USB cable comparisons

[jabbr]

TE Connectivity USB cables are known to have 90 ohm impedance. Many crappy USB cables aren't up to spec and can cause problems.

 

Whether you need an outboard linear PS depends on the DAC.

 

Best to spend the rest of your money on really really good mushrooms.

[jabbr]

 

I didn't read the whole Corning usb cable thread, but it seems the failure rate is almost 100% which means you will be on an endless treadmill of cable returns. Of course, please correct me if I am missing something, but at this point, I don't know why anyone would buy the Corning cable.

 

1) it sounds great

2) Corning will get it right ... I'll just assume it's a bad batch

[jabbr]

How many replacements will they send you until they decide to no longer warranty the cable?

 

This is a sincere question, not intending to be snarky.

 

I didn't read the whole Corning usb cable thread, but it seems the failure rate is almost 100% which means you will be on an endless treadmill of cable returns. Of course, please correct me if I am missing something, but at this point, I don't know why anyone would buy the Corning cable.

 

Also: when using the Corning USB cable you don't actually have any USB cable in your system!!

[jabbr]

Many people feel the same way you do, and as you might imagine this "discussion" has been going back and forth in this and other audio forums for years. One thing we've done to waste less time on arguments that, like this one, are never going to be resolved, is to reserve certain threads for the "crazy" people, and others for the "sane" people. (Which is which is of course, up to you. ) We do this by letting the originator of the thread choose which sort of thread it's going to be. In this particular thread, the crazy people who think we can hear differences among digital cables are given free reign to share their delusions. For all the sane folks like you, it's up to you to find a thread someone else has started where you can call us crazy, or you can start one yourself.

 

Have fun!

 

Wow ... actual useful post in a USB cable thread ... what a find!

[jabbr]

2 hours ago, Allan F said:

 

IMO, there is a fundamental flaw in your reasoning. It assumes that the experiences reported are in isolation, i.e. not shared by others. When many people otherwise unrelated repeatedly report the same characteristics, there is a body of empirical evidence upon which one may rely. Those experiences may be communicated and may have as much reliability as any objective measurements. While there is no guarantee that you will hear the same thing, making decisions based on numerous reports by people who have earned your trust is far better than taking a stab in the dark. It is trite to repeat the simple truth that measurements do not necessarily correlate with what we hear.

 

Err ... no ... there is a fundamental flaw in your reasoning. Shared experiences do not form "empirical evidence" in the sense that scientists use this term of art. Your are a lawyer right? Suppose I were to assert that the millions of people who are exposed to the news about a crime form an opinion and share it. This does not mean that the accused is "guilty" in the way that the legal system uses the term "guilty". Perhaps use a different term than: "empirical evidence", lets just use "shared experience"

 

The flaw however: "group think", caused the Salem Witches to be hung or crushed to death and on and on with many examples over the years, which is why scientific reasoning evolved, and we can now safely fly in a plane, or drive over a bridge or in a tunnel. (i'm just giving a legal analogy to try and help you understand, there might be other more appropriate ones)

 

So no, group think about shared experiences does not have the reliability of objective measurement. Not in audio, or anywhere in where engineering matters. Of course your preference in art or music itself has nothing to do with objective measurement, that's purely subjective.

[jabbr]

10 minutes ago, look&listen said:

Sorry, but you confuse 'thought', 'opinion', 'preferences', & 'perceptions' - different concepts. 

 

Think your argument not hold up for shared 'perceptions'.

 

Sorry "shared experiences" or "shared perceptions" or whatever does not form "empirical evidence" in the scientific sense. Its not the same no matter how much you want it to be, or how many people say it is. The danger of allowing scientific conclusions (which are based on scientific evidence) to be drawn by a vote is that we deny "climate change".

 

If you are trying to optimize your own listening enjoyment, or perhaps viewing enjoyment, you can talk with your friends, and decide that you like a certain album or perhaps the artist Van Gogh. Perhaps a certain album or painting might be the greatest of all time. That's fine. Just don't think that you can casually call that "empirical evidence" in the scientific sense of the meaning.

[jabbr]

12 minutes ago, Allan F said:

With respect, you are being pedantic. "Measure" has many different meanings, depending on the context. And I am talking about "measuring aural enjoyment".

 

"measurement" is a simple term that has a simple definition: just look to a dictionary or let's say Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurement

 

You aren't "measuring aural enjoyment" unless you assign a number or unit to the degree of enjoyment. You are describing your experience of aural enjoyment. Words have meaning. In any case I responded because you claimed:

 

Quote

IMO, you have a fundamental flaw in your reasoning

 

You should know that two people could use perfectly good reasoning, yet assume widely different meanings to the terms, and come to widely different conclusions. We have developed languages with accepted terms so that we can have shared meanings. Perhaps by "flaw" you mean "greatness"? Perhaps by "true" you mean "false"? Nonsensical discussion.

 

This isn't pedantic, its basic.

[jabbr]

3 hours ago, marce said:

Velocity factor tells you how fast the waves propagate through the wire, a VF of 1 means the signal speed is approx 300mm/ns so

VF=1 a 1m interconnect would have a propagation time of 3.33ns... The difference for the cables listed is from 5ns to 3.9ns, even a two m interconnect is not going to be an issue.

 

Have you considered that the differences between USB cables might be how effective and in which ways they act as a wave guide to beam common mode noise/EMI from the USB transmitter to the USB receiver? Probably the entire difference in  cables has to do with the shield/wave guide. Some people might really enjoy certain types of CMN  

[jabbr]

10 minutes ago, The Computer Audiophile said:

Alex won't be allowed to talk about his non scientific appeals to authority in the Objective-Fi area. 

 

He wasn't included in the group of people who endlessly harass subjectivists when they plead to be respectfully ignored. 

 

Agreed, and a good bit of fun!

[jabbr]

2 minutes ago, mansr said:

Are you seriously saying Alex isn't part of the "people who can't have a civil conversation" group?

 

He is much more humorous than you .,. you need a better stand up routine