Shielded vs. unshielded Ethernet and Grounding

[Fitzcaraldo215]

27 minutes ago, jabbr said:

 

Not bad!

 

There is a market for a consumer audiophile type switch. Hopefully one that can meet professional switch specs.

 

 

Your, the UpTone, products are very reasonably priced, particularly given the small audiophile market. 

 

I would like to see to see an end-to-end jitter/phase noise measurement the same as which is specified for the 10GBase-X Ethernet spec (2002) ie <5.5 picosec end to end jitter. Not required for 10/100 Mb Ethernet but give me a reason not to use a 10G switch at 1G, for example.

When you say "end to end" that must necessarily include the DAC, unless you think that is of no importance in our setups.  

 

Of of course it is.  In fact everything upstream really doesn't matter unless the analog output from the DAC is measurably affected.  So, why not just measure a range of DACs for  traditional audio frequency, noise, jitter, etc. with these various network transmission "improvements"?

 

Count me skeptical, but I have a hunch the results will not be dramatic, especially with certain DACS, and that much of these heroic efforts to improve the input to the DAC will not result in commensurate improvements at the output.

[Fitzcaraldo215]

1 hour ago, jabbr said:

It’s not relevant for you nor intended to be, however for people for whom upgrading Ethernet switch clocks or for whom cable shields, avoiding leakage currents is important, of for anyone interested in Ethernet signal integrity, I am pointing out that IEEE standards for 10Gbe fiber already have very stringent requirements and people should get some comfort in using equipment which meets such standards.

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?

[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.

[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.

[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.  

[Fitzcaraldo215]

Actually, I was going to summarize this thread from my own personal and narrow viewpoint.  I agree that audio systems, especiallty those that incorporate PCs and networks, can have grounding issues with potentially adverse effects.  Been there and done that myself.

 

So, while the esoteric technical details provided here are perhaps valid and illuminating, may I be allowed to just just shrug my shoulders over any relevance to me?

 

I personally see no need at all to use anything other than good old, metallic USB to my DAC.  It works great, even at 5 meters.  So, I feel no need whatsoever to play with Ethernet from my PC to DAC, including the necessary intermediary interfaces.  Experiments at "improving" that connection via gizmos, Corning fiber, etc.  have yielded tiny sonic changes, but none that were actually, in my view, sonic improvements, and certainly nothing at all to get excited about.

 

Any potential Ethernet grounding issue, for me, is only about my NAS to PC connection.  So, we have a noisy NAS,  which is Ethernet connected to a noisy PC.  So what?  How does any of that provably get through to and affect the analog output from my USB-connected, galvanically isolated DAC?

 

From long experience in audio systems and with some experience with grounding issues, let me say I took standard precautions.  I have 4 X 20A electrical circuits connected at identical length to the same phase of my breaker box.  My XLR-connected audio system, the PC and all networking gear are each on one of those circuits.  All are directly connected to the same common ground.  End result, in my humble opinion, is no grounding issues.  I actually have no idea whether my Ethernet patch cords are via connected shields or not.  It does not seem to matter at all.  

 

So, in the minutia of this discussion, my view is simple, and indeed my approach is quite simple and inexpensive.  Maybe all one needs to do do is just pay careful attention to one's electrical distribution system to avoid a lot of potential problems.  That has long been true of audio systems and added PCs/networks to them are no exception.

 

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

13 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

what DAC do you use?  maybe it is impervious, while lesser ones are not...?

I use an Exasound E28 with balanced miniXLR outputs directly to my amps and sub.

 

It is George Klissarov's stated philosophy to handle noise and timing issues at the DAC end in USB rather than in the many, many possible upstream nooks and crannies, here there and everywhere in the PC and network.  That the PC and network environment are noisy is a given in his view and he attempts to design his DAC accordingly.  My experience is that he has been successful.

 

However, I still believe that careful attention to basic and simple electrical and grounding issues is important in any audio system. By that, I do not mean fancy power cords and power conditioners, which are of little to no help.  When I first used my PC for audio, there were noticeable ground noise issues with the PC and network plugged into a separate, normal house circuit.  But, plugging those into my matched, but unexotic garden variety audio electrical circuits fixed that easily in a snap.  My system is dead silent, and the sound is quite excellent.