1. Home
  2. cables
  3. 195218-198226

How can different CAT5/6 cables affect sound.

While is is beyond doubt that analog cables affect sound quality and SPDIF, TOSlink and AES/EBU can effect SQ, depending on the buffering and clocking of the DAC, I am at a loss to find an explanation for how different CAT5 cables can affect the sound.

The signals over cat5 are transmitted using the TCP protocol.  This protocol is error correcting, each packet contains a header with a checksum.  If the receiver gets the same checksum then it acknowledges the packet.  If no acknowledgement is received in the timeout interval the sender resends the packet.  Packets may be received out of order and the receiver must correctly sequence the packets.

Thus, unless the cable is hopeless (in which case nothing works) the receiver has an exact copy of the data sent from the sender, AND there is NO timing information associated with TCP. The receiver must then be dependent on its internal clock for timing. 

That is different with SPDIF, clocking data is included in the stream, that is why sources (e.g. high end Aurenders) have very accurate and low jitter OCXO clocks and can sound better then USB connections into DACs with less precise clocks.

Am I missing something as many people hear differences with different patch cords?

retiredaudioguy
Post removed 
sns
4,218 posts
 

Per usual arguments (from the above link), theory and measurements vs subjective listening. I've tried many ethernet cables and lengths over the years and I hear differences with certain cables. So am I to believe the science or trust my senses. The measurement crowd will say my senses are not to be trusted, expectation bias clouding my senses. Usual retort is sometimes science hasn't yet formulated the right questions to ask, in other words fails to devise measurement protocol to account for what we hear. And then we go around and around ad nauseam. 

 

In the end, on this one I go with trusting my senses.  As for sound differences, I've only experienced issues with tonal balance (highs attenuated), this probably has to do with improper or excessive shielding. The only other change has to do with resolution/transparency, I've found silver content to be important for digital cables, the higher the silver content the better. Anyone reporting changes in something like timbre is imagining things.

 

In the final analysis, both sides free to present their arguments, up to the individual to choose who to believe. 

rick_n's avatar
rick_n
482 posts
 

I don't pretend to understand the science.  I was running an entry level Ethernet cable from my router to my streamer (about a 12' run) and just for fun decided to get a very high quality and much more expensive cable.  I got a noticeable improvement in the sound.  More smooth and pleasing sound.  To me it was worth the cost of the premium cable so I kept it and it's still in the system.  Just my 2c

Post removed 
devinplombier
1,673 posts
 

Once, one of those I-trust-my-ears guys was going on about how he didn’t like the sound of fibre Ethernet cables:

He claimed they sounded "glassy".

Glassy as in... fibre? Fiber? Fiberglass?? You can’t make that up.

@retiredaudioguy to answer your question, no, you are not missing anything - any components, cables, tweaks, etc. in the Ethernet chain (that is, everything upstream of the network streamer) have zero bearing on sound quality; because, as you correctly stated, the TCP protocol itself is error-free.

So error-free, as a matter of fact, that your streamed music travelled thousands of miles from Qobuz or Tidal servers, through countless data farms from which twee audiophile accoutrements are conspicuously absent, yet arrived at your home thoroughly unscathed and without a single bit out of place.

It is still advisable to use SFP (fiber) for the last run of cable into the streamer, to ensure proper galvanic isolation of the audio system.

At the risk, of course, of making it sound "glassy"! 😂🤣🤣

 

More to discover