of the range). The noise on the RCA outputs appeared to be different depending on the ethernet cable feeding the Sneaky (pictures attached).

 

However at the time I wasn't as aware of the benefits of switches, cable layout, power supplies, etc. I'm not sure what interference would've been around the equipment. I may have had a plasma TV in stand by directly above the streamer.

 

Something that is worth considering is that upstream upgrades may benefit poorer quality streamers. My two streamers are basically the bottom of the range. A Yamaha R-N602 and Linn Sneaky DS. The Yamaha seems to benefit quite a bit from upstream changes. For example, feeding the Yamaha with a 5 metre shielded Cat6a cable into a Netgear switch and then 1.5m AudioQuest Pearl into ethernet to USB adaptor, USB to USB-C adaptor, into 12" MacBook sitting on a glass table, I can hear the difference if I put a mouse pad under the laptop, or if I put the laptop on the floor.

 

A more expensive network streamer will hopefully be less sensitive to network noise. I also question whether a microwave is the best noise test. Microwave radiation is relatively easy to block. A thin foil will block it. But frequencies in the audible range (below 20kHz) are much more difficult to block.

 

Some food for thought.

 

 

Yeah, I like that test.  What I think would be really telling is:

 

Take a Merging Horus, Hapi, or NaDac.  Get equal lengths (say 25-30 feet) of generic CAT5E, BJC CAT 6A, and the Nordost Heimdall and other "audiophile" Ethernet cables.  Then send a DSD4 file of digital silence and show full spectrum analysis of the analog output for the various DUT.  This test would tell me everything I want to know about Ethernet cabling.

[plissken]

On 7/8/2017 at 6:16 PM, jolon said:

I did a comparison using an oscilloscope two years ago on the output of a Linn Sneaky DS network streamer (their bottom of the range). The noise on the RCA outputs appeared to be different depending on the ethernet cable feeding the Sneaky (pictures attached).

 

However at the time I wasn't as aware of the benefits of switches, cable layout, power supplies, etc. I'm not sure what interference would've been around the equipment. I may have had a plasma TV in stand by directly above the streamer.

 

Something that is worth considering is that upstream upgrades may benefit poorer quality streamers. My two streamers are basically the bottom of the range. A Yamaha R-N602 and Linn Sneaky DS. The Yamaha seems to benefit quite a bit from upstream changes. For example, feeding the Yamaha with a 5 metre shielded Cat6a cable into a Netgear switch and then 1.5m AudioQuest Pearl into ethernet to USB adaptor, USB to USB-C adaptor, into 12" MacBook sitting on a glass table, I can hear the difference if I put a mouse pad under the laptop, or if I put the laptop on the floor.

 

A more expensive network streamer will hopefully be less sensitive to network noise. I also question whether a microwave is the best noise test. Microwave radiation is relatively easy to block. A thin foil will block it. But frequencies in the audible range (below 20kHz) are much more difficult to block.

 

Some food for thought.

 

 

 

I'm aware of your thread at stereo.net.au in regards to this for quite some time.

 

1. Give me a scale with enough zeros after the decimal point and I'll show you most 1lb packages of ground beef aren't all exactly one pound. To the recipe it's not going to matter one bit. I hate using analogies because someone will say "what's the quality of the beef" and fail to get the point. Which is par for the course.

 

2. If you look at the Fr of the AQ and the CAT5, if a point is to be belabored, the AQ puts noise in a range that humans are more susceptible to noticing. Not a good thing.

 

3. There is every chance that you could take another of the same manufacturer cable and get routinely differing results.

 

4. While I believe the AQ most likely would hit it's spec for ISO/TIA I doubt a generic $2 CAT5 would. I'm not advocating for a $2 cable.

 

I understand what you are getting at, I understand why it's problematic considering that audio will be playing and simply saturating it. I'm not surprised at all that with good enough equipment you can measure these micro-volt outputs. Even when nothing is connected.

 

On two systems: Computer with Intel Dual GBe, Emotiva DC-1 and a Cary Audio DMS-500 with the posted output I made available I stand by position.  Anyone that has downloaded the tracks have failed in identifying when cabling changes were made. I've also offered to go onsite with a L3 Managed Switch, Client, and Server machine and tie into any ones USB cable. Only to watch people scatter like roaches with the lights suddenly turned on.

 

Thank for the instrumented results but I like to borrow pages from the subjective crowd where and when I can, and I quote, "I don't listen with a scope, I listen with my ears".

 

If an audiophile can't trust their ears neither do I.

 

 

 

[plissken]

On 7/8/2017 at 6:16 PM, jolon said:

I also question whether a microwave is the best noise test. Microwave radiation is relatively easy to block. A thin foil will block it. But frequencies in the audible range (below 20kHz) are much more difficult to block.

 

Please don't miss the fact that I had 315 foot of cable that I could reach the stove vs a 3 foot cable at $233 a foot and people still couldn't tell the difference.

 

It is what it is and I've publicly stated under what conditions I would be willing to be proven wrong. 

 

If a streamer is susceptible to an in spec cable and has such variance that one has to play cable roulette then said streamer is an absolute steaming pile of shit.