Power Cords for RS130

ROSE Products RS130
#123

I have heard good things about Pangea, and seem reasonably priced too.

#124

I do have both a power cord and a power conditioner for my RS 130 and it subjectively improves my experience. I went with Pangea Audio cables for all my sources, about $80-120 bucks on Amazon depending on length.

Don’t feed the trolls is the best remedy and never stoop their ad hominem attacks.

1 Like
#125

Amen. I completely agree. The BLOCK function has worked perfectly for me. Never enjoyed using the forum so much as I do now, and enjoying fellowship with other Rose owners .

2 Likes
#126

Si je ne me trompe pas le lecteur rĂ©seau RS130 est 100% numĂ©rique ? Dans ces conditions mettez un cĂąble de qualitĂ© correcte sans plus. Aucune caractĂ©ristique analogique ne peut ĂȘtre modifiĂ©e par un cĂąble d’alimentation ! (sauf Ă©ventuellement en milieu trĂšs perturbĂ© si vous utilisez une horloge externe et avec des cĂąble bien pourris). Le mythe du son des cĂąbles atteint ici son paroxysme ! Les “0” et les “1” qui transitent dans votre appareil se moquent Ă©perdument du filĂ© des aigus ou du fruitĂ© du mĂ©dium !

#127
#128

Oui et alors je sais tout cela ?! Je n’apprends rien de plus que ce qui est serinĂ© depuis des dĂ©cennies dans le milieu
audiophiles. Cela n’apporte aucune contradiction Ă  ce que j’affirme. Avez vous jamais mesurĂ© et comparĂ© des cĂąbles, fait des mesures de taux d’erreur sur une chaine de transmission, mesurĂ© le jitter sur des chaines de transmission, etc

Je maintiens qu’il est scientifiquement impossible que des erreurs sur les bits qui traversent un Ă©quipement purement numĂ©rique se traduisent par des caractistiques de signal analogiques modifiĂ©es aprĂšs passage dans un DAC. Il faudrait des corrĂ©lations d’erreurs telles que leurs probabilitĂ©s est nulle. Des clics, clocs, coupures et tout ce que vous voulez mais pas des modifications de bande passante ou des distorsions diverses.

1 Like
#129

Have any of you “bits are bits” crowd considered the EMI signals that travel with the 1s and 0s low voltage electrical signal? This is why galvanic isolation using fiber results in lowering the sound floor. This EMI noise is easily measured using science. Bit perfect does not equal EMI noise free.

1 Like
#130

Je n’ai jamais dit que les bruits EMI Ă©taient absent ! Mais l’avantage du numĂ©rique est qu’un tel bruit peut tout au plus faire qu’un 0 soit pris pour un 1 et rĂ©ciproquement. Il faut que le perturbateur soit fort cependant pour en arriver lĂ . Dans ce cas mettez vos equipement en cage de Faraday et des blindages partout !
Dans un appareils entiĂšrement numĂ©rique les taux d’erreur sur les bits (BER) sont trĂšs faibles et s’il ́’́

#131

Erreur de frappe !
Suite du post :
Et s’il y a un bit faux sur un million ce qui serait deja beaucoup cela ne se traduira pas par des modifications de “caractęristiques analogiques” du signal en sortie de DAC comme je le disais.
J’arrĂȘte sur le sujet, tout cela est trop long Ă  Ăšcrire
!

1 Like
#132

Exaxtly this 0 and 1 misinformation was already debunked thoroughly here, showing that there is much more to the signal:

#133

Yet to remember, all digital transmissions rely on analog radio frequency transmissions between the modulation/demodulation equipment. What we call digital, clear 1 and 0, sits at the end of an analog transmission.

#134

Faraday cages would not be very convenient, but you could use cables with better shielding and grounding. You don’t need to spend 10K but you may or may not be surprised at the results a decent cable will make if your environment is noisy.

#135

“Yet to remember, all digital transmissions rely on analog radio frequency transmissions between the modulation/demodulation equipment”

Absolutly faulse ! Dans mon cas il n’y a qu’un fichier entre mon lecteur et mon DAC !! Aucune trasmission radio frĂ©quence.

#136

Ethernet is already galvanically isolated. WiFi even more so. And of course with the amount of electronics in an optical SFP transceiver (speaking of which, a custom programmed 10G module, from the same one factory as any other, costs $14 in lots of one) you are just plugging an EMI source right into your device.

Quite true, these are oirthogonal concepts. The question is whether that EMI on the data input matters. And if it mattered that much, wired inputs would not work at all – the signal that carries your digital data is analog noise, and it completely dwarfs any EMI picked up along the way (if it didn’t, you would actually be in a situation where you need fiber, or shielded cables, but unless you are running 100 of meters of wire across factory floors, you don’t).

Take particular sort of stupid to believe that an ad with no data whatsoever debunks anything.

#137

Absolutely true ! digital systems rely on analog components at a fundamental level (like transistors and capacitors in circuits). Unless your drives don’t have any circuits ? Every digital system is made up of analog components that’s why the 1 and 0 arguments is a total fallacy of the uneducated.

#138

Si vous appelez ça “radio transmission” on ne parle pas de la mĂȘme chose ! Pour le reste vous n’allez pas m’apprendre ce qu’est la transmission numĂ©rique ni la transmission tout court, je pense pouvoir vous en apprendre plus sur le sujet que l’inverse, mais on est dans le virtuel ici et chacun peut se targuer de n’importe quelle compĂ©tence usurpĂ©e, donc je ne vous dirais pas pourquoi !
Adieu

#139

Please see my post on digital transmission being affected by EMI, every digital component is fundamentally influenced by analog principles. It’s like a computer uses coding , but performance of analog components will determine quality of performance and signal processing.

#140

Correct. Ethernet also has CRC to help w/ EMI interference impacting the 1s and 0s.

Neither Ethernet or CRC stop EMI from riding along the twisted pair copper wires.

Unless you come to my house and sniff my RF noise, how would you know how much noise or absence of noise is in my system, and how that impacts my subjective listening experience?

Bourdeau - I could also appeal to my authority, but I’ve learned you can’t convince anyone whose mind is already made up and thinks they know it all. I certainly do NOT believe I know it all, but I do know what sounds better to me in my system.

1 Like
#141

As any of buttcycle’s posts, it is just a collection of ignorant ramblings with no basis in fact.

Good. So we can agree that “galvanic isolation” is not an argument in favor of fiber and using SFPs.

Differential transmission over Ethernet does help with it though (just like balanced connections are less susceptible to noise than unbalanced).

We can drop the data errors and CRC part here, unless the network is completely f’d up, or something is broken, this is a non-issue.

Ah, now we are getting to the crux of the issue.

Nobody can tell you what your subjective would or should be. But it is subjective and can be affected by anything. But this has nothing to do with any physical differences in electrical signals going to your speakers. Those are not subjective at all.

We’ve already agreed that galvanic isolation is not an issue. EMI? Well, you’ve just stuck an RF emitter right into your device. A media converter is a very active, busy device.

Of course, if you have enough EMI to get through the network adapter and all the way into the DAC, then a) you have far bigger problems to worry about, like your long-term health, and b) you are picking that EMI on every analog interconnect (digital interconnects between DAC and streamer, if separate, too) and those are far more sensitive to it. In case of some “high-end” cables (cough, Kimber, cough) extremely sensitive. So what exactly have you achieved?

Fiber certainly does have its place. If your ISP supports it, connecting their access device to your router with fiber will, if anything, protect you from the lightning hitting some outdoor equipment. Stuff like that
 Plugging a fiber module into the streamer
 well, if you short out whatever’s on the other end of the fiber, it’s not going to fry the streamer. That’s a plus, I guess.

But when you are trying to come up with some “technical” explanation why it works, and start with something that you yourself know is not true (galvanic isolation)
 you just know that any sound quality effect is purely psychological.

#142

I am reposting here the argument about EMI . And a friendly reminder, don’t put up with anyone harassing or insult you. Use the BLOCK function , no need to put up with that .

For those of us who always hear the “it’s 0 and 1 binary transmission so it’s all the same”

There are 2 points:

First, EMI (Electromagnetic Interference) can significantly affect digital signals causing disruptions like increased error rates, data corruption, and even complete loss of data transmission due to the noise it introduces into the signal path; essentially degrading the quality and reliability of digital information transfer.

Second, many digital circuit components(transistors and capacitors) are inherently analog and their function can be affected by EMI and other interference leading to issues described above , leading to degradation of audio signal.

So the whole my $100 streamer is same as a RS130 is just scientifically and factually false and ignorant. Same with arguments discounting quality cables. This is why the RD160 fiber optic produces clear sound improvement, because of fiber optics ability to physically block interference

It’s like 2 machines running the same coding , but one has top tier new circuitry , and one is running old and worn down stuff, even though the same code is being used, there obviously be differences in performance, delivery, and quality.