CAT 7 - Ethernet Cable - Revelation Audio Labs - USA -

[bhagwan]

I agree with that.

But in this thread "Bhagwan" is almost being attacked for this experiment he is doing "for his own benefit", "off his own money", "off his own time", and without "any commercial benefit". OP is merely sharing his experiment; he hasn't passed any judgement, nor is he endorsing anything.


It's an experiment. Let's let it be. With so much noise about the thread, even if there were to be any tiny winy bit of sonic difference, it won't be audible anymore :lol:

Sir,

Thank You;

You have understood the crux of this thread very well.
I applaud you for your wide and encompassing vision.
I too at some level [however low] do know that a CAT Cable over TCPIP is working within its protocol set & not much can [should] happen.

However, what has prompted me is that 'well known' Cable manufacturers - Audio Quest / Supra / Acoustic Revive etc. etc. do make CAT Cables. Why ? They are not cheap either ? If they serve no purpose, why would they want to expose their brand to unnecessary 'loss of reputation' ?

I do not have the answers, therefore I am giving this a try;
Simple reason it, for the 1st time in 4 + Years of my adopting Computer Audio have I encountered such a huge leap in performance that I have managed - that maybe my practice vision has got 'blurred' [yes, I may have lost focus] & I am 'ready' to try the 'fringe' of [technically not possible] what a CAT Cable can / could / should be doing.

Please do give me some slack, if my results go 'either way' I will post.

Trust me gentlemen, I too 'do not like' to be called a 'fool' & that too for what purpose ? It is only a 'down hill' for me in this CAT Cable case.
Yet, I am keen to do what I am doing - please do let me go through with it...

Thank You All.

Have a Super [Musical] weekend...

 

[Shivam]

When will you be testing your new Ethernet cable? Waiting for your impression of what you hear.

 

[bhagwan]

When will you be testing your new Ethernet cable? Waiting for your impression of what you hear.

Have been at it from 1100.
It is still going on;
Just stopped for a 'tea' break...
Shall get back to it in 15;:licklips:

 

[keith_correa]

FWIW I think that this thread elicited some pretty strong reactions and to everyone's credit the post exchanges were mature. But then it degenerated into a strange direction which I could not relate to - maybe because some posts were removed by the Mods so there was no relation to what people were posting.
And, I don't think ANYONE was ridiculing Bhagwan. I think the strong reactions were because some folks BELIEVED that the manufacturer was ripping people off because there was no SCIENTIFIC reason why the high priced [to me at least] cable in question should cause an improvement in sound and that was what the posts were directed towards.

BUT, what I dread is the publishing of Bhagwans testing results. Now, what reactions will that provoke? Would just like to say something in advance - whatever his findings, any which way this goes, it DOES NOT prove that it would work or not work in other systems. What works/does not work for Bhagwan may cause the opposite effect in other peoples systems. It's the sum of the parts that works and the parts differ between systems.

 

[denom]

Not me - Sir, I assure you;

I do not laugh @ any post - take my word on that...

All said, I do not have any axe to grind with any FM.
If things get 'difficult' I just walk away..:sad:

Lighten up! The post of panditji was quite strong & was just trying to lighten things up. You should know me by now

Now this thread is taking a weird direction/dimension. Please pass the popcorn.

Its taking weird dimension because people are reading more into the matter than it actually is, can't help but thats the way this forum is, taking things -vely more often than not. :sad::indifferent14:

I agree with that.

Making a point is fine. In my first post in this thread I clearly stated that any cable in existence today will far exceed the performance requirement of this setup. And that's why I feel there should be no noticeable improvement.

I also am against things costing ridiculous money (Denon also had a USD 500 Ethernet cable, and it became a butt of all sort of jokes worldwide). But in this thread "Bhagwan" is almost being attacked for this experiment he is doing "for his own benefit", "off his own money", "off his own time", and without "any commercial benefit". OP is merely sharing his experiment; he hasn't passed any judgement, nor is he endorsing anything.

Only valid reason for criticism can be if someone is trying to "sell snake oil". If someone believes in snake-oil, wants to buy snake oil, fully aware that it's snake oil, then be it. Who are people to mock someone for the choices they make in their personal life?

This can be misread, but it seems like people would criticize someone for even wearing a Rolex. I know the popular arguments that are given when Rolex is mentioned in the context of hifi. But everyone knows that the a Rolex makes it's owner pride. And may be that's where the satisfaction lies, that's what motivates someone to buy it. Every product is targeted at a specific set of consumers. At the end of the day, if the product makes it's buyers happy, then others shouldn't be overly critical about it.

It's an experiment. Let's let it be. With so much noise about the thread, even if there were to be any tiny winy bit of sonic difference, it won't be audible anymore :lol:

Pls see sentence highlighted & that is all that needs to be said

Sir,

Thank You;

You have understood the crux of this thread very well.
I applaud you for your wide and encompassing vision.
I too at some level [however low] do know that a CAT Cable over TCPIP is working within its protocol set & not much can [should] happen.

However, what has prompted me is that 'well known' Cable manufacturers - Audio Quest / Supra / Acoustic Revive etc. etc. do make CAT Cables. Why ? They are not cheap either ? If they serve no purpose, why would they want to expose their brand to unnecessary 'loss of reputation' ?

I do not have the answers, therefore I am giving this a try;
Simple reason it, for the 1st time in 4 + Years of my adopting Computer Audio have I encountered such a huge leap in performance that I have managed - that maybe my practice vision has got 'blurred' [yes, I may have lost focus] & I am 'ready' to try the 'fringe' of [technically not possible] what a CAT Cable can / could / should be doing.

Please do give me some slack, if my results go 'either way' I will post.

Trust me gentlemen, I too 'do not like' to be called a 'fool' & that too for what purpose ? It is only a 'down hill' for me in this CAT Cable case.
Yet, I am keen to do what I am doing - please do let me go through with it...

Thank You All.

Have a Super [Musical] weekend...

Yes, exactly, so I don't understand why you should feel aggrieved. You do the 'experiment' & post that you will inform us of the 'results' - By writing about the above, won't we as FM's benefit also???

Carry on dear Bhagwanji

FWIW I think that this thread elicited some pretty strong reactions and to everyone's credit the post exchanges were mature. But then it degenerated into a strange direction which I could not relate to - maybe because some posts were removed by the Mods so there was no relation to what people were posting.
And, I don't think ANYONE was ridiculing Bhagwan. I think the strong reactions were because some folks BELIEVED that the manufacturer was ripping people off because there was no SCIENTIFIC reason why the high priced [to me at least] cable in question should cause an improvement in sound and that was what the posts were directed towards.

BUT, what I dread is the publishing of Bhagwans testing results. Now, what reactions will that provoke? Would just like to say something in advance - whatever his findings, any which way this goes, it DOES NOT prove that it would work or not work in other systems. What works/does not work for Bhagwan may cause the opposite effect in other peoples systems. It's the sum of the parts that works and the parts differ between systems.

Well said. Again, let me state that the nature of this forum is -ve. A slightest remark sparks off -vevity instantly.

People have forgotten to laugh & straight away jump to conclusions :indifferent14:

On top of that, 'shadow' boxers come & 'thank' people for continuing in the -ve vein

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

And, I don't think ANYONE was ridiculing Bhagwan.

Absolutely not. If I have anything to say to him personally on this, and I might have implied it already, it would be that I don't think he has the technical expertise or knowledge in this area to justify experimenting with network cables. He may i) disagree or ii) say, sure, but he's going to do it anyway. Either or both, that's his right.

I have another worry, which is sort-of-personal and sort-of-not-personal, and that is that, because of his experience, position, and opportunity of acquiring equipment that many or even most of us can only dream of, that people regard what he does as, in some ways, aspirational. To put that another way, Bhagwan buying equipment is, among HFVers, one of the best potential advertisements a manufacturer could have. But I'm on dodgy ground here, and must immediately argue with myself that Bhagwan's position is about the freedom to do, and any infringement on his freedom either to do, or to talk about it, is quite wrong.

I don't think, and I hope Bhagwan agrees, that there is anything there that he and I could not discuss peaceably over a cup of tea. I hope that, maybe, we might get to do so --- but, in fact, we might be too busy listening to music.

BUT, what I dread is the publishing of Bhagwans testing results. Now, what reactions will that provoke? Would just like to say something in advance - whatever his findings, any which way this goes, it DOES NOT prove that it would work or not work in other systems. What works/does not work for Bhagwan may cause the opposite effect in other peoples systems. It's the sum of the parts that works and the parts differ between systems.

As per my last (or very recent) post, I have to disagree in this instance. Briefly to repeat: audiophile thinking may or may not be appropriate to everything else on our hifi racks, but it is not appropriate to ethernet networking.

What I mean by this is that a person may have experienced that changing an interconnect or a speaker cable may have made a difference in the sound of their system. They might, having adopted PCs into their hifi, "naturally," think that the same might be true of networking and other computer cables. But it isn't. So the idea that network cable x might "suit" system a but not system b is completely erroneous. Keep thinking on the right path: different paths for different thoughts!

I am not worried by Bhagwan's results. I'm certainly not going to do any victory dance if he says they make no difference. On the other hand, great though Bhagwan's experience might be, and good though his ears might be, if he says that they improve, degrade, or change the sound in any way, it is something that I would want much, much more than subjective confirmation of. In the same circumstances I'd want much more than my own subjective experience. With respect to his ears and experience (both hugely better than mine), I have a doubt that he gives enough weight to the psychological. But I don't know him, except online. Again, we can discuss this over that cup of tea (if we're not too busy with the music). Face to face is always different. I know my writing style is rather dogmatic and, although I can't honestly see much space for manoeuvre on the principles discussed in this thread, I think (hope ) HFVers who have met me might say that I am an easier-going person than I might seem online.

 

[keith_correa]

As per my last (or very recent) post, I have to disagree in this instance. Briefly to repeat: audiophile thinking may or may not be appropriate to everything else on our hifi racks, but it is not appropriate to ethernet networking.

Too many variables here too. The TCP/IP stack, the cards, the OS, the processor and more... The cable is just one link in the chain.

 

[jls001]

Since everyone is speculating freely, kindly allow me also to speculate freely: there may be no known scientific basis as to why an ethernet should have an effect on the quality of the audio in this usage (we must not, however, haughtily rule out things just because the science we know cannot explain an observation we make), but I won't be surprised if it does in his system. Whether it is better, or worse than an IT-grade ethernet cable is a different matter. I remember one time he brought out a huge bunch of bearing-based equipment supports. We tried them and we were surprised to hear the distinct effect each had on the sound. Some good. Some clearly bad. Even the same model placed upside down had a different sound than when placed upright. I understand an equipment footer is different from an ethernet cable. I am only trying to convey how transparent his system is. It clearly conveys the differences in USB (digital), Firewire (digital), sound card breakout cables (carrying AES/EBU digital audio to his D/A) and of course analog interconnects and speaker cables.

And if you must accuse him of snake oil, at least do so properly: it is snake skin oil, NOT snake oil

 

[Santy]

"Why don't you keep your mouth shut", I did ask myself but I couldn't resist. If the 'quality' of a CAT cable matters so much, what about the quality of the RJ45 ports which form the exit / entry points of data transfer? What about the razor thin printed connections and solder joints inside the ethernet card/mother board? What about the quality of the bus circuit that runs between lan card / chipset/ RAM/ I-O hub/ processor etc., and the quality of those components themselves? Since the data originates from the hard disk, what about the quality of the drive's head which reads the data? What about the quality of SATA cable or its connection port? Well I am not trying to be accurate, but I think one can keep adding to the list.

I guess there could be a market for audiophile grade Intel processor and hard disks too. Having said that, I am also keenly waiting for results, though I know, it can be subjective and the audible difference if any, may not be perceived in all systems or by those with silver or bronze ears.

 

[bhagwan]

BUT, what I dread is the publishing of Bhagwans testing results.

Now, what reactions will that provoke?
Would just like to say something in advance - whatever his findings, any which way this goes, it DOES NOT prove that it would work or not work in other systems.

What works/does not work for Bhagwan may cause the opposite effect in other peoples systems.

It's the sum of the parts that works and the parts differ between systems.

Sir,
I 100 % agree with you...
What happens in my set up will definitely not happen in other set ups.
You see, this CAT Cable is the only link between the Black & Silver Computers & when music is played from the Black machine to the Silver machine - other commands too go along with it - that makes the Silver machine 'hibernate' & therefore the RJ 45 Jack & the rest of the things are common on both the Lan Ports of the 2 machines - something the cable can / could / maybe [do or not do] !
Therefore I want to state - that what ever the 'results' / findings of this experiment are - they relate to bhagwan & in no manner will the same result be seen in other set ups - unless J Play Mini 5.1 is installed on the other machines....

 

[bhagwan]

I guess there could be a market for audiophile grade Intel processor and hard disks too. Having said that, I am also keenly waiting for results, though I know, it can be subjective and the audible difference if any, may not be perceived in all systems or by those with silver or bronze ears.

Sir, I do not know enough about computers to get into details / specs & components in particular - but if I may just pen my 2 cents worth;
With regards Power Cords & IEC & US or Euro Schuko Plugs.
There are 'generic' plugs that we use - Crab Tree / Roma / Havells / Anchor etc. etc. & then there are Oyaide / Furutect etc.
What is the difference in them ?
They all operate at the same 'voltage'
Have the same 'plug & pin' dimensions etc. etc.
Yet, they 'impart' some signature to the sound.
Technically if you measure them - there will not be even 1 % of variation in their measured parameters - I have never done it - but that is my 'assumption'
Yet, when you use the same power cord with different terminations etc. the sound changes.....
My Point being, computers were never designed to be CD Transports / Music Servers etc. We [some audio people] are changing their use - so I suppose.
In that process, some mother boards / some RAMs etc. are more suited for 'audio' purpose [so I assume - no evidence again]

hence, I cannot prove or justify any of this in an objective manner - we [maybe only me] will have to be 'satisfied' with 'subjective' analysis - truly sorry for this - but I cannot think of a 'scientific' answer....

 

[arj]

......HFVers who have met me might say that I am an easier-going person than I might seem online.

My amen to that..the Thad one visualizes from posts and the Nick one meets in real life, have different behavioral measurements ( expectational)

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

Since everyone is speculating freely

No: I am not speculating, and neither are the other computer/networking-aware contributors who have clearly stated why this thing is a specious product. It is a not-hifi cable, spruced up to look hifi, and priced up to look hifi. Sorry if others can't see that, but I am not speculating.

there may be no known scientific basis as to why an ethernet should have an effect on the quality of the audio in this usage (we must not, however, haughtily rule out things just because the science we know cannot explain an observation we make)

Yes, we must. This is not theoretical science: it is simple technology. How many of you guys argue for consumer rights when we have a have a go at dealers thread? And yet you think that products like this are valid, at least "experimentally?"

As an experiment, this sucks. There is no theory to prove or disprove, and one migth as well correlate the sound to the nuumber of crows in the garden.

Whether it is better, or worse than an IT-grade ethernet cable is a different matter.

Not better or worse: it might work as a networking cable, but it is not a hifi cable at all. It does not carry either analogue sound or a digital audio protocol which is why

...the differences in USB (digital), Firewire (digital), sound card breakout cables (carrying AES/EBU digital audio to his D/A) and of course analog interconnects and speaker cables...

Are not relevant

And if you must accuse him of snake oil, at least do so properly: it is snake skin oil, NOT snake oil

Is it? I don't know. I guess I've got used to calling it snake oil: it sounds better! hyeah:

...this CAT Cable is the only link between the Black & Silver Computers & when music is played from the Black machine to the Silver machine...

No, Bhagwan. That is the whole point: Music is not "played" from one machine to another. Music has nothing to do with it.

 

[captrajesh]

my writing style is rather dogmatic

I think (hope ) HFVers who have met me might say that I am an easier-going person than I might seem online.

>>>Amen<<< hyeah::thumbsup:

 

[bhagwan]

As an experiment, this sucks.

http://www.hifivision.com/audio-vid...-revelation-audio-labs-usa-10.html#post517008

Interesting Synopsis;

It would [may] have been a slightly different 'comment' if we were to be living in the same city - we could have had that 'camomile' together or that 'cutting chai' what ever 'floats your boat' & 'listened' to some music & tried to reach our own 'synopsis' there after....i.e. with an audition being done.

No, Bhagwan. That is the whole point: Music is not "played" from one machine to another. Music has nothing to do with it.

Partially correct;
Yes, there is no music being played from 1 machine to the other.
This is all data in the digital domain.
In fact 0's & 1's leave the Silver machine - through the RME - Hammerfall AES - 32 via AES/EBU Protocal & it only converts into 'analogue' in the DAD - AX/24 DAC. Until that point all the 'so called music' is pure data in digital form.
Again my knowledge on this topic is almost non existent - but the - CAT Cable is carrying 0 volts to 3 volts when it actually transmits data - I think & the material used [purity of copper - alloy] / geometry of that cable [twist] / the shielding [number of layers - thickness] / the 'skin effect' / the plastic - polymer - teflon used / lots of other materials in the chain can / could have a bearing on the data that is transmitted - this is just a maybe - I do not know - I am asking; Kindly shed some light if possible - I shall truly appreciate.

 

[Thad E Ginathom]

CAT Cable is carrying 0 volts to 3 volts when it actually transmits data - I think & the material used [purity of copper - alloy] / geometry of that cable [twist] / the shielding [number of layers - thickness] / the 'skin effect' / the plastic - polymer - teflon used / lots of other materials in the chain can / could have a bearing on the data that is transmitted

Not only does it have a bearing, it is vital! Not only is it vital, but it is designed and developed, precisely, even down to the exact pitch of the twists. That is what makes it all work.

You might notice that I have talked about digital audio protocols separately and differently, saying that there is room for doubt in such things as USB and Firewire. Still, I think that anything over and above a properly-specced cable is not necessary, but I don't say that to talk about these cables as audio cables is entirely wrong.

With networking, on the other hand, data is being put into boxes and shipped out by courier. We do not mind who the courier is or how they physically transport our boxes. We only mind that 1. they all arrive in time and 2. they can be delivered comlpete, correct and in the right order. Until they reach the addressee, the contents of our boxes is absolutely irrelevant. Whilst it is in transit, it is just boxes. I mentioned in passing, somewhere, IP over carrier pigeon. It's famous, Google will find it immediately. It is amusing and explains a lot.

There mus be millions of miles of Catn networking cable and flyleads in the world. It has not come up on by chance, or was not discovered, as I said before, growing on a tree. Commerce, to a huge extent, depends on it. People rely on it working, without even thinking about it. It has been developed for purpose, made for purpose ...and works. People always want or need more, and for that reason, there will probably always be Catn+1, but that just allows bigger networks to process more data or bigger families to watch more HD movies: it does not (as someone has already posted) make the data any better or more accurate and reliability is already built in: it just shifts it further and faster.

Switching back into the courier analogy, our courier is, in fact, so good at delivering our boxes that, if one goes astray, or the contents get broken, he will make sure he returns to pick up an identical replacement and still deliver it.

It is so good, that we could not wish for a better courier. In fact, a better courier simply would not be possible. That is why a "better" network flylead is not possible, and why it doesn't matter if it carrying music, ATM withdrawal data, or connects a remote surgeon to the robot knife doing the job. And why anyone who tries to sell you one is wrong. And why it is a mistake, based on various misunderstandings, to buy one.

(I do concepts, not the technical detail. I can make jewellery, but I cannot explain the metallurgy of why some metals get hard and brittle when thumped. I leave that to the engineers here. But frankly, it is the concepts that matter here, and how many bits are in a packet and what the header fields contain, or just what happens to those pulses as they flash along the cable is not useful to us. And my TCP/IP manual is so old it pre-dates things like private address space and Cat5 cable...)

<non-DOGA mode >

Yes, there is no music being played from 1 machine to the other.
This is all data in the digital domain.
In fact 0's & 1's leave the Silver machine - through the RME - Hammerfall AES - 32 via AES/EBU Protocal & it only converts into 'analogue' in the DAD - AX/24 DAC. Until that point all the 'so called music' is pure data in digital form.

I think we can start to regard it as music or, at least, use the word "playing," once, it reaches the sound card is then transmitted by a digital-audio protocol. I'm telling myself that the clue is in the word "sound card!"
.

 

[Santy]

Brilliant explanation and analogy Thad. That has been the argument since beginning though emphasized only in recent posts. The ethernet cable carries data not music. SPDIF cables carry music in square waveform while CAT cables carry chunks of data with a CRC checksum that triggers an error or helps in reattempting transfer if the packets are damaged. The software player or the soundcard doesn't appreciate anything that does the work of streaming the data until that point. The errors are taken care by the ethernet card or the I/O chipset and internet protocols before even it is accessed by the player from the RAM. In case of SPDIF, the DAC has no idea if the digital waves reaching it are perfect or damaged so as to correct them, except for analyzing the clock errors. Because such a loss or damage to the actual music waves go undetected it may be making sense to use good quality SPDIF cables for interconnection. Not the case at all with data transfer. Heck, there is nothing like sampling rate in ethernet transfer which has a huge impact on sound quality. I am thinking aloud here. I may be grossly wrong.

 

[Santy]

IMHO, all such audiophile accessories (mostly cables) that claim to have technically un-provable qualities are probably manufactured for one reason; to eliminate that iota of 'uncertainty' that exists in the minds of ultra-high end audiophiles that that component in the chain could limit them from achieving what they classify as the "purest sound". What makes such stuff sell, is probably the thought among their prospective customers that "I have a 100,000 USD worth audio gear, why to add a 50 USD worth _____ (put any audio accessory here) in the chain and risk losing out on quality?" These are people who might believe that instead of living with this doubt, it is rather worth spending 2000 USD on _____ (put same accessory here)- it is still only 2% of the total value. In relative terms, it is not nonsensical for many of us to spend even upto 10% of the total value on them. Sure these accessories make a difference but at what quality and cost is the question. The mind seems to play an unbelievably big role in such experiments, auditions, reviews and purchases more than the ears.

 

[ranjeetrain]

IMHO, all such audiophile accessories (mostly cables) that claim to have technically un-provable qualities are probably manufactured for one reason; to eliminate that iota of 'uncertainty' that exists in the minds of ultra-high end audiophiles that that component in the chain could limit them from achieving what they classify as the "purest sound".

Bingo!

That's the truth and nothing but the truth.

When an affluent family goes out to dine, they don't only order what they can eat. They order a lot extra, fully aware in the back of their mind that they won't be eating all of that. Why? Because they just want to have the options. They just want to make sure that they didn't have any wish left, didn't have to feel they should have also ordered so and so stuff.

When people can afford, they spend over and above what they should/need. Their expenses are not governed strictly by the need. It's human nature. An audiophile is no different. He won't like to live in doubt forever to save a few hundred bucks when he has spent hundreds of thousands already.

 

[bhagwan]

@ Santy & Ranjeetrain;

Respected Gentlemen.
Why are we getting into financials ?
How does it matter ?

If a cable cost Rs. 100/- or Rs. 1,000/- or Rs. 10,000/- or even more - I am not interested or concerned with its price.

I am only interested to know if different CAT Cables that I have sourced - when installed between my 2 Computers that use J Play Mini V5.1 make any 'sonic' difference ? That is all I am concerned with;

Financials will come into play at a much later date.
Right now, I want to take a teat drive - see what suits my needs - buying / price to performance / VFM etc. are not important factors for me. I do not play by those rules in this case.

Phase 1 of my test was done on Saturday.
Phase 2 will start post lunch today.

I will keep this up & should know where I stand soon.:clapping: