Shielded vs. unshielded Ethernet and Grounding

[Ralf11]

comfort relieves you from the stress of listening for a tiny decrement in SQ (and all the bad neuro-chemicals that implies)

 

comfort relieves you from the risk of falling down deep when a cornice snaps off 

 

comfort is a safety margin

[Screwdriver]

I use a powerline network from my NAS to my renderer. How should I shield that? ?

[jabbr]

3 hours ago, Fitzcaraldo215 said:

Ok, but if those efforts have no provable effect on the output from the DAC, other than giving people "comfort", of what relevance are they to our listening?

Everyone is free to do whatever they want, and use whatever metrics or advice they want, at least within the limits of their budget.

 

Who says there is no provable effect on the output of the DAC? Hasn't been proven one way or the other and unquestionably hasn't for every combination of PC, switch, renderer and cable ...

 

Could I construct a situation where there is no question about a measurable effect of a network cable on the DAC? Certainly. (simple case is ground loop with shielded cable -- seen that, heard that ...)

 

Does upgrade a clock within a switch matter? I'm saying just use a 10Gbe fiber switch if you are concerned and don't worry about it. I'm also asking audiophile companies to at least show us the measurements that professional networking companies do all the time.

 

Does it make a difference in the DAC output? Not inconceivable but I'm not going to measure someone else's substandard switch with someone elses DAC. Here's what I can tell you from my own experience:

 

There are sometimes subtle factors that affect power plane and ground plane noise. One of which that hasn't been discussed enough, but one that unquestionably makes a surprisingly big difference is rise time. Too short a rise time results in overshoot and ringing at the receiver. Lots of the cheaper logic ICs generate too fast rise times. Ringing at the receiver can result in power and ground plane bounce which can result in additional phase errors at the receiver. Phase errors at the transmitter combines with issues at the receiver can thus result in increase phase errors at the receiver -- this is a fairly well accepted issue and one that IEEE 802.11ae acknowledges which is why the end-to-end phase error/jitter be measured and not just the receiver's.

 

In any case whether this makes its way to the DAC output is speculation and if I were ever to commercialize my DAC I assure you that I would publish my own data but right now we have what we have. I try to make recommendations taking reasonable price into account and at the moment, fiberoptic ethernet is so inexpensive that I choose to use it and not worry further about it.

[wanta911]

Interesting subject. I only have one small ethernet cable between NAS & router, which are both powered by separate HDPlex linear power supplies. I use wifi from the router to an Auralic Aries.

 

I can clearly hear a difference between a BJC CAT6 and a BJC CAT6A cable in this application. I would call the CAT6 open & detailed sounding with tight bass and the CAT6A is less detailed, being warmer/softer in the mid bass. I guess both have their pros & cons depending on the (standard of) material being played and which DAC I used but logic was telling me that the standard CAT6 was probably the "right" one.

 

Out of curiosity I ordered a Ghent ET02 CAT6A JSSG cable with Metz connectors, it is huge compared to the BJC cables. What was surprising was that it gave me exactly the same sound as the the standard CAT6 cable, which is 10x cheaper! This suggests that I have no problem with RF or interference/leakage but I am curious why the BJC CAT6A sounds different if the shield is indeed floating?

[jabbr]

@Fitzcaraldo215 do you have an answer for @wanta911 that will satisfy him/her?

 

@wanta911 you got me. I can't conceive of an electrical explanation because you've got complete galvanic isolation from the wifi router to the aries and to the DAC. I can't conceive of a way that cables connecting your NAS and wifi router could make an electrical difference.

[Fitzcaraldo215]

17 hours ago, jabbr said:

@Fitzcaraldo215 do you have an answer for @wanta911 that will satisfy him/her?

 

@wanta911 you got me. I can't conceive of an electrical explanation because you've got complete galvanic isolation from the wifi router to the aries and to the DAC. I can't conceive of a way that cables connecting your NAS and wifi router could make an electrical difference.

Nope.  Sorry, I will make no attempt at explanation that will satisfy anyone.  In fact, I am not satisfied that this listening anecdote based on unknown listening/testing conditions proves anything or is worth attempting to explain.  I am not doubting anyone's attempt at good faith in posting it, but I would need much more objective evidence to begin to take it seriously.  Unfortunately, such is the case with Internet forums.

[Darryl R]

Thought I'd post a response from Audioquest in connection with the main subject of this thread:

 

"Just like with our analog interconnects, we connect the shield at the receiving end of the cable only.  All cables are going to carry some noise, and we feel strongly that it’s better to ground the cable rather than have the noise floating around.  In our listening tests, both analog and digital cables sound better this way.  Please bear in mind that those cables that feature NDS (Noise Dissipation System), like Vodka RJ/E, dissipate the vast majority of the noise so there is very little being dumped into the component’s ground plane.

 

There is an easy (and cheap!) way of checking this out – you could buy an unshielded Ethernet cable for a few dollars and compare it to your Vodka.  It’s not just the superior conductors and insulation that makes Vodka better! In the unlikely event that an unshielded cable does offer improved performance in your system, we could always re-terminate your cable without the drain wire attached."

[wanta911]

On 8/5/2018 at 3:06 AM, Fitzcaraldo215 said:

Nope.  Sorry, I will make no attempt at explanation that will satisfy anyone.  In fact, I am not satisfied that this listening anecdote based on unknown listening/testing conditions proves anything or is worth attempting to explain.  I am not doubting anyone's attempt at good faith in posting it, but I would need much more objective evidence to begin to take it seriously.  Unfortunately, such is the case with Internet forums.

 

LOL - I don't blame you! And yet there is a difference that shouldn't be there.

 

I got to test it last night on my son & daughter in law, nothing "audiophile" and I wanted it to be something they were familiar with - just 2 tracks from the Police that had a repetitive bass line and to me at least, made the difference obvious as these tracks were mastered with a tight hard bass line in the first place. They had no idea what I was changing or my thoughts on any differences, with the only criteria being whether or not you hear a difference:

1. I played both tracks with the Ghent cable in first
2. Then with the CAT6A
3. And then back to the Ghent.

They both commented that 2 was different to 1 & 3 with my Daughter in Law describing it as softer and my son describing it as the bass being a little more extended and a more relaxed sound.

 

So unless my delusional behavior is contagious, there is something screwy going on here! Anyway, I'm not going to obsess about it, I just need to figure out what sounds "better" as my experience so far is that it depends on the type of music and the way it was mastered.

[mansr]

8 hours ago, wanta911 said:

So unless my delusional behavior is contagious

It might be. That's why tests need to be double blind.

[Darryl R]

On 8/7/2018 at 12:49 PM, Darryl R said:

Thought I'd post a response from Audioquest in connection with the main subject of this thread:

 

"Just like with our analog interconnects, we connect the shield at the receiving end of the cable only.  All cables are going to carry some noise, and we feel strongly that it’s better to ground the cable rather than have the noise floating around.  In our listening tests, both analog and digital cables sound better this way.  Please bear in mind that those cables that feature NDS (Noise Dissipation System), like Vodka RJ/E, dissipate the vast majority of the noise so there is very little being dumped into the component’s ground plane.

 

There is an easy (and cheap!) way of checking this out – you could buy an unshielded Ethernet cable for a few dollars and compare it to your Vodka.  It’s not just the superior conductors and insulation that makes Vodka better! In the unlikely event that an unshielded cable does offer improved performance in your system, we could always re-terminate your cable without the drain wire attached."

 

I've compared BJC UTP and AQ Diamond, and the cost of the AQD alone should be enough to eliminate the so-called placebo effect.  In fact, I wanted to eliminate the AQD, but there's no denying the extra detail, clarity, presence, in fact a quality that made me sit up and smile in comparison.  I really don't have the money to spare, and wanted to put it towards something else, but I'll be keeping the AQD.

 

Music:

David Benoit - Freedom at Midnight, Kei's Song

Al Jarreau - My Favorite Things (w/ Kathleen Battle)

Thomas Gropper, Arcis-Vocalisten München, Barockorchester L'Arpa Festante  - Bach Kantata 182

Thierry Fischer, Mormon Tabernacle Choir, Utah Symphony  - Mahler 8

 

Equipment:

Server: Fanless Ubuntu file server, dual SSDs, bridged Ethernet w/JCAT Net card
Digital: dCS Vivaldi DAC 2.0, dCS NBR
Amps: D'Agostino M400
Speakers: Wilson Alexia 2
Cable: Shunyata Sigma
Power: Shunyata Denali 6000T, 2000T

[Kal Rubinson]

1 hour ago, Darryl R said:

I've compared BJC UTP and AQ Diamond, and the cost of the AQD alone should be enough to eliminate the so-called placebo effect. 

What does the placebo effect have to do with this?

[Fitzcaraldo215]

12 hours ago, Darryl R said:

 

I've compared BJC UTP and AQ Diamond, and the cost of the AQD alone should be enough to eliminate the so-called placebo effect.  In fact, I wanted to eliminate the AQD, but there's no denying the extra detail, clarity, presence, in fact a quality that made me sit up and smile in comparison.  I really don't have the money to spare, and wanted to put it towards something else, but I'll be keeping the AQD.

 

Music:

David Benoit - Freedom at Midnight, Kei's Song

Al Jarreau - My Favorite Things (w/ Kathleen Battle)

Thomas Gropper, Arcis-Vocalisten München, Barockorchester L'Arpa Festante  - Bach Kantata 182

Thierry Fischer, Mormon Tabernacle Choir, Utah Symphony  - Mahler 8

 

Equipment:

Server: Fanless Ubuntu file server, dual SSDs, bridged Ethernet w/JCAT Net card
Digital: dCS Vivaldi DAC 2.0, dCS NBR
Amps: D'Agostino M400
Speakers: Wilson Alexia 2
Cable: Shunyata Sigma
Power: Shunyata Denali 6000T, 2000T

Wanting to eliminate the placebo effect and actually doing it are two different things.  There is no way to be certain it is eliminated in sighted listening.

[plissken]

23 hours ago, Darryl R said:

 

I've compared BJC UTP and AQ Diamond, and the cost of the AQD alone should be enough to eliminate the so-called placebo effect.  In fact, I wanted to eliminate the AQD, but there's no denying the extra detail, clarity, presence, in fact a quality that made me sit up and smile in comparison.  I really don't have the money to spare, and wanted to put it towards something else, but I'll be keeping the AQD.

 

 

I've a running offer of $5000 to anyones $1000 (loser also picks up travel expenses) that this can't be done when blinded. 

 

Part of the offer is I'll make a cable on the spot that tones out the same (shield etc) on the spot that is 3X longer than your AQ. 

 

I'll supply a server / client machine (with dual Intel GBE server NIC)running JRiver, and a managed layer 3 switch configured for dynamic LACP LAG. This will allow for me downing an interface or removing a network cable without interruption in playback. 

 

Two rounds of 10 possible, randomly chosen, swaps. You hit 16 for 20 and you are $5000 richer. 

[Ralf11]

is the offer good if I play Placebio Domingo?

[plissken]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

is the offer good if I play Placebio Domingo?

 

Also good for Sugar Pill Davis. 

[Darryl R]

On 8/20/2018 at 8:40 PM, plissken said:

 

I've a running offer of $5000 to anyones $1000 (loser also picks up travel expenses) that this can't be done when blinded. 

 

Part of the offer is I'll make a cable on the spot that tones out the same (shield etc) on the spot that is 3X longer than your AQ. 

 

I'll supply a server / client machine (with dual Intel GBE server NIC)running JRiver, and a managed layer 3 switch configured for dynamic LACP LAG. This will allow for me downing an interface or removing a network cable without interruption in playback. 

 

Two rounds of 10 possible, randomly chosen, swaps. You hit 16 for 20 and you are $5000 richer. 

 

Let me know your findings.  It appears I've been ruled out because mine was under $1K

 

You guys are fun, really.  And I truly appreciate all the participation in my thread.  I've nothing to prove, just merely posting my findings, and I wouldn't necessarily classify the difference as subtle.  Let me also reiterate that I wanted to put the money elsewhere, and I had the cable on contingency deal with a return authorization in my inbox* as I listened.  I did NOT want to hear a positive difference.

 

* no doubt some will say it was reverse psychology on the dealer's part .

[jabbr]

5 hours ago, Darryl R said:

You guys are fun, really.  And I truly appreciate all the participation in my thread.  I've nothing to prove, just merely posting my findings, and I wouldn't necessarily classify the difference as subtle.  Let me also reiterate that I wanted to put the money elsewhere, and I had the cable on contingency deal with a return authorization in my inbox* as I listened.  I did NOT want to hear a positive difference.

 

??? Your OP stated that you hear a hum ... is that an improvement?

 

If you like one cable better than the other why are you asking? 

 

To be clear your “findings” are that the shielded cable has a hum ... why not just go with @AMP‘s recs since that’s your equipment?

[plissken]

On 8/3/2018 at 9:13 PM, jabbr said:

Everyone is free to do whatever they want, and use whatever metrics or advice they want, at least within the limits of their budget.

 

Who says there is no provable effect on the output of the DAC?and not worry further about it.

 

Archimago for starters: 

 

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2016/11/measurements-on-value-for-ethernet.html Also, WiFi, as is to be expected and is my choice connectivity, shows to be superior because it can't pass on 60Hz AC hum. 

 

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2015/02/measurements-ethernet-cables-and-audio.html

 

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2015/02/measurements-intercontinental-internet.html

 

 

[plissken]

18 hours ago, Darryl R said:

 

Let me know your findings.  It appears I've been ruled out because mine was under $1K

 

You guys are fun, really.  And I truly appreciate all the participation in my thread.  I've nothing to prove, just merely posting my findings, and I wouldn't necessarily classify the difference as subtle.  Let me also reiterate that I wanted to put the money elsewhere, and I had the cable on contingency deal with a return authorization in my inbox* as I listened.  I did NOT want to hear a positive difference.

 

* no doubt some will say it was reverse psychology on the dealer's part .

 

 

You clearly didn't read what I posted. 

[plissken]

Here is a list of songs to evaluate Ethernet cables with:

 

 

 

[jabbr]

31 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

Archimago for starters: 

 

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2016/11/measurements-on-value-for-ethernet.html Also, WiFi, as is to be expected and is my choice connectivity, shows to be superior because it can't pass on 60Hz AC hum. 

 

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2015/02/measurements-ethernet-cables-and-audio.html

 

http://archimago.blogspot.com/2015/02/measurements-intercontinental-internet.html

 

 

 

You don’t get it.

 

I said I could construct a situation where a particular Ethernet cable has a measurable difference on a selected PC/DAC combo. 

 

Want to bet? (your favorite way to settle these issues) — let’s not piddle with $1K — let’s do $10K

 

I pick the cable, PC & DAC/AMP & oscilloscope.

 

Measurable — wanna bet  

 

also don't misquote me

[plissken]

 

46 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

You don’t get it.

 

I said I could construct a situation where a particular Ethernet cable has a measurable difference on a selected PC/DAC combo. 

 

Want to bet? (your favorite way to settle these issues) — let’s not piddle with $1K — let’s do $10K

 

I pick the cable, PC & DAC/AMP & oscilloscope.

 

Measurable — wanna bet  

 

also don't misquote me

 

You aren't being misquoted. 

 

IMO you are being disingenuous wrt to what is the main topic at hand: $340 cables vs $13 where a prudent and reasonable person could assume that both have like construction, reputable manufacturer, passes spec.

 

Sure if you want to talk about constructing a cable, as @Mansr did with his USB cable experiment to exaggerate a scenario to finally show error and the inability to recover that's all well and good. 

 

Yep I like shutting up yahoo's that have zero idea about how packet networks and NRT-OS's function but continue to tell others about the sighted gospel of their experience. I would like, no LOVE, to take not only their $1000 but watch tail get tucked. I've always stated it would have to be a spec passing cable and I'll construct on the spot a like cable. Ears only evaluation. I'm not interested in seeing microscopic variability between even cables from the same manufacturer but different production runs. 

 

Now if you're up for that let me know. 

[jabbr]

25 minutes ago, plissken said:

 

 

You aren't being misquoted. 

 

IMO you are being disingenuous wrt to what is the main topic at hand: $340 cables vs $13 where a prudent person could assume that both have like construction, reputable manufacturer, passes spec.

 

Sure if you want to talk about constructing a cable, as @Mansr did with his USB cable experiment to exaggerate a scenario to finally show error and the inability to recover that's all well and good. 

 

Yep I like shutting up yahoo's that have zero idea about how packet networks and NRT-OS's function but continue to tell others about the sighted gospel of their experience. I would like, no LOVE, to take not only their $1000 but watch tail get tucked. I've always stated it would have to be a spec passing cable and I'll construct on the spot a like cable. Ears only evaluation. I'm not interested in seeing microscopic variability between even cables from the same manufacturer but different production runs. 

 

Now if you're up for that let me know. 

No I’d demonstrate a difference in “SQ” at the DAC output between a shielded and unshielded cable of my own construction. Also measurable difference. ? 

 

Thats the topic at hand here. 

 

Regardless of what Archimago posted. 

 

Take home point: just because someone doesn’t measure a difference doesn’t mean a difference can’t be measured. (That’s no excuse for smoke and mirrors nor so called “audiophile” Ethernet cables)

[mansr]

8 minutes ago, jabbr said:

No I’d demonstrate a difference in “SQ” at the DAC output between a shielded and unshielded cable of my own construction. Also measurable difference.

So you'd create a nasty ground loop through the shield. I don't think anyone disputes the possibility of this.

[Fitzcaraldo215]

3 hours ago, jabbr said:

 

You don’t get it.

 

I said I could construct a situation where a particular Ethernet cable has a measurable difference on a selected PC/DAC combo. 

 

Want to bet? (your favorite way to settle these issues) — let’s not piddle with $1K — let’s do $10K

 

I pick the cable, PC & DAC/AMP & oscilloscope.

 

Measurable — wanna bet  

 

also don't misquote me

So, have you published those scope traces, even photos of them, as well as details of construction and connection details? If not, why let an as yet unaccepted bet for a measly $10k stand in your way?  The rest of us are all dying to know.

 

But, if you are going to publish, could you also possibly do simple frequency response both ways at the output of the DAC?  It might be interesting to determine if, as mansr suggests, it might be a simple grounding issue with spikes at 50/60 Hz and harmonics thereof.