@ssfas we're sorry to hear our products might not be for you, but just one quick point of clarification, all our cables are hand made from base conductors by us here in the UK, and we do not use Neotech or any other off-the-shelf wire. NA
Best audiophile switch
- Thread starter Frankie67
- Start date
@ssfas we're sorry to hear our products might not be for you, but just one quick point of clarification, all our cables are hand made from base conductors by us here in the UK, and we do not use Neotech or any other off-the-shelf wire. NA
@ssfas Thanks for your fullsome post. It's really helpful when someone sets out their stall like that so you can understand their experience (including their relevant professional background if any) and values when making buying decisions.
I agree partially regarding the choice of connector. I've tried several and the Telegartners are by a good margin the nicest to work with; they are also well-engineered and provide excellent continuity of shield against RFI right into the plug with no nasty plastic gaps; but I also admit they look the purposeful part so there is an aesthetic element to the choice too!
What I hadn't spotted at all were the instruction videos you mention; how cool is that?! Will check them out to see if I'm missing any top tips on eg. assembly sequence. Nice one.
I presume you mean the general "you" not me as I don't do this...
I agree partially regarding the choice of connector. I've tried several and the Telegartners are by a good margin the nicest to work with; they are also well-engineered and provide excellent continuity of shield against RFI right into the plug with no nasty plastic gaps; but I also admit they look the purposeful part so there is an aesthetic element to the choice too!
I buy quite a bit of stuff from HiFiCollective. Gave up on the Neotech wires for my DC cables as they do only red which means double and treble checking to ensure the right polarity; I now use silver-coated copper in a PTFE Teflon dielectric and am more than happy with the results.
What I hadn't spotted at all were the instruction videos you mention; how cool is that?! Will check them out to see if I'm missing any top tips on eg. assembly sequence. Nice one.
CAT6 pairs are twisted to eliminate EMI, CAT7 are shielded for the same purpose for longer and faster cable runs. The CAT7 shield creates a galvanic link, so the potential for noise. The extra shielding and speed of CAT7 are irrelevant for audio, which is why most people go for unshielded CAT6a, and which is why it is the primary cable specification that BJC sell (and they sell a lot of cable). The do still do CAT5e.
The material is irrelevant other than meeting the cable specification, so normal OFC copper is absolutely fine.
CAT6a is specified up to 55m. Given most people use very short ethernet cables (best to use fibre for the long runs) the data loss issue becomes totally irrelevant.
Some people talk about using the best cable closest to their streamer. This is also audiophile nonsense. Best to use the same cable throughout. This is from the Telegartner website:
Requirements for RJ45 Connection Technology
In today's data networks, RJ45 jacks are exposed to greater stress of more varieties than ever before. Damage from patch cords being torn out of mobile devices, over-bent contacts due to RJ11 and RJ12 plugs and especially disconnection sparks under load in remote powering situations require...
www.telegaertner.com
Sablon between the PhoenixNET and Antipodes Oladra.
Generic Cat 6 U/UTP between the PhoenixNET and the Cisco 2960 switch which I also use to connect to my router and to connect to all my non audio equipment.
I also have a second system with an Innuos Zenith mk3 and that is also connected to the same PhoenixNET (the one in my main system) using a temporary 20m Cat 8 which being shielded and earthed at both ends is perhaps against some wisdom because the shield is earthed at both ends but that is maybe an experiment for another day and in any case a quick and dirty comparison didn't seem to pick up any sound quality issues when I tried the 20m Cat 8 cable in various parts of my main system, eg between PhoenixNET and Oladra. Although having said that, all my main system devices are earthed using Earthing Rods in the garden using the Puritan Ground Master system but whether that has got anything to do with the price of fish I do not know.
Last edited:
Republicoftexas69
Well-Known Member
Your post makes the mot sense and I appreciate the information provided.CAT6 pairs are twisted to eliminate EMI, CAT7 are shielded for the same purpose for longer and faster cable runs. The CAT7 shield creates a galvanic link, so the potential for noise. The extra shielding and speed of CAT7 are irrelevant for audio, which is why most people go for unshielded CAT6a, and which is why it is the primary cable specification that BJC sell (and they sell a lot of cable). The do still do CAT5e.
The material is irrelevant other than meeting the cable specification, so normal OFC copper is absolutely fine.
CAT6a is specified up to 55m. Given most people use very short ethernet cables (best to use fibre for the long runs) the data loss issue becomes totally irrelevant.
Some people talk about using the best cable closest to their streamer. This is also audiophile nonsense. Best to use the same cable throughout. This is from the Telegartner website:
Requirements for RJ45 Connection Technology
In today's data networks, RJ45 jacks are exposed to greater stress of more varieties than ever before. Damage from patch cords being torn out of mobile devices, over-bent contacts due to RJ11 and RJ12 plugs and especially disconnection sparks under load in remote powering situations require...
View attachment 133292
So where do you get the UPOCC copper cable from? It's patented and I thought the only people who made it were the patent holder in Japan.@ssfas we're sorry to hear our products might not be for you, but just one quick point of clarification, all our cables are hand made from base conductors by us here in the UK, and we do not use Neotech or any other off-the-shelf wire. NA
My apologies, it looked like their flat white cable inside. Shunyata make their own configuration, I assume some other people do. Given the millions of miles of CAT6a in use, I'll take it as fit for purpose.
The EMI reduction comes from the weave, which is why my personal preference for woven cable is for it to be machine made. I do have a couple of handmade interconnects, they are not woven, but shielded.
Your website says : "4-core 100 MB/s precision-weaved cable architecture". Surely that is wrong? CAT5e is 1 gbps, CAT6a is 10 gbps. Ethernet cable is 8-strand.
eno Streaming Cable – Network Acoustics
www.networkacoustics.com
I entered the discussion about switches and what can be gained from looking inside. The point is that amateurs can get some idea and professionals can get a very good idea, down to the brand and speed of the clock. Even with very cheap components, it doesn't stop plenty of people buying where the mark-up is clearly very high. The issue with yours is that they are sealed. Contrast with LHY, where all the products are presented on their website 'open box'.
I have two shopping bags full of ethernet cables, CAT5e, 6, 6a, 7 and CAT8, both audiophile and generic and have tried all of them in my various audio systems. I have tried several audiophile cables that I did not purchase. My conclusions at completely at odds with yours. I have a couple of BJC CAT6a cables. They are OK, nothing special. I use them in non-critical locations. I know how to use shield-tied cables to prevent negative effects.
My silver Audio Sensibility cables are the sounding in my collection. I am quite fond of Furutech Nano Crystal Formula copper cables.
I use fiber for my longest runs (fifteen and five meters).
Telegartner connectors are great. I have broken many plastic tabs on cheap cables and a couple on more expensive cables. But Telegartner is not an audiophile company. They would probably look at me like I have two heads if I said cables and even connectors can result in different sound quality. They are entitled to their opinions, as are you. I will keep mine.Some people talk about using the best cable closest to their streamer. This is also audiophile nonsense. Best to use the same cable throughout. This is from the Telegartner website:
Requirements for RJ45 Connection Technology
In today's data networks, RJ45 jacks are exposed to greater stress of more varieties than ever before. Damage from patch cords being torn out of mobile devices, over-bent contacts due to RJ11 and RJ12 plugs and especially disconnection sparks under load in remote powering situations require...
This stuff is all over the internet and consistently described. I also discussed with Galen Gareis of Belden/BJC. They use 5c plastic ethernet connectors because they are the best, not because they cost 5c.
I have two very long runs and I use AudioQuest Pearl CAT6 in parallel with fibre. I like this cable because the conductors seem slightly thicker, which makes it a lot easier for people like me to use a crimping tool.
AQ Pearl is a CAT7 cable, with one end of the shield ground lifted. That is allowable for CAT7 cable, but not for CAT8, which must have the shield grounded at both ends.
I have a short length of AQ Pearl. It may be the worst sounding cable, even including generics, in all of my large collection.
I agree with most of what you say. I also use fibre, two 25m cables, with CAT6a in parallel. Telegartner are intended exactly as you describe, to make cable repairs quick and easy without the need for a crimper or anything more than a small pair of pliers.
If you look at the specification of your Audio Sensibility cables, it is the same as Neotech NEET-1008 UPOCC cable. It is almost certainly Neotech cable. Audio Sensibility specifically refer to other of their digital cables as being Neotech.
As it happens, the cable price is extremely good, it's basically not much more than the cable cost plus $50 for the Telegartner connectors (although they only take a minute or two to fit). So seem a very good choice if you want UPOCC.
The Audio Sensibility description:
The Neotech cable. AS refer to the inner cover as Teflon, but it's HDPE.
The is a CAT6 version of AQ Pearl.
It's easy to terminate and has a very thick and strong outer cover. My cables are 25m long and run under floors and through walls, so durability is important. It's good for that. One is a spare and the other is used for a wifi access point.
AudioQuest CAT6 Pearl RJ/E Ethernet Cable Custom
Built with Solid Long-Grain Copper and 100% shielded gold-plated connectors, AudioQuest's CAT6 Pearl allows 10G ethernet over up to 55 metres. This cable delivers excellent performance for streaming audio or video, and as always provides a more reliable connection than wi-fi.
www.futureshop.co.uk
Also, the jacket is different and cryogenically treated by Audio Sensibility.
Note that the cable you linked is two pairs, which means 100MBPS. I have one of those, and also the I2S version, which is gigabit. They sound different. The 100MB cable has a warmer sound, the 1G cable is more detailed and brighter, so it seems cable speed (bandwidth) can impact sound quality. I like them both a lot, they just need to be deployed appropriately.
Anyway, it seems we have gone off topic.
EtherRegen v2 for the win!
Republicoftexas69
Well-Known Member
Has the EtherRegen v2 even been released?Also, the jacket is different and cryogenically treated by Audio Sensibility.
Note that the cable you linked is two pairs, which means 100MBPS. I have one of those, and also the I2S version, which is gigabit. They sound different. The 100MB cable has a warmer sound, the 1G cable is more detailed and brighter, so it seems cable speed (bandwidth) can impact sound quality. I like them both a lot, they just need to be deployed appropriately.
Anyway, it seems we have gone off topic.
EtherRegen v2 for the win!
Nope, still in design stage, that's why there's an emoji in my post.
Er no. The thread is of course about switches but let's cover all bases:
1) If you do NOT use a switch, "using the best cable closest to the streamer" is either meaningless (what is it then connecting?) or nonsensical
2) If you do use a switch, it is far from audiophile nonsense. The challenge is to define what best actually means here and, let's face it, for many audiophiles best means most expensive and often this means shielded. Between a switch and a streamer, using a shielded cable where the shield is grounded at both ends is plain wrong (see the WBF thread I linked to earlier). The best cable between a switch and a streamer is one which is shielded but the shield is grounded only at one end; the next best is a completely unshielded cable like Cat6; the worst is a shielded cable in which the shield is grounded at both ends and acts as a noise conductor so undoes the good work of the galvanic isolation in the switch.
It's therefore really important to the discussion that if folk are going to say "I tried cable X and it was terrible" they also say where they used cable X, what two devices it connected. For example, I have a 10m shielded Cat6a connecting my router to my switch but wouldn't dream of using the same from switch to streamer where I have just replaced my (unshielded) Cat6 with a shielded cable which is grounded only at the switch end.
I'm still struggling to get over the idea of frequency-dependent sound quality from a digital cable sending packet data.Also, the jacket is different and cryogenically treated by Audio Sensibility.
Note that the cable you linked is two pairs, which means 100MBPS. I have one of those, and also the I2S version, which is gigabit. They sound different. The 100MB cable has a warmer sound, the 1G cable is more detailed and brighter, so it seems cable speed (bandwidth) can impact sound quality. I like them both a lot, they just need to be deployed appropriately.
Anyway, it seems we have gone off topic.
EtherRegen v2 for the win!
I looked at the ethernet cables at a local dealer and sorted into most expensive, which was Nordost Valhalla 2 at about £4,000. What amused me is the marketing description could just as easily be applied to a $10 patch cable, with the exception of the unnecessary gold connector.
Some of the nonsense is breathtaking, like cables designed for the demands of servers and DSD256. I have a SSD-fitted QNAP and DSD256 files on a SATA network drive and BJC 6a works perfectly fine. Generic CAT 5e would work perfectly fine.
There seems to be an audio mythology about music being extremely demanding on the network infrastructure. My understanding is that it is quite the opposite - it is generally a very low level signal. What is to be avoided is electrical noise getting into your streamer, whether through the shield, EMI or power supply.
All Ethernet Cables - Ethernet Cables | Futureshop.co.uk
Buy All Ethernet Cables products in All Ethernet Cables - Ethernet Cables - Digital
www.futureshop.co.uk
What follows is not directed at any one manufacturer or specific member/-s of this forum. I’m just trying to portray as best as I can my rather simplistic view on the categorization of switches and other such apparatus, as a means to fight Ethernet transmitted noise and mainly due to their relatively recent proliferation in every shape and size...
I see two major categories emerging for these devices: the first one would include all devices that for lack of a better term are designed and manufactured solely or partly utilizing pre-existing commercial designs, a category which would include all modified and/or re-housed devices, while the second one would include all devices whose design and manufacture is not directly based on any such design.
In the olden days of hi-fi, we would perhaps refer to the first category as the so called “cottage industry”, but since this does not seem entirely accurate these days, when a higher degree of sophistication is usually required to produce anything, I will refrain from using that term exclusively.
However, there should be a clear distinction between them in every conceivable aspect, but especially when designing and manufacturing costs are factored in and that distinction, as it was the rule with the “cottage industry” of yesteryear, should be reflected both in their status positioning and pricing, especially pricing...
However, for reasons mentioned above, this does not happen. Moreover, the distinction itself from a purely sound quality perspective seems rather blurred for two reasons mainly: 1. there is no clear and established methodology that would include all given ethernet use scenarios and 2. the technology itself is evolving and transitioning.
Personally, and that holds true with every audiophile I’ve had this discussion with, my leanings are clearly within the second category but I don’t outright dispel products from the first, especially when their pricing is attractive.
My problem is with products from the first category masquerading as ones belonging to the second and simply cannot justify at this day and age pages upon pages of reading material without a single picture of the insides of any given product!
I also simply find it utterly unacceptable when professional reviewers follow that exact practice! Maybe this would be a good place to let them know that if they crave any sort of credibility, the aforementioned method is one to lose it and not gain it!
I see two major categories emerging for these devices: the first one would include all devices that for lack of a better term are designed and manufactured solely or partly utilizing pre-existing commercial designs, a category which would include all modified and/or re-housed devices, while the second one would include all devices whose design and manufacture is not directly based on any such design.
In the olden days of hi-fi, we would perhaps refer to the first category as the so called “cottage industry”, but since this does not seem entirely accurate these days, when a higher degree of sophistication is usually required to produce anything, I will refrain from using that term exclusively.
However, there should be a clear distinction between them in every conceivable aspect, but especially when designing and manufacturing costs are factored in and that distinction, as it was the rule with the “cottage industry” of yesteryear, should be reflected both in their status positioning and pricing, especially pricing...
However, for reasons mentioned above, this does not happen. Moreover, the distinction itself from a purely sound quality perspective seems rather blurred for two reasons mainly: 1. there is no clear and established methodology that would include all given ethernet use scenarios and 2. the technology itself is evolving and transitioning.
Personally, and that holds true with every audiophile I’ve had this discussion with, my leanings are clearly within the second category but I don’t outright dispel products from the first, especially when their pricing is attractive.
My problem is with products from the first category masquerading as ones belonging to the second and simply cannot justify at this day and age pages upon pages of reading material without a single picture of the insides of any given product!
I also simply find it utterly unacceptable when professional reviewers follow that exact practice! Maybe this would be a good place to let them know that if they crave any sort of credibility, the aforementioned method is one to lose it and not gain it!
Oh dear, so much misinformation being put out there!
The tiny transformer magnetics at EVERY RJ45 Ethernet port in the world DO provide galvanic isolation. (Though some of those magnetics are better than others; most have 6~8 cores, the magnetics in EtherREGEN have 12 cores per port.) These transformers will block DC and low-source-impedance leakage. However, they DO NOT block high-source-impedance AC leakage.
Optical connections of course do block all leakage, but the circuitry in optical SFP transceivers generate their own noise at both ends and some amount of jitter (however small).
[As a footnote aside, since this is not a promotional forum, the--still 100% unique--advantage of the EtherREGEN (and why we have 'A' and 'B' side ports) is our active-differential isolation "moat". Literally high-speed differential digital isolation chips (expensive) sitting across a gap in the PCB.
Data--in SGMII format for Gen2 s we can offer 'B'-side Gigabit in Gen2 (isolators these fast were not available when back in 2018)--flows across this "moat", and clocks in differential format flow back to the 'A' side across another isolator. Following the isolators the data goes directly into our our secret 10GHz-capable ultra-low jitter (just 200 femtoseconds!) reclocking flip-flop. This is where the "magic" happens.]
The tiny transformer magnetics at EVERY RJ45 Ethernet port in the world DO provide galvanic isolation. (Though some of those magnetics are better than others; most have 6~8 cores, the magnetics in EtherREGEN have 12 cores per port.) These transformers will block DC and low-source-impedance leakage. However, they DO NOT block high-source-impedance AC leakage.
Optical connections of course do block all leakage, but the circuitry in optical SFP transceivers generate their own noise at both ends and some amount of jitter (however small).
[As a footnote aside, since this is not a promotional forum, the--still 100% unique--advantage of the EtherREGEN (and why we have 'A' and 'B' side ports) is our active-differential isolation "moat". Literally high-speed differential digital isolation chips (expensive) sitting across a gap in the PCB.
Data--in SGMII format for Gen2 s we can offer 'B'-side Gigabit in Gen2 (isolators these fast were not available when back in 2018)--flows across this "moat", and clocks in differential format flow back to the 'A' side across another isolator. Following the isolators the data goes directly into our our secret 10GHz-capable ultra-low jitter (just 200 femtoseconds!) reclocking flip-flop. This is where the "magic" happens.]
I agree with some of what you say. That said, most people use a switch at some point and the link to advice from Telegartner was in relation to networks with various connecting points.
For shielding, see:
Cat6a Shielded vs. Unshielded: Which Is Better for 10G Cabling? | FS Community
Cat6a Shielded vs. Unshielded, choice depend on your cabling environment and overall budget. Cat6a shielded cable can better handle EMI while Cat6a unshielded are less expensive and easier to install.
I use fibre and short CAT 6A (0.5m or 1m) at either end. No shielding. Pretty standard.
This relates to switches because some switch makers associate their switches to premium price/quality(?) ethernet cables.
Similar threads
