Will a Cat7 give me better SQ?

Hej Fredrik,  I think the answer is it depends - on your ears & your system & if you believe an ethernet cable actually has a sound.  IMO a low spec cable can introduce noise & other effects that degrade SQ, whereas a Cat6 or Cat7 has a higher & tighter spec & in theory at least should be able to give better SQ.

When I was planning to get a network player I chose Supra Cat7+ because I had the impression it sounded better than a no name Cat something,  but I listened on a friends Linn system.  We compared it at the same time with other Cat7 & I did not detect a difference that I was that sure about.

I have not changed the Supra since I installed my NDX so its hard to say.  But as it happens,  last night I installed a 1m length of Cat5e to experiment with the effects of grounding or not grounding Cat7 & there was a difference - not a good v bad, just different, but was it the effects of the ground v no ground or the cable, I don't know.  (see my recent posts on the grounding subject)

Regarding Supra Cat7+  it is for sure a high performing cable, its 1300MHz bandwidth is way more than needed for our systems,  but no harm in having it.  But its not the prettiest cable & it does not bend as freely as some others.  I would keep that in mind at least.   

I broadly agree with Mike's comments.

Unlike analogue or S/PDIF signals, the music signal in a network isn't real-time.  Unless the data transmission is faulty, the data signal doesn't affect the sound.  However, the cables do affect the way the system responds to RFI, and that does affect the sound.

The minimum spec of cable for an audio network is Cat5 as Ethernet streamers use 100Base-T for their data standard, however cables of higher category tend to be more precisely made and this can give better RFI rejection.

I note that you haven't said what your storage system and UPnP server are or how it's connected.

Some people have found the Apple Airport system to limit sound quality, and this may well be more of a limitation than the Cat6 cable.  It's possible that the Airport system introduces a certain amount of interference into the audio system through the connecting cables.

The other point about cables Cat6a and above is that they tend to be shielded (STP, SSTP, SFTP), this again can help reduce RFI, provided that the shields are properly terminated.  On the other hand, the problem with shielded cables is the possibility of earth loops.  Do you know if you have much RF either conducted down the mains or through EMI?  If so fixing this will be of considerable benefit, but this does mean getting it right.

Many Apple Airport Extremes in use here in the woods - no limit on sound quality as far as I can see.

Cat 6 - switch - server 

Tog

No Airport Extreme since his died.  He now has 3x Airport Express, with some connections wireless.  Without precise details it's impossible to be certain what's best for improvement - hence my 'generic' rather than specific suggestions.

I have no idea what this is about.  Do you mean in comparison to other wi fi solutions, or a wi fi vs. wired comparison, or . . . ?? 

Take it in context of the original question.

...Compared to a wired connection - to whit Cat7 (or others!).

Thank you for your replies.

Here's my total network chain

Telia ADSL modem & Synology DS411 NAS - Cat 6 UTP - Main AirPort Express - Wi-Fi - AirPort Express Repeater/AP - Cat 6 STP - UQ2

Main AirPort Express - Wi-Fi - AirPort Express AP - Cat 6 STP - Zyxel ES105A - Cat 6 STP - Uniti2

I'm to replace my broken AirPort Extreme with a new one just waiting to see if Apple releases a new one together with the next iPhone or iPad.

Just to make my self clear: I will keep the wireless connections as they are.

Ah, thanks for the clarification.

If you have to keep the wireless, then the Apple solution is better than generic WiFi, so I think the only two things you need to check

First is the possibility of earth loops

1  between the Airport Express and the UQ2

2  between the Airport Express, the ZyXEL switch, and U2

Second is the possibility of RFI

1  the cables connected the UQ2 and U2 (except speaker cables)

2  the SMPS

Huge, what are you referring to as 'generic' wifi? Apple wifi implementations certainly can have issues when you are trying to do certain things.

For streaming (UPnP/DLNA and Airplay) the area of support that can be troublesome is multicast data, and Apple and many other quality wifi access points support this.

However Its with the area of bundled wifi, as with bundled switches, that with some cheap broadband access routers where there appear to sometimes be  implementation  issues with multicast. Is it these cheap bundled wifi access points you are referring to as 'generic'?

Thanks

Simon

Yes. I use the term loosely for systems based on the IEEE802.11.g equipment delivered in bundles with a broadband package (usually the cheapest thing the broadband provider can source).  In addition to the quality of the equipment itself (and the attendant RFI problems), the 2.4MHz band usually has more contention issues than the 5MHz band that's often only supported by better equipment.  I've just also realised that I should have actually specified the Airport Extreme over the Airport Express).

Form other reports on here I get the impression that the Apple equipment may be creating fewer RFI issues for users, but this is just an impression garnered from other's posts, not based on hard fact.

I used the term 'generic' to avoid any perceived insult (which is specifically not intended).

You're an M short of a G 

Simon, (and with apologies to the OP for a hijack)

May I ask a point of detail about switches (for the config guide I'm writing)?

My understanding is:

L2 Unmanaged - passes Broadcast data packets to all active ports, but 'learns' to pass data packets that specify an endpoint only to the port where that endpoint is connected.

L3 Managed - allows the network admin to specify which classes of data packet (selectable using both Layer 2 and Layer 3 characteristics) are passed to which port.  Is the programming done by port, by endpoint ID or by either?

(I know L2 Managed also exist, but for this use they seem to be a less good compromise - they still need programming, but don't offer identification of packets on Layer 3 criteria).

Are these correct?  I tend to understand principles for a lot of stuff, but when it comes to specifics I often need to seek advice from those who really know in depth!

Huge - might be better to progress over in padded cell

<ACK>