High-priced boutique USB cables: worthwhile, or a waste?

[wgscott]

It would seem the best way to get a handle on these differences would be to measure them.

[Jud]

Smart electrical engineers have tried to develop good measurements for such things without success so far. Some of the things John Swenson has been working on seem somewhat related (various sources of jitter in DACs, including player software; power cord differences), but I haven't seen measurements and don't know whether there may be stuff he wants to keep proprietary. He did publicize a cheap, simple circuit said to minimize or eliminate power cord differences.

[fmak]

My purely anecdotal take is that the better the USB implementation then the less difference it makes. To me the law of deminishing returns always prevents me from looking at big-time cables. When you get into big bucks (four figures) I start thinking I would be better off upgrading the DAC for something newer or changing some other aspect of the system.

 

that many were persuaded to go usb (I used to call it SUSB - sometimes universal.....) audio when it was plain that there would be contamination of the signal from the power 5V computer supply. This would have been easy to fix by having a proper 90Ohm connector to D+ and D-, with a separate 5V terminal. This can still be done by using the inline sockets in a computer but I don't know that anybody has documented this.

 

So, we now have $1000 usb cables that are still contaminated because of socketry and only past memory of spdif which could have been and has been made to sound very good.

 

My own experience has been that spdif sounds as good as usb and sdif 3 wire (R signal, L signal, bit clock) even better.

 

Worse still, pundits are pushing for $1000s on I2S transfer that has no standard socketry, defined cabling, or impedance match, using of all things a 'many wired' video cable that can sell for another hundreds.

[Starre]

I get so tired of those answering to threads like this without having listened and compared themselves. They say if it is a difference the dac is crap and so on. Listen first before you post! And it takes some time to do this, it is not done in 5 min.

[mav52]

I get so tired of those answering to threads like this without having listened and compared themselves. They say if it is a difference the dac is crap and so on. Listen first before you post! And it takes some time to do this, it is not done in 5 min.

 

it's the game people play in audio forums.

[k6davis]

I get so tired of those answering to threads like this without having listened and compared themselves. They say if it is a difference the dac is crap and so on. Listen first before you post! And it takes some time to do this, it is not done in 5 min.

 

I agree with you completely about people responding and expressing opinions without having listening for themselves.

 

I disagree about the "5 minutes". I like to be able to detect a definite difference fairly quickly when I make a change. Deciding whether I prefer A or B can take a bit more time, but if the change is so subtle that I have to convince myself that I'm hearing it, then it's not for me.

[Toddc2]

I agree with you completely about people responding and expressing opinions without having listening for themselves.

 

I disagree about the "5 minutes". I like to be able to detect a definite difference fairly quickly when I make a change. Deciding whether I prefer A or B can take a bit more time, but if the change is so subtle that I have to convince myself that I'm hearing it, then it's not for me.

 

I can hear "different" fairly quickly, but it usually takes more time for me to decide if it's "better."

[wgscott]

I get so tired of those answering to threads like this without having listened and compared themselves. They say if it is a difference the dac is crap and so on. Listen first before you post! And it takes some time to do this, it is not done in 5 min.

 

Who would you like to see deleted from the community?

[JayDog]

I get so tired of those answering to threads like this without having listened and compared themselves. They say if it is a difference the dac is crap and so on. Listen first before you post! And it takes some time to do this, it is not done in 5 min.

 

this is somewhat like sex. Those that have not tried it may not understand what all of the fuss is about. Good news with USB cables: you can often return them if you do not like them; and without the financial and health implications.

[wgscott]

it's the game people play in audio forums.

 

Although I did not make the point, I think it is a sound one (pun intended). If USB cables reveal major differences, i.e., in significant excess of other ways to connect computers to DACs (eg: firewire, usb/coax, optical), then it suggests either the computer or the DAC is dealing with the connection in a manner that is less optimal than for the other types of interfaces. That variance difference indicates some sort of defect, or at least the inherent inferiority of USB. Given that any old usb cable transfers normal data flawlessly between computers and external drives, or printers, it does cast some suspicion upon the DAC.

[kbkaran]

Although I did not make the point, I think it is a sound one (pun intended). If USB cables reveal major differences, i.e., in significant excess of other ways to connect computers to DACs (eg: firewire, usb/coax, optical), then it suggests either the computer or the DAC is dealing with the connection in a manner that is less optimal than for the other types of interfaces. That variance difference indicates some sort of defect, or at least the inherent inferiority of USB. Given that any old usb cable transfers normal data flawlessly between computers and external drives, or printers, it does cast some suspicion upon the DAC.

 

I am also annoyed by posts saying it is all digitial - it is there or not. I have a CS/EE background and I am constantly trying to read protocols/standards to understand where the difference is coming from.

Scott - the DACs are not defective. It is just a disregard for the transport differences. Most of the world is happy with mp3. So the DAC designers focus on the core and not on the interface. Looks like human hearing is so refined and there is a big variance. The tiny minority is able to hear miniscule differences. Re: why USB ? Without this, you are at the mercy of the source for the quality of the clock. With a USB converter or DAC you can inject your own quality clock. What is mind boggling is, I hoped this async USB would be immune to the cables but it is not. My research on this, is not conclusive. This is the reason somebody like exasound have their own proprietary driver/protocol and people here have reported cables are not making a difference there.

(Personally, if I am buying a USB or SPDIF DAC, I will make sure it has a good receiver. The AMR guys are talking the right things. Another personal benchmark I use is - the music has to sound real.. like a live one - not smooth treble, tight bass etc. If it is a drum kit, does it sound like it is real. .in my room etc. I think you can never go wrong with this approach and most likely your components will be the ones with low jitter/distortion etc)

[k6davis]

Although I did not make the point, I think it is a sound one (pun intended). If USB cables reveal major differences, i.e., in significant excess of other ways to connect computers to DACs (eg: firewire, usb/coax, optical), then it suggests either the computer or the DAC is dealing with the connection in a manner that is less optimal than for the other types of interfaces. That variance difference indicates some sort of defect, or at least the inherent inferiority of USB. Given that any old usb cable transfers normal data flawlessly between computers and external drives, or printers, it does cast some suspicion upon the DAC.

 

It's been discussed ad nauseum that "transferring normal data flawlessly" is sufficient for printers and general purpose computing, but other factors come into play when you're dealing with audio, such as jitter and other types of interference. The large degree to which those things matter has recently become more clear. To believe otherwise is to subscribe to the idea that "bits is bits".

 

I used to be in that camp, but when I experimented to see if cables and other optimizations made a difference, the sound of my system improved radically. My old server rig (Win 7, J River, Generic USB cable) is not in the same league as my current one (Dual Win 2012 Sever Core, J River, jPlay, Mapleshade Clearlink Plus USB Cable, Paul Pang USB 3.0 card and most importantly audioPhil's Audiophile Optimizer tweak). Both systems "transferred normal data flawlessly" and were even bit-perfect, but they are in different worlds when it comes to sound quality.

 

The scientific explanations for why this is so are interesting to me but only in an academic sense. The audible impact is unambiguous and that is far more important.

 

Your deductions that USB is inferior or that the computer/DAC's USB implementation would have to be sub par for the sound to be impacted by a cable suggests a certainty that everything that can be known about these matters is already known - and agreed upon. Not everything has been scientifically quantified. New discoveries about things we "know" are occuring at an incredible rate.

 

Anyway, I'd be willing to bet that you'd never pick my old system that "transferred normal data flawlessly" over my new one that does the same.

[wgscott]

I'm willing to bet that absolutely no new scientific discoveries will ever be made by audiophiles swapping USB cables, regardless of how much "research" they put into it. I'm also willing to bet if, in your new system (or the old one), if someone swapped out the designer USB cable for the old one, you would not hear any difference until you looked (assuming, of course, your cables and DAC etc were not defective).

 

If your DAC can't handle the "jitter" and possible interference transmitted by a USB cable, there is quite likely something wrong with it, ipso facto, regardless of how much money you pay for the enclosure that houses your $5 DAC chip. How do you propose, physically, that jitter can vary as a function of USB cable materials? Do any measurements exist to substantiate this rather remarkable assertion?

[mav52]

I really don't think the debate on USB cables will ever reach some agreed to common ground. I just don't think anyone is going to perform measurements on which USB cable regardless of cost is better according to some measurement and if it did someone will counter that the test is flawed. Who knows maybe one day the design of a Dac will be so perfect that cables and external power supplies are not needed.

[kbkaran]

I'm willing to bet that absolutely no new scientific discoveries will ever be made by audiophiles swapping USB cables, regardless of how much "research" they put into it. I'm also willing to bet if, in your new system (or the old one), if someone swapped out the designer USB cable for the old one, you would not hear any difference until you looked (assuming, of course, your cables and DAC etc were not defective).

 

If your DAC can't handle the "jitter" and possible interference transmitted by a USB cable, there is quite likely something wrong with it, ipso facto, regardless of how much money you pay for the enclosure that houses your $5 DAC chip. How do you propose, physically, tare hat jitter can vary as a function of USB cable materials? Do any measurements exist to substantiate this rather remarkable assertion?

 

We are going nowhere, either you talk technology or share just as a listener what kind of experiments you did to conclude that USB cables do not have an influence on the sound of the system. I have made a somewhat detailed post on when USB cables will impact the sound in this same thread (see previous page). A few posts back I have also given an example when I kind of agree/hearsay that USB cables do not make a difference.

I am running a pure digital stack (Squeezebox Touch -> uLink -> TACT->Newform Research) and any changes in my system are mostly a function of jitter. I have done the Philip Golden Ear test and got the Bronze ear award easily. I am working on my Silver Ear and I believe my RE0 headphones are not cutting it. So I am certain I have some sense for sound and some science behind it.

[sandyk]

kbkaran

As an SBT user , you may find the replies by Pete W starting at post 6 of interest.

Regards

Alex

 

DAC/PC power supply experiment report - General HIFI Discussion - HIFICRITIC FORUM - HIFICRITIC FORUM : hi fi audio systems forum

[drez]

Why should we expect agreement?

 

There are those here who have an open mind and are at least willing to listen for themselves. These folks have systems that vary significantly in terms of transparency. In the more transparent systems, the USB cable (or any cable or component) can have a great impact. In the less transparent systems, not so much. So disagreement should be expected. I think the answer really comes down to "it really depends". And that's true of most things in this hobby.

 

Couldn't have said it better.

[Jud]

Although I did not make the point, I think it is a sound one (pun intended). If USB cables reveal major differences, i.e., in significant excess of other ways to connect computers to DACs (eg: firewire, usb/coax, optical), then it suggests either the computer or the DAC is dealing with the connection in a manner that is less optimal than for the other types of interfaces. That variance difference indicates some sort of defect, or at least the inherent inferiority of USB. Given that any old usb cable transfers normal data flawlessly between computers and external drives, or printers, it does cast some suspicion upon the DAC.

 

- I don't know if there's more perceived variation in USB cables than in, e.g., SPDIF cables. There was quite a thriving industry in SPDIF cables before USB DACs became so popular. SPDIF isn't set up to transmit noise from the power line to the extent USB is; on the other hand, async USB is capable of having lower jitter specs than SPDIF, at least with current SPDIF technology. Re optical, didn't you experience variation in the performance of optical SPDIF cables? Re firewire, I did an unintentional blind test on myself when I was trying out playback with SD cards. I was preferring (in sighted listening) SD card playback to playback from an external Firewire drive. But then in one trial SD card playback didn't sound as good. When I got up and walked over to the system after the track had finished playing, I saw I'd forgotten to disconnect the Firewire cable. The music had played from the SD card rather than the Firewire drive, but just the Firewire cable being connected had made an audible difference, blind. (Admittedly just one trial - could be coincidence.)

 

- The performance of external drives and printers, so far as I know, is not deleteriously affected by jitter, and is also by and large immune to noise on the ground plane, or in analog circuitry unless it is quite severe. Any of these things may affect the performance of a digital playback system; the only question is what levels are sufficient to be noticeable.

 

- Since there are smart audio engineers (who don't make and sell USB cables) who think these questions are still worthwhile looking into, and I am not a smart audio engineer, I think I will rely on their expertise.

[Jud]

I'm willing to bet that absolutely no new scientific discoveries will ever be made by audiophiles swapping USB cables, regardless of how much "research" they put into it.

 

I agree. I also doubt they'll be made through discussions between such folks and people who don't think USB cables make a difference (or that they can).

 

 

I'm also willing to bet if, in your new system (or the old one), if someone swapped out the designer USB cable for the old one, you would not hear any difference until you looked (assuming, of course, your cables and DAC etc were not defective).

 

 

You know that I am a glutton for punishment re such tests. If you are ever in the Philly-NYC area for a conference and have sufficient spare time, I'd be delighted to play host, and cable-swapping could be among the festivities.

[wgscott]

So why isn't more emphasis put on making wireless DACs? That seems like the ultimate solution.

 

You are right, I was disappointed with optical. I wanted to believe it would be the best, since it has perfect electrical isolation. The glass one at least sounded as good as my USB/spdif (Halide bridge), but the DAC had trouble locking onto an 96kHz signal. I attribute the difference, therefore, do the imperfection (limitation, defect?) of the DAC.

 

As much as I would enjoy hanging with you, I'm hoping we shouldn't have to be reduced to listening to USB cables.

[Audio_ELF]

There are those here who have an open mind and are at least willing to listen for themselves. These folks have systems that vary significantly in terms of transparency. In the more transparent systems, the USB cable (or any cable or component) can have a great impact. In the less transparent systems, not so much. So disagreement should be expected. I think the answer really comes down to "it really depends". And that's true of most things in this hobby.

With respect ... just because people repeat the "technology says there should be no difference" doesn't mean they have not ALSO listened to cables and tried to hear if there is a difference.

 

Eloise

[sandyk]

With respect ... just because people repeat the "technology says there should be no difference" doesn't mean they have not ALSO listened to cables and tried to hear if there is a difference.

 

Eloise

In many cases when people keep repeating the "technology says there should be no difference", Expectation Bias will prevent them from hearing any differences. It's a bit like sitting through a lecture with your arms crossed.

[mav52]

In many cases when people keep repeating the "technology says there should be no difference", Expectation Bias will prevent them from hearing any differences. It's a bit like sitting through a lecture with your arms crossed.

 

Darn Sandy, you nailed it....

It's a bit like sitting through a lecture with your arms crossed

they don't want to, their not interested and they could careless

[Audio_ELF]

In many cases when people keep repeating the "technology says there should be no difference", Expectation Bias will prevent them from hearing any differences. It's a bit like sitting through a lecture with your arms crossed.

Sandy ... you can't the argument both ways - either exception bias stops people hearing differences BUT will also cause people to experience differences where there are none; or everyone whatever their opinion can listen and with skill avoid exception bias!

 

Of course I know you won't accept either of those alternatives ...

[Audio_ELF]

Darn Sandy, you nailed it.... they don't want to, their not interested and they could careless

Just like those people who won't step back and assess if what they "hear" is actually real!

 

I'm not saying who is right with any absolute; just saying you can't ignore people who have the alternative point of view by dismissing them as "the have never listened".

 

Eloise