Linn Forums

Current time: 2017-12-16, 06:19 Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Linn Forums / Linn Music Systems & Hi-fi Separates / Network Music Players & Music Streamers v / Chord Cable Co Streaming Cable.

Post Reply 
Chord Cable Co Streaming Cable.
2017-09-30, 20:53 (This post was last modified: 2017-09-30 20:54 by DavidHB.)
Post: #11
RE: Chord Cable Co Streaming Cable.
(2017-09-30 18:38)MikeSpragg Wrote:  The problem is, David, it's not an argument - it's a fact.

Sorry, Mike. It's still an argument, one that says in effect, "these are the facts, and they are all you need to know to understand the issue". I accept that the facts that you adduce are indeed facts. I do not (necessarily) accept that they are the only relevant considerations.

Let's be clear. I am pretty much convinced that the digital data transmitted via Ethernet and TCP/IP is received bit perfect. In the digital domain, systems are more or less impervious to all but the most extreme levels of noise and distortion, because it is quite easy for them to distinguish between the digital data and the analogue artefacts which typically accompany them. Networks are quite noisy in electrical terms, and are normally allowed to be so, because the noise can be prevented from corrupting the digital data.

The problem arises in an audio system when either (1) the artefacts affect timing in some way, and so cause jitter, or (2) some or all of the electrical noise finds its way into the analogue domain. Either or both of these things can occur when the digital data stream remains bit perfect. So the issue is not that the data is corrupted in some way. It is that all the electrical 'stuff' that hitches a ride down the Ethernet cable with the digital data can do bad things downstream if it gets into the analogue domain.

Can changing the network cable make a difference in this situation? In my view, just possibly, though I am inclined to think that there are better ways of suppressing noise (the Katalyst architecture provides a good example). As I explained to timster, it is also necessary to think in system terms and not consider cables separately. Is there any snake oil in the marketing of 'audio quality' network cables? Quite a lot, in my opinion. I haven't seen any marketing literature that convincingly explains the mechanism by which the cable is supposed to work. If, as I suspect, changing cables makes a difference in some systems but not in others, the absence of that explanation is not at all surprising.

All in all, I am somewhat sceptical about the value of special network cables, though not as sceptical as you are. But I am clear that we cannot tell timster that he has cloth ears unless and until we can prove it.

David

Main system: [Basik/Basik+/K5/Lejonklou Gaio >][Roksan Kandy Mk III >] KEDSM > Akurate Exaktbox 10 > Linn Silvers> A4200 x 2 and A2200 > K600 > Akubariks
Second system: Kiko
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-09-30, 21:03
Post: #12
RE: Chord Cable Co Streaming Cable.
(2017-09-30 20:53)DavidHB Wrote:  
(2017-09-30 18:38)MikeSpragg Wrote:  The problem is, David, it's not an argument - it's a fact.

Sorry, Mike. It's still an argument, one that says in effect, "these are the facts, and they are all you need to know to understand the issue". I accept that the facts that you adduce are indeed facts. I do not (necessarily) accept that they are the only relevant considerations.

Let's be clear. I am pretty much convinced that the digital data transmitted via Ethernet and TCP/IP is received bit perfect. In the digital domain, systems are more or less impervious to all but the most extreme levels of noise and distortion, because it is quite easy for them to distinguish between the digital data and the analogue artefacts which typically accompany them. Networks are quite noisy in electrical terms, and are normally allowed to be so, because the noise can be prevented from corrupting the digital data.

The problem arises in an audio system when either (1) the artefacts affect timing in some way, and so cause jitter, or (2) some or all of the electrical noise finds its way into the analogue domain. Either or both of these things can occur when the digital data stream remains bit perfect. So the issue is not that the data is corrupted in some way. It is that all the electrical 'stuff' that hitches a ride down the Ethernet cable with the digital data can do bad things downstream if it gets into the analogue domain.

Can changing the network cable make a difference in this situation? In my view, just possibly, though I am inclined to think that there are better ways of suppressing noise (the Katalyst architecture provides a good example). As I explained to timster, it is also necessary to think in system terms and not consider cables separately. Is there any snake oil in the marketing of 'audio quality' network cables? Quite a lot, in my opinion. I haven't seen any marketing literature that convincingly explains the mechanism by which the cable is supposed to work. If, as I suspect, changing cables makes a difference in some systems but not in others, the absence of that explanation is not at all surprising.

All in all, I am somewhat sceptical about the value of special network cables, though not as sceptical as you are. But I am clear that we cannot tell timster that he has cloth ears unless and until we can prove it.

David

I deliberately cut the quote down to be specific (it’s not an argument about bits/bytes). So, we are (as above) agreed on that. The facts are that the topology isn’t making the difference.

The problem remains insofar as that changing one cable (in this case, ethernet) appears to be making a difference when, in fact, the type of interference alluded to should also travel up through mains cable, speaker cable (back fed), other interconnects etc. Why isn’t this the case ? Why do people claim better when, for the most part, it should be a reduction of other artefacts such as crackle & hum ending up in the speakers, rather than data changes.

If you look at the spec of the c chord - it mentions cable relief (as if squishing the data !) as being a selling point. It ain’t - and I’m sure you’d agree with that. It [/b]mentions nothing about suppression or how it would. It’s this snake oil that maddens me !

Regards, Mike
_______________________________________________________
Klimax DSM, Klimax Chakra 500 Twin, B&W CM8, QNAP TS-879
(6x4TB WD Red), MinimServer, iPad Air, Sneaky DSM w/Magik 109's
Melco N1A
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-09-30, 21:17
Post: #13
RE: Chord Cable Co Streaming Cable.
Some are open to the possibility that all things are not yet understood, some of them also write rather eloquently.
Others can't think beyond a narrow set of facts and bash hard at their keyboard.

Main: AK/0/D; AEDSM; MeiCord AExaktbox10; Silvers 2x A4200/1; K400 NSL Exakt dual-mono PMC Twenty.26; Twenty.C; Blacks AV5125 PMC Twenty.21
Playroom: SBT; V-DAC1; Cyrus6; M773e
Garage: SBT/Rega DAC; Arcam AVR100; 2x AV5125; Aktiv Ninkas, Trikan, AVSeKretan
www.audiophilemusings.co.uk
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-09-30, 21:19
Post: #14
RE: Chord Cable Co Streaming Cable.
(2017-09-30 21:17)sunbeamgls Wrote:  Some are open to the possibility that all things are not yet understood, some of them also write rather eloquently.
Others can't think beyond a narrow set of facts and bash hard at their keyboard.

... and others can’t contribute at all through lack of knowledge but chime in for no reason,

Regards, Mike
_______________________________________________________
Klimax DSM, Klimax Chakra 500 Twin, B&W CM8, QNAP TS-879
(6x4TB WD Red), MinimServer, iPad Air, Sneaky DSM w/Magik 109's
Melco N1A
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-09-30, 21:25
Post: #15
RE: Chord Cable Co Streaming Cable.
This Texas Instruments white paper describes the way that the quality/construction of an ethernet cable and mismatches in terminations can cause an imbalance in the differential signal carried by a twisted pair resulting in the generation of noise within the cable. It goes on to say that the network connector can become a source for radiating that noise into the chassis of the system.

http://www.ti.com/lit/an/snla107a/snla107a.pdf

As this is talking about 'data generated' noise, it's clear that this is different to the sort of common mode noise that might also get picked up by a mains cable. It's describing a mechanism for why Ethernet cables can make a difference to the amount of noise entering a system.

ADSM/1 -> ATC SCM19A's
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-09-30, 21:46
Post: #16
RE: Chord Cable Co Streaming Cable.
(2017-09-30 21:19)MikeSpragg Wrote:  
(2017-09-30 21:17)sunbeamgls Wrote:  Some are open to the possibility that all things are not yet understood, some of them also write rather eloquently.
Others can't think beyond a narrow set of facts and bash hard at their keyboard.

... and others can’t contribute at all through lack of knowledge but chime in for no reason,

The contribution of agreeing with one perspective and not the other was perhaps too subtle. The response strengthens my point.

Main: AK/0/D; AEDSM; MeiCord AExaktbox10; Silvers 2x A4200/1; K400 NSL Exakt dual-mono PMC Twenty.26; Twenty.C; Blacks AV5125 PMC Twenty.21
Playroom: SBT; V-DAC1; Cyrus6; M773e
Garage: SBT/Rega DAC; Arcam AVR100; 2x AV5125; Aktiv Ninkas, Trikan, AVSeKretan
www.audiophilemusings.co.uk
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-09-30, 21:53
Post: #17
RE: Chord Cable Co Streaming Cable.
(2017-09-30 21:46)sunbeamgls Wrote:  
(2017-09-30 21:19)MikeSpragg Wrote:  
(2017-09-30 21:17)sunbeamgls Wrote:  Some are open to the possibility that all things are not yet understood, some of them also write rather eloquently.
Others can't think beyond a narrow set of facts and bash hard at their keyboard.

... and others can’t contribute at all through lack of knowledge but chime in for no reason,

The contribution of agreeing with one perspective and not the other was perhaps too subtle. The response strengthens my point.

But, what was the point? To prove you’re an intellectual wordsmith ? Bravo, you win the internet.

Regards, Mike
_______________________________________________________
Klimax DSM, Klimax Chakra 500 Twin, B&W CM8, QNAP TS-879
(6x4TB WD Red), MinimServer, iPad Air, Sneaky DSM w/Magik 109's
Melco N1A
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-09-30, 22:13
Post: #18
RE: Chord Cable Co Streaming Cable.
(2017-09-30 21:53)MikeSpragg Wrote:  
(2017-09-30 21:46)sunbeamgls Wrote:  
(2017-09-30 21:19)MikeSpragg Wrote:  
(2017-09-30 21:17)sunbeamgls Wrote:  Some are open to the possibility that all things are not yet understood, some of them also write rather eloquently.
Others can't think beyond a narrow set of facts and bash hard at their keyboard.

... and others can’t contribute at all through lack of knowledge but chime in for no reason,

The contribution of agreeing with one perspective and not the other was perhaps too subtle. The response strengthens my point.

But, what was the point? To prove you’re an intellectual wordsmith ? Bravo, you win the internet.

OK. Lets make it simple. I agree with David's view that there is probably more going on than the successful delivery of 1s and 0s. And I don't agree with an opposing view that only considers a narrow set of facts as if other facts might not be a possibility.
And the response assumed my level of knowledge, thus demonstrating that a complete understanding of all the facts is not important before reaching a conclusion, for some.
That's not a competition to win something, its just an opinion.

Main: AK/0/D; AEDSM; MeiCord AExaktbox10; Silvers 2x A4200/1; K400 NSL Exakt dual-mono PMC Twenty.26; Twenty.C; Blacks AV5125 PMC Twenty.21
Playroom: SBT; V-DAC1; Cyrus6; M773e
Garage: SBT/Rega DAC; Arcam AVR100; 2x AV5125; Aktiv Ninkas, Trikan, AVSeKretan
www.audiophilemusings.co.uk
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-09-30, 22:20 (This post was last modified: 2017-09-30 22:36 by DavidHB.)
Post: #19
RE: Chord Cable Co Streaming Cable.
Before I respond directly to Mike, I need to come clean on one point. There is a Chord C-stream cable in my system. It serves as the 'umbilical' between my KEDSM and my Akruate Exaktbox 10. Does it improve the sound of the system compared with a bog standard Cat 5 cable? I have no idea.

Why, then, did I install it? (1) I was making a major investment - the upgrade to Exakt. (2) Sunbeam had reported that using that cable fixed an issue in his system, which had a similar specification to mine. (3) I was installing the cable under the carpet and did not want to change it any time soon. (4) The cost of the cable, which is one of Chord's less outrageously priced products, was small in comparison to the total investment. In other words, I installed the cable for risk management rather than sound quality reasons.

On with the response.

(2017-09-30 21:03)MikeSpragg Wrote:  The problem remains insofar as that changing one cable (in this case, ethernet) appears to be making a difference when, in fact, the type of interference alluded to should also travel up through mains cable, speaker cable (back fed), other interconnects etc. Why isn’t this the case ? Why do people claim better when, for the most part, it should be a reduction of other artefacts such as crackle & hum ending up in the speakers, rather than data changes.

Thinking in system terms, all connectors and cables in audio and other electronic systems create issues of one kind or another. There are in fact specialist cables for all the applications you mention, and, as my signature makes clear, I use some of them, but not others. Every one of these decisions was made in terms of benefit to the whole system versus cost. I apply the same logic in relation to Ethernet connections, which is why I still use standard patch cables from my (Cat 6 wired) wall sockets to the DSM, switches, NAS and computer.

There is also the somewhat obvious point that different power and signal leads connect to different points in the circuitry of the attached device, and therefore are prone to different kinds and degrees of problems. In relation to Ethernet, it is a fact that Ethernet cables are typically not shielded. Whether, in an audio context, they should be or not is a controversial issue. I tend to favour the use of shielding in high risk environments (where large numbers of power and signal leads are in close proximity, for example), but that's just my view. (Chord on their website, incidentally, make shielding sound like some kind of magic holiness, which is pretty typical if the guff they put out - see below).

I'm disappointed that you still mention data changes. I thought we were clear that the integrity of the data is almost certainly not in question here, and that any claim to the contrary should be regarded with great scepticism.

(2017-09-30 21:03)MikeSpragg Wrote:  If you look at the spec of the c chord - it mentions cable relief (as if squishing the data !) as being a selling point. It ain’t - and I’m sure you’d agree with that. It [/b]mentions nothing about suppression or how it would. It’s this snake oil that maddens me !

The Chord product descriptions on the website are almost completely lacking in real technical content, patronising and, frankly, sick-making. They offer virtually no cost/benefit justification of the product. I have found almost nothing on that site that might induce me to buy a Chord Cable product. But for Sunbeam's report, I probably would not have done so.

David

Main system: [Basik/Basik+/K5/Lejonklou Gaio >][Roksan Kandy Mk III >] KEDSM > Akurate Exaktbox 10 > Linn Silvers> A4200 x 2 and A2200 > K600 > Akubariks
Second system: Kiko
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
2017-09-30, 22:21
Post: #20
RE: Chord Cable Co Streaming Cable.
(2017-09-30 22:13)sunbeamgls Wrote:  
(2017-09-30 21:53)MikeSpragg Wrote:  
(2017-09-30 21:46)sunbeamgls Wrote:  
(2017-09-30 21:19)MikeSpragg Wrote:  
(2017-09-30 21:17)sunbeamgls Wrote:  Some are open to the possibility that all things are not yet understood, some of them also write rather eloquently.
Others can't think beyond a narrow set of facts and bash hard at their keyboard.

... and others can’t contribute at all through lack of knowledge but chime in for no reason,

The contribution of agreeing with one perspective and not the other was perhaps too subtle. The response strengthens my point.

But, what was the point? To prove you’re an intellectual wordsmith ? Bravo, you win the internet.

OK. Lets make it simple. I agree with David's view that there is probably more going on than the successful delivery of 1s and 0s. And I don't agree with an opposing view that only considers a narrow set of facts as if other facts might not be a possibility.
And the response assumed my level of knowledge, thus demonstrating that a complete understanding of all the facts is not important before reaching a conclusion, for some.
That's not a competition to win something, its just an opinion.

Let's make it really simple. The facts speak for themselves - there is nothing going on that can be proven beyond theory & personal opinion. Therefore, the narrow opinion (of mine) is still perfectly valid (as is yours) until proven otherwise - which you have to agree with. It's the basis of most sciences (homeopathy excluded).

I expanded, if you notice, on where else this may exist. It wasn't a straight "nope". Yet, truculently, you disposed if my theory because it didn't agree with yours. Simple as.

Regards, Mike
_______________________________________________________
Klimax DSM, Klimax Chakra 500 Twin, B&W CM8, QNAP TS-879
(6x4TB WD Red), MinimServer, iPad Air, Sneaky DSM w/Magik 109's
Melco N1A
Find all posts by this user
Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 


Forum Jump:


User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)