CAT 7 is much more resilient to interference compared to a CAT 5 cable. Why? CAT 7 has an overall shield as well as individual shielding of every pair.
CAT 7 is much more resilient to interference compared to a CAT 5 cable. Why? CAT 7 has an overall shield as well as individual shielding of every pair.
Ah, I see.....
Marco.
Oh yesQuote:
And are there 'audiophile' versions of Ethernet cables available?
http://www.custom-cable.co.uk/audioq...net-cable.html
Ditch the cables guys and go WiFi?
Fewer cables to worry about I'd always a good thing.
Nah!
Wired gives you much greater bandwidth than wireless - a 100mbps wired link can easily cope with 24/192 files, whereas wireless struggles to cope.
Precisely - and you're just increasing the risk of dropouts... I'm wireless, as far as my router and laptop goes, but I'll be staying wired from my NAS to the Pi.
Incidentally, how exactly does one provide the "appropriate grounding", in order to fully utilise the benefits of Cat7? A small step-by-step guide, which I can follow easily, would be good :)
Marco.
I can play 24/192 FLAC quite happily over my wireless connection when I use the PC that is set up as my audio and video storage. The wireless is not so fast when I use my NAS. So I suspect that the NAS is the bottleneck.
I also discovered that the SB Touch starts to produce buffering errors over the wireless network after more than 30 minutes of constant use. It is OK on the wired connection though even if that wired connection s coming from a wireless repeater.
I haven't investigated the ins and out behind the results, but it is an observation that I made.