Quote:
Originally Posted by W9TR
The whole Ethernet PHY layer discussion is an interesting one with audiophile routers and cabling now becoming more popular and widespread.
Suffice it to say the data gets there no matter what cable and router you use because TCP/IP is a handshake protocol.
What’s not apparent to me is the effects of EMI/RFI and device to device grounding and isolation that can vary based on the PHY implementation of the router/cables/devices. Lots of variables there. Good news is the Ethernet PHY is already transformer coupled and isolated by design, thereby eliminating a lot of potential issues out of the gate.
Far be it from me to comment or denigrate someone’s auditory experience with Ethernet components*.
Their experience is indeed their own, and to say these components don’t or can’t improve someone’s auditory experience is an statement that only they can answer, because it is personal.
*You can substitute lots of things for Ethernet components, like vibration isolation, speaker cables, interconnects, USB reclockers, analog power supplies, Tice Clocks, etc. The list is very long. The arguments for and against are tedious.
The only thing you can really say is that, to my ears, in my system, changing these components either did or did not make an audible difference to me.
That’s the kind of discourse that makes this forum unique and a good place to hang out.
Tom
|
Hence why I said I respect everyone’s opinion, because it is indeed personal.
The fact that the listener can “hear” a difference is truly subjective, whether factual or not.
IMO, the only reason you are seeing more audiophile routers and Ethernet cables bcomng more and more prevalent is the widespread acceptance and growth of digital. I think many audiophiles out there don’t fully understand certain technologies, and wishful upgrading ensues.
At the end of the day...it is an obvious personal choice, so do whatever makes you happy!
