WireWorld Starlight CAT 8 cable review

[r_w]

Fibre works well for me, I keep copper as short as possible, shielded LAN cable should have the metal connector cover removed at one end, IME no need for fancy wire after doing the fibre conversion (but use LPS at the server FMC end).

 

 

With fiber, her voice again returned to the center, matching what we heard with the WW. The differences between the two became more difficult to sort out, but were interesting nonetheless. There was a blacker background with the fiber but maybe also a slight loss of.... well something. It was tough to wrap our heads around it.

[r_w]

Hi,

 

IME, energetic treble is the opposite outcome of effective USB optimisation.

 

The outcomes I have repeatedly incremented (by each tweak) are analogue like lush, liquid, smooth, 3d, warm and fat.

 

IMO, energetic treble is a downside of bad digital, not the result of doing USB well.

 

I'm not surprised you don't like it.

 

:-)

 

 

With the WW Starlight CAT8, if anyone ever doubted that an ethernet cable can sound different, all they have to do is listen to this cable. You don't even have to blind yourself because it's that obvious. The treble is definitely more energetic and there is the perception of more detail (perhaps hyper-etched detail). You can call it distortion or whatever else you want to call it but this difference is very clear. Just to prove it to myself, I blinded my wife and she guessed correctly on 4/4 tries. Unfortunately, this energetic treble tips the balance in my system unfavorably and so it is not to my liking.

[r_w]

LOL, I should have said LAN optimisation, I said USB because the same goes for that IME.

 

Apologies.

 

Hi,

 

IME, energetic treble is the opposite outcome of effective USB optimisation.

 

The outcomes I have repeatedly incremented (by each tweak) are analogue like lush, liquid, smooth, 3d, warm and fat.

 

IMO, energetic treble is a downside of bad digital, not the result of doing USB well.

 

I'm not surprised you don't like it.

 

:-)

[r_w]

I'd say any wired connection can affect SQ unless completely isolated, so this cable shouldn't be the exception... but I don't think 'silly money wire' is the best cure for our system's ills, in that there's almost certainly other areas to get much bigger SQ gains for your money.

 

... and if it brightens the sound it's IMHO doing the opposite of what (my experiments tell me) it should be doing.

 

;-)

 

 

I suppose if your system is already on the lush side with rolled off treble, this cable could balance it out. Obviously, Steve Plaskin and others like it a lot, it just doesn't work in my system. According to Wireworld, it meets full spec at 100 ohms. The point is ethernet cables can and do sound different and if anyone doubts that they can, they should listen to this cable. There are clearly things going on with audio over ethernet that are not fully understood and so people need to keep an open mind as opposed to making sweeping judgments.

[r_w]

I read about people going to 100Mps but 1000 is sounding great with my gear, I didn't try 100 as I prefer faster file copy to the player (Aurenders copy the whole file and play it locally - the LAN is only in use when adding to the queue, it's not used for playback).

 

The key SQ change for me was powering the (Aurender end) FMC with an LPS, which tells me that Ethernet isn't 'perfect' for nerdy audiophile standards and sensitive audio equipment.

 

If you think about it Ethernet was brilliantly designed to be perfect for stable, safe, connectivity and data transfer, but I doubt way back then any consideration whatsoever was given to audiophile lunatics like us, given that back then streaming music in any kind of acceptable SQ (to us) wasn't the done thing, or probably even thought of.

 

If those who are streaming from source prefer 100Mps I'm prepared to believe their positive experiences.

 

:-)

[r_w]

What would be interesting is if someone could post some measurement graphs of Ethernet cable unplugged vs plugged. I would be happy to do this if a. I knew how and b. I had the measurement tools.

 

I would expect it to be possible to detect SMPS noise from the switch getting in via the cable, and possibly RFI pickup?

 

 

 

 

I still have your "unplug Ethernet cable while streaming" exercise queued up at my friend's venue (my own bedroom system is not resolving enough as a test vehicle, and my headphone setup is not ideal for assessing sound stage and instrument/vocal sizing changes). With my friend's Aries Femto capable of buffering an entire Redbook or even a high-res track, the Ethernet cable hot plug/unplug test should be a valid control test. I'll report my findings once it gets done.

 

[r_w]

A good test with results that confirm your stance on the robustness of Ethernet.

 

What we should try to work out next is how the having actual cable connected affects the PC/Music Server's electronic circuitry (EMI, RFI, GND, loops, leakage, noise, other?), as that is IMHO going to be the why SQ is affected when people hear sonic differences with Ethernet cables.

 

 

Ping results

 

315 foot of off the spool, hand terminate $0.30/ft

[ATTACH=CONFIG]32860[/ATTACH]

 

12 foot WW at $27/ft

[ATTACH=CONFIG]32861[/ATTACH]

[r_w]

If 'they' think about it, it's actually a very different debate.

 

I accept the 'bit are bits' point of view and the robustness of Ethernet, but those bits have to travel over connections and it's those connections that are IMHO & IME the predominant SQ influencer.

 

It's not so much the travelling bits (if they arrive bit prefect) but the fact that two or more devices are being electrically coupled and thus influence each other and in addition extend the system-wide electrical / gnd network.

 

I expect someone clever on here will be able to show a graph of an Ethernet cable connected vs unplugged with some measurable noise, interference or other variation between the two?

 

I would very much like to see that as it would help us (all) better understand the problem and how to negate it.

 

 

;-)

 

 

 

This is exactly it.

 

However, people with a little knowledge see everything digital as bits and are satisfied with bitperfection.

 

The domain, however, is largely an Electrical problem.

 

It is a waste of time to try and convince the 'bits are bits' people. Some of them can't overcome the cognitive dissonance they would inevitably undergo if they did really simple tests.

[r_w]

Because that mindset doesn't help both us and manufacturers identify issues, find solutions and make better equipment.

In an ideal world with equipment that had perfect circuitry throughout, plissken would be correct, LAN cables wouldn't make a sonic difference... we are not in that prefect world yet, so for some, they do.

 

TBF, you ought to chill a bit, your recent comments really have come across as deliberate plissken bashing.

 

Perhaps have a glass of wine and a Valium chaser now and then.

 

;-)

 

 

I like having data but look how difficult this is. You got one guy acting as a quasi scientist and a bunch of other guys kibbitzing. Do you realize these cables generally come with a 30 day return policy and you just plug it in, listen, and see if you like it?

Plissken, that unsighted subjective listening test requires little effort and two ears and a brain are excellent scientific instruments.

[r_w]

Good job ;-)

 

I already did this for USB in my system in a rudimentary fashion. Will get to Ethernet when I get to it.

[r_w]

Lolol!

 

you should fix your clean power, ground loop issues and leakage currents if you have some instead.

 

You're mistaken in thinking you have fixed anything here.

[r_w]

Yes agreed but the manner in which you re-quoted him made it very easy to miss that point and in doing so, his response was amusing.

 

This is a cyclical debate for sure with two resolute opposing sides but... 'the bits people' just need to consider the actual electrical connection of equipment, the bits are very, very robust which is why they have a very strong argument, until the effect of electrically coupling equipment is considered (now validity is no longer equal).

 

If 'they' would just add that one extremely important ingredient to their cake it could be beneficial to their systems - and that does not mean advocating boutique cables, it just means acknowledging that making an electrical connection between pieces of kit can affect SQ by extending the GND network, passing noise, leaked currents and interference around and cables could influence that - that's why I do fibre at critical points.

 

 

 

He missed the point. It's simply that his comment applies equally to both sides of the subjective / objective argument. You see it written his way in the cable threads, and with my change in the science threads. And it has equal validity in both cases.

[r_w]

Patience is a virtue.

 

;-)

 

Or you missed the post where I said it was going to take a little bit.