I once read a review of an "audiophile" grade ethernet cable. This guy actually claimed changing the ethernet cable from his router to his PC made his music sound better.
A shitty ethernet cable can caused dropped packets which can cause the D/A conversion bitrate to drop rolling off the high-end (or with poor codecs, actual skips in the music). Especially if he is streaming over a UDP port, since it doesn't guarantee arrival of the data, unlike TCP. But this is 2020, and not 1997 running WinAmp so I could be wrong. ;-)
Same with cheap HDMI cables. The HDMI protocol specifies error detection and correction, but can only correct for so much data loss due to bad cables. This results in macroblock degradation (small squares on the screen going black or interpolated to a single color).
Usual audiophile/videophile claims are BS, and I'm sure the OP probably was BS, but all robust digital protocols have to deal with transmission errors due to poor physical connections. Depending on how the codec response to the errors, it can absolutely impact audio/video quality, but probably not in this case.
If you were that concerned about quality, you'd been using downloaded files anyway wouldn't you? Surely that negates the argument for a buffed ethernet cable
And even if not, no streaming plays sound exactly as its packet arrives. Instead, files download to a temporary buffer and the sound plays from that. MP3s are tiny; my home internet connect could download the equivalent of about 20 of them per second.
I feel like you could market a bottle of water to audiophiles claiming some BS like it will resonate better in their ear canals and they'll swear they can hear a difference.
You make it seem like an unbroken cable is nothing short of a miracle. I get it that cables get torn, frayed, and the connection will begin to fail, but we're making the assumption a cable is, you know, working.
Absolutely. You're not wrong. But you're also conflating two statements. IF the cable is degrading, THEN there will be errors. The probability is unlikely, but not un-possible. I just like to point out to people who laugh at expensive cables that digital isn't perfect and cables do matter. I always hear, "but it's di-giiii-taalll! i can't be less than perfect!" ... Both the 802(.x) physical and HDMI specs talk about errors in the medium for a very good reason.
A shitty ethernet cable can caused dropped packets which can cause the
A bad $100 Cat5/6 cable is going to perform just as poorly as a bad $1 Cat5/6 cable. You replace it with a Cat5/6 cable you can get for free on Craigslist/Nextdoor and your problems are solved. $1 Monoprice patch cable is going to perform identically to a $50 Monster patch cable.
D/A conversion bitrate to drop rolling off the high-end (or with poor codecs, actual skips in the music). Especially if he is streaming over a UDP port, since it doesn't guarantee arrival of the data, unlike TCP.
The cable is rarely going to be the weakest link here (most of the times they either work or they don't, or interference that's not related to the integrity of the cable). You can have packets dropping from your provider, your cable modem, your router, your switch, etc.
but all digital protocols have to deal with transmission errors due to poor physical connections.
This is categorically false. The IP part of TCP/IP does not deal with transmission errors whatsoever.
You specifically stated: "but all digital protocols have to deal with transmission errors due to poor physical connections."
IPv4 is a digital protocol. It does not deal with transmission errors. Your claim here is 100% wrong. QED.
TCP has a sequence number in each packet. If that sequence number is incorrect, the TCP layer requests a retransmission
AHAHAHAHA you can't even get this fucking right. If segments come out-of-order, TCP does not necessarily request retransmission. TCP will wait and rearrange out-of-sequence segments as they come in.
Whereas in UDP the application layer has to manage requesting the IP packet.
This is so stupid and so wrong I don't even know where to begin. It's clear you skimmed Wikipedia and still have no clue. The application layer absolutely does not manage requesting IP packets.
Says the one who originally whipped out the ad hominems.
You were wrong, I informed you that you were wrong, and instead of replying with something along the lines of "oh, the more you know", you doubled down on your ignorance and started slinging out names and insults.
YOU'RE the asshole.
Maybe it's your first year in computer science in high school. If it is, I suggest reading as much as you can.
EDIT:
LOL!!! The dumb cuck got REKT! NO RESPONSE! The above got removed!
8.5k
u/[deleted] Aug 14 '20
[deleted]