Wifi vs hardwired for streaming

I am using a Netgear Orbi mesh network.  I compared it to direct ethernet and cannot hear any difference.

If you want a better experience overall --for network and streaming-- use fiber. It is relatively inexpensive and there is no EMI along the run, and if your streamer accepts fiber you will not be conveying the noise into that audio device.  If you have a wired or wireless network, spend the 50$ to convert the last leg using a media converter such as:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B09P8DN3HJ?ref=ppx_yo2ov_dt_b_fed_asin_title

 ...Along with (as long as you need) single mode fiber cable.  Some streamers now accept SM fiber, so you would only need one media converter, not two.  If your streamer only accepts ethernet, buy a ***short***  quality piece (less than $50 by far) and segregate it from any other electrical/electronic cables. 

This will make a phenomenal difference that is better and cheaper than anything else you can do to your network.  You certainly do not need expensive switches, the internet protocols your streamer uses will guarantee that the data arrives as it was sent.. and the noise that would be introduced into your system will be stopped at the point of the media converter.  

Why does this work?

1) Because the data is the data and the protocols will guarantee its arrival without alteration - or failure.  If you have a poor connection, it just means you will encounter more retransmissions but the data will be the data as it was sent. You can interrogate your router or terminal digital point for retransmissions and errors - if you encounter more than a few, check all your connections inside your network path. Chances are your wireless will have more than your copper ethernet simply due to radio clutter.

2) Because you are limiting the noise that accompanies the digital connection INTO your audio streamer where it ***may*** introduce EM noise.

There is absolutely no need for special $900 ethernet cables or absurd switches etc if you convert the last leg to fiber. There is no need to obsessively upgrade every piece of network gear and media with ridiculous and expensive storytelling:

The data is the data as sent. There either is additional noise on the line or there isn't. It is the noise that is the issue, not the data. If you do not understand networking theory and practice, have an expert explain the same thing to you. Otherwise, feel free and spend money on things that will not make anywhere as much difference as this $50 fix.

As @vicweast says, fiber is inexpensive and noise-free, it’s also slim and easy to route. However, the back conversion from optical to electrical (in the SFP transceiver) generates its own noise, so it’s not exactly ideal to do this inside the streamer. A lot of people who have a streamer with SFP port find they prefer the sound when they do this conversion outside the streamer ina separate FMC and have a short (ideally 2ft/0.5m) run of unshielded cable like Cat 6 to the RJ45 port on the same streamer. It doesn’t cost a fortune to buy a separate FMC and try this.

Cat-6 can be both shielded (STP) or unshielded (UTP). Patch cords usually are shielded. 
 

@pcolvin @nigeltheflash 

The literature and other content on this topic is probably in its infancy. The basic problem is that few audiophiles actually understand the network layer and the electrical properties of the media and the analog transmission of digital bits.  Surely we all grasp that what is being transmitted are "1"s and "0"s, but it the "HOW" that is the key when it comes to minimizing or eliminating co-transmitted analog noise with that digital content. Good luck getting a coherent and through understanding of that.  First, the network guys (unless they are national security) don't care as long as the connection passes testing/verification.  The data is good, the error rate is low, the retransmits are low, ...All is good they would say.  But we are audio guys and we are hardly ever electrical engineers who understand the analog noise co-transmitted with the digital content.  And who does?  As I said, probably in the early days of understanding the limits of removing that analog noise... The last leg conversion to fiber demonstrably improves the situation remarkably -- but does it get everything? DO these devices themselves need "innovation"? I think yes...