WireWorld Starlight CAT 8 cable review

[kennyb123]

great, please post your experience, thanks

 

Posted here.

[4est]

2. I'm interested in how Benchmark was able to run a 100 foot of digital cable to a DAC (way beyond spec) and the DAC was totally un-phased.

 

Unphased?

 

Either you are being completely disingenuous as an attempt to win an argument or completely do not understand. The Benchmark DACs re-clock all inputs to provide what they call "immunity". If you are using and input such as theirs to test these cables, then you are testing someones ASRC, and not the signal integrity maintained by the cable under test.

[plissken]

Unphased?

 

Either you are being completely disingenuous as an attempt to win an argument or completely do not understand. The Benchmark DACs re-clock all inputs to provide what they call "immunity". If you are using and input such as theirs to test these cables, then you are testing someones ASRC, and not the signal integrity maintained by the cable under test.

 

I 100% understand the argument. What you don't get is that a competently designed DAC doesn't need a dongle to recover and reconstruct data. And why would I care if the sound coming out of my speakers is 100% accurate?

 

Now are you making an argument about NOS DAC's, USB 're-clockers', and cabling? If so what NOS DAC's? What re-clocker/s, what cabling?

 

Why would I purchase a piece of junk for $2000 and start complicating the chain for even more $$ when I could get a properly designed DAC for $2000?

 

Why would I purchase and $8000 Aurender that loses composure with a 12 foot Ethernet cable when I have a $220 system with a $12 Intel PCIe NIC that shows me either:

 

People are actually hypocrites in their belief system and won't listen to the captured tracks. It's better to keep ones mouth shut then open it and prove themselves the fool.

 

or

 

People actually have intellectual honesty and humility to @ least give them a try regardless of finding a difference or not with a 315 foot @ $0.30/ft and 12 foot @ $27.50.

[plissken]

Is anyone here attending the next RMAF in October?

[witchdoctor]

I 100% understand the argument. What you don't get is that a competently designed DAC doesn't need a dongle to recover and reconstruct data. And why would I care if the sound coming out of my speakers is 100% accurate?

Now are you making an argument about NOS DAC's, USB 're-clockers', and cabling? If so what NOS DAC's? What re-clocker/s, what cabling?

Why would I purchase a piece of junk for $2000 and start complicating the chain for even more $$ when I could get a properly designed DAC for $2000?

 

uhhh, because you can also get a properly designed DAC for less than $200 like a Dragonfly, it just won't sound like a $2000 DAC

Why would I purchase and $8000 Aurender that loses composure with a 12 foot Ethernet cable when I have a $220 system with a $12 Intel PCIe NIC that shows me either:

People are actually hypocrites in their belief system and won't listen to the captured tracks.

 

It's better to keep ones mouth shut then open it and prove themselves the fool.

 

uhhh, then why are you opening your mouth?

or

People actually have intellectual honesty and humility to @ least give them a try regardless of finding a difference or not with a 315 foot @ $0.30/ft and 12 foot @ $27.50.

People actually have intellectual honesty and humility ... keep an open mind

[Johnseye]

Here's what I think I heard. I can only qualify what might be changes in loudness of fullness, then back to what I can best describe as softer or thinner. It could entirely be the music itself, the way the song was engineered or the musician's intensity when playing. In my opinion the louder or fuller sound was preferred. I listened through both Focal Elear headphones and Sennheiser HD590 headphones only so far.

 

I didn't read this thread other than the first couple posts so I wouldn't have any bias. I will say that any change I heard was incredibly subtle and would not justify the expense of this cable. Going into this test I was a complete skeptic of ethernet cables having an impact on sound quality. The data packets themselves don't get modified. I am very surprised that I could hear a difference at all. The fact that differences can be identified, regardless of exact timing or number of times, shows that the cable has some kind of impact on the sound. I can only guess that it has to do with the power, or noise generated from power, traveling over the cable. What else could it be?

 

Louder = fuller

Softer = thinner

 

icarryyourheart.wav :

louder at around :6

louder again at :30

softer at 1:00

louder at 1:15

softer at 1:40

louder at 2:20

softer at 3:35

 

songforgeorgerandom.wav :

louder at :40

1:00 softer

1:30 louder

[plissken]

Here's what I think I heard. I can only qualify what might be changes in loudness of fullness, then back to what I can best describe as softer or thinner. It could entirely be the music itself, the way the song was engineered or the musician's intensity when playing. In my opinion the louder or fuller sound was preferred. I listened through both Focal Elear headphones and Sennheiser HD590 headphones only so far.

 

I didn't read this thread other than the first couple posts so I wouldn't have any bias. I will say that any change I heard was incredibly subtle and would not justify the expense of this cable. Going into this test I was a complete skeptic of ethernet cables having an impact on sound quality. The data packets themselves don't get modified. I am very surprised that I could hear a difference at all. The fact that differences can be identified, regardless of exact timing or number of times, shows that the cable has some kind of impact on the sound. I can only guess that it has to do with the power, or noise generated from power, traveling over the cable. What else could it be?

 

Louder = fuller

Softer = thinner

 

icarryyourheart.wav :

louder at around :6

louder again at :30

softer at 1:00

louder at 1:15

softer at 1:40

louder at 2:20

softer at 3:35

 

songforgeorgerandom.wav :

louder at :40

1:00 softer

1:30 louder

 

 

G = Generic

W = WW

Song for George:

10 / 25 / 37 / 51 / 1:07 / 1:30

w / g / w / g / w /g

 

 

I Carry Your Heart:

 

10 / 37 / 51 / 1:07 / 1:22 / 1:47 / 2:30 / 3:03 / 4:18 / 4:40

w / g / g / w / g / w / w / w / g / w

 

Consecutive w or g means I removed and reinserted the same cable. Thanks for giving it a go.

[Johnseye]

G = Generic

W = WW

Song for George:

10 / 25 / 37 / 51 / 1:07 / 1:30

w / g / w / g / w /g

 

 

I Carry Your Heart:

 

10 / 37 / 51 / 1:07 / 1:22 / 1:47 / 2:30 / 3:03 / 4:18 / 4:40

w / g / g / w / g / w / w / w / g / w

 

Consecutive w or g means I removed and reinserted the same cable. Thanks for giving it a go.

 

So I was close but not exact on only some of the changes. Where I thought there was an increase in loudness or fullness it didn't matter if it was the WW or generic because I heard that around the times of changes for both cables. That tells me (through pure conjecture) that the cable component's materials have nothing to do with the sound but the disruption of the power current over the cable is having an impact. It also means I won't spend any money on an audiophile branded ethernet cable.

[plissken]

The fact that differences can be identified, regardless of exact timing or number of times, shows that the cable has some kind of impact on the sound.

 

I am surprised that you came to this conclusion without prior knowledge of the time of the cable change or what cable was in use.

 

What do you think now that you identified changes where nothing happened and didn't identify changes when something did change?

[Johnseye]

I am surprised that you came to this conclusion without prior knowledge of the time of the cable change or what cable was in use.

 

What do you think now that you identified changes where nothing happened and didn't identify changes when something did change?

I was replying the same time as you posted this. Check my post just before yours.

I came to the conclusion without prior knowledge because I heard something change in the sound of the music. Better, worse, wrong or right it changed. The inconsistency of my perception around the changes show the cable itself doesn't make a difference.

 

To quote Dylan...

 

"Well, the sword swallower, he comes up to you and then he kneels

He crosses himself and then he clicks his high heels

And without further notice, he asks you how it feels

And he says, "Here is your throat back, thanks for the loan"

And you know something is happening but you don't know what it is

Do you, Mr. Jones?"

[plissken]

So I was close but not exact on only some of the changes. Where I thought there was an increase in loudness or fullness it didn't matter if it was the WW or generic because I heard that around the times of changes for both cables. That tells me (through pure conjecture) that the cable component's materials have nothing to do with the sound but the disruption of the power current over the cable is having an impact. It also means I won't spend any money on an audiophile branded ethernet cable.

 

Even if we simply leave it to when was the cable plugged in or not:

 

With 'Song for George' you managed 1 out of 6

 

With 'I Carry Your Heart' it was 0.

 

If we go with the contingency that the cable is making an electrical difference to the DAC output the guesses have to be spot on to be correct because the interruption of the circuit (ethernet in this case) is instantaneous the moment the cable is pulled. It's not a delayed response.

 

Again thank you so much for participating :-)

[Johnseye]

Even if we simply leave it to when was the cable plugged in or not:

 

With 'Song for George' you managed 1 out of 6

 

With 'I Carry Your Heart' it was 0.

 

If we go with the contingency that the cable is making an electrical difference to the DAC output the guesses have to be spot on to be correct because the interruption of the circuit (ethernet in this case) is instantaneous the moment the cable is pulled. It's not a delayed response.

 

Again thank you so much for participating :-)

 

 

You're right, it could be the song's engineering or the musician's change in intensity and have nothing to do with the cable whatsoever.

[Johnseye]

I had never heard these songs before so had no preconceptions. I went back and listened to them through Tidal, which in whole sounds different than the .wav files. Some of the reasons why I thought the cable was changed appear in the Tidal version as well, indicating it is a change in the song itself. It could be a deeper bass resonance or a vibration I literally feel from the music. I then went back to your .wav files and listened while looking at the change timings you provided. I can't hear an actual change at those times. I listened with both headphones and speakers. Again, nothing I'm hearing at those timings indicate, to my ears, that a change was made.

 

Not to call anyone out, but those who review cables could be influenced by a change in the song itself without realizing it. They could also be influenced by any kind of payment, gift or even respect they have for any one cable manufacturer, knowingly or unknowingly. I'm not saying that was the case with the ethernet cable review that spawned this thread. I'm speaking in generalities. We know it happens, we just don't know when.

[plissken]

Looks like it is 0 for 3 of the people that have tried it.

[kennyb123]

Looks like it is 0 for 3 of the people that have tried it.

 

I'm shocked, shocked to hear this!

 

Congratulations on getting exactly your desired results - you couldn't have planned it any better! :-)

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

[plissken]

 

Congratulations on getting exactly your desired results - you couldn't have planned it any better! :-)

 

 

 

Any well thought out and reasoned comment or critique about the way I went about this is welcome and always has been.

[Johnseye]

Any well thought out and reasoned comment or critique about the way I went about this is welcome and always has been.

You mean you don't like condescending, sarcastic comments with a vain attempt at humor that add no value to the discussion? Wait, I think this response could be classified as that as well. I'll stop now.

[plissken]

You mean you don't like condescending, sarcastic comments with a vain attempt at humor that add no value to the discussion? Wait, I think this response could be classified as that as well. I'll stop now.

 

Kenny could try the files at the very least. If there is a problem let me know and I'll do what I can to resolve it. If a really good point of view is made where my method is very flawed then I would recant said method and use that input to improve the process.

 

I get it that if someone has spent hundreds or even thousands (as is with the Platinum editions) that this makes it uncomfortable to give it a whirl.

 

At this point there are a few things that are meritorious:

 

1> Of the three people that have tried the result has been no difference

 

2> Of the two or three posters that report that upscale Ethernet cables make a difference for them none have attempted the bias controlled tracks I've posted.

 

I understand how networking and computer audio work. I have a foot firmly in each field as I spent 7 years doing installation and design of DAW and DVE suites in the early 90's. That along with the T.I., Siemons, Ott and some other papers helped form my hypothesis that there is going to be no difference. And it is just a hypothesis even now in light of any testing that has gone on.

 

I'm always willing to be proven wrong and they may require steps beyond what I've attempted. I did offer to fly out to one members home and test in their setup.

[kennyb123]

You mean you don't like condescending, sarcastic comments with a vain attempt at humor that add no value to the discussion? Wait, I think this response could be classified as that as well. I'll stop now.

 

I offered advice earlier in the thread suggesting that he try to come close to matching the conditions of those who have reported hearing differences in ethernet cable. He ignored my advice.

 

If one participates in his test and they don't hear any differences, he'll boast that his test is proof that there are no differences between ethernet cables - and not leave open the possibility that his test methodology was flawed or that the equipment he used wasn't up to the task.

 

And if one chooses to pass on the test because of the obvious problems with his methodology, he'll still only boast the claim that folks are too scared to take his test.

 

My gosh - he even acknowledged here that the gear he used was impervious to smearing some have reported from ethernet cables - and yet he still boasts that his test makes some of us uncomfortable? I think sensible people are avoiding the test because he pitches his test like a snake oil salesmen pitches their product. Gotta love the irony.

[Johnseye]

I offered advice earlier in the thread suggesting that he try to come close to matching the conditions of those who have reported hearing differences in ethernet cable. He ignored my advice.

 

If one participates in his test and they don't hear any differences, he'll boast that his test is proof that there are no differences between ethernet cables - and not leave open the possibility that his test methodology was flawed or that the equipment he used wasn't up to the task.

 

And if one chooses to pass on the test because of the obvious problems with his methodology, he'll still only boast the claim that folks are too scared to take his test.

 

My gosh - he even acknowledged here that the gear he used was impervious to smearing some have reported from ethernet cables - and yet he still boasts that his test makes some of us uncomfortable? I think sensible people are avoiding the test because he pitches his test like a snake oil salesmen pitches their product. Gotta love the irony.

I get it. He's trying to stay objective, but his thoughts on the subject come through. He's personally tried the cable and compared it so his opinion has been formed. I've only heard the recordings. You should if you get a chance. Have you listened with the cable and done a side by side? I think you may have hurt your position by responding the way you did, that's all.

 

There are a lot of companies out there using marketing tools like special packaging, logos and materials just to make their cables look classy. The whole Nordost line with its Norse mythology spin is made in Massachusetts. Glad that it's a US made product, but it wasn't made in heaven. Or how about the Sarum Super Array ethernet cable. $4000 for a 1m run. I'd really like to know their margin on that cable.

 

While there may be benefit to some cables if you address things from an engineering standpoint to flush out the reality, then look at the cost to make the cable, including any R&D, I think you'll be surprised. These companies are riding a wave trying to make as much as possible on hype and trend. There's no crime in that, but as consumers we need to be wary. There's nothing wrong with being cynical. There's so much BS in marketing that we need a little cynicism to stay real.

 

If you believe in all the crap that people try to sell you I've got a lucky rabbit's foot for you. Special bargain at $4000. If we're able to dissect reality from fiction then we get to the true value of an ethernet cable. Personally, I'll bank on solid engineering with statistics to back it up. Then I need to hear it for myself.

[plissken]

I offered advice earlier in the thread suggesting that he try to come close to matching the conditions of those who have reported hearing differences in ethernet cable. He ignored my advice.

 

If one participates in his test and they don't hear any differences, he'll boast that his test is proof that there are no differences between ethernet cables - and not leave open the possibility that his test methodology was flawed or that the equipment he used wasn't up to the task.

 

And if one chooses to pass on the test because of the obvious problems with his methodology, he'll still only boast the claim that folks are too scared to take his test.

 

My gosh - he even acknowledged here that the gear he used was impervious to smearing some have reported from ethernet cables - and yet he still boasts that his test makes some of us uncomfortable? I think sensible people are avoiding the test because he pitches his test like a snake oil salesmen pitches their product. Gotta love the irony.

 

You can either poke holes in the methodology or you can't. It's Server <>Switch<>Client<>DAC<>ADC.

 

It 315 foot of $0.30 / foot cable vs 12 foot of $27.50 foot cable. It is what it is. IMO there was no change and I still feel my setup is impervious to the change in very costly cable vs what would be considered a standard costs (actually you can get 500 foot of horizontal run for $50).

 

I like how that fact is lost on you.

[Johnseye]

You can either poke holes in the methodology or you can't. It's Server <>Switch<>Client<>DAC<>ADC.

 

It 315 foot of $0.30 / foot cable vs 12 foot of $27.50 foot cable. It is what it is. IMO there was no change and I still feel my setup is impervious to the change in very costly cable vs what would be considered a standard costs (actually you can get 500 foot of horizontal run for $50).

 

I like how that fact is lost on you.

For that cable a 1m is $64/ft. 3m is $33/ft. 1/3rd of the cable is about double the cost. There must be higher demand for the 1m cable, but that tells you something about how the margins are built.

 

Simple and effective solution is to not buy these cables and send a message to the manufacturers that we're not suckers. I'd love to hear from an ex-cable manufacturer who knows the true cost of the cable.

[kennyb123]

It 315 foot of $0.30 / foot cable vs 12 foot of $27.50 foot cable. It is what it is. IMO there was no change and I still feel my setup is impervious to the change in very costly cable vs what would be considered a standard costs (actually you can get 500 foot of horizontal run for $50).

 

I like how that fact is lost on you.

 

A proper test methodology requires that the test equipment be sufficiently able to detect the differences under test. You haven't proven that you've done this, nor have you shown any indication that it's important for you to get this right.

 

Users have reported that better Ethernet cables eliminate noise. So the noise floor of the test system is an important consideration. This is lost on you.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[kennyb123]

Simple and effective solution is to not buy these cables and send a message to the manufacturers that we're not suckers. I'd love to hear from an ex-cable manufacturer who knows the true cost of the cable.

 

I think some of them are now starting to get the message that their components are too sensitive to Ethernet cables. Some of the recent advances aimed at lowering other sources of noise in digital playback have actually made it easier to hear differences in Ethernet cables (or optical fiber vs copper). I think we'll start seeing more in terms of isolation on the Ethernet side.

 

The problem may also have to be solved though closer to the source, and a fix there might not be possible - or expensive as in the case of an audiophile NAS or Ethernet switch.

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

[plissken]

A proper test methodology requires that the test equipment be sufficiently able to detect the differences under test. You haven't proven that you've done this, nor have you shown any indication that it's important for you to get this right.

 

Users have reported that better Ethernet cables eliminate noise. So the noise floor of the test system is an important consideration. This is lost on you.

 

See here is the problem: You are convinced that differences exist but yet you only have anecdotal data.

 

The only thing I've been able to show is I have a noise floor that isn't going to be lowered by either a 12 foot $27.50 nor RAISED by a 315 foot $90 cable and I've posted the files.

 

Now with that said:

 

My setup is 100% posted. Even you could go get a Cisco SG 200-8 and I'll backup my config and PM it to you. You can load it to the switch and do the same ADC that I did and post the results.

 

The entire point of posting my method is for you to be able to independently reproduce the results.