USB cable comparisons

[matthias]

1 hour ago, christoph said:

I don't think it is very expensive and it comes from Serbia.

I do think it has an absolutely excellent price-performance-ratio ?

 

 

Christoph,

do you or one of your audiophile friends have experience with a MacbookPro USB out to Callisto or does Callisto need an expensive server to shine?

Thanks

 

Matt

 

[reverendo]

11 minutes ago, matthias said:

 

Christoph,

do you or one of your audiophile friends have experience with a MacbookPro USB out to Callisto or does Callisto need an expensive server to shine?

Thanks

 

Matt

 

In my experience, the inferior the server the more important the USB cable is. With the uptone the differences between cables were not in the same degree as before, although there were still definite differences.

[matthias]

4 minutes ago, reverendo said:

In my experience, the inferior the server the more important the USB cable is. With the uptone the differences between cables were not in the same degree as before, although there were still definite differences.

 

Thanks,

with uptone you mean regen?

 

Matt

[reverendo]

7 minutes ago, matthias said:

 

Thanks,

with uptone you mean regen?

 

Matt

sorry, that's it. ?

[Sal1950]

On 12/17/2018 at 11:52 PM, matthias said:

 

The human ear/brain comes first, the technical explanation later......

 

Matt

It all depends on your definition of High Fidelity.

If warm and pleasing is your goal, fine.

If Fidelity is important, then multiple testing methods are required to ensure the impressions of system changes are factual. Otherwise it's all just guessing.

[matthias]

On 12/18/2018 at 5:52 AM, matthias said:

The human ear/brain comes first, the technical explanation later......

 

@Sal1950

What I meant by this statement:

Some people neglect audible differences between USB cables.

@barrows stated somewhere on this forum that audible differences between a Phasure Lush and an Inakustik Reference USB cable for example are very easy to discern.

So the technical explanation comes later.......

 

Matt

[xyzzy1]

30 minutes ago, matthias said:

 

@Sal1950

What I meant by this statement:

Some people neglect audible differences between USB cables.

@barrows stated somewhere on this forum that audible differences between a Phasure Lush and an Inakustik Reference USB cable for example are very easy to discern.

So the technical explanation comes later.......

 

Matt

 

Good luck Matt, your responding to someone who can’t tell red from blue without some kind of blind testing. 

[#Yoda#]

I wonder a little bit that now one mentioned and tried here the AQVOX EXCEL or EDGE USB cables as AQVOX was one of the very first manufacturers for audio grade USB cables. I'm using the EXCEL for more than three years now to connect my Auralic Aries with the Ayre CODEX and compared it before purchase with some other cables. Result was, the EXCEL cable was in my ears better sounding than the Audioquest Coffee and very close to the AQ Diamond for not even a third of its price. Just my subjective impression.

[Ralf11]

2 hours ago, xyzzy1 said:

 

Good luck Matt, your responding to someone who can’t tell red from blue without some kind of blind testing. 

 

He is completely correct.

 

BTW, I prefer slightly warm and pleasing, and use an Audio Research euphonicisor to get it - it also does other things, such as input switching, volume control, sound staging improvements, and (I swear) lends the music a sense of rhythm & pace.

[Sal1950]

6 hours ago, matthias said:

 

@Sal1950

What I meant by this statement:

Some people neglect audible differences between USB cables.

@barrows stated somewhere on this forum that audible differences between a Phasure Lush and an Inakustik Reference USB cable for example are very easy to discern.

So the technical explanation comes later.......

 

Matt

Your absolutely correct. No attempt to determine technical explanations should ever be pursued until the fact of audible differences are substantiated in a manner more supportable than sighted bias influenced listening and random guessing.

[xyzzy1]

4 hours ago, Ralf11 said:

 

He is completely correct.

 

BTW, I prefer slightly warm and pleasing, and use an Audio Research euphonicisor to get it - it also does other things, such as input switching, volume control, sound staging improvements, and (I swear) lends the music a sense of rhythm & pace.

 

As I prefer Budweiser cause it almost tastes like beer and everyone says it’s good and everyone drinks it. Haayuk. 

[Teresa]

12 hours ago, Sal1950 said:

It all depends on your definition of High Fidelity.

If warm and pleasing is your goal, fine.

If Fidelity is important, then multiple testing methods are required to ensure the impressions of system changes are factual. Otherwise it's all just guessing.

 

What's wrong with warm, pleasing and accurate sound? Just because something is accurate does not mean it has to sound cold. Ever been to a great sounding concert hall? To me music sounds warmer and more pleasing in a great concert hall than any audio system I've ever heard. So in short if it doesn't sound warm and pleasing it is inaccurate as it does not reflect reality, no matter the specs. Of course demand excellent specifications, but listen for how close it sounds to a real concert hall experience. It is possible to have both accuracy and warm pleasing sound.

[STC]

46 minutes ago, Teresa said:

So in short if it doesn't sound warm and pleasing it is inaccurate as it does not reflect reality, no matter the specs.

 

The saddest part is many sacrifice musical enjoyment in the name of accurate measurements. I have seen many audiophiles do not listen to some of their favourite oldies because they do not sound good with the accurately measuring equipment.

 

The greatest trick that audiophile equipment manufacturers did was to remove the bass and treble knobs. A lot of this discussion would be a none issue with this two knobs.  

[Sal1950]

9 hours ago, Teresa said:

 

What's wrong with warm, pleasing and accurate sound? Just because something is accurate does not mean it has to sound cold. Ever been to a great sounding concert hall? To me music sounds warmer and more pleasing in a great concert hall than any audio system I've ever heard. So in short if it doesn't sound warm and pleasing it is inaccurate as it does not reflect reality, no matter the specs. Of course demand excellent specifications, but listen for how close it sounds to a real concert hall experience. It is possible to have both accuracy and warm pleasing sound.

Who said there were at odds?  Accurate simply means it sounds like whats on the recording, the engineers intended result. If the recording is cold, and your system makes it sound warm, it's doing something wrong,  that isn't High Fidelity.

I'm not sure what part of that simple truth you don't understand?

[Ralf11]

12 hours ago, Teresa said:

 

What's wrong with warm, pleasing and accurate sound? Just because something is accurate does not mean it has to sound cold. Ever been to a great sounding concert hall? To me music sounds warmer and more pleasing in a great concert hall than any audio system I've ever heard. So in short if it doesn't sound warm and pleasing it is inaccurate as it does not reflect reality, no matter the specs. Of course demand excellent specifications, but listen for how close it sounds to a real concert hall experience. It is possible to have both accuracy and warm pleasing sound.

 

Nothing is wrong with it.  See my post above.

 

Just recognize it is not High Fidelity (or the highest fidelity) and inaccurate.  So Sal is right about that, and wrong about wrong.

[Teresa]

13 hours ago, Sal1950 said:

Who said there were at odds?  Accurate simply means it sounds like whats on the recording, the engineers intended result. If the recording is cold, and your system makes it sound warm, it's doing something wrong,  that isn't High Fidelity.

I'm not sure what part of that simple truth you don't understand?

 

They are not at odds!

 

It is you who does not understand what I am saying. Accurate equipment is not supposed to sound cold when reproducing a warm acoustic. It's as simple as that, understand? I can't be clearer. In short warm, pleasing and accurate sound is the goal of high fidelity.

 

If a cold sounding recording is played on an warm, pleasing and accurate system it will sound cold, DUH! If equipment makes warm sound cold or cold sound warm it is not accurate. I trade in or sale cold sounding recordings, as I prefer accuracy which is a warm acoustic if the recording engineer did their job correctly and captured reality. It is about the closest to reality. And cold is very far from reality. Thus with equipment with identical specifications the one that has the warmth of real live music is the most accurate. Do you understand now?

 

Thus it is possible to have warm, pleasing and accurate sound is all I tried to say. And you are correct they are not at odds.

[highstream]

On 12/22/2018 at 12:45 PM, Sal1950 said:

It all depends on your definition of High Fidelity.

If warm and pleasing is your goal, fine.

If Fidelity is important, then multiple testing methods are required to ensure the impressions of system changes are factual. Otherwise it's all just guessing.

 

To the degree that you are open to considering your own assumptins, you might be interested in the discussion in response to Paul McGowan's blog post today called "Who Would Decide."  Among the respondents who are typically in the discussions are an international conglomeration of long-time high level engineers, sound people, audio dealers and developers, as well as experienced audiophiles with relatively high level systems.

https://www.psaudio.com/community/pauls-posts/

[highstream]

On 12/23/2018 at 2:14 AM, STC said:

 

The saddest part is many sacrifice musical enjoyment in the name of accurate measurements. I have seen many audiophiles do not listen to some of their favourite oldies because they do not sound good with the accurately measuring equipment.

 

The greatest trick that audiophile equipment manufacturers did was to remove the bass and treble knobs. A lot of this discussion would be a none issue with this two knobs.  

 

I'm with Teresa, and will take it further. I find the part that's hardest to deal with is not those who insist on measurements as a precondition or accompaniment for musical pleasure; I think they deserve limited attention. Rather, it's those who prioritize various aspects of "sound effects" and fetishize what's commonly called "neutral" as tonally accurate. I say that while accepting and understanding the differences among us in musical experience, hearing and tastes or preferences, and am not suggesting that anyone go with sound that doesn't please them.

 

Yet, I suspect the striving for so-called neutrality is distorting development in audio equipment, as developers feel obliged to cater to the whiz-bang market that accompanies it for survival. Finding modestly warm equipment, especially among better quality cables, that resembles actual music is not so easy these days, although it does exist. And it's typically downplayed in comparative reviews as not being as detailed or having some other sonic characteristics as those called neutral. However, the odd thing is that I can't recall a performance where the sound, tonally or in sonic effects, resembled what I've heard in well-celebrated home audio equipment and cables called neutral, except on the rare and unpleasant occasions when performers insisted on being miked that way. If there is a warm cable, for instance, that matches the sonic effects of what goes with neutral, I'd love to hear it. But I suspect bringing the two together is well beyond my price range.

[Sal1950]

21 hours ago, Teresa said:

And you are correct they are not at odds.

I knew I was correct all along, so why are you arguing with me?

 

[Jud]

Would be nice to get back on topic.

 

Christmas, Santa will know who's been naughty!   

[Teresa]

2 hours ago, Sal1950 said:

I knew I was correct all along, so why are you arguing with me?

 

I guess we misunderstood each other, I'm glad in the end we agree.

[Superdad]

10 hours ago, Teresa said:

I guess we misunderstood each other, I'm glad in the end we agree.

 

Sal & Teresa agreeing?  Not since the friendship between Justices Ginsberg and Scalia has there been a more unlikely pairing.

A Christmas miracle if I ever saw one! 

[Sal1950]

11 hours ago, Teresa said:

 

I guess we misunderstood each other, I'm glad in the end we agree.

Teresa,

Merry Christmas, Happy New Year, and God Bless.

 

Father,

Close the door of hate
and open the door of love all over the world.
Let kindness come with every gift
and good desires with every greeting.
Deliver us from evil by the blessing
which Christ brings,
and teach us to be merry with clear hearts.

May the Christmas morning
make us happy to be thy children,
and Christmas evening bring us to our beds
with grateful thoughts,
forgiving and forgiven,
for Jesus' sake.

Amen.

[Ralf11]

43 minutes ago, Superdad said:

 

Sal & Teresa agreeing?  Not since the friendship between Justices Ginsberg and Scalia has there been a more unlikely pairing.

A Christmas miracle if I ever saw one! 

 

She clarified her original post.  Originally, it looked like she wanted to alter the original sound to be more euphonic (warm, pleasing) - something I am not really opposed to....

 

Sal's position is that the reproduction chain must be accurate, no matter what.

 

Later, she said that she wanted the reproduction chain to preserve the euphonic characteristics of the original recording.

 

This is an old debate; has been an active topic both recently and even this am.

 

The real issue I think is what do you do when the evil recording engineer made things sound 'bad' - overly clinical??

[Kimo]

I recently set up an Innuos Zenith server and am running it into a Linnenberg Telemann DAC.  Currently, I am using a Belkin Gold USB cable, but am considering an upgrade to an Audioquest Carbon.

 

Is the Carbon worth adding?  I have only heard the Belkin in system.