Jump to content
IGNORED

WireWorld Starlight CAT 8 cable review


Recommended Posts

I've had Chord and AudioQuest. The least expensive being $340. No audible nor measured difference.

Furthermore I'm stating that Steven Plaskin can't hear a difference either. Nor Michael Lavorgna. But they won't actually provide anything other than opinion.

If either of them actually sat down for a bias controlled evaluation they would be in deep shit.

 

How can you say that when you are biased? Are you in deep shit too?

Link to comment
Do your movies look more 3D over the Vodka/Diamond? How about photos? More color? Better contrast?

If you streamed something from a service how did it manage to make it 3000 kilometers to you to have the last meter of magic cable fix it all?

 

You remove the jitter from the first 3000 kilometers with the last meter using a great cable. Do you really not know these answers?

Link to comment
If we are talking cable roulette then try it with a bunch of cheap ones to figure out what sounds best. With that said we are talking lengths that are just a few percentage points in length out of the 328 foot spec. That 'should' mean signal integrity is high among them causing the PHY not to work hard.That is unless all the hacking these outfits have done have managed to birth a cable that passes data but fails spec. And if they fail spec and making the PHY work harder and somehow it makes it all the way through the system. Then you have to entertain, in this particular scenario, that you like inferior sound.

Swenson also said he is dubious as to the boutique outfits actually knowing what they are doing in regards to cables.

Witchdoctor is dubious that plissken knows what he is doing regarding cables.

 

You get Voodoo cable or I do voodoo on plissken

 

http://voodoocable.net/product/silverstream-digital-interconnect-rca-or-bnc/

Link to comment
You remove the jitter from the first 3000 kilometers with the last meter using a great cable. Do you really not know these answers?

 

The cable is a passive device. It could ADD jitter (doubtfully meaningful in the context of spec passing cables at ~6 feet out of 328) but it certainly can not remove jitter.

 

What happens is that at each router and switch the packet/frame is regenerated. You have some common types of switches like store and forward or cut through.

 

One thing to think about is why can't I have a 656ft run of Ethernet cable, but I can have two 328 foot runs with a switch in between? And the commentary isn't about jitter, it's about the claimed packet loss. I've yet to see a 4 foot cable come up with missing data.

Link to comment
A biased person making recordings, now what's wrong with that picture?

 

Well thought out input to the process is always welcome. My goal is to construct a long cable, use a $300-400 short cable.

 

With the fancy cable put the NIC to 10Mbps

 

With the long run cable put the NIC to 1000Mbps

 

Capture a track with each one and post the tracks.

 

Let me know what issues you see with the process.

Link to comment
Well thought out input to the process is always welcome. My goal is to construct a long cable, use a $300-400 short cable.

With the fancy cable put the NIC to 10Mbps

With the long run cable put the NIC to 1000Mbps

 

Capture a track with each one and post the tracks.

Let me know what issues you see with the process.

 

Simple, if I made two recordings and posted them on the internet they would sound different to you than they did to me. Even if we had the same equipment we would need to have the same listening volume and the same room and this makes your exercise pointless. You simply need to try cables at home in your own system. Nit a recording of a cable made by some guy on the internet in his system. Again, do I really have to explain this too you? Why don't speaker manufacturers just send you recordings made using their speakers for an audition instead of sending the real thing? duh

Link to comment
Simple, if I made two recordings and posted them on the internet they would sound different to you than they did to me. Even if we had the same equipment we would need to have the same listening volume and the same room and this makes your exercise pointless. You simply need to try cables at home in your own system. Nit a recording of a cable made by some guy on the internet in his system. Again, do I really have to explain this too you? Why don't speaker manufacturers just send you recordings made using their speakers for an audition instead of sending the real thing? duh

 

The argument being made is the cable affects output. Speaker manufacturers often publish measurements. Either gated or anechoic.

 

I can offer measurements in-lieu of recordings. People are making claims about what the DAC outputs. I have an ACD with 114dB SNR with which to directly capture the output and see if the claims stand.

 

Sorry if this is rubbing you the wrong way, but it's time to put these claims to the test.

Link to comment
The argument being made is the cable affects output. Speaker manufacturers often publish measurements. Either gated or anechoic.

I can offer measurements in-lieu of recordings. People are making claims about what the DAC outputs. I have an ACD with 114dB SNR with which to directly capture the output and see if the claims stand.

Sorry if this is rubbing you the wrong way, but it's time to put these claims to the test.

 

I already put the claims to the test and am enjoying the results every day. Thanks for the offer:)

If you want to hear a recording made with the cables I personally am enjoying use this link:

 

Mapleshade Records - Music

 

This is not any kind of test. If you like what you hear you can audition whatever you want at no risk.

Link to comment
I already put the claims to the test and am enjoying the results every day. Thanks for the offer:)

If you want to hear a recording made with the cables I personally am enjoying use this link:

 

Mapleshade Records - Music

 

This is not any kind of test. If you like what you hear you can audition whatever you want at no risk.

 

Since this is my thread I'll ask you to either find technical counter arguments and back them up or exit the thread.

Link to comment
I can offer measurements in-lieu of recordings. People are making claims about what the DAC outputs. I have an ACD with 114dB SNR with which to directly capture the output and see if the claims stand.

 

I reported hearing a voice get smeared with one cable relative to the other. Assuming what I heard was truly there. How would that show up in your measurements?

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

Digital:  Sonore opticalModule > Uptone EtherRegen > Shunyata Sigma Ethernet > Antipodes K30 > Shunyata Omega USB > Gustard X26pro DAC < Mutec REF10 SE120

Amp & Speakers:  Spectral DMA-150mk2 > Aerial 10T

Foundation: Stillpoints Ultra, Shunyata Denali v1 and Typhon x1 power conditioners, Shunyata Delta v2 and QSA Lanedri Gamma Revelation and Infinity power cords, QSA Lanedri Gamma Revelation XLR interconnect, Shunyata Sigma Ethernet, MIT Matrix HD 60 speaker cables, GIK bass traps, ASC Isothermal tube traps, Stillpoints Aperture panels, Quadraspire SVT rack, PGGB 256

Link to comment
In what scenario, with cables that meet spec, does the power draw numbers listed, get modified and at what length?

 

And to take the supposition to the most logical of conclusions based on the working theory.

 

An ultimate test would be 24/192 PCM (this data rate should work) on a link that is set to 10Mbps with a short length say 3-6 feet of cable and and a 1000Mbit connection with say a 100' cable.

 

We could use the boutique cable for the short run and some Belden for the long run. What would the outcome have to be for you to admit there is going to be no audible difference?

 

I've haven't seen any claim that 10Mbps is audibly superior to 1000Mbps anywhere on any forum.

 

I don't think I can answer your question, as that Intel datasheet lists "Power Consumption Targets", which don't necessarily equate to max/worst-case, and there is no data showing power consumption variance by Ethernet cable length. Shorter cable should translate to lower PHY power, but I have no idea by how much.

 

To argue about Ethernet cables sounding different seems ridiculous, as Ethernet is not involved in digital audio timing so an Ethernet cable cannot possibly have a sound signature in and of itself. BUT, I believe the Ethernet cable type and length can affect how the Ethernet PHY on the receiving end operates (e.g. in streamer/renderer) and the extent the Ethernet PHY noise impacts the rest of the circuitry in a specific piece of equipment is VERY design dependent. I suspect there are large differences among various contemporary designs. So the Ethernet cable (among other components within the Ethernet subsystem) indirectly induces a performance change in the non-Ethernet and audio timing sensitive section of the box, e.g. D-to-A converter, leading to a SQ change. Better designs can strongly immunize against incoming Ethernet signal integrity issues, and with such a box, the expectation is little or no SQ change when Ethernet cables are changed (make, construction, length, etc.). A poorer box design will be vulnerable to a harder-working PHY generating more noise that more severely contaminates the D-to-A conversion circuitry. Such a box should more readily reveal SQ changes with Ethernet cable changes, and is in a position to be "helped" to some extent by cable tweaks.

 

Another possibility is the rest of the audio system being incapable of revealing any SQ difference with different cables. I have at least one such setup: my bedroom system based on a pair of KEF X300A speakers driven by USB. It's a very decent sounding system for a bedroom, but no good for discerning sound changes coming from USB or Ethernet cable changes. If other woes in the system are swamping the effects of the cables then obviously changing the Ethernet cables won't yield any audible difference.

 

The audible differences among Ethernet cables are not the result of BER differences, but rather how hard the Ethernet PHY of the receiving device has to work to deliver error-free data packets downstream to the rest of the circuitry. That signal integrity in transport interfaces like Ethernet & USB can have an effect on SQ is a relatively new understanding. In the ideal world signal integrity of Ethernet or USB should have no influence on SQ but to achieve this is easier said than done.

 

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.

 

I also have a project to attempt to correlate audio device power consumption with SQ. My theory on this needs to be backed up with measurements of controlled experiments. PHY power is a new knob to play with.

 

In a different post, I have reported listening test results (at my friend's place) favoring 100Mbps over 1000Mbps within a pseudo control experiment, using the afore-mentioned "100Mbps only" Ethernet cable. Results were with a specific set of gear, so I'm not generalizing this preference to be universal. In other words, YMMV.

Link to comment

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.

 

:-)

Source:

*Aurender N100 (no internal disk : LAN optically isolated via FMC with *LPS) > DIY 5cm USB link (5v rail removed / ground lift switch - split for *LPS) > Intona Industrial (injected *LPS / internally shielded with copper tape) > DIY 5cm USB link (5v rail removed / ground lift switch) > W4S Recovery (*LPS) > DIY 2cm USB adaptor (5v rail removed / ground lift switch) > *Auralic VEGA (EXACT : balanced)

 

Control:

*Jeff Rowland CAPRI S2 (balanced)

 

Playback:

2 x Revel B15a subs (balanced) > ATC SCM 50 ASL (balanced - 80Hz HPF from subs)

 

Misc:

*Via Power Inspired AG1500 AC Regenerator

LPS: 3 x Swagman Lab Audiophile Signature Edition (W4S, Intona & FMC)

Storage: QNAP TS-253Pro 2x 3Tb, 8Gb RAM

Cables: DIY heavy gauge solid silver (balanced)

Mains: dedicated distribution board with 5 x 2 socket ring mains, all mains cables: Mark Grant Black Series DSP 2.5 Dual Screen

Link to comment

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.

 

Source:

*Aurender N100 (no internal disk : LAN optically isolated via FMC with *LPS) > DIY 5cm USB link (5v rail removed / ground lift switch - split for *LPS) > Intona Industrial (injected *LPS / internally shielded with copper tape) > DIY 5cm USB link (5v rail removed / ground lift switch) > W4S Recovery (*LPS) > DIY 2cm USB adaptor (5v rail removed / ground lift switch) > *Auralic VEGA (EXACT : balanced)

 

Control:

*Jeff Rowland CAPRI S2 (balanced)

 

Playback:

2 x Revel B15a subs (balanced) > ATC SCM 50 ASL (balanced - 80Hz HPF from subs)

 

Misc:

*Via Power Inspired AG1500 AC Regenerator

LPS: 3 x Swagman Lab Audiophile Signature Edition (W4S, Intona & FMC)

Storage: QNAP TS-253Pro 2x 3Tb, 8Gb RAM

Cables: DIY heavy gauge solid silver (balanced)

Mains: dedicated distribution board with 5 x 2 socket ring mains, all mains cables: Mark Grant Black Series DSP 2.5 Dual Screen

Link to comment
Since this is my thread I'll ask you to either find technical counter arguments and back them up or exit the thread.

 

All you want to do is argue, why would I want to stay in this thread? I'll bet you never even listened to the file I posted did you? As the host of this thread it would seem your "arguments" are weak, you have no way to support your claim by sending recordings around the internet, and you aren't open to a polite invitation to a recording of a track. I was very polite in post 61 and you reply with contempt in post 62. Another sign you can't defend your thesis. I proclaim victory in this "argument" and if I wanted to do a battle using a recording I would just watch a video of a cable on youtube. This is the same speaker I use as height and wide channels in my HT. Listen how awesome it sounds with a good cable. Now would a recording of a cable influence YOU one way or the other? Not hardly right?

Link to comment

BUT, I believe the Ethernet cable type and length can affect how the Ethernet PHY on the receiving end operates (e.g. in streamer/renderer) and the extent the Ethernet PHY noise impacts the rest of the circuitry in a specific piece of equipment is VERY design dependent.

 

I would prefer a design, that when presented with in specification cable is used (I.E. it will pass on a Fluke or Tektronix or HP analyzer) that it would, and I'll say should, be immune.

 

If you looked at the Intel data sheet you would see the PHY at it's worse at something like 90milliwatts of power draw. Compared to what is going on with RAM, CPU, Disk etc.... All those items going up and down the power envelope, how do you figure out what is smearing the vocals?

 

I've still yet to see a single shred of real proof, other than subjective thoughts, about two cables that are only ~2% of the length spec causing the PHY to drive its self so incredibly hard.

 

I don't buy it and I'm going to do some testing.

 

A poorer box design will be vulnerable to a harder-working PHY generating more noise that more severely contaminates the D-to-A conversion circuitry. Such a box should more readily reveal SQ changes with Ethernet cable changes, and is in a position to be "helped" to some extent by cable tweaks.

 

Can you think of such a box that Audiophiles would use? Should we test with a $100 DAC from Amazon?

 

Another possibility is the rest of the audio system being incapable of revealing any SQ difference with different cables. I have at least one such setup: my bedroom system based on a pair of KEF X300A speakers driven by USB. It's a very decent sounding system for a bedroom, but no good for discerning sound changes coming from USB or Ethernet cable changes. If other woes in the system are swamping the effects of the cables then obviously changing the Ethernet cables won't yield any audible difference.

 

Or the setup is competent and immune.

 

The audible differences among Ethernet cables are not the result of BER differences, but rather how hard the Ethernet PHY of the receiving device has to work to deliver error-free data packets downstream to the rest of the circuitry. That signal integrity in transport interfaces like Ethernet & USB can have an effect on SQ is a relatively new understanding. In the ideal world signal integrity of Ethernet or USB should have no influence on SQ but to achieve this is easier said than done.

 

1. I don't buy the noise theory for two same length cables both that beat spec.

 

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.

 

On a side note check out the Silicon Labs 'What is Internet Infrastructure'. They go into good detail about Ethernet PHY's

 

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.

 

Cool :)

Link to comment
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?

 

One way to birth this is to have a test signal played back from local storage. Could even setup a RAM disk.

 

Start a short file copy and record the interval where the file is copying and not being copied.

Link to comment
What is being sent out to the amp, from the DAC is voltage, If they null out then what you think you heard wasn't truly there.

 

You really don't see that is not a good way to determine if there were small phase differences at a particular frequency or range of frequencies?

 

 

 

 

Sent from my iPhone using Computer Audiophile

Digital:  Sonore opticalModule > Uptone EtherRegen > Shunyata Sigma Ethernet > Antipodes K30 > Shunyata Omega USB > Gustard X26pro DAC < Mutec REF10 SE120

Amp & Speakers:  Spectral DMA-150mk2 > Aerial 10T

Foundation: Stillpoints Ultra, Shunyata Denali v1 and Typhon x1 power conditioners, Shunyata Delta v2 and QSA Lanedri Gamma Revelation and Infinity power cords, QSA Lanedri Gamma Revelation XLR interconnect, Shunyata Sigma Ethernet, MIT Matrix HD 60 speaker cables, GIK bass traps, ASC Isothermal tube traps, Stillpoints Aperture panels, Quadraspire SVT rack, PGGB 256

Link to comment
Phase should show up in the DAC output. It's completely measurable.

 

In other words, you have no clue how to devise a set of measurements that can confirm what listeners are reporting.

 

It's as if you think that finding that two pieces of fruit weigh exactly the same confirms that they will taste exactly the same.

Digital:  Sonore opticalModule > Uptone EtherRegen > Shunyata Sigma Ethernet > Antipodes K30 > Shunyata Omega USB > Gustard X26pro DAC < Mutec REF10 SE120

Amp & Speakers:  Spectral DMA-150mk2 > Aerial 10T

Foundation: Stillpoints Ultra, Shunyata Denali v1 and Typhon x1 power conditioners, Shunyata Delta v2 and QSA Lanedri Gamma Revelation and Infinity power cords, QSA Lanedri Gamma Revelation XLR interconnect, Shunyata Sigma Ethernet, MIT Matrix HD 60 speaker cables, GIK bass traps, ASC Isothermal tube traps, Stillpoints Aperture panels, Quadraspire SVT rack, PGGB 256

Link to comment

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...