There's More "There" There!

[opaqueice]

A question: if I send you two copies of the same CD, one in a blue
envelope and the other in a yellow padded envelope, which one will sound
better?

The answer is, of course, that as long as the CD makes it to you through
the postal system undamaged they will both sound identical.

The light which filters through the two envelopes will have a different spectrum, which results in differential degradation in the dye on the CD (let's assume these are CD-Rs), which in turn induces different levels and spectra of jitter when you play them back. If you have a sufficiently revealing system, even your dog will hear the difference...

[Robin Bowes]

opaqueice wrote:
> Robin Bowes;258412 Wrote:
>> A question: if I send you two copies of the same CD, one in a blue
>> envelope and the other in a yellow padded envelope, which one will
>> sound
>> better?
>>
>> The answer is, of course, that as long as the CD makes it to you
>> through
>> the postal system undamaged they will both sound identical.
>>
>
> The light which filters through the two envelopes will have a different
> spectrum, which results in differential degradation in the dye on the CD
> (let's assume these are CD-Rs), which in turn induces different levels
> and spectra of jitter when you play them back. If you have a
> sufficiently revealing system, even your dog will hear the
> difference...

No, these are commercially-pressed audio CDs. And I forgot to mention
that the envelopes are both lined with totally opaque black plastic.



R.

[alekz]

<joke>
Properly broken-in LSD might work better then Shiraz. You don't even need the cables.
</joke>


<serious>
I wonder if:
o- a shielded ethernet cable can create ground loops.
o- a fiber cable "sounds" better than a copper one. Despite the transformer coupling and differential schemes the "copper" brings noise directly into the unit.
</serious>

[Apparition]

<joke>
Properly broken-in LSD might work better then Shiraz. You don't even need the cables.
</joke>


<serious>
I wonder if:
o- a shielded ethernet cable can create ground loops.
o- a fiber cable "sounds" better than a copper one. Despite the transformer coupling and differential schemes the "copper" brings noise directly into the unit.
</serious>

No. You have to ask yourself if a $3m UNIX server running an Oracle financials app that passes requests to an Z/OS backend db (mainframe based) over IP!!!! worries about these things. Because their 1s and 0s are a heck of a lot more important than an audio 1 or 0. And I know you are not worrying about the signal as it in the packet in the cable but the impact of an electrical charge that the packet in the cable creates on the surrounding electronics, but the answer is still clearly, demonstrably no. I don't mean to single anybody out, because the question I think was asked in earnest by somebody that probably doesn't undestand Ethernet really well. Well, in comparison to a Cisco engineer, I don't either, but I know enough to know that the notion is complete nonsense. Again, I am not putting it that way to be offensive but to put doubt to rest for anybody that is remotely open minded about this (ie. everybody who is just wondering, and doesn't think CAT6 will sound "warmer" and more "holographic" than CAT5 or some such nonsense).

[mvalera]

Enyone that spends there time posting and reading on hifi forums are more or less infected with audiophila.


Some beleive in cables,mods,tweaks,or Linn and some only beleive in adam slim and that enything else is a wast of time.

But all still audiophils none the less.

The irony is many on this forum uses the word audiophil as a bad thing.

Some of us get paid to read them.

harmonic wrote:

In my world, audiophile *is* a bad thing. I prefer the term "audio
enthusiast".

R.

Kind of a Trekkie v.s. Trekker thing. :P

Mike

[alekz]

Apparition, you misunderstood my post. I'm not talking about digital domain. I'm talking about cables introducing ground loops and noise into the analogue signal via RFI, shared ground, etc.

[Apparition]

Apparition, you misunderstood my post. I'm not talking about digital domain. I'm talking about cables introducing ground loops and noise into the analogue signal via RFI, shared ground, etc.

No, I got you, I just don't believe it. Not even remotely. For all the reasons I cited in that post and the previous one. Again, I am not an engineer, but in a computer (server), that same ethernet port would sit next to tens or hundreds of thousands of dollars of memory. Next to processors, I/O ports, etc. And in a data centre, it would likely be surrounded by 100 other ethernet cables. So I understand what you are saying, I just don't buy it. And I understand you are driving at an impact on the signal once it becomes analog, but heck, memory is switched by an electric signal. If ethernet could generate an impact on the analog signal in a transporter, it could flip bits in memory. And it can't.

Also, it occurred to me that the end of the cable is not shielded, right? Or no signal at all would get through... so... No difference at all between shielded and unshielded cable as it terminates at the port.

[alekz]

And in a data centre, it would likely be surrounded by 100 other ethernet cables. So I understand what you are saying, I just don't buy it. And I understand you are driving at an impact on the signal once it becomes analog, but heck, memory is switched by an electric signal. If ethernet could generate an impact on the analog signal in a transporter, it could flip bits in memory. And it can't.

You are talking digital again. OK, if you like the data centers, let's use them as an example.

What sound will you get if you use one of the 750W power supplies taken from a $1M server in a 250W amplifier? Or a preamp?

Do you use spikes under your $1M server?

What happenes if you use a computer grade capacitors taken from a
$1M server in the audio path?

Why do they never use shielded power cables in the data centers?

What happened if you replace a good audio quality power cable with a computer cable?

and the list of questions goes on and on ...

[Apparition]

You are talking digital again. OK, if you like the data centers, let's use them as an example.

What sound will you get if you use one of the 750W power supplies taken from a $1M server in a 250W amplifier? Or a preamp?

Havent got a clue.

Do you use spikes under your $1M server?

Sort of, but not for the reasons you are thinking of.

What happened if you use a computer grade capacitors taken from a
$1M server in the audio path?

Depends whose computer? Cray, NASA, or Dell?

Why do they never use shielded power cables in the data centers?

What happened if you replace a good audio quality power cable with a computer cable?

Probably nothing. Why not use a hospital cable? All data centres (real ones, raised floor) use expensive power conditioning anyway...

and the list of questions goes on and on ...

Well, for some of us it does. The original point of the discussion was (I think... so long ago now) if wireless, wired, or shielded wires matter. With a computer background I can firmly and unequivocally say no, they don't. Somebody who designed the darn thing seems to hold the same point of view.

I am happy to let other opinions exist, but I did want to point out from the stance of somebody who is ethernet savy, my opinion is that this shielded/unshielded stuff is nonsense.

But ultimately, unless we do a double blind test, all you have is opinion. Some are better educated than others, however.

[alekz]

Yes, it all began with cables. But my point was that the analogies do not always work. In a $1M DB server you do not care if the S/N is 80 or 85dB. But in the high-end audio 85dB is not a good ratio. And you are trying to squeeze extra decibels out of everything.