Bits is bits?

[Kimo]

56 minutes ago, John Dyson said:

Even though I agree with everything that you are saying, and I am definitely sure (with knowledge and expertise) that there are things that just cannot happen based upon differences in USB cables, there can definitely be certain kinds of analog signal quality differences when changing between cables.

There are various kinds of failings or design issues in a system, and one of them (which I often overlook) is poor interface design and noise infiltration.  When a change in USB cable (properly selected by manufacturers info) makes a  difference, it is definitely due primarily to poor electronics design or extreme environmental noise....  PERIOD.

 

Things like 'soundscape' or whatever descriptive term about the imaging, frequency response, etc just cannot change when a properly selected (by even inaccurate manufacturers specs) cable is changed to another properly selected cable.   Assuming no nearby extreme EMI events, extreme power problems, etc when such changes make a difference, the problem is definitely releated to 1) poor hardware design, 2) consistently poor cable design, or very unlikely 3) inadequate standards specification.   Even if there is a change, the change in sound will be related to noise, the effects of noise, etc.   In the extreme case, a poor quality cable along with poorly designed hardware that perfectly depends on capabilities missing in that poor quality cables -- then the system might work so poorly as to be intermittent.

 

None of this USB/Ethernet/etc cable stuff is rocket science (and definitely not brain surgery.)  Almost everything in the audiophile world  is NOT high-tech.   If you want to look for something that is closer to high tech, think about the cell system infrastructure, and all of the very high spec components needed -- that stuff requires serious expertise.  The audiophile consumer is being swindled, but they seem to enjoy and embrace it...

 

The problem with audiophile equipment is not always incompetent engineering (even though that seems to happen fairly often), it is more often caused by bean-counter controlled design constraints.

 

If manufacturers hobble the quality of the cables, and hobble the quality of hardware (maybe keeping boards as single sided, or maybe just double sided -- that kind of thing, or maybe using jellybean parts and trying to select ones way out of quality problems --garbage), then it just might be difficult to maintain quality.   That hobbling of quality, focusing on profit only, or playing solely the boutique game (when truly standards compliant, responsibly designed industrial quality is better anyway), will produce the need or desire to 'tweak or find the correct cable' syndrome.   Of all things, good quality cables, interfaces, and board layouts are NOT rocket science, but simply require compentent designers, and consumers who are intolerant of junk.

 

Noise isolation and isolation from transient errors in data transport are well known disciplines.  However, when a HW hacker tries to do the work of an actual adult engineer, or if a bean counter tries to play 'engineering decision maker', then consumers will be misled and effectively swindled.

 

 

John

 

 

I have actually heard this happen, or not happen, with spdif.  I upgraded my DAC within the same manufacturer line, and now can't really notice a difference between the Apogee and the Belden, whereas with the previous DAC the two cables provided slightly different results.  I also noticed this with my old Gill Audio DAC.   It does make me wonder if I should be using that interface instead of USB.  Perhaps, it is better than going into the Amanero 383 board.  I don't have multiple USB cables to compare.

 

It also seems like the high end might frown upon this result.  Something like, "the DAC lacks the transparency to display the subtle differences of cable design."