Who has tried out different USB Cables?

[Ralf11]

use opto-isolators

[mansr]

2 minutes ago, Speedskater said:

Over two decades ago, audio manufacturing consultant Dick Pierce noticed that poorly designed (but rather expensive) digital audio equipment were sensitive to SPDIF cables.

That doesn't answer the question. If we don't agree that it is in principle possible for a device to be insensitive to cables, there is no point discussing further. If we do agree on this premise, then we can discuss how such a device might be designed.

[Speedskater]

25 minutes ago, mansr said:

That doesn't answer the question. If we don't agree that it is in principle possible for a device to be insensitive to cables, there is no point discussing further. If we do agree on this premise, then we can discuss how such a device might be designed.

And just how many devices have been identified in proctored tests that are sensitive to reasonable cables?

 

[mansr]

5 minutes ago, Speedskater said:

And just how many devices have been identified in proctored tests that are sensitive to reasonable cables?

Someone said the Schiit Modi is sensitive to noise carried over USB.

[TJHUB]

On 8/9/2019 at 1:51 PM, Ralf11 said:

 

Let's try to stay on topic

 

I am interested in listening experiences (and the goal is to track down some factors (galv. isolation is one) that may be responsible for perceived differences)

 

It is very difficult to want to post in a deteriorated thread like this.  It's such a shame...

 

I've had many USB cables in my audio system over the years, and every one of them sounds very different in many ways.  I've also tried a fair number of DACs and USB to SPDIF converters, a few with galvanic isolation.  The character of the USB cable was always consistent regardless.  What made one USB cable preferable to another was how it reacted with the character of the rest of the system.  No USB cable wins best for all systems, which holds true for most things audio.  The source feeding the USB cable is as critical as any USB cable or DAC.  The trick is to be lucky enough to have tried enough stuff to find a great recipe of gear.

 

My favorite USB cables to date are the Lush^2, PPA Red, and the current best sounding cable in my system, the budget friendly $20 .5M basic Pangea that I never used to like.  I hated most of the popular brands some find best, but I wasn't able to keep them to try with various gear changes, so who knows???

[bobbmd]

@mansr I only use cables made by/for the Norse god of drinking PYST( not to be confused with PTSD) and have never heard any noise from my Modi Magni or FULLA or Gungnir with those cables

[John Dyson]

On 10/23/2019 at 3:11 PM, barrows said:

Well, that is a nice "concept".  In practice how would this be achieved..  Anyone can suggest the concept, actual engineering of the USB interface is an entirely different thing.  This is my point,   @John Dyson's comment makes it sound like he believes DAC (and perhaps USB source) manufacturers are inept because the USB cable matters.  I do not agree (at least not that all manufacturers are, there are some DACs with very well implemented USB receiver sections).  

In my view, it is not OK/fair for a lay person with no knowledge of such to call out manufacturers just because that lay person's personal view is that the USB cable should not matter, as they do not know what they are talking about. .

I have to admit that there are varying levels of ineptness, but it is a design fault that if the USB cable matters to the audio output (of whatever kind.)   Ineptness is relative...  Here, I am not speaking of a total failure of digital transmission.

 

A small amount of leakage is probably okay, but it is  a quality flaw.   The design specification (if one ever existed on a given piece of hardware) should specify the amount of acceptable leakage on given design   In all but the highest quality organizations and designs, a lot of design specs will be missing.   Whether or not the leakage amount is worse than the design spec would help to judge whether or not the design is actually flawed per the goals for the engineer..

 

Since the errant leakage isn't specified in a design spec, then the amount of acceptable leakage is a matter of feeling/opinion, not so much an actual design criterion.

 

In all cases, the leakage is a flaw -- the digital transmission (assuming no bit errors) should not interfere with the audio at all, and such leakage IS INTERFERENCE.   For allegedly high quality equipment, there should not be 'leakage' -- but without hard and fast quality standards, low quality WILL leak through -- it then depends on the consumers' own opinion.

 

(BTW -- 'design spec' is a term of art, basically describing the specific design goals, which is pretty much an answer to a specification done by marketing types.  Much of the time, the marketing-types do go into the excruciating technical detail of the design spec.)

 

John

 

[beerandmusic]

On 8/8/2019 at 11:56 AM, Ralf11 said:

Please give the number of USB cables you tried out in your system, and list your DAC.

 

Feel free to say whether you used a cable rental place, swapped with friends, or just bought several.

 

Also if you have any galvanic isolation devices in your system (or know that your DAC includes this) please state which one, or none.

 

i have tried a few different cables and have had many different dacs. 

I currently use an audioquest forest, although i wouldn't swear it is any better or not than any other usb cable.

 

personally, i believe Miska in his suggestion that in his testing that using a standard usb cable with ferrites has been more effective than  any of the fancier cables he has tried.

 

 

[John Dyson]

3 hours ago, Blackmorec said:

Hi John,

With respect you seem to have very little experience with specialist engineered and built high-end hi-fi gear...the kind of stuff that sits at the pinnacle of resolution, detail and finesse. This stuff isn’t built by amateurs and fly-by-nights, rather its built by professional engineers with a formal education and thousands of hours experience in their own and other companies designing and building state of the art hi-fi equipment . 

We’re talking companies and engineers that build Worldwide reputations for supplying superb equipment that clearly propels the state of the art.....that win accolades and awards, that build large followings of loyal customers and user groups...whose designs are often timeless and capable of providing pleasure for years and whose products are still sought decades after the last one rolled off the production bench.  You can draw up a little list if you like....Conrad Johnson, Krell, Audio Research, Sugden, Quad, Naim,  Technics, Macintosh, Burmeister, DCS, Sony, Balanced Audio, Atmosphere etc to name just a few. 

These beautifully designed and built units will perfectly reveal the differences between power cables, interconnect cables, dIgital cables or whatever. 

I’m very familiar with the type of product lifecycle to mention above, indeed far more detailed life cycles needed to integrate hardware and software designs and ensure compatibility with legacy systems. And yet, despite all this, when the systems are completely integrated, run-in and fine tuned, they are entirely susceptible to the quality and performance of nearly every type of cable used to carry power (AC or DC), analog and digital signals. Even the sockets on the wall will make their identity know and that’s despite some incredibly well built power supplies. 

I currently have 2 DC cables used to connect a Switch in my network to its LPS. One is a Neotech 7N JSSG360 cable and the other a silver twisted pair with ferrite. One is fully conditioned and the other has about 60 hours. One sounds like an open window on the music the other like the sun’s shining on the window pane your trying to look through. Why? No one knows...a phenomenon that many recognise as running in but know of no valid technical reason that can explain the phenomenon.

Some say it imagination, some acclimatisation, but the funny thing is, if you run units for a few hundred hours before listening the entire phenomenon disappears, gone. It’ll be the same with these 2 DC cables. I leave them on while I’m away for 2 weeks and on my return, 2 open windows.

Does this mean my switch or power supply is poorly designed or that my server and DAC are lacking?  Of course it doesn’t because any  server and DAC with the same audio resolution will reveal the same thing. In 40+ years of buying and implementing high end gear I have yet to encounter a single piece that’s immune 😉

 

 

When reading your first sentence using the term 'finesse' -- good engineering at the level of current technology audio equipment doesn't really need it - competence and quality is what is needed.  The Boeing 737 problem is typical of not being concerned with the quality of a project, almost guaranteeing it by good process.   Finesse is what the 737Max development team tried to get by with.

 

A competent design can pretty much eliminate (there will always be micro amounts of leakage) any leakage.   As soon as I hear 'finesse' on anything that is at least 20yrs into perfection of technology, it tells me that engineering isn't being done -- just designing.   Artists creating abstract paintings do a kind of design also, but is poorly defined.  Artists don't 'engineer' -- they mostly create eccentric product.

If high end audio works the way that I am reading in these discussions, we have 'designers/Artists' creating eccentric product -- I'll bet that they don't have any kind of serious design spec either.   Just 'feel a good design', and this 'expert' can do that because they have a lot of experience and a following?   Nope, when working professionally, my goal is quality (usually being successful), not to blather out an artistic project.

 

John

 

[Ralf11]

finesse might be useful in the analog stage of a DAC...

 

but let's get back on topic!

[John Dyson]

1 hour ago, Ralf11 said:

finesse might be useful in the analog stage of a DAC...

 

but let's get back on topic!

I will admit that sometimes designs can be challenging, as long as you have good specification, the design will work itself out -- because the design engineer must test and verify that his/her design works within spec (then an integration tester will double check in several real-world situations.)  Yes -- unfortunately, with design the way it is in audiophile suppliers today, there might be a difference WRT USB cables.  Much of the difference will come from the  HW that allows varying quality USB cables to encourage leaks.

 

A lot like mastering problems, the audiophile MUST start demanding more quality.   Proper quality can easily be attained, but good quality requires discipline in the engineering, and grownups doing the work.

 

It is terminally upsetting to me when I hear that people are being sold stuff that should simply be done better, and no reason not to, other than 1) a lack of engineering discipline, 2) developer competence or 3) simple cheapness.

 

There HAS to be some way that the audio equipment purchaser can detect and return defective equipment -- that is, stuff that has noise leaks.  (Some very small amount of leaking will likely happen, but that amount is a matter of specification.)

 

I will let the discussion continue along the main subject, but PLEASE, if you find quality problems as being commented about in this discussion, then demand better from your suppliers.

 

John

[marce]

Stated probably because you make audio replay equipment design sound like the pinnacle of electronic design, when in reality its pretty mundane these days... And if high end audio is effected by a bit of copper wire ,to the extent the interference is audible, between to units, well something is wrong.

 

 

[marce]

By mundane I mean it is not cutting edge electronics's we've been reproducing music for many years now and had digital for 30 years... look at the advances in electronics in the same period.

As to do I know what brilliant sound is, yes and I have had numerous systems over the years, my first given me by a rich Aunt when I was only 14, a valve system with some 12" Tannoy drivers I believe. Through a variety of systems over the years. Also dabbling in playing various instruments over the years, piano when young (4-10) Trombone in a youth brass band (my Mum was once lead trombonist with Ivy Bensons Dance band, her sister played Trumpet, so I was brought up surrounded by musicians and played and sang myself) bass guitar as a teenager to early 20's and again started just recently on the bass again as arthritic old man. So I have an inkling on sound quality.

What I find interesting is there are so many more threads on cables and their magic abilities than room treatments or other things that would have much more effect on the sound field...

 

[Ralf11]

anyone wishing to save their comments should copy them to a new thread - thread cleanup is imminent

 

I may leave some of the better comments (marce) but don't depend on it

[AnotherSpin]

Some of the best and most desirable USB cables are German made, such as Inakustik, Intona, Göebel... How it could be explained by both believers and non-believers?

[marce]

I can't use desirable and cable in the same 😁....

Are we referring to the Laws of Physics believers and non-believers?

[Speedskater]

4 hours ago, AnotherSpin said:

Some of the best and most desirable USB cables are German made, such as Inakustik, Intona, Göebel... How it could be explained by both believers and non-believers?

And some are made in the USA and some in other countries.  No explanation necessary.

[Speedskater]

1 hour ago, Blackmorec said:

Unfortunately Marce, Laws of Physics not withstanding, cables including USB cables make a very clear sonic difference. Are they defying the Laws of Physics? Of course not. Are there Laws of Physics and Phenomena we still don’t understand?

Maybe.

So they have anything to do with USB cables?  Of course NOT.

[Blackmorec]

44 minutes ago, Speedskater said:

Maybe.

So they have anything to do with USB cables?  Of course NOT.

Well normal physics is having little success so far in explaining a phenomena that shouldn’t happen but that an awful lot of people can clearly hear and easily reproduce.  Some may claim its confirmation bias, but that would always result in positive outcomes, which is quite often not the case. 

Your first answer was spot on the money. Regarding your question, how would we know?

[Speedskater]

17 minutes ago, Blackmorec said:

Well normal physics is having little success so far in explaining a phenomena that shouldn’t happen but that an awful lot of people can clearly hear and easily reproduce.

I can't recall a case where this premise has been tested.

[pkane2001]

4 hours ago, marce said:

I can't use desirable and cable in the same 😁....

Are we referring to the Laws of Physics believers and non-believers?

 

Laws of Physics are optional for cable believers. Non-believers are not so lucky.

[Ralf11]

Laws of Cognition

[marce]

4 hours ago, Blackmorec said:

For me its more a case of ‘blind obedience’ vs a questioning mind . 

The one thing we do know about Quantum Mechanics is that they don’t follow the laws of physics as we currently understand them. 😯

For open minded people contradictions of nature are grounds for investigation but as history shows only too well for the closed minded its also grounds for ‘flat earth’ denial. 

 

Closed-minded people don't want their ideas challenged. They are typically frustrated that they can't get the other person to agree with them instead of curious as to why the other person disagrees. Closed-minded people are more interested in proving themselves right than in getting the best outcome.

Yet the close minded people you mention are the ones working at the forefront of science and on cutting edge technology...

Your last paragraph describes the cable believers in perfect detail.

Science is all about challenging ones beliefs otherwise it would not move forward and we would not have the likes of CERN or LIGO...

A signal travelling down a wire can be covered by basic physics, Maxwells equations, Heavisides work etc. no need to go quantum.

And always remember anecdotal is not empirical....

[pkane2001]

4 hours ago, Blackmorec said:

For me its more a case of ‘blind obedience’ vs a questioning mind . 

The one thing we do know about Quantum Mechanics is that they don’t follow the laws of physics as we currently understand them. 😯

For open minded people contradictions of nature are grounds for investigation but as history shows only too well for the closed minded its also grounds for ‘flat earth’ denial. 

 

Closed-minded people don't want their ideas challenged. They are typically frustrated that they can't get the other person to agree with them instead of curious as to why the other person disagrees. Closed-minded people are more interested in proving themselves right than in getting the best outcome.

 

Talk is cheap. Have you, with your ‘open mind’, actually done anything to learn the truth or have you blindly accepted that what you hear or others tell you is all there is? Have you actually done anything to learn the truth, or are you just repeating the mantra of the believer? 

[pkane2001]

9 minutes ago, sandyk said:

 

The same  also perfectly describes quite a few members from the Objective side down to a Tee, . but to be fair, the  poster immediately above to a much lesser degree, who has complete faith that his measurements tell the whole story.

 

If you are talking about me, Alex, then you’re wrong. I’ve conducted many more listening tests than measurements. I use them to validate measurements and to make sure that I can confirm my own beliefs. I don’t listen to what ‘many members’ say. My mind is open to learning, but not to blindly accepting the beliefs and random opinions of others.