It *cannot* just be about 1's and 0's - surely?

[gmgraves]

On 12/14/2018 at 4:44 PM, mansr said:

That's not how USB works. Not at all.

I dunno. Seems to me that if the check-sums are identical, the volume of the converted audio signal would have no choice but to be identical too. If you have some other info that would make my conclusion incorrect, please post it. Like most humans, I don't like to be wrong and would benefit from the facts.

[gmgraves]

9 hours ago, EdmontonCanuck said:

 

 

What happens to the SQ if you remove the battery?

Good question. Glad somebody thought of it. Another thing just occurred to me as well. If the AQ cable did have circuitry in it that re-clocked the digital bit stream to boot the level by 2 dB, what powers it? That 72 Volt battery? Digital circuits don't need, (nor can they abide) 72 volt power supplies. Even if they did "siphon off" a few vilts to power some digital circuitry, while the rest was shield "bias", that battery couldn't and wouldn't possibly last as long as AQ says it will (according to the "bias" theory, the battery is not actually being drained it just provides a static field on the shield (permit me to be skeptical here) and therefore will last for the shelf-life of the battery). That can't be if there is active circuitry on board. ???!!!!

[esldude]

2 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

Good question. Glad somebody thought of it. Another thing just occurred to me as well. If the AQ cable did have circuitry in it that re-clocked the digital bit stream to boot the level by 2 dB, what powers it? That 72 Volt battery? Digital circuits don't need, (nor can they abide) 72 volt power supplies. Even if they did "siphon off" a few vilts to power some digital circuitry, while the rest was shield "bias", that battery couldn't and wouldn't possibly last as long as AQ says it will (according to the "bias" theory, the battery is not actually being drained it just provides a static field on the shield (permit me to be skeptical here) and therefore will last for the shelf-life of the battery). That can't be if there is active circuitry on board. ???!!!!

They'd be using the voltages in USB which power USB DACs or extenders or any number of devices.  It is right there for that use.  No need to touch the 72 volt battery. 

[Hugo9000]

3 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

Good question. Glad somebody thought of it. Another thing just occurred to me as well. If the AQ cable did have circuitry in it that re-clocked the digital bit stream to boot the level by 2 dB, what powers it? That 72 Volt battery? Digital circuits don't need, (nor can they abide) 72 volt power supplies. Even if they did "siphon off" a few vilts to power some digital circuitry, while the rest was shield "bias", that battery couldn't and wouldn't possibly last as long as AQ says it will (according to the "bias" theory, the battery is not actually being drained it just provides a static field on the shield (permit me to be skeptical here) and therefore will last for the shelf-life of the battery). That can't be if there is active circuitry on board. ???!!!!

It's USB, which has power.  Without a teardown, who is to say that USB power isn't connected to an active component inside that thing?

[gmgraves]

7 hours ago, daverich4 said:

 

Don't know about the Audioquest digital cables but with my AQ analog interconnect and speaker cables the answer to your question about removing the batteries is, nothing. 

Which is exactly what I would predict. It's a gimmick. Again, all of this interconnect and audio cable theory, may have some effect on the cable's performance at some frequencies, but audio ain't among those frequencies!

[gmgraves]

6 minutes ago, esldude said:

They'd be using the voltages in USB which power USB DACs or extenders or any number of devices.  It is right there for that use.  No need to touch the 72 volt battery. 

DUH! Stupid me! Of course. The USB cable carries 5 volts. What could I have been thinking? Nothing of course! That's why I'm in this factual pickle! Thanks, esldude, for the correction. Are they gonna take my degree away from me now? They should! 

[Hugo9000]

This little USB-C to headphone adapter has a DAC and headphone amp built into it, and it's much smaller than that magic box on the AQ USB cable, so there is certainly room for mischief, as I mentioned in a previous post.

 

 

They don't just rely on pseudoscience or misapply actual science, they also dishonestly impugn other companies in their own marketing copy (noted earlier in this thread, from AQ's current marketing on their website), so I would say anything stated by AQ deserves to be taken with a healthy ration of salt.

[gmgraves]

9 minutes ago, Hugo9000 said:

It's USB, which has power.  Without a teardown, who is to say that USB power isn't connected to an active component inside that thing?

Correct. I wasn't thinking when I wrote that. This is what happens when I try to listen to the live concert of the BSO on the radio and contribute to CA at the same time (they're playing Stravinsky's Firebird at the moment)!

[esldude]

2 minutes ago, gmgraves said:

DUH! Stupid me! Of course. The USB cable carries 5 volts. What could I have been thinking? Nothing of course! That's why I'm in this factual pickle! Thanks, esldude, for the correction. Are they gonna take my degree away from me now? They should! 

Well I see some degreed cable designers.  As long as they have a degree yours should be safe.

[Kal Rubinson]

7 hours ago, daverich4 said:

Don't know about the Audioquest digital cables but with my AQ analog interconnect and speaker cables the answer to your question about removing the batteries is, nothing. 

Not only that but it makes no difference to the sound, in my experience.

[Hugo9000]

It would actually be rather cunning of them to sneak an active device into a USB cable.  So many people have made fun of those battery packs on their speaker cables since they introduced them, that it's possible no one would ever think to check if this thing on the USB cable actually was more than just a battery connected to one end of a shield.  A perfect trojan horse to put an active component into!    

 

If it turns out to really be just another silly battery and shield contraption, they might still do such a thing in the future--they might get the idea from seeing our speculations here on C.A.  lol

[Fokus]

5 hours ago, Hugo9000 said:

It would actually be rather cunning of them to sneak an active device into a USB cable. 

 

But still unlikely.

 

Suppose they embedded a processor in the lump that would detect PCM audio formats and sneakily increased the volume with 2dB, whille leaving all other data alone.

 

1) Sooner or later that would be discovered, and AQ would be lynched (*) of forums.

2) It would cause clipping on many recordings, and on some of these this would be audible clipping.

 

(* While the audiophile press would shrug it off.)

 

 

As for the battery bias thing: I remember people theorising about exactly that on forums 20 years ago. And didn't JBL/Infinity have battery bias on speaker crossover caps some time ago? Not very original, then.

 

 

[JD809]

I purchased a Vero audio cable from an indiegogo project they launched a few years ago. I opened up the cable and discovered a circuit board inside, I still have no idea if this improved the sound or distorted it. I don't regret doing it as it was a learning experience. But long story short, I don't use it anymore.

[4est]

2 hours ago, JD809 said:

I purchased a Vero audio cable from an indiegogo project they launched a few years ago. I opened up the cable and discovered a circuit board inside, I still have no idea if this improved the sound or distorted it. I don't regret doing it as it was a learning experience. But long story short, I don't use it anymore.

Vero as in MIT cables? If that is the case, many(most?) have some sort of time/phase circuitry built into them. I've never heard one...

[davide256]

21 hours ago, EdmontonCanuck said:

 

 

What happens to the SQ if you remove the battery?

I can't speak to the USB cable. But I can tell you with the Eagle Eye coax, removing the DBS batteries leaves it sounding no better than the exotic material coax cables I've built myself. The DBS when energized puts the cable at a much higher plateau for resolution and neutrality.

Given that and how well the Lush 2 works, there's clearly more to how to connect two devices together than just good soldering, insulation, and materials.

[daverich4]

13 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Not only that but it makes no difference to the sound, in my experience.

 

Art Dudley came to the same conclusion in his review of Audioquest cables in Stereophile some time ago. 

[daverich4]

1 hour ago, davide256 said:

I can't speak to the USB cable. But I can tell you with the Eagle Eye coax, removing the DBS batteries leaves it sounding no better than the exotic material coax cables I've built myself. The DBS when energized puts the cable at a much higher plateau for resolution and neutrality.

Given that and how well the Lush 2 works, there's clearly more to how to connect two devices together than just good soldering, insulation, and materials.

 

I have all AQ Colorado balanced interconnects and Mont Blanc speaker cables and in my system with my ears there isn’t a lick of difference in SQ whether there are batteries in the DBS system or not. Clearly you hear a difference but I do not, either good or bad. 

[davide256]

32 minutes ago, daverich4 said:

 

I have all AQ Colorado balanced interconnects and Mont Blanc speaker cables and in my system with my ears there isn’t a lick of difference in SQ whether there are batteries in the DBS system or not. Clearly you hear a difference but I do not, either good or bad. 

?? this discussion is digital signal interconnects vs analog amplification interconnects. Analog is a completely different beast for interconnects... down that path lies madness ?

[daverich4]

2 minutes ago, davide256 said:

?? this discussion is digital signal interconnects vs analog amplification interconnects. Analog is a completely different beast for interconnects... down that path lies madness ?

 

I can’t find that Audioquest claims that the DBS system works differently on their digital cables versus the way it works on their analog cables. In fact, they explicitly say it’s the same.

 

”Depending on the model of interconnect (analog or digital) or speaker cable, an existing foil “shield” is used as the DBS anode by connecting it to positive (+) of the DBS battery pack.”

 

My comment was not about whether different cables make a difference or not, it was about whether DBS on or off makes a difference or not. To you it apparently does. To me it does not. 

[Kal Rubinson]

6 hours ago, daverich4 said:

 

Art Dudley came to the same conclusion in his review of Audioquest cables in Stereophile some time ago. 

Some time ago?  My report was in 2004 about a decade prior to Art's arrival at Stereophile.  Still, it is nice to have the corroboration.

 

note: Correction posted below. -CC

[daverich4]

45 minutes ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Some time ago?  My report was in 2004 about a decade prior to Art's arrival at Stereophile.  Still, it is nice to have the corroboration.

 

???  I’m not sure who is corroborating who. Art’s article that I was referring to was in the August 2004 issue, about three months prior to yours. 

 

https://www.stereophile.com/cables/804aq/index.html

[davide256]

1 hour ago, daverich4 said:

 

I can’t find that Audioquest claims that the DBS system works differently on their digital cables versus the way it works on their analog cables. In fact, they explicitly say it’s the same.

 

”Depending on the model of interconnect (analog or digital) or speaker cable, an existing foil “shield” is used as the DBS anode by connecting it to positive (+) of the DBS battery pack.”

 

My comment was not about whether different cables make a difference or not, it was about whether DBS on or off makes a difference or not. To you it apparently does. To me it does not. 

 

Experience using the DBS solution as an analog  amplifier interconnect  ( sine wave signal transmission)  has no usefulness in a discussion of digital interconnects 

(  square wave signal transmission).  Haven't tried the DBS solution for analog, not surprised that in an LRC circuit it doesn't help.

 

 

[daverich4]

58 minutes ago, davide256 said:

 

Experience using the DBS solution as an analog  amplifier interconnect  ( sine wave signal transmission)  has no usefulness in a discussion of digital interconnects 

(  square wave signal transmission).  Haven't tried the DBS solution for analog, not surprised that in an LRC circuit it doesn't help.

 

 

 

I’m in over my head technically here but are you saying that ”maintaining a bias on the dielectric at a substantially higher voltage than is ever achieved through normal use” would have an effect on digital cables but not analog cables even though Audioquest makes no such distinction?

[Kal Rubinson]

2 hours ago, daverich4 said:

 

???  I’m not sure who is corroborating who. Art’s article that I was referring to was in the August 2004 issue, about three months prior to yours. 

 

https://www.stereophile.com/cables/804aq/index.html

You are correct.  I will amend my post.

[gmgraves]

19 hours ago, Kal Rubinson said:

Not only that but it makes no difference to the sound, in my experience.

Why would it? It's an answer to a problem that doesn't exist. If you go into an auto-parts store, you will find a section of the store that sells what my father used to call "mouse milk". These are fluids (and hardware) of dubious worth. Various mystery oils and gasoline additives, devices said to turbo-charge your car by changing the way that air enters your carburetor or FI system, and dubious spark plugs called "Fire Injectors" promising to increase power while giving better fuel economy. A company named J.C. Whitney used to have a catalog full of this automotive nonsense (and some useful parts too). The audiophile world has the same thing for the same reason. While AQ makes some real products, they are selling "mouse milk" along with it and I'm afraid that the hype accompanying their cables is in that category. Buy AQ analog and digital interconnects because they are well made and look good, but any claims made about their sonic performance or any gimmicks they employ that aren't general practice among all cable manufacturers (like "bias batteries" for the cable shield) take with a grain of salt. There is no real science or engineering behind the claims and they do nothing. AQ is counting of expectational bias  to sell this crap. ("Gee, I paid a lot of money for these AQ cables with the battery in them, they had better give me the sonic improvement I'm looking for!") And so they do...