USB audio cracked... finally!

[PeterSt]

16 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

Anything that changes the sound signature colors it. Unless, of course, you are going to say that your cables removes the coloring that other aspects of the system add....

 

Sir, I said exactly that in this very thread. This, as what apparently was happening to my previous cable (it rendered cymbals to "white").

But I say this anno Sept 2017, so wait till July 2018 because each 6 months things change drastically.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

38 minutes ago, fas42 said:

In my case, audio replay triggers a sense of 'wrongness' when listening to inferior quality, which never happens when it's live acoustic; so, upgrading the quality to the point that this subconscious trigger is never fired is the goal I chase.

 

I agree, and my goal is in recreating that illusive quality of having more "there there" or perhaps even harder to achieve, you are more there ie musicians in your room vs you are in their room there...ahh so there!

 

20 minutes ago, barrows said:

I disagree that this sense of "wrongness" never occurs when listening to live un amplified music.  A guitar with poorly adjusted action for example, and much fret buzzing, or music played in an overly reverberant space will totally turn me off, and feel wrong.

I think he was saying that he never gets the sense that live music sounds fake as in "wrong" rather than he likes or dislikes it?

[PeterSt]

23 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Hi Peter,

Whether it can be described or not may reflect limitations of the person doing the description. It is fabulous that the DAC that you make has got better and better. To me that means, using Barry's definition, it is getting closer and closer to not having a sonic signature.

I suspect there is no such beast as a piece of audio kit that has no sonic signature. IMO a good clue that one is getting close is if you hear sonic differences in different recordings, some sound lush, some sound harsh, some sound congested, some sound dry and analytical, etc. In other words faithful to the source - high fidelity.

David

 

Hi David,

 

On this forum, together with the Phasure forum, I must have said a 100 times really, that if even two tracks of the same album sound the same, something is very wrong.

So at that level I appreciate neutralness. This in itself has a natural processes in it, because you sure will hear the recording technique of CCR's Cosmos Factory, vs Fleetwood Mac's Tusk.

 

Regards,

Peter

[PeterSt]

29 minutes ago, barrows said:

I disagree that this sense of "wrongness" never occurs when listening to live un amplified music.  A guitar with poorly adjusted action for example, and much fret buzzing, or music played in an overly reverberant space will totally turn me off, and feel wrong.

 

Yes, and I gave a nice example of that a few days ago (the too large hotel lobby)

[PeterSt]

27 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

I am not sure which post you quoted from but I would respectfully wonder about any piece of gear that turns things into "beautiful compositions". I am however probably misinterpreting you.

 

With better audio gear I believe it is possible to 'rediscover' some old music. I believe this is due to the better gear "getting out of the road" and not exacerbating the shortcomings of the original recording. OTOH if it was crap to begin with it will remain crap on a good HiFi system.

David

 

David, ... Quotes ? Not sure what you're referring to.

 

Otherwise, again in this thread I gave the example of Middle of the Road, now sounding as from today.

I have a collection of a couple of 100 hits from 60s and 70s and they all sound from today. Start with American Woman (The Guess Who).

So don't believe it and rather take it from me.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

36 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

Anything that changes the sound signature colors it. Unless, of course, you are going to say that your cables removes the coloring that other aspects of the system add....

 

I think it is clear that Peter is saying he strives not to add a sonic signature.

 

That being the case, I fail to see the logic that the cables might remove the coloring added by other aspects of the system

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

12 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

David, ... Quotes ? Not sure what you're referring to.

 

Otherwise, again in this thread I gave the example of Middle of the Road, now sounding as from today.

I have a collection of a couple of 100 hits from 60s and 70s and they all sound from today. Start with American Woman (The Guess Who).

So don't believe it and rather take it from me.

Hi Peter

Don't worry, just me not always understanding what you have written, sorry.

I am always keen to hear classic old recordings that sound great. Some of Elvis sessions, The carpenters, Ella Fitzgerald too and others. I will check out The Guess Who. I love the Stones and have upteen different recordings/masterings all of which sound equally atrocious. Do you have a list somewhere of "of a couple of 100 hits from 60s and 70s and they all sound from today."?

Sorry for taking this thread off topic

Dvaid

[Speed Racer]

14 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

I think it is clear that Peter is saying he strives not to add a sonic signature.

 

That being the case, I fail to see the logic that the cables might remove the coloring added by other aspects of the system

 

You and me both!

[PeterSt]

David, yes I have that list. But I can't access it from where I am. I put it in my ToDo and will hand it when back.

Notice I talk about hits. Give up your Guns from The Buoys. Wild Thing fom the Troggs. And 98 more.

[PeterSt]

26 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

That being the case, I fail to see the logic that the cables might remove the coloring added by other aspects of the system

 

OK, if we are going to be literal, of course not. Take the gist of the thread's title; From there try to see that other cables (including our own) create the coloring.

[fas42]

48 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

I agree, and my goal is in recreating that illusive quality of having more "there there" or perhaps even harder to achieve, you are more there ie musicians in your room vs you are in their room there...ahh so there!

 

I think he was saying that he never gets the sense that live music sounds fake as in "wrong" rather than he likes or dislikes it?

 

Yes, exactly. If the instruments as recorded have some problems - and I'm thinking here of listening to a recital some years ago at a school, every precious son and daughter getting up to do their bit, including on the Yamaha Grand that was there ... trouble was, the poor beast was a complete mess; I don't think I've heard such a once glorious instrument sound so bad before, the action as well as the tuning was in terrible shape, and then having some child's valiant efforts to coax music out of it, well, ...

 

Yet, it was "real" - there is a difference ...

[fas42]

35 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Hi Peter

Don't worry, just me not always understanding what you have written, sorry.

I am always keen to hear classic old recordings that sound great. Some of Elvis sessions, The carpenters, Ella Fitzgerald too and others. I will check out The Guess Who. I love the Stones and have upteen different recordings/masterings all of which sound equally atrocious. Do you have a list somewhere of "of a couple of 100 hits from 60s and 70s and they all sound from today."?

Sorry for taking this thread off topic

Dvaid

 

Yes, that's the go. A favourite test CD of mine is the very first Stones album, the straight transfer done by Decca - this is, proverbially, "rough as guts" - the musicians were rough, the playing was rough, the recording was roughly done, etc, etc. The tone of this will slice layers of skin off your eardrums if not replayed as well as it possibly can be - but get it right, and 'magic' happens ...

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

1 hour ago, Speed Racer said:

1 hour ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

That being the case, I fail to see the logic that the cables might remove the coloring added by other aspects of the system

 

You and me both!

Just to clarify Speed, it was your logic I was questioning, not Peter's

 

26 minutes ago, fas42 said:

The tone of this will slice layers of skin off your eardrums if not replayed as well as it possibly can be - but get it right, and 'magic' happens ...

 

I am fortunate enough to have a very good system but out of hundreds of Stones tracks, I only have a handful on my playlists. I agree they create musical magic but as you say most of their recordings will strip the lining off your ear drums. I just can't get no satisfaction .

 

Now if Peter was saying, and he is NOT imo, that his usb cable makes all Stones' recordings "lush" I would doubt its neutrality.Listenable maybe, magic music definitely, magic reproduction definitely not.

Regards

David

[Speed Racer]

1 minute ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

Just to clarify Speed, it was your logic I was questioning, not Peter's

 

David,

 

The "logic" you are assigning to me was logic I was assigning to Peter when he said his goal with his cables was not to add color. The only way his cables could not be adding color if the sonic signature was changed was if they "removed" color. When he thought he was called on that by you, he said that his cables do add color.

 

So now we are at a strange place. His has said that goal is to be sonically neutral yet he says his cables aren't. Then we have this quote: "If *anything* colors I reject instantly". Yet he says his cables "create" color. Which is it? I don't know.....

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

18 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

David,

 

The "logic" you are assigning to me was logic I was assigning to Peter when he said his goal with his cables was not to add color. The only way his cables could not be adding color if the sonic signature was changed was if they "removed" color. When he thought he was called on that by you, he said that his cables do add color.

 

So now we are at a strange place. His has said that goal is to be sonically neutral yet he says his cables aren't. Then we have this quote: "If *anything* colors I reject instantly". Yet he says his cables "create" color. Which is it? I don't know.....

 

Hi Speed,

Can you quote where Peter says his cables create color (referencing the url "share this post")?

Edit: I note he said " try to see that other cables (including our own) create the coloring". IMO this is not the same as saying he strives to create color or that his cable is colored.

 

English is not Peter's first language and I for one have misunderstood him in the past. I believe now he is clearly saying he strives not to add a sonic signature. At least that's the way I read it.

 

Yes, I called out what I thought was a fault in logic, a non sequitur, simply put that if something does not add coloration it does not follow that it removes coloration. Did Peter actually say this?

David

[fas42]

22 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

 

David,

 

The "logic" you are assigning to me was logic I was assigning to Peter when he said his goal with his cables was not to add color. The only way his cables could not be adding color if the sonic signature was changed was if they "removed" color. When he thought he was called on that by you, he said that his cables do add color.

 

So now we are at a strange place. His has said that goal is to be sonically neutral yet he says his cables aren't. Then we have this quote: "If *anything* colors I reject instantly". Yet he says his cables "create" color. Which is it? I don't know.....

 

How I would explain it is that aspects of an audio system are not functioning as well as they theoretically could, or should - this then "colours" the sound. That weakness in the functioning can be resolved by modifying or changing some part of the system, say a cable - it "fixes" the weakness.

 

So, a better working system has "less colour in it", courtesy of the parts of it "working better together". If you wish to call the latter situation a type of colouring, that's your call ...

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

3 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

How I would explain it is that aspects of an audio system are not functioning as well as they theoretically could, or should - this then "colours" the sound. That weakness in the functioning can be resolved by altering by changing some part of the system, say a cable - it "fixes" the weakness.

 

So, a better working system has "less colour in it", courtesy of the parts of it "working better together". If you wish to call the latter situation a type of colouring, that's your call ...

 

In truth I have in the past practiced that approach to a "synergistic" system.I am not so sure I would advocate it as ideal.One flaw correcting another flaw, what could go wrong...?

[fas42]

28 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

In truth I have in the past practiced that approach to a "synergistic" system.I am not so sure I would advocate it as ideal.One flaw correcting another flaw, what could go wrong...?

 

The flaw in your thinking, , is that the part correcting the intrinsic flaw is being considered to also be a "flaw" - a mechanic improving an engine takes out the original bearings, and installs higher quality, differently engineered ones; the engine now can run faster without destroying itself - the mistake people make is considering that that the parts used in the standard audio boxes are "good enough" - sorry, they're not. This doesn't mean a mad round of replacing every capacitor with an expensive, boutique variety - it means understanding where the manufacturer shaved costs in critical areas, or didn't appreciate the importance of some aspects - those "deficiencies" can then be corrected.

 

Back to the Stones tracks for a sec - my approach would be to say that I have to make every Stones track I possess "work" - that is, can be played at any volume, with, yes, complete satisfaction ...

[Ciukas]

3 minutes ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

In truth I have in the past practiced that approach to a "synergistic" system.I am not so sure I would advocate it as ideal.One flaw correcting another flaw, what could go wrong...?

 

30 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

So now we are at a strange place. His has said that goal is to be sonically neutral yet he says his cables aren't. Then we have this quote: "If *anything* colors I reject instantly". Yet he says his cables "create" color. Which is it? I don't know.....

 

I'm not sure any of us know what a truly transparent and perfectly neutral setup to any specific music sounds like unless we were there at the recording studio and had perfect audibility recall. Any addition in the audio chain, whether it be the very best DAC or the 'best' power amp, adds some sort of coloration to the end result. 

 

After a couple of weeks w the Lush, unlike other posters I simply didnt find the Lush cable to be 'lush' sounding in comparison w the stock usb cable (Roon > Lush > Hugo 2 > Lionheart > LCDi4)... an y differences are certainly not night and day to me. And certainly, I do not think the Lush adds any 'warm' coloration. On the contrary, most of my A/B comparisons w the stock Hugo 2 cable, I consistently found the Lush to be more transparent, more effortless in its reproduction of music. Bass slightly less bloated, more defined, midrange slightly less grainy... about half of the tracks I tested were slightly easier to listen to.. and simply more musical... I dont know how else to put it bc for me, it's a subtle but positive difference. Very rarely did any tracks sound more 'lush'... and if it did, it was because the track was already lush to begin with, and the Lush simply made it slightly more 'lush'.. Who's to say that it wasn't my stock usb cable adding any wanted jitter or 'coloration'?

 

The stock hugo 2 usb cable already sounds perfectly fine thanks to the extremely low noise floor of the Hugo 2. But like I already privately told Peter, I would have simply bought his usb cable because it is obvious to me that the cable is highly experimental and I was quite happy to support his rather unorthodox and slightly subversive approach.

 

Ergonomically, it is quite rigid in the sense that it clearly has a preference for certain angles at both ends. It sort of tells you how it wants to be arranged, but it's not as stubbornly rigid as the QED reference usb... there's a sort of method to the madness.

 

I do wish the terminations sat more flush with my USB ports... there's quite a bit of wiggle room on both ends and can result in sudden audio drop. Also, would be cool if the USB B side could be terminated in a micro usb but I understand it wouldnt fit... and so I have to use a USB B > micro usb adapter. Otherwise, I think it's a worthwhile upgrade to my audio system, especially now w the addition of the Iso Regen.

[vrao]

A. neuroscience: pleased to make your acquaintance .  Good to see another fellow enthusiast!  As far as I can see from your posts, you're in a similar thought process as me. Couple of possible suggestions: 

 First and foremost pay extra attention to the exact mechanical to electrical conversion process, and the criteria related to it. Hearing has been refined and perfected in the last 200 million years .... the keys are in the basics

 Think beyond,  way beyond the typical auditory scene analysis (I'm sure you have). ASA is just the starting point.

 Most important for reproduced music, try a holistic approach -- total system distortion, rather than nitpicking on individual components. This is where a complete system approach such as Phasure has an edge! Every component is meant to synergistically match with others, up and down stream, and provide an overall positive effect along the chain. 

 

[Summit]

3 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

 

David,

 

The "logic" you are assigning to me was logic I was assigning to Peter when he said his goal with his cables was not to add color. The only way his cables could not be adding color if the sonic signature was changed was if they "removed" color. When he thought he was called on that by you, he said that his cables do add color.

 

So now we are at a strange place. His has said that goal is to be sonically neutral yet he says his cables aren't. Then we have this quote: "If *anything* colors I reject instantly". Yet he says his cables "create" color. Which is it? I don't know.....

 

A cable, DAC or amp can obvious add artificial color. I guess we have all heard it. This kind of coloration make all music sound quite similar and after a while music with this extra color-filter often start to sound boring (low selectivity). A cable, DAC or amp can also bring out more of the true natural color from the recording by take away or reduce noise and jitter. The difference is the later going to have much higher selectivity. To me the Lush USB cable doesn’t make all recordings sound the same, IE more colorful or lush. Like some others have reported some recordings can sound more organic and naturel with Peter’s Lush USB while others sounds more ruthless, hot and thin.

 

Sometimes to establish if the change we hear by changing a part of the audio chain is done by adding color or if it’s by bring out more of the true color, we need to listen to many records to see if the cable, DAC or amp imprints a sonic color-filter that reduce the selectivity or not. Bigger variation between different records often means less coloration.

[Audiophile Neuroscience]

I would agree that it is difficult to know what is truly more neutral without actually having the real thing as your reference point.

 

I have no problems with people choosing components based on making a subjective improvement to the whole. As I said I have done this.

 

I believe system *compatibility* is important and that the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. I would fall short of "synergistic" as *for me* it smacks of audio dealers saying, hey, your system is too lean well try this fatter sounding cable. Its not a fair criticism of the term based on my biased experience.

 

I have no problem at all with a component bringing out more true colors of the source.

 

None of this however negates (for me) that if you seek neutrality, all components should approach the *ideal* of neutrality. Any "upgraded" parts should be closer to neutral, closer to getting out of the way of the music. A neutral chain of components producing a more neutral outcome.

[Bystander]

6 hours ago, PeterSt said:

... try to see that other cables (including our own) create the coloring.

Are you claiming every other (USB) cable does, in all circumstances? Is it only the expensive (how expensive?) ones that do not color the sound, or even only the latest one you are selling?

[vrao]

Among all USB cables that I've tried Clarixa and Lush are my top favorites. While Clarixa in my previous speaker-room configuration had a bit of a harsher/sharper presentation, not so currently. Just recently when comparing the Clarixa to Lush did I realize that synergy. Don't get me wrong Lush is a great cable, but the differences are apparent. While Lush adds a bit of meat on the bones, there is a very subtle background haze (SNR), and the transients are not as flushed out. While the horizontal sound stage is about the same (maybe a  bit smaller with Lush), it's the vertical sound staging where Clarixa shines.

[barrows]

8 hours ago, Audiophile Neuroscience said:

 

In truth I have in the past practiced that approach to a "synergistic" system.I am not so sure I would advocate it as ideal.One flaw correcting another flaw, what could go wrong...?

Agreed.  But to be clear, this is the way most audiophiles operate when system building.  The problem is we lose resolution and accuracy with every step down this path.