Topic: Hi-Fi USB Cables - Worthwhile? (Read 38809 times)

Houckster · « **on:** February 23, 2012, 03:33:15 pm »

I recently bought a DACMagic that has allowed me to use my computer for most of my listening and I'm enjoying this very much. I am, however, wondering if there are real PRACTICAL advantages to "high fidelity" USB cables. Note that I am using a USB2 hub so I am assuming that any advantages to be accrued from such a purchase would require two cables.

I am using MC17 and the DACMagic is apparently not an asynchronous USB device.

Any recommendations on what cables I should purchase if any? I'm looking for a cable with the best price/performance ratio.

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #1 on:** February 23, 2012, 09:34:36 pm »

Start with a "high fidelity" hub. If you can't find one of those you should probably not waste your money on cables.

Houckster · « **Reply #2 on:** February 24, 2012, 12:20:21 am »

Very interesting about a high fidelity hub. I've never heard of them before. Can you point me to an example, i.e. a link? Thanks

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #3 on:** February 24, 2012, 08:01:42 am »

They don't exist. That's my point.

MrHaugen · « **Reply #4 on:** February 24, 2012, 08:07:36 am »

As long as the cables length does not exceed the recommended maximum, there should not be any data loss, what so ever. So, no. I would say with 99,9% certainty that you'll be throwing your money out the window. The 0.1% chance is only there because there might be a chance that I've slept through such a topic in my IT and electronic classes, and it's not been mentioned for 10 years after that either.

Sandy B Ridge · « **Reply #5 on:** February 24, 2012, 08:45:56 am »

Quote from: DarkPenguin on February 24, 2012, 08:01:42 am

They don't exist. That's my point.

Now there's a marketing opportunity for you....

I'm sure I could buy a joblot of cheap hubs off 'the Bay' and rebox them in my garden shed in nice shiny aluminium cases and sell them on for $200 a pop. What do you think?!

SBR

mojave · « **Reply #6 on:** February 24, 2012, 09:32:17 am »

Here is an article that explains what could cause a USB cable to change the analog sound: Digital Audio: The Possible and Impossible. The author was formerly a Corporate Vice President at Microsoft and managed the Digital Media Division. Those that have adaptive USB are more likely to have sound differences do to changes in USB cables because the computer is the master clock instead of the DAC. The derived clock is then more susceptible to acquiring jitter. Some that have changed cables like the cheaper Audioquest USB cables. I have also read that cable length trumps "quality" with a shorter cable being preferred.

I've used the USBlyzer, a protocol analyzer and USB packet sniffer, to try to see what is going on during playback. My DAC uses both asynchronous and bulk transfer modes. The actual music packets are transferred with asynchronous mode. I can lower the hardware buffers until the music sounds distorted, but the packet sniffer is still receiving a "success" status from the DAC. If I activate "use large hardware buffers" in JRiver, sometimes a very small packet of in bulk transfer mode is sent at even intervals. It doesn't happen every time so I'm still trying to figure out what is going. You can also see that the packet size changes depending on sample frequency.

Alex B · « **Reply #7 on:** February 24, 2012, 10:14:11 am »

This thread reminds me about the $500 Denon AK-DL1 link cable. It was an Ethernet cable, not an "audiophile USB" cable, but in a similar way the manufacturer did not provide any technically valid explanation for the claimed quality improvement.

From: http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20080618

Some other links:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/06/20/denon_cable/
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B000I1X6PM (now discontinued, but the old customer reviews make a good read)

Houckster · « **Reply #8 on:** February 24, 2012, 01:06:57 pm »

Quote from: DarkPenguin on February 23, 2012, 09:34:36 pm

Start with a "high fidelity" hub. If you can't find one of those you should probably not waste your money on cables.

Obviously you're much more versed in computer audio than I am. I'm just getting started. Consequently, your point was not very obvious. In fact, it was completely lost on a newbie. All in all, it wasn't a very helpful response.

As for the rest of the comments, it seems that there's a wide spectrum of opinion about the worthiness of audio USB cables. My conclusion, at least at this stage is that higher quality USB cables are important and become more important as a function of length. The article provided by MOJAVE seems very worthwhile though much of it is still beyond my understanding. The ultimate question so far as I can determine is whether the jitter in the signal when it finally reaches the DAC (DACMagic in my case) is low enough to be removed or at least reduced to what is an "acceptable" level. I'll have to read the article again to gain more of an understanding. Not having a science background is a real PIA sometimes.

And how do you determine this? The answer that occurs to me is that a company selling a DAC would equip that DAC to recognize the output from a test disc they would provide with the DAc. The DAC would have the circuitry to compare what it's getting from the USB cable with what it should be hearing. If the jitter being received is too great, it would activate a light on the front panel of the DAC.

MrHaugen · « **Reply #9 on:** February 24, 2012, 02:01:11 pm »

Ok. I read the article. It opened my eyes a bit. I have to admit that. I see that one bit is not just one bit. It's a sinus wave, no matter how far you push it. And, sure. The timing on this can have an impact. I think I've known this at some level for some time, but I did not know that it can have any impact on sound at all. I mean what you CAN hear. Not just a ridiculous diagram with a sin wave blown up to gigantic proportions.

So the clock on DAC's and PC's can be a factor. So can the transport medium. It was mentioned that HDMI had up to 10 times as much problems with jitter than SPDIF. And even with a SPDIF connection and DAC (pretty lousy one perhaps) could make jitter levels as much as 1 of 16 bits from a CD. And that might actually be audible. How USB differs from the other two, I have NO idea. And the article does not say anything about the importance of the "quality" of USB cables either. So, who knows. Perhaps it will help. I would be careful spending awfully much money on them though.

pcstockton · « **Reply #10 on:** February 24, 2012, 02:10:46 pm »

The thing to remember everyone, is that although the 0s and 1s will do what they do with any cable of any build quality, bog standard cables may have detrimental affects in other ways you may not be thinking about.

Some DACs and other equipment may be VERY sensitive to things like RFI and microphony, vibrations etc. Some cables will handle this better than others. Certainly the "audiophile" cables take some of these things into account.

You know if you are in that camp or not and can often easily hear differences between cables.

For example, older (Olive and Chrome Bumber) Naim gear have unregulated outputs from the amplifier. Naim uses the the speaker cable to present the correct loads. In this case the speaker cables should actually be seen as a part of the amplifier. If you use speaker cables like Kimber with older Naim gear it will not sounds as good as using something with the right inductance/resistance (or whatever it is called).

That said, I think the goal here is "well built", not "ridiculously expensive". There is also the point that a good looking cable is sometimes desired. In some scenarios you can see these things and they are in the middle of the living room. A nice braided cable or whatever can be pleasing.

If you spent $30 on a well built, well shielded 2 meter USB cable I wouldn't make fun of you. However, if you start dropping $1000 per meter for some cryogenically frozen Cat-5 cables I might think you wasted some money.

In the end though, WITH ALL AUDIO COMPONENTS, and there is NO exception to this, let your ears do the walking. Dont look at tech sheets, specifications, test data or graphs. Get recommendations from people you trust and buy from people with a return policy.

I know lamp cord will work for speaker cable, and a $1 USB cable from Radio Shack connect your DAC up, but given the level of kit you have you may want to reach a little higher.... unless of course your ears tell you otherwise.

ALWAYS LISTEN TO YOUR EARS. They tell the whole story.

Dont forget placebos DO work, you can see that in any drug trial. The sugar pill cures headaches etc... So if it sounds better, it does sound better. Yes a tautology but one that is often overlooked.

-Patrick

Houckster · « **Reply #11 on:** February 24, 2012, 03:12:36 pm »

Quote from: pcstockton on February 24, 2012, 02:10:46 pm

In the end though, WITH ALL AUDIO COMPONENTS, and there is NO exception to this, let your ears do the walking. Dont look at tech sheets, specifications, test data or graphs. Get recommendations from people you trust and buy from people with a return policy.

While this is certainly good advice, it's still a good bet the audio industry could help us a bit more. I continue to believe that the solution I proposed above is a step in the right direction.

As a follow-up, I just bought two Pangea USB cables from Audio Advisor. I'll see if there's a difference. I asked about how much of the jitter the DAC can eliminate and he said that it can't eliminate all the jitter so preventing it is also important.

pcstockton · « **Reply #12 on:** February 24, 2012, 04:15:31 pm »

I still think your ears are all that matter.

Some of the best CD players ever created have higher jitter numbers than some crappy ones.

Jitter isn't everything. It is just one of hundreds of factors that affect SQ. Who cares what the jitter numbers are if you prefer something else or cannot discern a meaningful difference?

-patrick

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #13 on:** February 24, 2012, 06:17:20 pm »

Quote from: Sandy B Ridge on February 24, 2012, 08:45:56 am

Now there's a marketing opportunity for you....

I'm sure I could buy a joblot of cheap hubs off 'the Bay' and rebox them in my garden shed in nice shiny aluminium cases and sell them on for $200 a pop. What do you think?!

SBR

I think you could sell them. Particularly if you put a big enough power cord on them.

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #14 on:** February 24, 2012, 06:20:06 pm »

Quote from: Houckster on February 24, 2012, 01:06:57 pm

Obviously you're much more versed in computer audio than I am. I'm just getting started. Consequently, your point was not very obvious. In fact, it was completely lost on a newbie. All in all, it wasn't a very helpful response.

Okay.

Houckster · « **Reply #15 on:** February 24, 2012, 06:21:37 pm »

Quote

I still think your ears are all that matter.

Some of the best CD players ever created have higher jitter numbers than some crappy ones.

Jitter isn't everything. It is just one of hundreds of factors that affect SQ. Who cares what the jitter numbers are if you prefer something else or cannot discern a meaningful difference?

-patrick

Ears do matter and if one is happy with their system, that's all matters for many.

From my point of view though, there is the consideration that it is also nice that one's system portray the music realistically so getting rid of the trash is important.

And if someone is selling a CD player for a lot of money and it produces more jitter than a cheap one, I'd say that one should look elsewhere or buy the cheap player. How can a player that is producing distorted sound be one of the "best CD players"? Frankly, I doubt that if you're spending $750-$1500 for a component these days, it should be pretty good in the specs department. I think you may be overstating your argument here.

But as you say, ears matter and I know what my system does now. We'll see what happens with the new cables.

JimH · « **Reply #16 on:** February 24, 2012, 06:46:13 pm »

Quote from: DarkPenguin on February 24, 2012, 06:17:20 pm

I think you could sell them. Particularly if you put a big enough power cord on them.

Thomas ....

pcstockton · « **Reply #17 on:** February 24, 2012, 06:51:23 pm »

go find the jitter specs for the Naim CD 555. Not the lowest out there by any means. Yet it is still regarded as one of the finest CDPs ever made.

I am not going to argue with you about this. Do whatever you want.

I will stand by my personal assertion that there is NO EXCEPTION to the use your ears, demo at home method. It doesn't matter how much you are spending or how happy you are with your current kit.

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #18 on:** February 24, 2012, 06:59:59 pm »

Quote from: JimH on February 24, 2012, 06:46:13 pm

Thomas ....

I'm not even kidding. I do think you could sell them. And considering the trouble I've had getting enough power from my netbook to feed my HRT I'd probably even buy one.

But to be clear on my point. If the hub isn't screwing up the OP's sound then I don't think cables will matter. Ditch the hub then worry about cables. (I don't think he needs to worry about either.)

pcstockton · « **Reply #19 on:** February 24, 2012, 07:08:36 pm »

agreed. no real point in getting a nice USB cable then jam a sub-par connection between them.

I am guessing he will hear no meaningful difference. If he does then it will be a worthwhile upgrade!!!

Once again. Listen and tell yourself whats up.

Don't forget to come back in here and report your findings though. This is how we all learn.

-patrick

JimH · « **Reply #20 on:** February 24, 2012, 08:11:30 pm »

Quote from: DarkPenguin on February 24, 2012, 06:59:59 pm

I'm not even kidding.

What makes you think we'd buy that?

Marlene · « **Reply #21 on:** February 24, 2012, 08:54:02 pm »

I measured several USB cables as good and realistic as possible with RMAA, the results were published on my blog:

http://marlene-d.blogspot.com/2012/01/hot-voodoo-audio-differences-between.html
http://marlene-d.blogspot.com/2012/01/more-usb-cables-more-differences.html

Different USB cables not only sound slightly different, they also measure slightly different (in one case even a bit more than expected).

pcstockton · « **Reply #22 on:** February 24, 2012, 09:24:58 pm »

i cant make heads or tails of either of those posts.

In the first you come to no conclusions.
In the second I am not sure what the point is other than you say the Belkin is best???

I am not sure. It almost reads like a google translation of another language.

No offense, I am sure you have done something worthwhile here. Can you interpret those graphs and conclusions for the lay person.

Every single one of those graphs, which must be meaningful or you wouldn't post them, look identical to me. What are we supposed to be looking for there?

Thanks!
Patrick

drmimosa · « **Reply #23 on:** February 24, 2012, 10:04:58 pm »

I've got a 19.99 powered Belkin hub with 4 USB inputs, it is dead quiet when plugged into a decent outboard USB DAC.

Three hard drives later, I needed more USB inputs, so I bought a 7-plug USB powered hub from a neighborhood computer store. Suddenly there was audible, quiet electrical noise coming out of the speakers. Each time I plugged a new USB cord into the device the speakers popped, I'm assuming this was from a power spike.

I came to the conclusion that a bad power supply on a USB hub can wreck havok on an audio system... but it wasn't "audiophile noise", it was electronic hums, pops and clicks.

In any case, I'll send you guys the faulty unit for use in the Dynamoid Audiophile USB Powerhub sales pitch A/B demo.

Houckster · « **Reply #24 on:** February 25, 2012, 08:42:27 am »

Quote

agreed. no real point in getting a nice USB cable then jam a sub-par connection between them.

I am guessing he will hear no meaningful difference. If he does then it will be a worthwhile upgrade!!!

Once again. Listen and tell yourself whats up.

Don't forget to come back in here and report your findings though. This is how we all learn.

OK, I didn't wish to be argumentative but I guess I was a little.

I will get the cables next week. I will give them a listen and report back. And if I don't hear a difference, I will report that I didn't. Note that I'm not expecting an earth-shattering difference, just a bit more definition to the music. It probably won't be very apparent in casual listening.

I am using an Adaptec hub that I've had for years. To my knowledge, it has never introduced any noise to the music so I don't think it's going to be a factor unless the new cables reveal something that the Belkin cables I am using didn't.

Marlene · « **Reply #25 on:** February 25, 2012, 08:42:43 am »

Quote from: pcstockton on February 24, 2012, 09:24:58 pm

i cant make heads or tails of either of those posts.

In the first you come to no conclusions.
In the second I am not sure what the point is other than you say the Belkin is best???

I am not sure. It almost reads like a google translation of another language.

No offense, I am sure you have done something worthwhile here. Can you interpret those graphs and conclusions for the lay person.

Every single one of those graphs, which must be meaningful or you wouldn't post them, look identical to me. What are we supposed to be looking for there?

Thanks!
Patrick

None taken. It´s the first time that someone asked me to tell how a graph works... The point is that I avoid telling which cable is the best. And the Belkin seems to be the worst when viewed from my "measurments" - you just have to look for the slight increase of distortion (the funny, jittery, mountain like looking lines in the THD graph) at high frequencies (frequency is the line on the ground, amplitude is the line on the right; in both case you can see numbers). Conclusions are difficult in any case; things like this are not black or white, there cannot be an easy conclusion. The audio magazines might tell you so but it isn´t true. The Belkin "measures" worse when one looks at high frequency distortions, the Audioquest is "the best" there while on the other hand it shows the strongest increase of low frequency noise (where the Belkin is best). I cannot really make a conclusion because it´s possible that both cables aren´t constructed to USB standards and I don´t know which cable represents a true standard USB cable.

My ears tell me that the NuForce Impulse and the Audioquest are the best cables but this cannot be confirmed even though the Audioquest indeed sounds like the cable that distorts less. But someone might actually prefer the thin and brittle sounding Belkin. I find all of this really stupid - these are only USB cables for Christ´s sake. Talking about sound differences there almost feels like an abomination.

Marlene · « **Reply #26 on:** February 25, 2012, 08:45:52 am »

Quote from: Houckster on February 25, 2012, 08:42:27 am

OK, I didn't wish to be argumentative but I guess I was a little.

I will get the cables next week. I will give them a listen and report back. And if I don't hear a difference, I will report that I didn't. Note that I'm not expecting an earth-shattering difference, just a bit more definition to the music. It probably won't be very apparent in casual listening.

I am using an Adaptec hub that I've had for years. To my knowledge, it has never introduced any noise to the music so I don't think it's going to be a factor unless the new cables reveal something that the Belkin cables I am using didn't.

I´m sorry for joining the hub discussion like this but in my experience one should avoid connecting a USB soundcard to an external hub. My "measurments" confirmed that the soundblaster measured better when it was the only device connected to an internal hub sitting on the mainboard. I would only connect less important devices like keyboard, flashdrives or mouses to the external USB hub.

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #27 on:** February 25, 2012, 11:08:12 am »

Quote from: JimH on February 24, 2012, 08:11:30 pm

What makes you think we'd buy that?

It was worth a shot.

Houckster · « **Reply #28 on:** February 25, 2012, 01:54:59 pm »

Quote

I´m sorry for joining the hub discussion like this but in my experience one should avoid connecting a USB soundcard to an external hub.

Maybe I'm mistaken but I thought I read somewhere that when you're using MC, the sound card isn't used. Also, I have to use a hub since my laptop has only three USB ports which are all taken.

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #29 on:** February 25, 2012, 02:13:05 pm »

Quote from: Houckster on February 25, 2012, 01:54:59 pm

Maybe I'm mistaken but I thought I read somewhere that when you're using MC, the sound card isn't used. Also, I have to use a hub since my laptop has only three USB ports which are all taken.

Your DAC is a usb soundcard.

As to the lack of usb ports can you unplug something from one of the laptop USB ports and put it on the hub?

pcstockton · « **Reply #30 on:** February 25, 2012, 03:43:50 pm »

Quote from: Marlene on February 25, 2012, 08:42:43 am

None taken. It´s the first time that someone asked me to tell how a graph works...

Funny. But seriously I didn't now what the graph was representing.

Quote

The point is that I avoid telling which cable is the best. Conclusions are difficult in any case; things like this are not black or white, there cannot be an easy conclusion. I cannot really make a conclusion because it´s possible that both cables aren´t constructed to USB standards and I don´t know which cable represents a true standard USB cable.

ok?

Quote

I find all of this really stupid - these are only USB cables for Christ´s sake. Talking about sound differences there almost feels like an abomination.

Now you are confusing me. What is the point of those posts if you think it is so stupid. You lost me.

pcstockton · « **Reply #31 on:** February 25, 2012, 03:45:10 pm »

Quote from: DarkPenguin on February 25, 2012, 02:13:05 pm

Your DAC is a usb soundcard.

As to the lack of usb ports can you unplug something from one of the laptop USB ports and put it on the hub?

+1.

Just use the hub for everything else and give your DAC a direct connection.
Then you only need one USB cable.

Urbanito · « **Reply #32 on:** February 25, 2012, 04:52:54 pm »

Please don´t forget that the computer USB quality is just fair. The connections inside the computer and the USB female are just fair and not hi standard. So, the signal will be already affected by the quality of the PC internal wiring and by the USB. In my opinion, a bad connection can't be corrected by the best cable you can think about.
It is through in my experience that all cables have a particular signature witch translates on differences in sound, particularly on the analog domain.
I notice slightly differences in the sound with different USB cables, but they are minor and I don't know witch is better. I use a CEntrance DAC Mini, witch is quite good.
On a blind test at home with friends, we couldn't agree:
That there was a difference on sound;
When it was noticed, no one could identify consistently which USB cable was being used, when I switched them, without telling which one was connected.
Sometimes the same cable was considered better or worst by my audiophile friends, when they thought that I had switched them.
What was quite clear was that a clean connection was the main differentiating factor.
I have Audioquest, Cord and several others, including a real cheap one.
Like it was said, nothing replaces our ears. And please have in mind that the hours of the day and our mood also have influence on our appreciation of sound quality.

Marlene · « **Reply #33 on:** February 25, 2012, 05:43:23 pm »

Quote from: pcstockton on February 25, 2012, 03:43:50 pm

Funny. But seriously I didn't now what the graph was representing.

ok?
Now you are confusing me. What is the point of those posts if you think it is so stupid. You lost me.

I think that I hear a difference and I also think I can see the difference in my "measurments" - but it´s still stupid because any USB connection delivers just one thing: data. This data is encapsulated inside a serial, protocolled, synchronized, highly controlled data stream with strong error correction. Otherwise external hard drives connected via USB wouldn´t work at all, they would write faulty data. But in 99% that isn´t the case so we can assume that the USB connection is working flawless. But why can I hear and see differences when there shouldn´t be any (assuming these differences are created by faulty data)? I haven´t found an answer to that question yet but I think it´s a strong enough reason for doing the things I do.

Houckster · « **Reply #34 on:** February 25, 2012, 05:55:15 pm »

Quote

Just use the hub for everything else and give your DAC a direct connection. Then you only need one USB cable.

A good suggestion. Thanks.

Quote

By Urbanito: Please don´t forget that the computer USB quality is just fair.

If you just buy a generic computer for general business work, you're probably right. OTOH, I've got a laptop that was designed with movies, photography and music in mind and I'm reasonably sure the internals are probably much better. When comparing what I'm hearing on my computer with what I hear on my main system, I'm hard pressed to hear any trash or experience any loss of soundstage or definition.

Houckster · « **Reply #35 on:** February 25, 2012, 06:52:55 pm »

Quote

I think that I hear a difference and I also think I can see the difference in my "measurments" - but it´s still stupid because any USB connection delivers just one thing: data. This data is encapsulated inside a serial, protocolled, synchronized, highly controlled data stream with strong error correction. Otherwise external hard drives connected via USB wouldn´t work at all, they would write faulty data. But in 99% that isn´t the case so we can assume that the USB connection is working flawless. But why can I hear and see differences when there shouldn´t be any (assuming these differences are created by faulty data)? I haven´t found an answer to that question yet but I think it´s a strong enough reason for doing the things I do.

There's a problem here. There's a fundamental difference between processing data for music and communicating with something like a hard drive. With a hard drive, error-correction continues until the problem is resolved but with music, there isn't time for this so a CD player or a DAC may have to "guess" what the data is. This is because music systems don't have large buffers, at least I don't think they do. If this is true, they can't use the full bandwidth of USB but can only take in as much data as is necessary to play the music at that particular instant of time. Avoiding this shortcoming is part of the thinking behind the PS Audio PWT which can read most or all of a whole disc, then store it in internal memory (so I understand). Then there's time for the machine to resolve any problems with the data (using their Digital lens) before it needs to be used by rereading the disc until a bit-perfect copy is obtained. http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=PSPWTP%20%20%20%20BLK

So the key point, it seems to me is that we want to minimize the need for error correction as much as possible.

With this in mind, the proposition I'm investigating is that with better cables, less of the error-correction that deteriorates the music we hear need occur.

Another way to hear better quality sound is to make sure the CD you play is the best quality possible. For example, Nero Burning ROM 11 inspects the disc before it burns it to be sure the surface is of suitable quality. Then patience on your part can assure even better results. Use the slowest speed the software provides to read source CD and to write the destination CD. It's my belief that these procedures insure that the data on the disc is as correct as possible by eliminating error-correction when the disc is created and when it is read. Also, of course, make sure the disc blank is high quality. I like Verbatim. Stay away from Memorex.

Here's an interesting article that I used as part of the reasoning for this post: http://www.genesisloudspeakers.com/archive/Black_CD_Paper_v3.pdf

See what you think.

BTW, I moved the USB cable to the laptop from the hub and the music does sound better.

Marlene · « **Reply #36 on:** February 26, 2012, 01:46:33 pm »

Quote from: Houckster on February 25, 2012, 06:52:55 pm

There's a problem here. There's a fundamental difference between processing data for music and communicating with something like a hard drive.

(...)

BTW, I moved the USB cable to the laptop from the hub and the music does sound better.

Houckster... I´m sorry but the "paper" you kindly linked... I stopped reading as soon as I´ve read the comment from a happy customer: "My wife came running from the kitchen...". I loathe sentences like this, it´s exactly why companies like this need to be ridiculed. Audiophiles like that are always hetero, married and the wife came running from the kitchen, exclaiming in surprise how new the stereo system sounds. And they are always conservative, judging by their statement that the wife came running from the kitchen (where she obviously in the minds of these people belongs). There´s so much bulls*** and wrong technical information (if any at all) in this paper that it´s mind boggling. Here´s the thing: everyone in the high end business thinks that the reading process of CDs ruins their sound. Reasons are jitter, vibrations, error correction and what not. Jitter is a serious problem, no doubt about that. But the error correction... CDs have a relatively strong error correction that can reliably correct errors up to 2 millimeters (doesn´t matter if it´s a scratch or missing information), this correction is able to correct errors perfectly. And I mean "perfect" literally. With the help of surrounding data the error correction can restore everything to 100% integrity that´s on it. When the missing part of the CD exceeds roughly 2 mm only then the "guessing mechanism" kicks in. The first error correction step is called C1, the second C2 - that´s at least what many ripping programs are able to read. Additionally, many tests of audio magazines found out that error correction rarely kicks in at all with normal audio players. 90% of all discs in this world can be read without the need of error correction - and they are. The argument that error correction destroys the music simply isn´t true. It´s a lie to exploit customers who don´t understand the technical side. The more important question would be instead if the error correction is good enough or overlooks some kind of error - but even then it would be used in only roughly 10%.

Furthermore, PS Audio writes this:

Quote

... It is, in fact, a minor miracle that a CD mechanism works at all. The mechanical devices that control the laser reading mechanism, the varying rotational speed of the disc, the wobbling of the CD and the errors that must be corrected for even the best CD's all need separate feedback based systems to correct for their errors.

Until the advent of the PerfectWave Transport, every CD player ever built relied on the same mechanical technologies and suffers from the same problems as every other. PS Audio designed an entirely new system that accepts any quality digital audio data and outputs perfect data in its place, unaffected by disc, data, or mechanical/optical performance issues.

Unlike a traditional CD transport, you are never listening directly to the data from the optical disc. Instead the data is pulled off the disc and sent to the internal Digital Lens where it is rebuilt and stored for up to three minutes and then output by the asynchronous (unrelated) clock.

It´s not a miracle, it just works. What they are describing is how the CD is constructed, it´s supposed to work that way. They say that every player until the PerfectWave Transport suffers from the same problems - but what are these problems? The first paragraph of the quoted article doesn´t make that clear. And even then they outright lie: their player has to use the same basic principle to obtain the data from the disc: variying rotational speed, wobbled CDs and error correction. What they do is simple: they play the disc with higher speed and buffer the result. My cheap multi player Pioneer DV-610 does the same with CDs and SACDs (not for three minutes though). Most likeley they use a drive for computer audio because special drives for high end use simply doesn´t exist (with two exceptions by Denon/Marantz and Yamaha) or are way too expensive.

But I´d like to come to my point: you can´t compare USB audio to CD based audio, they work differently. USB delivers data in serial blocks, in case of asynchronous soundcards only when the soundcard needs it - complete with error correction (because it´s part of the USB standard). If one of these blocks is transmitted faulty it will just be transmitted again and again - this happens so fast that you won´t notice it because - believe it or not - the USB soundcard has a small buffer too. CD instead is transmitted as one continous data stream and not one audio equipment manufacturer can change this, it´s impossible because otherwise the data could not be read. So, USB is not one continous data stream but millions of data blocks that gets transmitted whenever needed. That´s also one of the reasons why USB cables shouldn´t sound different. I assume that the reason for their different sound cannot be found in the data transmission but in their power supply. Even self powered soundcards usually don´t power their USB interface themselves, it gets supplied with electrical energy through the computer.

Houckster · « **Reply #37 on:** February 26, 2012, 03:24:33 pm »

I agree that audiophiles are given to hyperbole but there is still real information in the article and you should give it a chance. You admit that your "measurements" tell you one thing and that your ears tell you something else. The article provides a point of view worth consideration. It is all right to be skeptical but get the full picture first.

Marlene · « **Reply #38 on:** February 27, 2012, 12:26:24 am »

Quote from: Houckster on February 26, 2012, 03:24:33 pm

I agree that audiophiles are given to hyperbole but there is still real information in the article and you should give it a chance. You admit that your "measurements" tell you one thing and that your ears tell you something else. The article provides a point of view worth consideration. It is all right to be skeptical but get the full picture first.

The point is that I know everything that was written in these articles, I´ve read it countless times before by other manufacturers for years now. They are not doing something new and they don´t re-invent the wheel. It´s just the same old and tired arguments catering at the audiophile, usually not technique-savy crowd. And I never wrote that my "measurments" tell one thing and my ears another. I´m so very sorry but you´re reading something into my articles that just isn´t there because I usually avoid making "easy" statements like "this is better than that", CDs, CD players and headphones being an exception. But in case of USB cables I was extremely careful not to make a comment about better/worse sound simply because I don´t know which one is the original and if one of the cables is doing something wrong.

Back to fancy CD players: In the article linked below I compared several portable CD players with a level-matched listening test (not a blindtest) to the original files from the very same discs I used for these players. You´d be surprised how incredibly close a 450,- Euro player, 17 years old, came to the sound of the original file. I compared to the original and not to some fancy, dubious and ridiculously expensive reference. I also offered excerpts to listen to so everyone can hear for themselves if they hear any differences at all - I´m sure that many people won´t.

http://marlene-d.blogspot.com/2012/01/wahoo-portable-cd-players-shootout-half.html

Houckster · « **Reply #39 on:** February 27, 2012, 06:17:29 am »

You wrote:

Quote

I think that I hear a difference and I also think I can see the difference in my "measurments" - but it´s still stupid because any USB connection delivers just one thing: data.

That is where I got the idea that your measurement tell you one thing and your ears another. I am sorry I misinterpreted.

I realize that you are far more versed in the how USB works (and computer audio for that matter) than I am so I have read your comments with interest. I really did. In fact I added your comments to a file so that I would not forget them. I would also be very appreciative of a link that gives me a fuller understanding of how USB works if it can be digested by someone who have no technical background.

Here's my quandary: If I should hear an improvement, though very subtle as I expect because the sound I'm getting is very good, what should I conclude? Is it just my imagination or is there variation in how effectively the USB protocols are implemented leading to differences in sound? All I am at this point is confused.

Marlene · « **Reply #40 on:** February 27, 2012, 07:29:06 am »

Quote from: Houckster on February 27, 2012, 06:17:29 am

You wrote:

That is where I got the idea that your measurement tell you one thing and your ears another. I am sorry I misinterpreted.

I realize that you are far more versed in the how USB works (and computer audio for that matter) than I am so I have read your comments with interest. I really did. In fact I added your comments to a file so that I would not forget them. I would also be very appreciative of a link that gives me a fuller understanding of how USB works if it can be digested by someone who have no technical background.

Here's my quandary: If I should hear an improvement, though very subtle as I expect because the sound I'm getting is very good, what should I conclude? Is it just my imagination or is there variation in how effectively the USB protocols are implemented leading to differences in sound? All I am at this point is confused.

It´s allright, really. And I´m not that versed in USB and computer audio, trust me. I still have much to learn and obviously can get things wrong. I wrote that USB has error correction - this isn´t true, it has error detection where data gets sent again. Much information can be found on the very good page about USB at Wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Serial_Bus

As to the improvement: IMO you should hear something different. At least I do with my Soundblaster, the effect of for example the Audioquest cable is quite apparent. But your DAC magic is a self powered device and while I think that it´s USB receiver is still powered by the USB bus itself this could very well be different. You have to try it out and I really would recommend the Audioquest Forest for that. It has a good manufacturing quality and the sound it produces with my Soundblaster comes closer in quality to my ASUS Xonar Essence ST compared to the sound when connected with the standard cable. A recording made with the ASUS when playback was done with the Soundblaster clearly shows that with the Audioquest the Soundblaster also comes closer to the sound of the original digital file on the HDD. You could also try out the NuForce Impulse, both cables are not expensive and are worth a try. And though I´ve never tried it I suppose you can avoid ultra-expensive USB cables because the performance of my Soundblaster with these two cables is already very surprising and I cannot imagine that it can be improved any further.

Houckster · « **Reply #41 on:** February 29, 2012, 08:55:55 pm »

I just received my new USB cables. It's a Pangea USB-PC cable with "24-Gauge 4% Silver-Plated Audiophile-Grade PCOCC OHNO-Cast Copper Conductors". Ooooohhhh my!!!!! Give me a moment to calm down …

There. I'm better now.

I have just completed listening to several different pieces of music that I'm familiar with and I must admit that I do hear a difference. It is, as I suspected, a subtle improvement but one that seems to apply to just about every aspect of the music: sound stage breadth and placement of instruments, definition of the music, and the general clarity of the music. It's necessary to actively listen to the music to hear the difference. If I had to offer a comparison, I think it's roughly akin to the difference between a DDD of say, 10 years of age going up against a SACD disc of the last couple of years.

All in all, I think this was $50 that was well spent. I have no idea if the performance of the cable will improve with burn-in' as analog cables are supposed to do. I think some of the improvement is due to the length of the cable which is three meters long, the same as the Belkin cable it replaced. My supposition is that the longer the cable, the more time that any problems that can occur in a USB cable have to develop. It's a guess and nothing more.

If you read MARLENE's comments above, you will see that USB is supposedly able to resolve any problems it has irrespective of the cable so long as the cable meets the USB specs. So at this point I definitely have better sound (my ears are pleased, your ears my vary) but I have no truly reliable explanation why it's better.

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #42 on:** February 29, 2012, 09:16:00 pm »

Quote from: Houckster on February 29, 2012, 08:55:55 pm

I just received my new USB cables. It's a Pangea USB-PC cable with "24-Gauge 4% Silver-Plated Audiophile-Grade PCOCC OHNO-Cast Copper Conductors". Ooooohhhh my!!!!! Give me a moment to calm down …

There. I'm better now.

I have just completed listening to several different pieces of music that I'm familiar with and I must admit that I do hear a difference. It is, as I suspected, a subtle improvement but one that seems to apply to just about every aspect of the music: sound stage breadth and placement of instruments, definition of the music, and the general clarity of the music. It's necessary to actively listen to the music to hear the difference. If I had to offer a comparison, I think it's roughly akin to the difference between a DDD of say, 10 years of age going up against a SACD disc of the last couple of years.

All in all, I think this was $50 that was well spent. I have no idea if the performance of the cable will improve with burn-in' as analog cables are supposed to do. I think some of the improvement is due to the length of the cable which is three meters long, the same as the Belkin cable it replaced. My supposition is that the longer the cable, the more time that any problems that can occur in a USB cable have to develop. It's a guess and nothing more.

If you read MARLENE's comments above, you will see that USB is supposedly able to resolve any problems it has irrespective of the cable so long as the cable meets the USB specs. So at this point I definitely have better sound (my ears are pleased, your ears my vary) but I have no truly reliable explanation why it's better.

I'm going to go with "because you expected it to be" until I hear how you did your listening tests. How did you do you listening tests?

Marlene · « **Reply #43 on:** March 01, 2012, 03:33:49 am »

Quote from: DarkPenguin on February 29, 2012, 09:16:00 pm

I'm going to go with "because you expected it to be" until I hear how you did your listening tests. How did you do you listening tests?

I´m going there too. I´ve never heard sound differences from different cable lengths and up to five meters the sound and the function should be fine with any cable that has been constructed to meet the standard. And I assume (but I´m not sure) that even fancy USB cables meet the standard. My tested Belkin cable for example is the shortest cable and is the worst when regarding my "measurments" (and IMO my listening test). And burn-in won´t affect USB cables, much the same as with digital RCA-cables (I´ve tested this years ago).

Houckster · « **Reply #44 on:** March 01, 2012, 11:57:30 am »

I said I would give my impressions about the effect of the new USB cables and I have. I have also speculated about why the sound improved but I clearly labeled this stuff completely speculative and that from a newbie as well. I have absolutely no ability to offer any quantitative evidence to support my impressions. That should have been clear from my previous comments. After further listening to stuff I'm familiar with from previous critical listening experiences, I continue to believe the cables made a positive contribution. The improvement is subtle but definitely there.

I might add that though you think I'm determined to hear a positive effect, it seems possible to ascribe the opposite that one is determined not to hear a difference if that difference would contradict one's predispositions.

People who read this thread will see both sides of this debate and make their own decisions.

What more can I say?

MrC · « **Reply #45 on:** March 01, 2012, 01:34:21 pm »

Quote from: Houckster on March 01, 2012, 11:57:30 am

I have absolutely no ability to offer any quantitative evidence to support my impressions.

You do. You really do.

This is what a blind test is all about. Perform 20 trials, 10 using one set of cables, 10 using the New and Improved version. Someone else creates the random list of cable assignment to trial, swaps the cables, and you blindly rate each test. Since your cable-swapper will know which cables are which, a double blind test will not be possible, unless you not tell your tester anything about either cable, or allow the tester to influence you in any way.

If you cannot perform better than 50%, you've demonstrated you can't hear a difference.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_experiment

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #46 on:** March 01, 2012, 04:04:46 pm »

Quote from: Houckster on March 01, 2012, 11:57:30 am

I might add that though you think I'm determined to hear a positive effect...

Never said that.

Houckster · « **Reply #47 on:** March 01, 2012, 04:13:51 pm »

Quote

I'm going to go with "because you expected it to be" until I hear how you did your listening tests.

That's how I came to that conclusion.

Quote

You do. You really do.

This is what a blind test is all about. Perform 20 trials, 10 using one set of cables, 10 using the New and Improved version. Someone else creates the random list of cable assignment to trial, swaps the cables, and you blindly rate each test. Since your cable-swapper will know which cables are which, a double blind test will not be possible, unless you not tell your tester anything about either cable, or allow the tester to influence you in any way.

If you cannot perform better than 50%, you've demonstrated you can't hear a difference.

Sorry. I don't have access to anyone who has that kind of time or inclination to help.

DarkPenguin · « **Reply #48 on:** March 01, 2012, 07:42:49 pm »

Quote from: Houckster on March 01, 2012, 04:13:51 pm

That's how I came to that conclusion.

It isn't the same.

pcstockton · « **Reply #49 on:** March 01, 2012, 08:11:11 pm »

Quote from: DarkPenguin on March 01, 2012, 07:42:49 pm

It isn't the same.

Dark,

He just agreed with you. And you are still arguing with him. Whats up?

INTERACT FORUM

Author Topic: Hi-Fi USB Cables - Worthwhile? (Read 38809 times)