Computer Audio Asylum

Music servers and other computer based digital audio technologies.

Return to Computer Audio Asylum

Message Sort: Post Order or Asylum Reverse Threaded

Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable

71.146.0.173
Posted on July 23, 2015 at 22:01:41
Jaundiced Ear
 An interesting slide show. On the one hand you have silver coated individual wires and very nifty looking RJ45 connectors, while on the other hand you have masking tape?

JE

Edit: Oops, sorry, I've been scooped by AudioStream:

http://www.audiostream.com/content/cable-porn-ars-technica-destroys-340-cable-purpose

 

Hide full thread outline!
    ...
RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 07:01:39
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 Paper tape probably isn't the worst dielectric they could have used. Probably better than some pvc electrical tape. For the money that cable costs they maybe could have used some Kapton at least.

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 07:54:25
Ryelands
Audiophile

Posts: 1867
Location: Scotland
Joined: January 9, 2009
 you could almost certainly use them for 10-gigabit Ethernet over 100-meter runs [but] . . . you can also use other shielded Cat7-equivalent Ethernet cables that cost one-tenth the Vodkas' price for the same purpose, so the fact that they're high quality cables doesn't really justify the price.

Without defending AQ's IMHO absurd prices, it's hard to miss that the product is explicitly aimed at the audio sector. How it compares to mainstream LAN products in conventional LAN settings has nothing to do with the price of eggs. Or fancy cables, even. IOW, it's a red herring, a straw man argument, whatever.

I am not smart enough or educated enough to judge the manufacturer's claim that the silver coating is "excellent for very high-frequency applications, like Ethernet audio," and that the high-frequency signals "travel almost exclusively on the surface of the conductor" and thus "use" the silver instead of the underlying copper.

As JE notes, ML also picked this one up. What it led me to wonder was what qualifications the author does have to review what is, by any stretch, an esoteric product. It's not as if he's even reporting on listening tests.

Note BTW that if his links are to be believed, the cable was bought from an Amazon dealer, not AQ. An e-mail to the latter might have determined whether the rather amateur looking use of masking tape is standard practice or even whether the cable was a genuine AQ product. All that guff about ethical behaviour is a diversion - Ars Technica's was anything but.

Folk here shout at Mercman because he sometimes starts his review procedure by talking to manufacturers. Maybe it's not such a bad idea after all . . .

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 08:04:56
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46295
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
 It's interesting that a couple folks (in the comments after the article) called this cable out for not being CAT7 at all.

Yes, you can buy cables on Amazon and else where that are advertised as "CAT7" but to meet CAT7 specs the cable cannot use RJ45 style connectors. And CAT7 is not recognized by the Telecommunications Industry Association (TIA) which DOES recognize CAT6, CAT5, etc. CAT7 is essentially DOA. And seeing those photos of how this cable is terminated to the connector makes me wonder if the thing even meets CAT6 specification.

None of this matters though as no one needs CAT7 or even CAT6 for the speeds and distances required in home networking at audio data rates.... even 'hi-res' audio data rates. However, I'm sure we can speculate to death about shielding, EMI, RFI, etc.

AND.... I am certain that some will 'hear' the benefits of CAT7 cables from AudioQuest and others. ;-)


 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 08:11:38
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46295
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
"Note BTW that if his links are to be believed, the cable was bought from an Amazon dealer, not AQ. An e-mail to the latter might have determined whether the rather amateur looking use of masking tape is standard practice or even whether the cable was a genuine AQ product."

That's a bit of a stretch IMHO to think that the cable might not be genuine. There are a number of legit audio dealers who sell through Amazon as well as their own store front be it online or brick and mortar.

 

am not smart enough or educated enough to judge , posted on July 24, 2015 at 08:29:15
fmak
Audiophile

Posts: 13158
Location: Kent
Joined: June 1, 2002
 But it doesn't stop some inmates here to conclude that it doesn't serve the purpose for which it is made. I don't use many AQ products but the higher end stuff do exude care and quality in construction over commercial computer products.

Silver coating? This is standard AQ and anyone interested in high quality audio should know about the skin effect along which hf signals ride.

 

I was looking at Audioquest USB cables on Amazon..., posted on July 24, 2015 at 08:29:52
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001
 and ALL of the Amazon sellers listed for that product were indeed Audioquest dealers (according to Audioquest's web site).

Ebay?

Not so much.


First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 08:39:22
Dynobot
 I found that $300 is my threshold for positive differences in sound for wire. So basically you can put some nice braid on a lamp cord price it at $350 and I'll be dammed it sounds great!

:-)


 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 08:46:30
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 You try to pass your self off as an authority, but I suggest you do some fact checking.

RJ45 connectors are absolutely ok for CAT7 cable. The CG45 or Tera connector are RECOMMENDED by the TIA.

Please clarify what you mean that CAT7 is not recognized by the TIA?

If I am wrong, provide evidence.

And for the record, I have been calling out AQ for their so called "Cat7" cable for a year now.

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 09:01:39
b.l.zeebub
Audiophile

Posts: 9361
Location: 52deg 28'N,1deg56'W
Joined: April 17, 2006
 "As of November 2010, all manufacturers of active equipment have chosen to support the 8P8C for their 10 Gigabit Ethernet products on copper and not the GG45, ARJ45, or TERA in order to function on Cat 6A.

Category 7 is not recognized by the TIA/EIA."

from wiki

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 09:18:10
Ryelands
Audiophile

Posts: 1867
Location: Scotland
Joined: January 9, 2009
 That's a bit of a stretch IMHO to think that the cable might not be genuine.

Not necessarily. The review cites a page on AQ's web site. Those who bother to check it will note that it prominently links to a warning about counterfeit products that offers to authenticate any cable claiming to be genuine. Finding that the cable under test was made using roughly wound masking tape seems a pretty good reason for any half-way intelligent reviewer to ask AQ to have a look at it before going public with a review. (BTW I did NOT suggest that most that most Amazon dealers are not perfectly upright.)

It's interesting that a couple folks (in the comments after the article) called this cable out for not being CAT7 at all

Although the reviewer says that "There's every indication that the cables conform to the listed Category 7 specifications", that remark and the comments thereon are sloppy. A quick look at AQ's site shows that it does not describe the cables as CAT7 though I accept that its wording is misleading, perhaps intentionally so.

I am certain that some will 'hear' the benefits of CAT7 cables from AudioQuest and others.

I'm equally certain that you won't so what's the point of raising the issue (aka repeating the jibe) again and again and again? It's tiresome. See my post below for a report on hearing differences between pretty modestly priced LAN cables (ten or a dozen times cheaper than AQ's and on a par with commerical grade mainstream LAN cables). I even suggest why that might be the case. Unlike you, I've compared them, more than once.

To repeat, I'm not defending AQ's products (bar an ancient but treasured AQ-branded tonearm actually made by Jolida, I've not tried them and don't plan to) or its outlandish pricing policy.

I'm simply pointing out that Ars Technica's reviews are pretty shabby and that its ethical policies don't seem much better. A corollary is that those who persist in citing its reviews ought perhaps to read them with a little more care. After all, if they don't, they leave themselves open to a charge of propagating audio mythology . . .

 

I still get blotches on my print-outs when I don't use the right ethernet cable [nt] ;-), posted on July 24, 2015 at 09:24:33
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 09:28:00
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46295
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
 I'm not a networking authority but it's not uncommon knowledge.

RJ45 connectors are fine for CAT7 cables if you wish to only achieve CAT6A specs. CAT7 is pretty much a non starter as we wait on CAT8. CAT7 is not even recognized by the TIA/EIA. Look it up. It's not hard to find... or maybe it is because they don't officially recognize it!

Don't get the cable type mixed up with meeting a spec. CAT7/7A cable with RJ45 connectors do not meet CAT7/7A specs.

Basically CAT7 is a solution looking for a problem and promoted by cable makers.

CAT6a is perfectly suited for 10GBASE-T per Cisco and others but not suited for 40GBASE-T (the next step), and CAT7 doesn't cut it for 40GBASE-T.

So, CAT7/7a is caught in between so to speak. It's not needed for 10GBASE-T and it doesn't cut it for 40GBASE-T and beyond.

And IMHO, none of this even matters in the world of home networking for audiophile applications. Plain ole CAT5E (or CAT6A if you must) is MORE than sufficient.



 

RE: I was looking at Audioquest USB cables on Amazon..., posted on July 24, 2015 at 09:32:05
Ryelands
Audiophile

Posts: 1867
Location: Scotland
Joined: January 9, 2009
 I was looking at Audioquest USB cables on Amazon . . . and ALL of the Amazon sellers listed for that product were indeed Audioquest dealers (according to Audioquest's web site).

Fair point. Yes, the dealer cited in Ars Technica's review, Electronics Expo, is accredited by AQ.

I'd still have asked AQ to check the cable out if only to have the company admit in writing that the masking tape is pukka.

D

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 09:36:55
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46295
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
 I'm equally certain that you won't so what's the point of raising the issue.

True. Some of us know blatant snake oil when we see it.

I'm simply pointing out that Ars Technica's reviews are pretty shabby and that its ethical policies don't seem much better. A corollary is that those who persist in citing its reviews ought perhaps to read them with a little more care. After all, if they don't, they leave themselves open to a charge of propagating audio mythology . . .

Sounds familiar... Just like every review we read in main stream audiophile magazines.


 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 09:44:00
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Thanks for the detail and the overview.

There is more to the story, but you provide generally accurate info I believe.

The TIA was not able to agree on standards, and there was of course differing agendas and politics involved. Cat7 has been adopted happily by industry for mission critical applications and is quite standard in data centers.

But yes, supposedly Cat8 is next.

But to be clear, the technical benefits of Cat7 are there...superior noise rejection, higher bandwidth and much better connectors.

 

I'm sure everybody was waiting patiently for the "snake oil" argument to appear.., posted on July 24, 2015 at 09:59:00
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 7181
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 What do you know - it's here now!

As usual, it's a sure sign of lack of experience with matters discussed, and also lack of willingness to gain such experience.

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 11:14:17
rick_m
Audiophile

Posts: 6230
Location: Oregon
Joined: August 11, 2005
 "Paper tape probably isn't the worst dielectric they could have used. Probably better than some pvc electrical tape."

I suspect so also. I've had excellent luck making interconnects out of masking tape.

"For the money that cable costs they maybe could have used some Kapton at least."

Maybe... I really don't know about that. I've never compared the dielectric absorption of Kapton with paper & adhesive. My guess is that the paper is quite good but I'm not as sanguine about the adhesive layer.

I do happen to have a roll of Kapton tape but it's not as wide as the masking tape. But I could build up matching sizes using narrower masking tape. The higher impedance lines have the advantage of more of the field being in free space which I deem a good thing UNLESS you get crosstalk with nearby cables.

By the way, if you decide to dink with "open lines" you need to terminate them with their charactoristic impedance. Mine came out around 300ohms and I've found that just using a 330ohm resistor at the load and a 220 build-out at the source works well with my solid-state gear which typically has a Zo~100ohms.

I'm pretty sure that the termination could start quite a ways out-of-band (and so could be "decoupled" at audio with a Cap.) However it depends on where the ends run out of GBW so having a "pure" resistance makes life simpler if you can get by with it.

I did all this years ago and it has really paid off in enjoyment. Probably there are some links in the system more sensitive than others and I suppose someone less lazy could sort them out but I have a possibly unfortunate tendency to quit dinking once I'm happy with the sound. Recently, however I've been reminded that adequate for happiness does not necessairly equate to optimum and doing a little Vib. work has really improved some performance areas.

Guess that's what makes this great hobby: You never succeed in reaching optimum! (or if you do, you can't know it...)

Rick


 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 11:15:40
Tony Lauck
Audiophile

Posts: 13629
Location: Vermont
Joined: November 12, 2007
 I'd like to know what qualifications the Audioquest cable designer has who designed these cables. This would help me understand what's esoteric about these cables (other than their price).





Tony Lauck

"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 12:28:18
Bob_C
Audiophile

Posts: 2667
Location: NY
Joined: July 31, 2000
 "But to be clear, the technical benefits of Cat7 are there...superior noise rejection, higher bandwidth and much better connectors."

True, and I have found them an improvement most likely due to the shielding. I use good CAT7 for audio, not boutique ones.

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 12:40:15
jec01
Audiophile

Posts: 1462
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Joined: September 22, 2004
 Here's another perspective on this whole topic, which I offer without comment.

Happy listening,

Jim

"The passage of my life is measured out in shirts."
- Brian Eno

 

Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 24, 2015 at 12:55:24
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 7181
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 N/T

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 12:56:34
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 Rick you make a great point about the absorption. I haven't seen anything where Dupont specifies it. Perhaps some sticky backed polypropylene closed/open celled foam tape if it exists? I was just thinking at least the Kapton looks fancier but you may have a point...the paper might actually be the high performance ticket. I like air too but I can't get the pairs to not short out when I twist my air insulated conductors. :)

Regarding your "open lines". You must be talking about speaker cables judging by your termination values. I would definitely look into this with higher resolution based on your recommendation. I'm picturing twin lead for some reason based on your description. Is that close? Are you also shielding?

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 24, 2015 at 13:10:03
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Let's get real on this "review".

It is a major FAIL, as with the Darko and Lavorgna write ups.

They simply commit one omission that nullifies any of their findings.

They all refuse to compare the AQ to Rosewill, or equivalent, industrial grade Cat7 cable. Period. Not one.

There is not a single review out their with the guts to take on a fairly large company, by audiophile industry standards, like AQ for obvious reasons.

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 13:11:50
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 As I have posted before, Rosewill, at a buck a foot, is all you will ever need unless you are a NASA rocket scientist.

 

I just installed a run of Rosewill Cat 7 to my network printer..., posted on July 24, 2015 at 13:46:18
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001
 and now I don't have to replace the toner cartridge anymore.


First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 15:29:34
rick_m
Audiophile

Posts: 6230
Location: Oregon
Joined: August 11, 2005
 "Regarding your "open lines". You must be talking about speaker cables judging by your termination values."

No, they're interconnects actually.

I wanted to get away from the dielectric absorption AND multiple strand wires common in shielded cables.

The impedance is sort of a compromise driven roughly by the nominal port impedances and size issues. The in-band impedances of my solid state gear run vaguely 50K at the receivers and 100ohms at the source. Normal shielded cable is around 50-90 ohms so the whole mary-ann is, technically, a POS. But them's the givens.

I was hoping to be able to use TV twinlead but it didn't sound good for some reason. I suspect that longitudinal currents in the common line are intermoding with the signal current through it. Anyhow solid wire sounds much better so I'm using double runs of Beldon 8066. It's 28AWG magnet wire whose most outstanding property is that it's on an almost full roll in my junkbox.

The wire insulation is electrically "hard" which means that it has little interaction with the signals and the tape seems to also be benign.

As far as needing to terminate the wire goes, I think it's a Fn of the cable's dielectric ansorption losses. The less there are, the more it benefits from termination. But the more there are, the more distortion happens to the audio signal. I could easily be all wet but emperically that seems to be the case and DA causes time-energy smearing which we seem to be especially sensitive to. Probably a holdover from the jungle days of fast twig-snap analysis having survival value...

Regards, Rick

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 16:25:07
Sordidman
Audiophile

Posts: 13665
Location: San Francisco
Joined: May 14, 2001
 Very interesting...

As I understand it, it is the RJ45 connector that does not meet spec.

Speculating: could it be the pin configuration causing a problem with cross-talk?

From what I understand, the non-RJ45 connector for CAT7 does meet spec. Manufacturers are supplying adapters to female RJ45 ports.

What I am curious about, besides exactly why it doesn't meet spec, is how is CAT8 with RJ45 termination going to meet a spec that is even higher in bandwidth?





"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 16:33:20
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Nice written article.

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 24, 2015 at 16:38:45
Sordidman
Audiophile

Posts: 13665
Location: San Francisco
Joined: May 14, 2001
 Yes, exactly right....

As I mentioned in the other thread... this kind of poor testing/reviewing needs to be fixed as it could be that whatever these high priced audio manufacturers are doing, makes no significant difference.

"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 17:38:52
AbeCollins
Audiophile

Posts: 46295
Location: USA
Joined: June 22, 2001
Contributor
  Since: February 2, 2002
...how is CAT8 with RJ45 termination going to meet a spec that is even higher in bandwidth?"

A couple ideas come to mind.

- The CAT8 specs calls for a shorter maximum distance so that helps a lot.

- New manufacturing techniques with tighter tolerances in terminating the connector to the cable.... techniques that will be impractical to impossible to achieve in hand soldered boutique cables.

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 24, 2015 at 19:33:19
Tony Lauck
Audiophile

Posts: 13629
Location: Vermont
Joined: November 12, 2007
 This is why I pay little attention to reviewers. My working assumption is that they are whores until proven otherwise.



Tony Lauck

"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar

 

As expected...., posted on July 24, 2015 at 19:37:18
carcass93
Audiophile

Posts: 7181
Location: NJ
Joined: September 20, 2006
 .... you just left a pile of stinking excrements - and the insidious schmo'llins fly is here in no time.

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 20:03:06
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 Well it's interesting for sure.

It sounds like most of us must be enjoying the benefits/tragedies of our non linear terminations without even realizing it is there.

Can you share your construction technique? Do you just hold it all in place with the masking tape? What's your wire spacing? How close do you route these things which might couple electrically?

The hang up I'm having is loop area. Won't a twin lead esque arrangement have more diff mode noise issues? My turntable/high gain preamps tell me I have some extremely healthy 60HZ field in the neighborhood of my amps which is the exact neighborhood these dudes would live in.

Thanks for the discussion man. What I wouldn't give to buy you a beer sometime and pick your brain about WMD construction etc for a while...Cheers!

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 24, 2015 at 21:02:30
Ivan303
Audiophile

Posts: 48887
Location: Cadiere d'azur FRANCE - Santa Fe, NM
Joined: February 26, 2001
 "Propagation Delay & Delay Skew"

"Propagation delay is the amount of time that passes between when a signal is transmitted and when it is received at the opposite end of a cabling channel. The effect is akin to the delay in time between when lightning strikes and thunder is heard - except that electrical signals travel much faster than sound. Delay skew is the difference between the arrival times of the pair with the least delay and the pair with the most delay. Transmission errors that are associated with excessive delay and delay skew include increased jitter and bit error rates."

For what it's worth and it could be nothing, note the specified 'delay skew' is about half for CAT 7 (30ns) as that for CAT 6/6a (50ns).




First they came for the dumb-asses
And I did not speak out
Because I was not a dumb-ass

 

Hey, dude - you questioning our experiential insights?, posted on July 25, 2015 at 00:25:24
Chris from Lafayette
Audiophile

Posts: 26477
Location: SF Bay Area
Joined: February 17, 2004
Contributor
  Since: February 6, 2012
 I'd lay odds that they're WAY more experiential than yours!

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 25, 2015 at 01:24:10
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 "The wire insulation is electrically "hard" which means that it has little interaction with the signals and the tape seems to also be benign."

As you'd hope a good magnet wire insulation would be. The other good thing about magnet wire insulation is it's super thin for tight packing. Even if the coating isn't perfect it's impact will be minimized since it's such a thin coat.

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 25, 2015 at 01:30:29
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 " (and so could be "decoupled" at audio with a Cap.)"

I see now this must not have sunk in for me the first time I read it. Yes makes sense.

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 25, 2015 at 07:39:24
Mercman
Audiophile

Posts: 6581
Location: So. CA
Joined: October 20, 2002
 "Folk here shout at Mercman because he sometimes starts his review procedure by talking to manufacturers. Maybe it's not such a bad idea after all . . . "

I try to get the manufacturers to tell me things often not found on their sites. In the case of my last review of the MSB Technology Premium Quad USB module, I was able to include detailed information of the design not otherwise found.

I can only think of one inmate that likes to shout at me, but given his comments, he obviously doesn't take the time to read the reviews in their entirety.

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 25, 2015 at 08:26:57
rick_m
Audiophile

Posts: 6230
Location: Oregon
Joined: August 11, 2005



Can you share your construction technique? CRUDE

Do you just hold it all in place with the masking tape? YES

What's your wire spacing? HOPEFULLY there is an attached picture of it.

How close do you route these things which might couple electrically? WELL, other than trying to not have them lay along power cords they're just part of the jumble.

The hang up I'm having is loop area. Won't a twin lead esque arrangement have more diff mode noise issues? My turntable/high gain preamps tell me I have some extremely healthy 60HZ field in the neighborhood of my amps which is the exact neighborhood these dudes would live in. I SUSPECT that it's not a good choice for the TT to Preamp cable but might work if the Zo of the cartridge is low enough.

These were just done for fun and out of curiousity. My objective initially was to try and understand the factors that matter in interconnects. And I suppose nowadays that it's no big surprise that about everything does to some extent. Sorting out the mechanisms is another matter but DA seemed to be an important factor so I tried to minimize the dielectric. The cool thing is I ended up with much improved sound for next to no money and had fun.

The uncool thing is that the adhesive on the tape drys our eventually so after a decade or so they sort of crumble... Always something.

Rick

 

Wow, posted on July 25, 2015 at 09:53:51
jec01
Audiophile

Posts: 1462
Location: Baltimore, Maryland
Joined: September 22, 2004
 I haven't had this many replies to one of my posts get deleted since the days of Severius.

Happy listening,

Jim

"The passage of my life is measured out in shirts."
- Brian Eno

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 25, 2015 at 10:12:28
Bob_C
Audiophile

Posts: 2667
Location: NY
Joined: July 31, 2000
 I see the part time guy got his stuff deleted. lol

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 25, 2015 at 10:22:06
Ugly
Audiophile

Posts: 2912
Location: Des Moines, WA
Joined: August 22, 2006
 Thanks for the pic. Cool interconnects!

It is telling that they have stood the test of time in your system.

I don't see how I not try these at some point when I get some time and materials on hand.

I definitely appreciate the approach, trying to exaggerate a certain effect you suspect you find important to help understand how it fits in the big picture.

Have you played with the termination much? I'm wondering how the tradeoffs between audiophile and high frequency cap play into the equation? Some tiny surface mount networks soldered between pairs near the ends might survive with the tape to hold it. You could get that thing to up into the VHF.


 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 25, 2015 at 11:18:18
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Yes, it seems so. Ran to his mommy?

Your assessment of his so called review was spot on. This type of fictional nonsense must be called out.

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 25, 2015 at 11:28:14
Bob_C
Audiophile

Posts: 2667
Location: NY
Joined: July 31, 2000
 Yes... There is no way a network could perform as badly as he initially claims unless the cables were wrapped around fluorescent lights!

It's hilarious his network has dropouts and glitches and then the HQ cables ride in on a white horse to save the day. LOL

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 25, 2015 at 11:34:16
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 yes, and his assertion that there was a colossal difference between networked and locally stored files shows his knowledge of how to set up a computer audio system is non existent.

Having read some of his other computer audio related reviews, this is obvious.

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 25, 2015 at 11:35:18
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 The funniest part is he claims to be an "IT professional" yet still had the gaul to publish such crap.

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 25, 2015 at 12:06:00
Bob_C
Audiophile

Posts: 2667
Location: NY
Joined: July 31, 2000
 I posted something over on Critics. What do you think?

 

RE: Ars Technica dissects an AudioQuest Vodka ethernet cable, posted on July 25, 2015 at 12:59:20
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Nice! i will comment.

 

RE: Wow, posted on July 26, 2015 at 22:12:22
Jaundiced Ear
 "Four turkeys in a big black car!"

One of my favorite songs!

JE

 

A Note about CAT7/Type F, posted on July 27, 2015 at 10:06:07
Bromo33333
Audiophile

Posts: 3502
Location: Ipswich, MA
Joined: May 4, 2004
 CAT7 is a proposed spec. It isn't "DOA" nor is it in early stages. It is an incremental improvement above Cat-6a, and adds screened-shielding over the entire cable, and calls out double shielding on each twisted pair. This was done for 2 reasons: reduce crosstalk further, and make it immune from "alien crosstalk" (meaning RFI). It also is suitable for routing near noise sensitive equipment, if you can't avoid the cable routing altogether.

Where CAT7 has a weakness, if you do not connect the shields to the shield on the GG45 connector you might drop to Cat-6 for datarate and throughput. Given the GG45 is not compatible with RJ45, and there is little gear that accepts GG45, it is no wonder that every cable maker out there has been producing a "RJ45" compatible pseudo-CAT7 cable. Thae main thing is the shielding.

So while this cables might not meet the self crosstalk spec of true CAT7, it will meet the RFI/EMI specification, which in a home networking environment is probably more important considering both Cat-6a and Cat-7 have similar bandwidths (500MHz vs 600MHz) and datarates.

So far a CAT choice ... if you are running cables near your audio gear, you would probably do better to choose a pseudo-Cat-7 cable than anything else.

But having said that, since Cat-7 isn't an official standard, it is unlikely cost conscious makers will be meeting the spirit of the spec with the only giveups being the RJ45 compatibility. If my experience with Cat-5e and Cat-6 is a guide, they probably vary all over the map.

I expect that Audioquest hasn't skimped on anything in this range -- and their whole ethernet range from the Pearls to the Diamonds will meet this standard and then go on up from there. And from $7-9/foot - $hundreds/foot you will be paying a premium over no-name, but you do know what you will be getting. And given a typical "audiophile" stereo is about $5k, adding a network connections using at least the low end Pearls for the noise reduction, will likely be money well spent all told. Or if you are handly, learn how to terminate ethernet cables and roll your own. It isn't that hard.
====
"You are precisely as big as what you love and precisely as small as what you allow to annoy you." ~ R A Wilson

 

LOL - He did!, posted on July 27, 2015 at 10:39:29
Bromo33333
Audiophile

Posts: 3502
Location: Ipswich, MA
Joined: May 4, 2004
 Did you read the article?

He compared it to a "CAT7" cable he sourced.


====
"You are precisely as big as what you love and precisely as small as what you allow to annoy you." ~ R A Wilson

 

Wow, it must be confusing to go to a Burlesque show, then., posted on July 27, 2015 at 10:40:12
Bromo33333
Audiophile

Posts: 3502
Location: Ipswich, MA
Joined: May 4, 2004
 "This is why I pay little attention to reviewers. My working assumption is that they are whores until proven otherwise."

Thanks for the chuckle. It must be rather confusing for you to read Stereophile and then go to a burlesque show. ;-)


You might read the review before pronouncing judgement.


====
"You are precisely as big as what you love and precisely as small as what you allow to annoy you." ~ R A Wilson

 

Ha! Funny., posted on July 27, 2015 at 10:42:32
Bromo33333
Audiophile

Posts: 3502
Location: Ipswich, MA
Joined: May 4, 2004
 Okay, color me interested.

How would you perform a test, then?
====
"You are precisely as big as what you love and precisely as small as what you allow to annoy you." ~ R A Wilson

 

Qualifications?, posted on July 27, 2015 at 11:20:03
Bromo33333
Audiophile

Posts: 3502
Location: Ipswich, MA
Joined: May 4, 2004
 Given the information at hand (the cross section, the ad copy, some reviews) someone skilled in the art who is qualified to judge would already know.


====
"You are precisely as big as what you love and precisely as small as what you allow to annoy you." ~ R A Wilson

 

"Snake Oil?" Do tell, posted on July 27, 2015 at 11:29:08
Bromo33333
Audiophile

Posts: 3502
Location: Ipswich, MA
Joined: May 4, 2004
 I find it interesting that whenever anyone starts talking about "snake oil" they have usually been reading Skeptics' websites.

Interestingly enough, I am curious. What about the Vodka cable is "snake oil?"

The only valid complaints I can see so far are:

1. CAT7 isn't an official standard, and since they aren't using the GG45 connector, the cable can't possibly be real CAT7, but some sort of Paeuso CAT7. While they do use copious shielding on the connector, it can only be rated as an over built CAT-6a technically.

2. It is expensive (a little over $100/foot). And even though the prices for their ethernet series starts at $8/foot, we're talking about *this* cable and boy is it expensive.

3. It seems somewhat over-engineered (Though that masking tape is weird. You'd think in a overbuilt expensive cable everything would be expensive in it?)

.----

For something to be "Snake Oil" is has to be like the patent medicine issued in the 19th century -- It cannot possibly do what it says on the bottle.

From what I can tell, the Vodka cable does what it claims to do. It carries ethernet signals. It's well shielded (if overbuilt) which would convey any benefits of shielding where it is used. It's only fault is that it is expensive, somewhat mitigated by the range of prices in their range.

That's not snake oil.
====
"You are precisely as big as what you love and precisely as small as what you allow to annoy you." ~ R A Wilson

 

RE: LOL - He did!, posted on July 27, 2015 at 13:53:44
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Perhaps I missed it. Please point out where he compares the AQ to Cat7 cable. I saw he used Cat6 cable he purchased from a vendor called Cable Matters on Amazon.

 

I stand corrected!, posted on July 27, 2015 at 14:03:21
Bromo33333
Audiophile

Posts: 3502
Location: Ipswich, MA
Joined: May 4, 2004
 Oh, wait. I just went back and re-read the article. Should have paid closer attention. You are correct, it was Cat-6, not pseudo Cat-7.

*blush*
====
"You are precisely as big as what you love and precisely as small as what you allow to annoy you." ~ R A Wilson

 

RE: I stand corrected!, posted on July 27, 2015 at 14:07:52
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Uh yeh exactly. You had me worried, but I re-read this POS write up and thankfully I have not lost it...yet.

Appreciate the follow up.

 

RE: I stand corrected!, posted on July 27, 2015 at 14:25:53
Bromo33333
Audiophile

Posts: 3502
Location: Ipswich, MA
Joined: May 4, 2004
 I found in my house that paying attention to shielding, calbe routing, and what switches I was using paid off in throughput in the network. When I upgraded to gigabit internet (long story. but if you can ... DO!) I found my wired network was much slower than my wireless. I upgraded my router, cables and switches and found that my sound improved greatly when I switched to shielded cables (pseudo Cat-7). Another neat trick is to get the gret 3M anti-static bags and wrap them around the areas where you connect cables - or individual cables, and throughput improves, too. But I had to buy and ditch a few cables that were supposed to be "Cat-7" that weren't even shielded, or in one case the shield was on the cabl but not hooked up to the shield don the connector!

I also had to move my phono amp away from my switch further, too. That helped with records.

I'll be honest with you - when I saw the cross section of the Audioquest, I realized that with a slightly larger budget, and a little less tech, I'd buy Pearls to Cinnamon and be done with it in the "problem solved" kind of way.

None of this is rocket science.

And for the record, I didn't find the Part Time review to be a POS. But horses for courses!
====
"You are precisely as big as what you love and precisely as small as what you allow to annoy you." ~ R A Wilson

 

You know something? You are right!, posted on July 27, 2015 at 23:54:37
Jaundiced Ear
 "For something to be "Snake Oil" is has to be like the patent medicine issued in the 19th century -- It cannot possibly do what it says on the bottle."

Having looked at the AudioQuest web page describing this product, I have to admit that they make no claims whatsoever regarding the "audibility" of the product, other than to caution that the product is "directional" (in an Ethernet cable?) and for best results "have the arrow pointing in the direction of the flow of music. For example, NAS to Router, Router to Network Player."

Caveat Emptor!

JE

 

Thanks!, posted on July 28, 2015 at 06:38:39
Bromo33333
Audiophile

Posts: 3502
Location: Ipswich, MA
Joined: May 4, 2004
 Thanks for the followup.

I'm always a little skeptical about directionality, too. But, when I have put in cables in the 'ol stereo, I usually "follow the directions" -- and since most of the cables I have in the interconnect variety are XLR, so there isn't a lot of choice.

I agree, I think the strongest thing you can say about AQ's Vodka is "Caveat EMptor" you really can't accuse them of being liars.
====
"You are precisely as big as what you love and precisely as small as what you allow to annoy you." ~ R A Wilson

 

RE: Ha! Funny., posted on July 29, 2015 at 09:10:22
Sordidman
Audiophile

Posts: 13665
Location: San Francisco
Joined: May 14, 2001
 Use a much wider sample group.

As stated numerous times by others, comparing an Audioquest Diamond to a cheap CAT 5e is essentially creating a straw man.

"Asylums with doors open wide,
Where people had paid to see inside,
For entertainment they watch his body twist
Behind his eyes he says, 'I still exist.'"

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 29, 2015 at 11:28:40
Michael Lavorgna
 Hi Tony,

I've followed your posts here and have found you to be a reasonable person. So I'm wondering, beyond me simply stating that I am not a whore, what kind of proof would make you change your mind?

Thanks.

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 29, 2015 at 11:35:26
Michael Lavorgna
 Hi Abe,

René van Es on ear.net compared a Supra CAT7 cable to the AQ cables.

When I reviewed these cables nearly 3 years ago, the main question was not whether different CAT-level cables can make a difference, the question was, and still is for some people, whether Ethernet cables can make a difference.

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 29, 2015 at 12:10:16
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Michael:

Did you mean to respond to Abe or me?

Thanks for info on ear.net.

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 29, 2015 at 12:15:07
Michael Lavorgna
 Yes, my mistake. This was only my second post on AA in a while so I really should slow down and pay closer attention.

My pleasure on the ear.net link.

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 29, 2015 at 13:19:30
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 No worries. For the record, a search here will find that I have posted many of your reviews here, I especially like what you do with sources.

I hope you don't feel upended in that I really feel AQ got a free pass with reviews for their ethernet cable, not comparing it to far cheaper, yet high quality CAT7 options is just common sense to me.

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 29, 2015 at 13:53:24
Michael Lavorgna
 Thanks!

I was of the opinion that Ethernet cables couldn't make any difference going into the first review so I just used the cable I was using for comparison which was a CAT5 cable. Once I heard a difference, I bought a $16.99 CAT6 cable from Staples and used it as well.

One reason I focused on the CAT5 cable for comparison purposes in my reivews was to instigate conversation. Since most people were saying Ethernet cables cannot possibly make a difference, by using a CAT5 cable I had people comment as to why a CAT7 cable would be a more appropriate comparison. This brought the importance of shielding into the conversation from people with the requisite knowledge to discuss why this may be an important factor when choosing an Ethernet cable.

While I touched on this in my first review, I felt it might be taken more seriously if a number of people talked about shielding and noise in the comments. While this did in fact happen, it didn't seem to sway anyone's opinion.

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 29, 2015 at 14:37:20
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 thanks for the follow up.

i remember the review and the follow up comments.

i kinda get you were in a no win situation.

here is what irks some..AQ uses the rattiest CAT5 cable in their live demos and in their invite, press only demos at their factory. More than a little disingenuous. I have seen this first hand at several demos.

The fact that the 5 or 6 reviews that have been published have done the same, except for the one you noted, makes it look like reviewers are kinda following AQ's lead. Here is an example..when John Darko was asked about what control cable AQ used at a show he attended, where was happily reporting how good AQ cables sounded in comparison to the control..he replied he had no clue. I can't imagine not knowing or asking..if I actually gave a damn.

for the record, I absolutely believe ethernet cables make a difference other wise i would not blather on about using CAT7 instead of CAT5.

One of the reasons I post Audiostream reviews here often is I think you do show that natural curiosity and a desire to drill down and find out why things affect the sound that really does serve the readers.

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 29, 2015 at 14:58:56
Michael Lavorgna
 Thank you for the kind comments. They are very much appreciated.

I obviously have a vested interest in making AudioStream a valuable resource for our readers. That's not only the job I was hired to do, I could not imagine living with myself if it wasn't the case when I go to work every day.

John Darko, whom I consider a friend, used a Blue Jeans CAT6 cable for comparison in his review. In terms of the AQ Ethernet demos, they are clearly intended to show their cables in the best possible light. I would think it foolish of them to do otherwise. I personally don't place much value in these kinds of demos and prefer to make decisions based on hearing things in my own room/system.

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 29, 2015 at 15:06:58
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Just one more comment..I promise!!..i like the way you bring in industry experts, sometimes even two at a time with TOTALLY opposing views, to help explain certain highly technical matters. Many reviewers just fake it, which is just sad. It takes a humble journalist and someone who really is trying to serve the readers to say "hey, I don't understand this stuff or know how to explain it, but here is someone who can."

I get what you are saying about AQ, but we don't expect a journalist to fall for their trying to put their products in the best light. It extends beyond pure marketing when the get John Darko, who i also like, to fly home down under and rave about what he heard at a sham demo. Journalistic due diligence would require he report what the control cable was and the entire chain.

Keep up da good work!

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 29, 2015 at 16:52:11
Michael Lavorgna
 The Q&As are among my personal favorites. Having access to the people behind the products is something I value and I really should do more of them. There's one in the works which will hit in a few weeks that I'm really looking forward to. There's nothing like learning.

I have also written about the AQ demos and I agree with your point. I should have taken more care in describing the specifics of the setup.

Cheers.

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 29, 2015 at 17:00:28
Tony Lauck
Audiophile

Posts: 13629
Location: Vermont
Joined: November 12, 2007
 There is nothing to prove. You and your web site are not on my "do not read list". If there is an article on a subject that interests me I will read it and if it appears to be factual and relatively unbiased I will enjoy and/or use it. I have nothing against people of the (R), (M) or (D) persuasion per se, but I follow the principle of caveat emptor and assume that all three groups of people are trying to sell me something, even something that I may not need, unless proven otherwise.

Tony Lauck

"Diversity is the law of nature; no two entities in this universe are uniform." - P.R. Sarkar

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 29, 2015 at 18:09:52
Sprezza Tura
Audiophile

Posts: 4585
Location: New York City
Joined: August 24, 2012
 Although I get your drift, it is not so black and white.

Real journalists are in business of "selling" information which could be quite useful. There is not always an ulterior motive, and many times there is.

Broadcast networks were given licenses to use the airwaves with the concession that they serve the public good in the course of their making a profit. That is how prime time news started. Of course that has all been forgotten and networks offer infotainment, and have totally and completely ceased to fulfill their obligation to the public, as detailed in the stellar HBO series, Newsroom.

 

RE: Funny how a perspective of someone with actual experience differs from perspective of those without. N/T, posted on July 30, 2015 at 05:13:16
Michael Lavorgna
 Thank you for the clarification Tony.

 

Page processed in 0.045 seconds.

[ Top Top of Page ] [ Contact Us ] [ Support/Wish List ] [ Copyright © 2024, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
[ General ] [ Speakers ] [ Tubes ] [ Vinyl ] [ Digital ] [ Hi-Rez ] [ Video Asylum ] [ Cables ] [ Tweaks/DIY ] [ Music ] [ Films ]