Well if you thought cables was a debate....

Soldato
Joined
5 Jan 2003
Posts
3,523
Location
Somewhere in the middle
I was reading on another Audio forum...... but had to leave quick, before I commented....;) the statement was that some guy says is NAS drive sounds better when it was on some 950 quid audio table..... For sure he already had tried different CAT 5 cables. :D

Now I'm all up for being open minded and listening to try something.... but this was just to far for me ..... hahahahaha....
 
I would imagine the NAS drive would sound the same sat on top of running washing machine as any hi-fi rack (as long as the drives still worked).

Hi-Fi Cat5 was an aprils fools joke a few years ago, can't remember which website/manufacturer posted it.

Dave
 
Hi-fi Cat5 exists, Denon make one which costs $500.

It's directional, I wonder if your music plays backwards if you plug it in the wrong way? :D
 
I feel such a failure, with my NAS sitting on the floor, and my CAT5 Home made from parts from B&Q !!! :D LOL...
Even after it being confirmed the stream/receiver reads into a memory buffer, "they" keep maintaining it sounds better.... bet that wasn't a double blind test !!!...
I give most idea a try..... but this....... hahahaha
 
I was reading on another Audio forum...... but had to leave quick, before I commented....;) the statement was that some guy says is NAS drive sounds better when it was on some 950 quid audio table..... For sure he already had tried different CAT 5 cables. :D

Now I'm all up for being open minded and listening to try something.... but this was just to far for me ..... hahahahaha....

Hey.. you never know till you've tried it ;) :D

Btw I just went out and bought a Canon 40D - I double blind tested it vs. the 50D and the pictures were 100% identical :eek::D
 
Hey.. you never know till you've tried it ;) :D

Btw I just went out and bought a Canon 40D - I double blind tested it vs. the 50D and the pictures were 100% identical :eek::D

I will wait for girlfriend to move the NAS when clearing up one day, without telling, see if notice a difference ;-)...

I've been into Photography longer than HiFi.... but still don't get the upgrade bug that seems to exist in the photo forum !! :confused:...... I can upgrade my audio and hear an improvement...... Changing my camera doesn't make me take better pictures..... oh and I was shooting some B&W film this week..:D
 
I will wait for girlfriend to move the NAS when clearing up one day, without telling, see if notice a difference ;-)...

I've been into Photography longer than HiFi.... but still don't get the upgrade bug that seems to exist in the photo forum !! :confused:...... I can upgrade my audio and hear an improvement...... Changing my camera doesn't make me take better pictures..... oh and I was shooting some B&W film this week..:D

I've just got back into photography over the past year, I used to be into it years ago when I was at school and I had an Olympus camera that was fully manual - so I'm still amazed by things like auto-focus :D But yeah - if I was a decent photographer I might consider a 1Ds.. but until that day, I think this camera will last me a while!
 
I feel such a failure, with my NAS sitting on the floor, and my CAT5 Home made from parts from B&Q !!! :D LOL...
Even after it being confirmed the stream/receiver reads into a memory buffer, "they" keep maintaining it sounds better.... bet that wasn't a double blind test !!!...
I give most idea a try..... but this....... hahahaha
Curious.. why won't you entertain this idea but you do entertain the idea that speaker cables can make a difference? Science strongly suggests that neither should really alter the sound that much so why do you believe one and not the other?

Remember - the table guys are saying that they can hear a difference between tables, so you saying 'well I can tell the difference between speaker cables so it must be true' would make you rather hypocritical :p
 
I'm far more skeptical about digital cable than analogue cable. I'm not convinced that zeros and ones are really effected by cable, they either get there or they don't. Seeing as the cat5 I use on my home computer works just fine I can't see the need to pay more than a quid for one. Aside from that I don't use it for audio or video much, I have the hifi for that.

Dave
 
Well you need to look at each case in a little more detail, so here is my view, from listening and my engineering back ground.

Analogue cables, can and do have a varying effect (no link to price). As the type of material used, copper, silver etc... the construction, Oxygen free copper, plated in silver, type of insulation used and design.... and on and on.
With these cable you are forcing the signal you will listen to down the cable, same as you push the signal through resistors, capacitors and chips. So the design is in the analogue signal path.

In the digital example of a NAS drive, the hard drive reads from the the platter, into it's memory buffer, it's then sent in packet down the CAT5 cable, and checked when it is received by the Steaming player. If any packet is corrupt, it is resent. Next this packet data is loaded into another memory buffer. It is then fed into the DAC and analogue stages of the Digital Streamer.
The design of this process has been set up to protect it from external or cable issues, as it in effect "error corrects" it's self. The design advantage of a NAS playback system is the read errors and jitter timing issues in a CD playback system is removed.
Hence the NAS/Streamer system has potential to sound better than the CD/CDplayer. In my system this is true.

Digital cables, as long as it's well made, and not leaking any of the data, and causing high error correction to occur, then they should be equal.
I have experimented with a few SPDIF cables, but never convinced myself that I heard any real difference.

Main Cables, I am on the fence here, so dependant on the power supply in the equipment I think. For me with Linn Switch Mode Power supplies, I don't find much or any effect. Others do claim different. I use the OEM leads, plus a few RA mains blocks, because they give some spike protection and were easy way to convert UK plugs to a Euro mains lead for use here in Italy. (Plus the power supply here is flaky)

Tables:- For a NAS drive, unless you put the drive on a washing machine on spin cycle it should in theory not be effected, unless you get to many read errors, or mis sent packets. So a "sensible" surface should be ok.
For CD players, you don't want to much feed back or vibration, as you can again cause read errors and more Jitter problems. For me a good sensible table/surface will do.... again not related to price. Once again some players could be more sensitive than others, so it's not a predictable science in my view.

For Amps.... With my amps, never experience any change with the type of table I have used.... The claimed micro-phoning effect on electronics I can believe is technically possible, but does it in the real world get high enough to be heard.... Again equipment dependent.

Turntables.... Very critical, partly dependent on design of TT, you need to prevent external vibration and ground internal caused by the motor and rotating mass.

Hi Fi, simple hobby really hahaha :D :D
 
ill have you know my pc plays games faster when its on a concrete plinth :cool:
:D

I have been to some nights where the bass from the PA will cause feedback on the turntables, a quick and dirty fix is to to put a heavy concrete plinth on some foam and this gets rid of a lot of the feedback! :p
 
:D

I have been to some nights where the bass from the PA will cause feedback on the turntables, a quick and dirty fix is to to put a heavy concrete plinth on some foam and this gets rid of a lot of the feedback! :p


Just needs an impressive brand name and big price tag and away you go ;)
 
Well you need to look at each case in a little more detail, so here is my view, from listening and my engineering back ground.


Digital cables, as long as it's well made, and not leaking any of the data, and causing high error correction to occur, then they should be equal.
I have experimented with a few SPDIF cables, but never convinced myself that I heard any real difference.

There is actually some good theory on problems with the SPDIF digital chain that can mean cables/different devices can make a difference to the audio.
By far the biggest contributor to this is the difference in clocks (which are obviously un-sync'd) between source/receiver. Since the compressed audio was recorded with exact frame dimensions, it is almost impossible to get your source to transmit these at the exact frequency they where originally encoded, and worse still, the receivers DAC clock is extremely unlikely to be in sync as well. Compressed audio is actually quite senstive to changes in presentation speed, this can make a difference. This is all becuase there is no 'clock' signal in the data stream, and no error correction/transaction based data streaming.

To be fair, the inevitable lack of clock sync between the source/receiver and the original encoding along with latency in the TOSlink transceivers is going to have a magnitude higher affect then the cable, it would have to be quite poor to introduce a large effect then all those.. but it can happen, and has a solid basis on simple theory.

However, the NAS thing, I agree 100% with your synopsis.. being buffered data, the only 'clock' is at the decoder, and no matter what you do with the source data, it's going to be presented to the DAC according to the receiver equipment, not the source..
 
Last edited:
There is actually some good theory on problems with the SPDIF digital chain that can mean cables/different devices can make a difference to the audio.
By far the biggest contributor to this is the difference in clocks (which are obviously un-syncsync'd) between source/receiver. Since the compressed audio was recorded with exact frame dimensions, it is almost impossible to get your source to transmit these at the exact frequency they where originally encoded, and worse still, the receivers DAC clock is extremely unlikely to be in sync as well. Compressed audio is actually quite senstive to changes in presentation speed, this can make a difference. This is all becuase there is no 'clock' signal in the data stream, and no error correction/transaction based data streaming.

To be fair, the inevitable lack of clock sync between the source/receiver and the original encoding along with latency in the TOSlink transceivers is going to have a magnitude higher affect then the cable, it would have to be quite poor to introduce a large effect then all those.. but it can happen, and has a solid basis on simple theory.

However, the NAS thing, I agree 100% with your synopsis.. being buffered data, the only 'clock' is at the decoder, and no matter what you do with the source data, it's going to be presented to the DAC according to the receiver equipment, not the source..


The clocking issues was addressed on Linn's original two box players, (Karik Numerik)there was an extra "sync lead" linking transport and DAC together so there was one clock for the system.
I guess modern DAC's now reclock the signal to get in sync and eliminate as much timing jitter as possible.
 
The clocking issues was addressed on Linn's original two box players, (Karik Numerik)there was an extra "sync lead" linking transport and DAC together so there was one clock for the system.
I guess modern DAC's now reclock the signal to get in sync and eliminate as much timing jitter as possible.


Some of the Tag-MacLaren's DVD transports also had a clock line running from transport to DAC for the same reason :)
Although just syncing the clocks isn't quite enough, you still need to have this clock as close to the original encoder clock as possible. (But I guess the top end stuff also had ultra-precise clock sources.

Even older setups used to effectively re-clock the signal, although (and I guess you meant this), the re-clocking is at the pre-decoder or internal to the decoder, the DAC clock is effectively set by the decoder, but I'm sure you are right that jitter has slowly improved over the years to the point it's probably not worth worrying about :)



I'm not sure what major advances if any have been made in getting the source transports to clock at the exact rate the video/audio was encoded at, even with zero jitter, a source clock running a fraction high/low will inevitably have an effect on the de-compressed output, and of course any small discrepency between source/receiver units is going to lead to frame errors at some point..
 
Back
Top Bottom