This may initially sound a bit geeky, but that's not really the point.
When I started streaming, I discovered that the network should only be earthed at one point for optimum performance. So following good advice I got a plastic 90 degree adaptor that broke the earth where the ethernet cable attached to the nas. All good. Then a couple of years later I got some swanky ethernet cables, and kept using the adaptor. I investigated how the earthing of the cables worked and found that the cables don't have the earth connected at both ends. So the adaptor shouldn't make a difference....
So, I tried swapping the adaptor in and out and convinced myself that the adaptor made the music smoother and more enjoyable. I'd play a few tracks, remove the adaptor and play them again. The sound seemed worse without it - a bit harsher and more shouty. So that's how I left it.
Then a couple of weeks ago - about nine months later - I got to thinking - there is a £300 wire with a £5 plastic adaptor on the end....
So rather than swapping between 'with adaptor ' and 'without adaptor' and listening for changes I just took it out, went out for the day and started just listening to music in the evening. And, two weeks on, it's better, in that the music is more engaging and draws you in more. It doesn't sound shouty or harsh at all.
So it's a totally different conclusion to that which I drew from quick A/B comparisons. I know that when auditioning speakers that you need to try each for a good few days before drawing conclusions, and that rapid switching is just confusing. So I wasn't practicing what I preach, and that now I've applied the logic to the network issues, I've worked out what really is best. So a free upgrade for me and another lesson learned.
Posted on: 24 August 2017 by nigelb
Geeky maybe, but useful information, certainly. I too have followed the same advice by reducing the ethernet earth/drain points to one by inserting the isolating Lindy adapter. This is because, like you, I use Audioquest Cinnamon and Vodka ethernet cables that all carry an earthing screen and by definition, earth at all connection points giving 'too many' earthing points. Hopefully Mike B will chime in if I have got the theory wrong.
Like you, at the time I did this I 'believed' the adapter gave some very subtle improvement, but the power of placebo may have played a part.
May i ask if you have made any significant changes to either your system components or your ethernet LAN between the time you first inserted the adapter and now?
Posted on: 24 August 2017 by hungryhalibut
Ah, the Lindy is exposed.... since getting it a couple of years ago I've switched to AudioQuest Vodka wires and a Cisco 2960 pro switch. But the point of the thread was not the geeky stuff, it's about not making decisions on the back of quick A/B comparisons - something I know but did not follow. Since removing the £5 plastic item the system is audibly better. Much more lively and engaging, to an extent that has surprised me.
Posted on: 24 August 2017 by Gazza
Could it be that you were in a good mood after a nice day out, and found it more agreeable without the adaptor and you then continued and got used to it. Whatever, the reason as long as you are happy, that's all that counts.
Posted on: 24 August 2017 by nigelb
I agree, quick A/B comparisons can lead you astray. I hate evaluating a new bit of kit. Listening to the same tracks two, three or four times is boring, requires much concentration and has it limitations as a tool for evaluating/comparing kit. It does however give a direct comparison as long as it is not rushed or done over too short a period.
I tend to steer a middle path and generate about 20 test tracks that I know well of different genres and containing different musical/vocal challenges for a system so I don't get too bored with the process and kit being tested/compared has a proper chance to show all their capabilities and shortfalls.
But with a £5 bit of plastic, who can be ar*ed with a full-blown test. Like you I probably made a snap judgement and I was probably also swayed by the technical advice. I do intend to do a bit more testing with and without the Lindy adapter as I too may find something new. Just out of interest I too have employed a Cisco 2960 switch since I first tried the Lindy adapter, although I think I did have my Vodka ethernet cables already installed at that time.
Posted on: 25 August 2017 by Mike-B
Remember the Lindy adapter was only intended to achieve a one point ethernet shield earth/ground at the time, nothing to do with SQ. I've since changed my Cat-7A (STP) to Cat-6 (UTP) & no longer have an ethernet shield to earth. I initially kept the the Lindy in place as it made the cable dressing better, but being a bit geekier than most & was concerned that the purpose designed RJ45 plugs of my new ethernets are maybe compromised with the Lindy & I removed it, but did not bother testing/comparing SQ.
Posted on: 25 August 2017 by Mike-B
Another point (question) to both Nigels; there was a thread about AQ Vodka shield connected to the RJ45 outer casings at both ends. I did not stay interested as it seemed to be going nowhere, but was it ever finalised (proven) how the AQ Vodka shield is connected. ?? If the Vodka does have a floating end on the shield, then the Lindy (UTP) is not required.
Posted on: 25 August 2017 by Mike1951
Following my signal dropout issue, which turned out to be entirely a WISP fault, I had a "what if" thought.
So I upgraded to a Cat7 ethernet cable and decided I'd spent money well.
It was only a quick test with one very familiar track (Brand X - "Rhesus Perplexus") but the improvement was obvious, in all the usual things where you hear improvements...
Posted on: 25 August 2017 by hungryhalibut
Another point (question) to both Nigels; there was a thread about AQ Vodka shield connected to the RJ45 outer casings at both ends. I did not stay interested as it seemed to be going nowhere, but was it ever finalised (proven) how the AQ Vodka shield is connected. ?? If the Vodka does have a floating end on the shield, then the Lindy (UTP) is not required.
Hi Mike
I tested the shield with a meter and it does float at one end. But - I thought - I still preferred the sound with the Lindy, based on quick listens. Of course, electrically it makes no difference.
The point of the thread is that quick switches led to one conclusion, whereas sustained listening seems to lead to another. Perhaps others are less easily confused.
Posted on: 25 August 2017 by Mike-B
I tested the shield with a meter and it does float at one end. But - I thought - I still preferred the sound with the Lindy, based on quick listens. Of course, electrically it makes no difference.
The point of the thread is that quick switches led to one conclusion, whereas sustained listening seems to lead to another. Perhaps others are less easily confused.
Hi Nigel, yes indeed I had not lost the point of your post over hasty conclusions; however at that time of the Lindy UTP shield break threads I thought you had AQ Cinnamon which I'm pretty sure has a shield connected at both ends. I meter tested my old AQ Pearl (uses the same RJ45's as Cinnamon) at it has the shield connected at both ends.
Posted on: 25 August 2017 by hungryhalibut
I did test the Cinnamon as well, and I think from memory that it has has a floating shield, whereas the Forest is definitely connected at both ends. Anyway it doesn't matter. The Vodka is thick unwieldy stuff and without the adaptor it's easier to route the cable, so it's a win-win really.
Clearly adding the adaptor was the correct thing to do at the time; it seems that I convinced myself I was hearing things that I perhaps wasn't. It all sounds jolly good though, which is the main thing.
