USB audio cracked... finally!

[kravi4ka]

Wow, that comes from barrows who usually does not loose his calm, impressive new troll here we have ... 

 

@CuteStudio, could you please explain the transmission line theory that they taught you in university so we can compare with what they teach here?

[lmitche]

10 minutes ago, kravi4ka said:

Wow, that comes from barrows who usually does not loose his calm, impressive new troll here we have ... 

 

@CuteStudio, could you please explain the transmission line theory that they taught you in university so we can compare with what they teach here?

Yes, well we have a special type of British troll here, one that misses social cues and is especially adept at mental masturbation.  I think the Brits have a special name for people with that behavior, but I forget it . . . I think it begins with W ?:

 

He is just two hundred euros and a few days away from owning a Lush cable.  Hopefully he buys one and lets us know what he hears, or measures or both.  In the meantime one can only hope we never hear from him again.

[k-man]

8 minutes ago, lmitche said:

He is just two hundred euros and a few days away from owning a Lush cable.

Sorry, but with the lengthy posts, I can't see that happening. Even if the Lush was discounted to $1.58 for his sake, I wouldn't even count on it . It's too mind blowing to be proven wrong. Even investing disproportionate hours into posting here can be more than the 200 Euro punt, but still..the belief is too strong.

[CuteStudio]

1 hour ago, kravi4ka said:

Wow, that comes from barrows who usually does not loose his calm, impressive new troll here we have ... 

 

@CuteStudio, could you please explain the transmission line theory that they taught you in university so we can compare with what they teach here?

 

Ah, the tribal 'burn the heretic' posts LOL.

So let me get this straight:

 

1. a cable maker makes a number of outlandish claims for how a digital cable affects the sound in new, positive ways, but there is no explanation known to physics or electrical engineering to account for how it does this. 

 

2. No measurements are provided either.

 

3. I ask the fairly basic question of HOW it does what it does. I'm polite, insult no one, never dispute that the cable works.

 

4. A host of angry posters attack me personally because somehow, I'm the bad person here. How does that work?

 

Are you sure this isn't a religious forum? Are we REALLY discussing audio and computers? Seriously guys, look at what you are posting, none of you know me yet your attacks are quite consistently personal and have nothing to do with engineering, HiFi or basic manners. Some of the most intelligent posts have ironically been from the inventor, if he's not swearing at me and calling me names: then why are you?

 

 

I put up a page explaining transmission lines with my post that explains it in detail as I remember it. Essentially to prevent a reflection from an end of the line you match the impedance of the line to the item it's connected to at the end. This is basic to many RF systems that use 50 and 75 ohm and pretty much every bus and serial cable out there. Indeed the early SCSI disks had manual termination so you had to fit a resistor pack to the last drive to terminate the line. 

 

All wires are transmission lines at some level or another, I think USB is around 90ohm (45+45) IIRC.

 

If the terminator doesn't quite match the line you get a small voltage reflected back down the line which can sum to voltage levels and therefore induce jitter. This is why a properly made cable can only not add jitter, existing jitter will still be there (because the cable doesn't know and cannot edit the signal), but a poor cable can induce additional jitter.

 

So how did you think TLs behaved?

[Johnseye]

17 minutes ago, CuteStudio said:

 

Ah, the tribal 'burn the heretic' posts LOL.

So let me get this straight:

 

1. a cable maker makes a number of outlandish claims for how a digital cable affects the sound in new, positive ways, but there is no explanation known to physics or electrical engineering to account for how it does this. 

 

2. No measurements are provided either.

 

3. I ask the fairly basic question of HOW it does what it does. I'm polite, insult no one, never dispute that the cable works.

 

4. A host of angry posters attack me personally because somehow, I'm the bad person here. How does that work?

 

Are you sure this isn't a religious forum? Are we REALLY discussing audio and computers? Seriously guys, look at what you are posting, none of you know me yet your attacks are quite consistently personal and have nothing to do with engineering, HiFi or basic manners. Some of the most intelligent posts have ironically been from the inventor, if he's not swearing at me and calling me names: then why are you?

 

 

I put up a page explaining transmission lines with my post that explains it in detail as I remember it. Essentially to prevent a reflection from an end of the line you match the impedance of the line to the item it's connected to at the end. This is basic to many RF systems that use 50 and 75 ohm and pretty much every bus and serial cable out there. Indeed the early SCSI disks had manual termination so you had to fit a resistor pack to the last drive to terminate the line. 

 

All wires are transmission lines at some level or another, I think USB is around 90ohm (45+45) IIRC.

 

If the terminator doesn't quite match the line you get a small voltage reflected back down the line which can sum to voltage levels and therefore induce jitter. This is why a properly made cable can only not add jitter, existing jitter will still be there (because the cable doesn't know and cannot edit the signal), but a poor cable can induce additional jitter.

 

So how did you think TLs behaved?

 

 

It's because the pro science folks in this forum and others take a hard line approach with a closed mind.  It shouldn't be personal and I don't think your questions were unreasonable.  Those who trust what they hear without needing hard facts to back it up have become so defensive that the immediate response to any question of noted improvement in sound quality is angry.

 

I think there are people who legitimately would like to learn more and find out why a device sounds the way it does.  They don't dispute the claim that it has an effect on the sound, they just don't know why it does and would like to know more about it.  That can get lost in the approach.

[m3lraaHnevetS]

22 minutes ago, CuteStudio said:

a properly made cable can only not add jitter, existing jitter will still be there (because the cable doesn't know and cannot edit the signal)

I think this is where you are wrong, apparently Peter has, by trail and error, found a way to influence the signal in a helpful manner. Buy one and listen for yourself.  

[Ralf11]

7 minutes ago, Johnseye said:

 

 

the pro science folks in this forum and others take a hard line approach with a closed mind...

 

I strongly disagree with this - asking someone to offer evidence of a claim is hardly a closed mind.  In fact, it is the basis for all progress in our civilization.  The evidence need not espouse a mechanism, it can epidemiological.  And careful listening comparisons are received well by at least some of the scientists on here, tho a valid testing regime is better evidence.

 

Someone trying to sell cables should have a brief outline of the advantages of their design on their website.  It could then easily be linked in response to questions.  The response here is not a good way to do business.

[kravi4ka]

The way I see it:

 

1. PeterSt has put some time and effort into making a cable, he sells it for a reasonable amount of money, at least for those who have spent much more money, space and time to have a system, that reproduces music to their taste. 

 

2. Obviously he doesn't want to say how he came up with the idea of what makes that cable is different form the others, fact is a few people say that it makes a difference that they can hear.

 

3. People like you come to that specific forum and demand answers, measurements and start using qualifications like "outlandish" because what he is doing does not sound right to them. Because they studied at university. Gave links. Feel that all those people with DACs hearing something different are delusional. 

 

Why should it sound right? Peter can do whatever he wants and say whatever he wants. As far as I know he will return the money to those who are not happy. 

 

I have a friend who has studied as well, has some patents behind his back which made him rich. He was shocked to hear a difference between SPDIF cables and that changed his audio world for sure. 

 

I don''t think you are a heretic, no desire to burn anybody.

 

But I am subscribed to this thread and posts like yours and the replies after that flood my email with notifications of replies and I am hoping that this is something useful and it is not, it is just another cry for proof, measurements, links, theories, ohms, multi layer boards and so on. Just ignore the Lush and you will be happy, why do we need another "doesn't sound right to me" post....

 

Peter please admit that you are a crook, idiot and became rich by selling USB cables so we can all rest, please. 

 

[Johnseye]

Just now, Ralf11 said:

 

I strongly disagree with this - asking someone to offer evidence of a claim is hardly a closed mind.  In fact, it is the basis for all progress in our civilization.  The evidence need not espouse a mechanism, it can epidemiological.  And careful listening comparisons are received well by at least some of the scientists on here, tho a valid testing regime is better evidence.

 

Someone trying to sell cables should have a brief outline of the advantages of their design on their website.  It could then easily be linked in response to questions.  The response here is not a good way to do business.

 

Asking for evidence in order to understand why is not having a closed mind.  Not accepting that something could sound different and creating an obstinate wall to the possibility is closed.  You never sound like that type of person, you're looking for answers.  That's the difference.  And, I shouldn't generalize.  It only gets me in trouble.

[k-man]

6 hours ago, CuteStudio said:

Thank-you for the personal insult, I'm not sure why why my reasonable question warranted that response.

Peter was the first person to say what an intelligent post yours was. If you got the chance to interact with him more you wouldn't react in this manner.

36 minutes ago, CuteStudio said:

A host of angry posters attack me personally because somehow, I'm the bad person here. How does that work?

You should report any such attacks because they break the rules. Even though I haven't seen it, I haven't seen anyone say you are a bad person. At best, 'uninformed' 

[Johnseye]

[acg]

8 hours ago, CuteStudio said:

 

Not at all, the fact I have to point out basic engineering/science facts in 2017 does not please me at all, the shift from the science based progress of the 1950s and 1960s into a quasi religion outside of physics has decimated the industry - we are now reduced to hanging onto the coat tails of surround sound and selling cables to stay in business. Remember all those HiFi shops in the 1970s and 1980s? Most of them are now closed or sell widescreen TVs and mobile phones instead.

 

My post was simply a engineering appraisal of the HiFi chain from my observation and experience over the decades and where I see cables in it. To logically follow your excellent "process then becomes simply to trace the source of the flaws that are audible, and fix them" systemwide philosophy is one I support: what I actually did in that post was simply point out the weak points in the system. Did you actually read the post?

 

If people want to punt their cables all day that's fine, it's a great big long free advert for them courtesy of CA: Good luck to them: as long as we are free to point to the wood behind the tree and get back to the science without being stoned for heresy. Science built the studios, sound equipment, DACs and speakers we all listen to: it will also lead us to better sound: in my view it's the only way to solve what is essentially an engineering problem and should not be exclusively portrayed as a mystical art protected against the unbelievers.

 

Apart from jitter and RFI there is nothing a USB cable can do to the sound, it has no idea if a number whizzing down is a cymbal, bass, treble or a parity check or block marker. The DAC only sees digital numbers over time, only the value of the number or the time can change the output current/voltage, the numbers can never change or the cable will fail completely so we're simply down to power + timing: and all the cable can do is to not add extra jitter with reflections in the transmission line. 

As for the PSU part of a USB cable, if the DAC sound changes due to the stability of the power from it's USB cable (which in turn depends upon what it's plugged into remember!) the DAC needs fixing and will never sound right. The best bandaid would be a local powered USB hub with a strong PSU. If it's sensitive to jitter it needs to have internal re-timing added as jitter comes from all sources: no cable can reduce it!

 

DACs replace the turntable, arm, cartridge and phone amp and need similar care at each stage: up-sampling, de-jitter, power, filtering, buffering, you may have a €400 euro cable plugged into your €0.50 USB chip in your source but remember the best it can do is not make things worse.

 

 

So much to learn.  I am a consultant that gets to work with engineers (not EE's but civil) and am often amazed at how narrow their expertise is compared to the task at hand.  Often my job is to either get them back on track (to meet the goals of the project) or to fix that which has already been done and is unacceptable (or do the design myself).  Of course this audio stuff is a different field to large civil works but I see much input on these forums from people claiming to be engineers that comes across as very narrow focus:  sort of can't see the forest for the trees.  That is also what comes to my mind when I read your previous posts in this thread:  got preconceived ideas; have not read the entire thread (I don't blame you, it is huge); and come in with a big chip on your shoulder espousing all that is wrong with the audio industry.

 

Well, I think you are barking up the wrong tree.  You've just picked a soft target in cables, that is all.  But you have also picked one of the digital audio pioneers in PeterSt.

 

 

6 hours ago, CuteStudio said:

 

As you have noticed there is some speculation about the possible mechanisms by which a USB cable could achieve these interesting results, I have realised - and feel a bit sheepish about missing - that we are all failing to do the obvious: Ask the inventor how it works!

 

Please then can you explain how the cable manipulates the serial data stream or the timing - or some other factor to achieve the sonic improvements? I.e. what is the electrical and/or physical mechanism? Is there an internal processor in there somewhere?

 

Apologies for not just asking the obvious earlier, many thanks in advance!!

 

 

As mentioned above, you have obviously not read the entire thread.  Peter does not wish to divulge his IP but has been playing cat and mouse with some seemingly knowledgeable people, one of which turned out to be an undisclosed competitor operating under an alias trying (with plenty of pressure in the end) to get Peter to give the recipe for his secret sauce.  Cat and mouse is probably not the correct metaphor, but he has been willing to talk about the directions in which he came when designing this cable, and be sure that it was designed with an electrical theory in mind.

 

I also don't know if you picked up that Peter is sunning himself in Cuba at the moment and will take and submit some measurements after he returns to the Netherlands, so if that is what you want just hang in there for a while until the holiday is over.  Peter is very objectively based.  The dac he produces resolves 23bits or thereabouts, his digital filters eliminate pre and post ringing and his speakers are 118dB sensitive and flat 19Hz-20kHz to within 0.5db, his playback software can be used to manipulate a constant (and low) cpu draw to further improve SQ.  He measures stuff, he listens, and freely he admits that he does not have all the answers as to why things happen (which is most important).

 

I hope my tone is not to aggressive.  It seems that so much of this forum is people just shouting over the top of each other. 

[m3lraaHnevetS]

just had a funny thought, will try to explain...

What if measurements of the Lush prove that the signal at the DAC output is influenced in a positive way....

Would this make the usual suspects aka unbanned trolls buy the cable? 

If so how objective will they be able to be when listening. I mean, at that point the listener would 'know' the cable is better than their 1.59 cable so they will be bias.

So in theory the cable could sound the same or worse than the 1.59 cable but the good measurements could make the listener believe what he/she hears is better because of expectation.

Just a thought.

[Ralf11]

Thx John.  I await your pre-amp thread.  BTW, science also has a thing called an Empirical Generalization - we see something general tendency (say, bigger animals in high latitudes) but don't have a law or theory to explain (until we understand heat exchange a century later).  One could easily apply that to audio, such as tubey sounds, dipole speakers, etc.

 

But I didn't see a closed mind from CuteStudio - certainly not at first.

 

Peter should have noted some of the things acg mentioned.  Glad to have that info as it puts his replies in context.  But I am still wondering why a cable needs to be used to reduce jitter when we have boxes to provide galvanic isolation, reclocking, etc.

[The Computer Audiophile]

@CuteStudio It really seems like you aren't here to find out how this cable works or doesn't work. If that was the case, you'd have stopped posting in this thread long ago. It seems that you have something to prove. 

 

Person A: How does this thing work, I don't see how it's possible?

Person B: Not totally sure, but maybe it's related to X, Y , or Z.

Person A: It can't be related to that because C, D, and E.

 

Must the discussion continue?

 

 

Haven't you received all you're going to get with respect to how it works? Yet, you insist on "educating" and assuming what others want to know and assuming what will increase sales for someone you don't know. There is much more at play here than simply wanting to understand how this works or doesn't work.

 

Feel free to look up the other threads where USB cables have been discussed or even start your own thread about your USB cable ideas, engineering, etc... If you don't believe they can effect the sound, then start a thread stating so.

 

Attempting to act altruistic in a search for how this works, is a bit disingenuous. 

[The Computer Audiophile]

6 minutes ago, Ralf11 said:

But I am still wondering why a cable needs to be used to reduce jitter when we have boxes to provide galvanic isolation, reclocking, etc.

Perhaps the topic for another thread.

[mansr]

1 hour ago, CuteStudio said:

All wires are transmission lines at some level or another, I think USB is around 90ohm (45+45) IIRC.

In USB, the D+ and D- lines should be terminated to ground through 45 ohms. The transmitter drives one or the other with a current source to produce the two states of the NRZI coding.

[mansr]

43 minutes ago, acg said:

Cat and mouse is probably not the correct metaphor

Smoke and mirrors would be a better one.

[esldude]

5 hours ago, mansr said:

I do not claim to be a scientist. My education is in electronic engineering.

Well, that clearly makes you completely misguided and unqualified for audio engineering.

[fas42]

2 hours ago, CuteStudio said:

1. a cable maker makes a number of outlandish claims for how a digital cable affects the sound in new, positive ways, but there is no explanation known to physics or electrical engineering to account for how it does this.

 

Of course there is. Any system which does anything, in any area of human interest, requires all the elements in it to work reasonably correctly to be genuinely useful, and not be a source of constant irritation because "it's not working quite right!". Unfortunately, the history of audio systems over the years has created an overall approach which works against getting it right, and hence there is a constant battle to compensate for this. What approach?! Answer: the need to be able to fiddle with all the parts, use plug and play to one's heart's content ... just imagine if the car industry worked by one buying an engine from one dealer, the body from another retailer, all the suspension bits elsewhere again - and then you bolt them together, meccano like - yes, it would work as a means of going from A to B; but would you automatically achieve a totally refined, fully competent in all situations mode of transport?

 

The theory says that one can hook all the audio bits together and it will work 'perfectly'; the practice is, this doesn't happen. Yes, music comes out and all the rest of it - but the inconvenient truth is that enough weaknesses are introduced to cause audible issues - thus, the battle then becomes to locate and eliminate those technical weaknesses.

[GeneZ]

I have gone full hog with iFi filtering to the DAC (iPurifier 2) and 4 iSilencer 3.0's on other USB inputs. I also hAve a fanless PC with a SSD.. and a low noise PSU.. That seemed good..

 

But,  what I may have discovered yesterday needs to be verified by others to see if it happens to them, too..

 

It  all happened by happenstance.  Two days ago there was a major AT&T outage.   My DSL and landline phone were dead for two days. I decided to unplug the "red flashing light" modem.  What happened next took me quietly by surprise.

 

With the modem shut down having its power unplugged.... I could only listen to what was on my SSD.  As I listened I noticed what I was hearing took on a new more relaxed sound.  I found myself feeling quite satisfied after watching a live band video that I have heard a good number of times before.  I found the same thing with other videos and some music files.

 

Could it be?   That with the modem disconnected that Windows shuts down certain background activities that creeps into effecting the sound when the audio source itself is found on the hard drive? 

 

Just wondering if it was only coincidental.   Now that AT&T is back... I will try comparing again. 

[barrows]

19 minutes ago, GeneZ said:

Could it be?   That with the modem disconnected that Windows shuts down certain background activities that creeps into effecting the sound when the audio source itself is found on the hard drive?

Easily could be...  Reasons like this are part of why many choose to use audiophile sources, in my case, an Ethernet connected Audio renderer, getting all commercial computer gear as far (physically and electrically) from the audio system as is reasonable.  Just an ultra low noise Renderer, made for audio, in the playback system.

[lmitche]

17 minutes ago, barrows said:

Easily could be...  Reasons like this are part of why many choose to use audiophile sources, in my case, an Ethernet connected Audio renderer, getting all commercial computer gear as far (physically and electrically) from the audio system as is reasonable.  Just an ultra low noise Renderer, made for audio, in the playback system.

 

42 minutes ago, GeneZ said:

I have gone full hog with iFi filtering to the DAC (iPurifier 2) and 4 iSilencer 3.0's on other USB inputs. I also hAve a fanless PC with a SSD.. and a low noise PSU.. That seemed good..

 

But,  what I may have discovered yesterday needs to be verified by others to see if it happens to them, too..

 

It  all happened by happenstance.  Two days ago there was a major AT&T outage.   My DSL and landline phone were dead for two days. I decided to unplug the "red flashing light" modem.  What happened next took me quietly by surprise.

 

With the modem shut down having its power unplugged.... I could only listen to what was on my SSD.  As I listened I noticed what I was hearing took on a new more relaxed sound.  I found myself feeling quite satisfied after watching a live band video that I have heard a good number of times before.  I found the same thing with other videos and some music files.

 

Could it be?   That with the modem disconnected that Windows shuts down certain background activities that creeps into effecting the sound when the audio source itself is found on the hard drive? 

 

Just wondering if it was only coincidental.   Now that AT&T is back... I will try comparing again. 

Well the cable is designed to carry RF into your home. It does that very well.  If you don't isolate your computer network from your cable modem, that same RF will permeate your network.  You can use passive network isolators or active Fiber Media Controllers to create this barrier. There are quite a few threads on CA about network isolation.

 

This thread is not one of those.

[GeneZ]

4 minutes ago, lmitche said:

 

Well the cable is designed to carry RF into your home. It does that very well.  If you don't isolate your computer network from your cable modem, that same RF will permeate your network.  You can use passive network isolators or active Fiber Media Controllers to create this barrier. There are quite a few threads on CA about network isolation.

 

This thread is not one of those.

  I use DSL... not cable.  If that makes a difference.

[fas42]

55 minutes ago, GeneZ said:

With the modem shut down having its power unplugged.... I could only listen to what was on my SSD.  As I listened I noticed what I was hearing took on a new more relaxed sound.  I found myself feeling quite satisfied after watching a live band video that I have heard a good number of times before.  I found the same thing with other videos and some music files.

 

Could it be?   That with the modem disconnected that Windows shuts down certain background activities that creeps into effecting the sound when the audio source itself is found on the hard drive? 

 

Just wondering if it was only coincidental.   Now that AT&T is back... I will try comparing again. 

 

People may wonder where weaknesses I talk of creep in - here's a classic example of such ...

 

A standard procedure I follow when tweaking is to completely shut down the house electrically - everything, absolutely everything that has some electronics and electricals inside it is rendered completely dead - no standby modes, battery running - the circuits are completely non-functional. Any piece of mains cord that is plugged in is pulled from the socket. The only thing running is the audio system - and I listen. And then I slowly bring the house back to life again, step by step, and listen carefully at each step - has anything changed? I have learned so much from doing this - doesn't take expensive measuring gear to work out if there are any undue influences in the environment - just careful use of one's ears is all that's required.