Ethernet set up

Provided its all neat and that the socket behind the NDX is properly terminated with the right punch down tool, you have a perfect set up.

Plug in your new ethernet lead and marvel at how the last metre has cost more than the rest of the network hah!

I may be showing my ignorance here but I struggle to see how the addition of an 'expensive' patch lead between the socket and the NDX can improve the SQ. It is surely impossible for said lead to improve the signal from the socket and the impact of any further loss would, I presume, be minimal. Would it not be a better solution to place the Chord between the NAS and socket?

To be honest, in that scenario I don't think it would be better at all but if anything it should be closer to the source.

Thanks everyone, one of the reasons I've not installed the c stream lead yet is I'm trying to figure out how to "blind test" it to see if there is anything to be gained (it's only the 40 quid one I hasten to add). Chord Company did a very convincing demo at Bristol this year. Just wanted to be sure my basic Ethernet set up was ok. John

I use Audioquest leads, which are a big improvement over a standard lead. You should use your Chord between the wall socket and the NDX, as that's where it will make the greatest difference. Just plug it in and see if you like what it does. The improvement should be obvious, and if it's not, take the lead back to the shop.

Why not try it in both positions - wall to NDX - & - NAS to Router(Switch)

Then your ears will tell you - if indeed you can actually hear any difference

The Chord C Stream is not expensive in the rarefied world of Chord cables at £40 for 0.75m, & maybe buying another to do both ends is worth considering.  But I am a little skeptical about adding such a cable - especially such a short length - to the end of 12m of basic Cat6. I suspect the NAS-Router connection might bring the better result. 

Mike

That's exactly what I am saying. I just can't see how putting an expensive cable on the end of the cable route can make a substantial difference, it can't improve the signal. It makes much more sense, albeit not a lot in my view, at the start of the 'route'. I'm sorry but the suggestion that it should be returned if there is no audible improvement is nonsensical. Logic suggests there won't be.

Logic is no substitute for ears on experience.  You will either hear a difference or you won't. And if in doubt, classify it as don't. Postulating what other people might or might not hear is futile. This is HiFi, after all!

I will declare my own interest by saying that despite initial scepticism (put on hold by the offer of a home trial) I heard a difference. As I did with a network isolator but which I don't for different types of switches or any ferrite chokes. Unlike the network isolator which I thought flattened the music, I found AQ Vodka to be revealing of more detail and tightening up the timing. Not much, but enough to justify (to me) the outlay. I've never heard two digital interconnects which sound the same either. Could be that I'm just selectively (or randomly) gullible and fanciful. But I can hear a difference with Ethernet cables and that's where it ends for me. There will be a reason somewhere. But I don't care what it is.

The effect or lack of one is a very easy thing to test. The results are bound to be in a normal distribution but there is really no excuse for sitting back and saying "I don't believe it" without going out (or getting some in) and hearing for yourself. It's easy.

Harry

Your points are sensible and well made. However, I was not suggesting that there is no difference between ethernet cables or that an individual would not be able to hear such a difference.

Given that the sole purpose of an ethernet cable is to transmit the signal from NAS to Steamer then it seems to me that it follows that if more expensive cables do improve the sound then the only way this is achieved is that the more expensive and (hopefully) better constructed cable allows a lesser degradation of the signal in transmission. If we accept this premise then it should be possible to hear sonic improvement with better cable.

However, given the above, it also follows that a length of patched cable will only be as effective as it's weakest link. So in JohnL's case if the 'bog standard' lead from the NAS to the first socket is the weakest then the addition of a Chord cable to the end of the chain will only ensure that the signal is not degraded any further, it cannot improve it. If the Cat cabling is the weakest link then the situation is possibly worse because of it's length (assuming length of cable increases potential degradation).

Accordingly, the addition of 1 Chord cable at the end of the Cat cabling may make a very minor difference given that you are only preventing further signal degradation in the last metre or so of the signal path. The addition of 2 at either end of the Cat cable may make a more substantial difference assuming that the 'bog standard' cable is the weakest link. If you are a billionaire then cabling with Chord throughout clearly has the potential to make most difference.

The only really argument I have seen here for ethernet 'sounding' better is from Simon who suggests it might be to do with RFI. 

I think we all agreed however a competently made cable will do the job and a metre one in my experience is around 4 quid.

The reality is, we are men. Cables are shiny. The reality is putting a shiny cable on the NAS in the other room, well thats just not as cool as having it connected to your shiny shiny in the living room. All shiny together.

Some people even put the nas in the music room. All shiny together

Just some more thoughts to keep the pot stirred 

I first listened to different Ethernet cables a short while ago. It was with a small group on a Linn based system specifically to find if we collectively could hear a difference. We changed between the owner’s installed cable to some loose patch cord lengths of 3m or 8m between switch & player (NAS to switch had 12m of screened Cat6 into another room)   

I heard a difference between Cat5 & the various Cat7’s, but could not hear a change that I could be that sure about between the various Cat7’s.  It was maybe ?? maybe not,   but I picked Supra Cat7a for my pref.

Further to putting a more up-spec cable on the end of 12m of standard Cat6.

I read that many cables do not meet the Cat spec in typical installed conditions & not wishing to call Maplin into question, but does it actually meet the spec, were is the data sheet & mnft name  – but that said, so what if it doesn't? 

Another concern is the Chord C Stream is Cat7 & screened, I am concerned about hanging a length of screened cable out on the end of an un-screened line, does it do anything & more important does it, as an isolated & unconnected screen,  attract rather than reject RFI.   

I’ve got Cat7 but it’s a continuous screen NAS-Switch-NDX & the switch is grounded, I tried both open & grounded but couldn't hear any change, so I left it grounded. 

" it seems to me that it follows that if more expensive cables do improve the sound then the only way this is achieved is that the more expensive and (hopefully) better constructed cable allows a lesser degradation of the signal in transmission. If we accept this premise"

You are interpreting your own premise too narrowly, transmission also involves the signal crossing the joints between cable and sockets. 

My own hypothesis is that a lot of the last metre effects reported are down to better terminations improving signal transmission at these critical points and this would suggest each junction you improve will improve the SQ. 

If a one metre Powerline can make such a difference on the end of miles of electricity transmission, I don't see why a fancy Ethernet cable can't have a similar effect. 

Powerlines are very shiny though aren't they? 

Olly