Audiophile Network Cables..... REALLY...REALLY!

[Orb]

Out of interest how many here do use some kind of ethernet streaming solution and if so do you use reasonably quality switches with dedicated router or everything going into the router-hub, combination of hubs-routers, multiple devices on the network (maybe also the TV), WLAN/wired?

Would be interesting to know how most domestic home LANs are setup.
Cheers
Orb

[chessman]

I simply connect devices via CAT 6 to the modem or to the router.

[Orb]

Thanks Chessman,
I get the feeling your setup is probably the standard done by most.
Thanks again.
Orb

[crwilli]

I am using WIFI to connect my streamer to my network. No cables.

[Still-One]

No switches. My MC200 and 808 endpoint are hardwired direct to my Timecapsule. I do have a MS200 endpoint connected to a Airport Express that connects wirelessly to my network.

[blacsno]

Originally Posted by Orb

Out of interest how many here do use some kind of ethernet streaming solution and if so do you use reasonably quality switches with dedicated router or everything going into the router-hub, combination of hubs-routers, multiple devices on the network (maybe also the TV), WLAN/wired?

Would be interesting to know how most domestic home LANs are setup.
Cheers
Orb

Standard LAN setup cat5 cables, router, and 8 port hub. Wi-Fi is used only for phone and tablet.

[crwilli]

Originally Posted by Still-One

Don't worry. As a group we can start forwarding all of our robo calls and other non-essential messages directly to you. You will quickly become very popular.

Not sure how to take that. Seems like a threat.

[Still-One]

Originally Posted by crwilli

Not sure how to take that. Seems like a threat.

I thought I was quoting another post but it was in the Phone thread. I have no idea how it ended up in this thread. Sorry.

[doggiehowser]

Before I get taken to be a crazy voodoo worshipper, here's my take.

Ethernet can be used in a variety of ways.

If you use DLNA which uses UDP, then yes: I believe the cable can make a difference. To put it simply, this is a real time transmission not dissimilar to SPDIF transmission.

If you use Ethernet for a computer like a Mac Mini to read off a NAS - then no, I don't believe the Ethernet will make a noticeable difference - because the usual TCP protocols apply.

[Orb]

Originally Posted by doggiehowser

Before I get taken to be a crazy voodoo worshipper, here's my take.

Ethernet can be used in a variety of ways.

If you use DLNA which uses UDP, then yes: I believe the cable can make a difference. To put it simply, this is a real time transmission not dissimilar to SPDIF transmission.

If you use Ethernet for a computer like a Mac Mini to read off a NAS - then no, I don't believe the Ethernet will make a noticeable difference - because the usual TCP protocols apply.

Agreed but to expand further it still can actually be either TCP or UDP with regards to Mac Mini, just depends how one sets up the system and what it is connecting to. pulling/pushing,etc.
The one issue with TCP is that it utilises both retransmit and time-out settings, while also using dynamic window and 'bandwidth' utilised.
Great if on a fast minimal shared network where one can pull the data in massive chunks that can be buffered while still pulling.
It can fall down on the slower wireless LAN hubs and slower wired hubs though, but more to do with hirez rather than CD.
Anyway it can (more likely with hubs/wifi) create a situation of greater latency and buffer considerations, when going with TCP.

Also this is compounded by the home setup, and is exacerbated when not using switches due to contention-collision of using the network, which is still applicable to router-hubs even if they are wireless.
On top of this it is worth noting the overhead beyond data packets, which means roughly only 70% of the ethernet capability can be used.
This is important if when using devices (not laptops/desktops as they should be 100BASE-T these days with their cards) that are only 10BASE-T or WLAN based upon 2.4GHz band (this limits to a theoretical throughput of 31Mbit/s but in reality will be much less due to packet overhead, not being ideal signal quality,signal strength, shared-collision (CSMA-CD) and possible contention with other wireless devices-APs in the area, and in fact these devices do not even need to be traditional WLAN related as this is a shared band with other domestic wireless devices/microwaves so interference can and does happen.
This is made worst that most setups of WLAN is very dynamic in how it adjusts its throughput based on some of those variables above.

For lossy music files the above is probably not worthy of note, but it is possibly when going to CD quality and especially higher.
Lossless Hirez 96khz requires a throughput of 4.6Mbits/s, that then is expanded by network overheads; calculation is 96,000 * 24 (bit depth of the music) * 2 (stereo using two channel).
Another consideration for that throughput is if it utilises multiple devices to stream that music; more likely I guess with WLAN but as a crude example could be NAS to MacBook to wireless player such as a Devialet product.

So comes down to knowing what is sharing the potential to transmit data at the same time over same resources (why a switch is sometimes ideal as it gives dedicated ethernet to each cabled device).
Cheers
Orb