AudioCircle
Audio/Video Gear and Systems => Owner's Circles => Digital Amplifier Company Owners => Topic started by: AmpDesigner333 on 15 Nov 2021, 11:31 pm
-
I’m getting older, wiser, and frankly tired of having to undo the misinformation out there regarding USB Audio.
In this thread, I will explain why the USB cable that connects your source (PC or other) to your DAC shouldn’t matter, as long as it is of reasonable quality and is undamaged.
First, let’s talk about the nature of USB Audio....
Just curious who already knows this: Where is the audio data “clock” coming from?
-
....and not TOO long.
-
Subscribed!...mostly for the comments. :D
-
I’m getting older, wiser, and frankly tired of having to undo the misinformation out there regarding USB Audio.
In this thread, I will explain why the USB cable that connects your source (PC or other) to your DAC shouldn’t matter, as long as it is of reasonable quality and is undamaged.
On the same subject: if the USB cable doesn't matter, is a plain-Jane USB cable good enough/not as bad as people say?
-
Just curious who already knows this: Where is the audio data “clock” coming from?
Isn't the clock in the digital to analog converter? So therefore it's after the USB cable.
Although I realize that the clock can be separate from the D/A converter, I think it's integral to the conversion process. But I'm no expert.
-
On the same subject: if the USB cable doesn't matter, is a plain-Jane USB cable good enough/not as bad as people say?
If a “plain jane” cable works, and a super fancy cable works, there will be no difference in sound quality UNLESS the equipment design is faulty.
How can it be “faulty”? One way is relying on USB power without any conditioning (aka reconstruction) to run the rest of the hardware. Another is a lack of error detection, and that’s just not going to happen when using a decent USB “receiver” interface chip.
-
Isn't the clock in the digital to analog converter? So therefore it's after the USB cable.
Although I realize that the clock can be separate from the D/A converter, I think it's integral to the conversion process. But I'm no expert.
The USB interface clocks the data by way of packet requests. Therefore, any claims of “lower jitter” regarding a fancy USB cable are ludicrous.
-
PLUS, if you’re using a USB-to-SPDIF converter such as the Cherry USB, the data is re-clocked by the DAC, which is the case for any SPDIF connected DAC, such as the Cherry 130dB+ DAC DAC 2.
-
PLUS, if you’re using a USB-to-SPDIF converter such as the Cherry USB, the data is re-clocked by the DAC, which is the case for any SPDIF connected DAC, such as the Cherry 130dB+ DAC DAC 2.
Great thread!
So, if a user has a USB to SPDIF converter feeding a DAC, you're saying the data is re-clocked once by the converter, and then re-clocked by the DAC? Does sending the data through multiple "re-clockings" (is that a word? 8) ) have any negative effects on the data?
Never thought that a cable would have any impact on jitter, but I don't mind spending a bit more (not more than $50) for a USB cable that I know is well constructed.
-
Great thread!
So, if a user has a USB to SPDIF converter feeding a DAC, you're saying the data is re-clocked once by the converter, and then re-clocked by the DAC? Does sending the data through multiple "re-clockings" (is that a word? 8) ) have any negative effects on the data?
Never thought that a cable would have any impact on jitter, but I don't mind spending a bit more (not more than $50) for a USB cable that I know is well constructed.
That's a good rule of thumb price wise!
Yes, the data is reclocked twice with USB -> SPDIF -> DAC, but the data itself remains unchanged, thus no difference in the sound!
-
If a “plain jane” cable works, and a super fancy cable works, there will be no difference in sound quality UNLESS the equipment design is faulty.
How can it be “faulty”? One way is relying on USB power without any conditioning (aka reconstruction) to run the rest of the hardware. Another is a lack of error detection, and that’s just not going to happen when using a decent USB “receiver” interface chip.
Why do people claim that they hear a difference? Are they looking for a difference?
-
The USB interface clocks the data by way of packet requests. Therefore, any claims of “lower jitter” regarding a fancy USB cable are ludicrous.
I agree with this (though I've never tested high priced digital cables of any kind). Is there any way that there can be an error in the movement of packets through the cable? Are there digital reflections within the cable? What if there is some kind of increased resistance?
-
I agree with this (though I've never tested high priced digital cables of any kind). Is there any way that there can be an error in the movement of packets through the cable? Are there digital reflections within the cable? What if there is some kind of increased resistance?
What's a "digital reflection"? In terms of resistance, digital cables that are specified for 75 ohms are fully capable of moving a digital without issue.
-
I am no expert in it, but when dealing with multiple amplifiers in a system where we are sending all digital signals to them, we put an impedance plug at the end so we can minimize reflections. Here's the thing; I don't completely understand the science, but I have seen problems that occur without the plug. It might also have to do with the amplifiers losing digital sync due to mismatched impedance. But again, I operate the equipment, I don't design it.
Here's an article on digital reflections:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/technical-article-digital-audio-cable-reflections-and-dacs.7159/
-
I know nothing about the legitimacy of the claims made by cable manufacturers and have not personally invested in expensive cables, but many manufacturers talk about the introduction of "distortion" due to "inferior" materials, strand configuration, shielding, or dielectric. If the fundamental digital outcome is not corrupted by compromised materials, design, or manufacturing in USB cables, is it nevertheless possible for "bad" cables to pick up and transmit any kind of harmful noise to the devices they connect while still transmitting an accurate bitstream?
If the science and engineering is as open-and-shut a case as you've outlined here, I find it hard to reach any other conclusion than USB cable manufacturers who claim otherwise are bad people who are intentionally lying to us and should not be trusted in their claims about speaker cables, other interconnects, and power cables, too.
-
I own several USB cables ranging from $40 to $225. They all sound different and it is not subtle. They can also sound different on different DAC's. 3 years ago we did a usb cable shoot out with cables in the $40 to $600 range and the results were eye opening as there were big differences. The best sounding cable was a WW Starlight 7 Platinum which sells for $600. The worst was a $40 Pangea, it was thin, bright and not really listenable with my Luxman DAC.
Anyone is welcome to come to my house in the Twin Cities and hear the differences with a Luxman and Qutest DAC.
-
Yikes! Another usb cable discussion.
Don P.
-
Yikes! Another usb cable discussion.
Don P.
Years ago, I was in the "cables don't make a difference in the sound" camp. I bought a decent set of cables cheap with ZERO thoughts and NO expectations that it would make a difference. Period. It does.
But reading about your system, apparently you do too, so I guess it's the discussion you're yikes-ing about. :lol:
-
I would think that it could be measured since it's just transferring packets of zeros and ones.........couldn't we see the jitter or change in the packets from one side of the cable to the other?? It's going to take someone smarter than me to figure it out.
I have never A/B'ed USB cables to hear a difference. I have never tried higher quality power cables either. I would be open to trying it in a blind test. I have definitely heard the difference between different clock sources on A/D converters and it's not subtle.
-
I own several USB cables ranging from $40 to $225. They all sound different and it is not subtle. They can also sound different on different DAC's. 3 years ago we did a usb cable shoot out with cables in the $40 to $600 range and the results were eye opening as there were big differences. The best sounding cable was a WW Starlight 7 Platinum which sells for $600. The worst was a $40 Pangea, it was thin, bright and not really listenable with my Luxman DAC.
Anyone is welcome to come to my house in the Twin Cities and hear the differences with a Luxman and Qutest DAC.
The difference you're hearing has nothing to do with the cables. It's all about the underground resonances from the Mesabi range iron ore that warp the propagation of digital signals. 8)
-
I didn't want to be the first contrarian to post on a manufacturer's circle. I met Tommy once, great guy and his amps sound superb. I don't spend big money on usb cables and had an application needing a ten foot length, so bought one from Monoprice and one from Belden and they did sound sightly different. Moved to a new place and no longer needed ten feet, so I saw the Monolith from Monoprice seperated the power and signal cables similar to the high priced spread, and used superior quality copper and connectors. Still very reasonably priced, but the difference in sound quality was dramatic. This wasn't supposed or transitory, it was like a new DAC. And it was the same across different DACs and when I went back to one of the old cables they were unlistenable. So I agree that you may not have to spend uber cash on usb cables, but they do make a difference.
-
PLUS, if you’re using a USB-to-SPDIF converter such as the Cherry USB, the data is re-clocked by the DAC, which is the case for any SPDIF connected DAC, such as the Cherry 130dB+ DAC DAC 2.
Just maybe using both the Cherry USB and DAC DAC 2 together eliminates/minimizes the differences in USB cables. I have both the $20 PYST (Straight Wire) USB and $1299 Hapa AerØ USB cables but it would cost me money to find out if that is true.
-
For asynchronous USB, I mostly use 5-6 feet long USB cables. I have around 30-40 USB cables made of all kinds of construction and design. I think most of them sound the same. The ones that sounded slightly different were the Belkin Gold (10 feet) and the Audioquest Forest (0.75m). Not sure if that's due to their lengths and/or their construction. BTW all these cables were perfect for data transfer and no issues in speed
I have had 3 converters with asynchronous USB, which should be throwing away the incoming clock and using the internal clock, yet they all undergo the same change in sound when I add in a (passive) Audioquest Jitterbug. I've used my HDDs to transfer TBs worth of data with and without the Jitterbug on USB 2.0 spec, and have never noticed any differences in speeds or any dropouts. Data transfer is perfect either way. Yet, it still makes a difference in sound. I am not looking to argue that it sounds better or worse, just that it is different, which ANNOYS me. I just wished they all sounded the same since it's asynchronous. Yet, it's not the case. The system is still sensitive.
With synchronous digital AES on the other hand, I've used all kinds of regular 110 (Gotham GAC-2, Grimm TPR +/-5 ohm), long distance 110 (Mogami 3173+/-10 ohm), and even all kinds of analog balanced wire (such as Mogami 2549, Ghost (new), unshielded Vovox, Canare quad, and even some shielded but non-twisted wires) and they all transfer data perfectly. No dropouts so all the bits are making it through, yet they all sound different from one another. The impedance on these cables can be as low as into the 30-40 ohm, yet no problem in the DAC producing sound. Although, they definitely sound different from one another. Of course, this can be explained by saying this is a synchronous system, so all bets are off.
With my AES and SPDIF cables, I've actually bought multiple of the same wire and same connectors but just at different lengths and they sound different from another. So I'll have Mogami 3173 at 10 feet and 18 feet, or Gotham GAC-2 AES at 6 inch vs. 6 feet, or Grimm TPR at 2 feet and 8 feet. There are some overlaps as well where two cables have the same length but are different wires...they all sound different in subtle ways. Yet, data transfer - NO issues. No dropouts.
This thread is about digital so I won't go into it, but at least for analog I came up with a solution to evaluate cables in an objective manner and how to find a cable that is (close to) neutral with a logical 'reference' point. So I'm not just guessing at what neutral may be like most reviewers, but have something concrete to base neutral on...I have yet to come up with a similar objective reference method for digital.
-
Hey, hey, hey now fellas. I spent $2000 on my USB cable and it is awesome! One off those "dropped it in and had an immediate positive result, worth every penny" moments.
Carry on. Educate us Tommy....
-
Always learning. Please tell me more.
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=232256)
-
The difference you're hearing has nothing to do with the cables. It's all about the underground resonances from the Mesabi range iron ore that warp the propagation of digital signals. 8)
Yes! That’s it! :wink:
-
The difference you're hearing has nothing to do with the cables. It's all about the underground resonances from the Mesabi range iron ore that warp the propagation of digital signals. 8)
Nah, when we built the house we had it shielded from the effects of the iron ore. But step one foot off our property and its a different story. :D
-
I agree with this (though I've never tested high priced digital cables of any kind). Is there any way that there can be an error in the movement of packets through the cable? Are there digital reflections within the cable? What if there is some kind of increased resistance?
Bottom line is that error detection will mute the audio if there are ANY errors. So, if it works, it works 100%.
-
Just maybe using both the Cherry USB and DAC DAC 2 together eliminates/minimizes the differences in USB cables. I have both the $20 PYST (Straight Wire) USB and $1299 Hapa AerØ USB cables but it would cost me money to find out if that is true.
Yes, properly designed equipment doesn't suffer from issues that may be caused by USB cable differences, thus the "SHOULDN'T" part of the title!
-
For asynchronous USB, I mostly use 5-6 feet long USB cables. I have around 30-40 USB cables made of all kinds of construction and design. I think most of them sound the same. The ones that sounded slightly different were the Belkin Gold (10 feet) and the Audioquest Forest (0.75m). Not sure if that's due to their lengths and/or their construction. BTW all these cables were perfect for data transfer and no issues in speed
I have had 3 converters with asynchronous USB, which should be throwing away the incoming clock and using the internal clock, yet they all undergo the same change in sound when I add in a (passive) Audioquest Jitterbug. I've used my HDDs to transfer TBs worth of data with and without the Jitterbug on USB 2.0 spec, and have never noticed any differences in speeds or any dropouts. Data transfer is perfect either way. Yet, it still makes a difference in sound. I am not looking to argue that it sounds better or worse, just that it is different, which ANNOYS me. I just wished they all sounded the same since it's asynchronous. Yet, it's not the case. The system is still sensitive.
With synchronous digital AES on the other hand, I've used all kinds of regular 110 (Gotham GAC-2, Grimm TPR +/-5 ohm), long distance 110 (Mogami 3173+/-10 ohm), and even all kinds of analog balanced wire (such as Mogami 2549, Ghost (new), unshielded Vovox, Canare quad, and even some shielded but non-twisted wires) and they all transfer data perfectly. No dropouts so all the bits are making it through, yet they all sound different from one another. The impedance on these cables can be as low as into the 30-40 ohm, yet no problem in the DAC producing sound. Although, they definitely sound different from one another. Of course, this can be explained by saying this is a synchronous system, so all bets are off.
With my AES and SPDIF cables, I've actually bought multiple of the same wire and same connectors but just at different lengths and they sound different from another. So I'll have Mogami 3173 at 10 feet and 18 feet, or Gotham GAC-2 AES at 6 inch vs. 6 feet, or Grimm TPR at 2 feet and 8 feet. There are some overlaps as well where two cables have the same length but are different wires...they all sound different in subtle ways. Yet, data transfer - NO issues. No dropouts.
This thread is about digital so I won't go into it, but at least for analog I came up with a solution to evaluate cables in an objective manner and how to find a cable that is (close to) neutral with a logical 'reference' point. So I'm not just guessing at what neutral may be like most reviewers, but have something concrete to base neutral on...I have yet to come up with a similar objective reference method for digital.
I’m a big fan of measurements although “the proof is in the pudding”. The reason is that test equipment is several orders of magnitude better at finding differences. There will be no difference between functioning USB cables. I’m talking about audio performance measurements, like THD, SNR, IMD, etc. — same data, same equipment, different cable, same result. There are USB Audio tests out there (search and ye shall find) that prove this, but they are unnecessary since it’s like proving digital does what digital does — lossless transmission of data. The reason I brought up clocking is due to the ridiculous claims made by some manufacturers to sell ineffective products, such as reducing “USB jitter”. I’ll leave citing specific examples to others on this thread, but a simple search for “USB cable reduces jitter” will show the prevalence of such claims.
Please try having someone else switch cables (or lie and say they did). At a least single blind will possibly prove that you hear a difference play-to-play due to many factors, regardless of switching cables. Thanks for your detailed reply!
-
Please try having someone else switch cables (or lie and say they did). At a least single blind will possibly prove that you hear a difference play-to-play due to many factors, regardless of switching cables.
A few years ago while trouble shooting no sound from my music server the first thing I tried was to switch USB cables, it was the easiest possible solution. After a few reboots and checking the WASAPI configuration the server was working again but the music still didn't sound right, the soundstage was flat with no low bass. Then I remembered the Schiit PYST was still in the loop, after replacing the USB cable back to the JMaxwell the magic was back. That was a totally blind test.
None of the USB cables I have used claimed to lower jitter.
-
Man oh man, where has this thread been for the last decade?!
-
....but the music still didn't sound right, the soundstage was flat with no low bass.
I'm not saying that it's impossible for a USB cable to cause the audible effects that you describe. It just seems that the likelihood is in the 0.00001% range. :P
Seriously, there's no USB cable that I've inserted in my system here that impaired the system's ability to render low bass: whether that cable is dirt cheap or otherwise. I've played around with USB cables when moving system components around and have never, ever heard compromised bass response. I've even dropped in some old S-Video cable in there for a spell and didn't lose bass. Is it even remotely possible that something else was going on that - for a time - caused the audible loss of bass in your system?
-
I’m a big fan of measurements although “the proof is in the pudding”. The reason is that test equipment is several orders of magnitude better at finding differences. There will be no difference between functioning USB cables. I’m talking about audio performance measurements, like THD, SNR, IMD, etc. — same data, same equipment, different cable, same result. There are USB Audio tests out there (search and ye shall find) that prove this, but they are unnecessary since it’s like proving digital does what digital does — lossless transmission of data. The reason I brought up clocking is due to the ridiculous claims made by some manufacturers to sell ineffective products, such as reducing “USB jitter”. I’ll leave citing specific examples to others on this thread, but a simple search for “USB cable reduces jitter” will show the prevalence of such claims.
Please try having someone else switch cables (or lie and say they did). At a least single blind will possibly prove that you hear a difference play-to-play due to many factors, regardless of switching cables. Thanks for your detailed reply!
We're in agreement as far as data transfer and integrity is concerned. In 99.9999% cases with any USB cable that passes the class specification, can and will transmit TBs worth of data without any issues. Not even a single error. It just works...We're in 100% agreement there.
I'm not even pushing for USB cables sounding different. However, I will say that all the asynchronous USB implementations I've found on DACs are not as immune to upstream changes as I would have hoped! Why is it that the presence of the Jitterbug (or not) makes no difference in transfer speeds or causing/fixing errors in data transfer, yet markedly changes the sound in those DACs. Jitterbug, like the USB cable, is also a passive cable, although with filters. Still, even if it was an active device...why should the sound change either way!? There should be no change since data was perfectly being transmitted before without any issues. Yet, the sound changes.
With Jitterbug, people either say no difference with or without, or that they do hear a difference. Amongst the people that do hear differences (in their systems), I've found that they all describe the change in sound almost always the same, regardless of whether they think the change in sound is less or more musical/better, or if they think the sound is more or less accurate to the recording than before. They mostly describe the sound field in the same way, regardless of their interpretation of it and how that fits with what they want out of their system. I do hear the same consistent changes in sound every time and I honestly wish I didn't. I also don't think I'm making this is up in my head (more on it later).
People (such as on ASR) have conducted tests with and without Jitterbug and the measurements rarely show any differences. You mentioned THD, SNR, IMD, etc...
So IMO this is how you can interpret and proceed with the matter. If one assumes that any changes in the sound are entirely made up by the listener and none of it is real, then case closed. There is nothing to discuss. However, if one assumes that these differences are real and do pass blind testing, then you have 2 ways of interpreting those measurements:
1) Our ears/brain are very sensitive to those subtle changes that one would think wouldn't matter on those graphs, but yet we can resolve those tiny difference.
2) We're currently measuring the wrong things. Some measurement category(s) is being missed which is causing these differences, and we're either ignoring it or are oblivious to it.
___________________
As far as blind test are concerned, I haven't done any with USB cables as I'm doing these tests by myself and I don't have a method of being able to conduct them blind by myself. However, I have come up with ways to do some blind testing with ethernet and network setups. It's not USB, but it's similar to asynchronous USB in the sense that the incoming clock should not matter and as long as the data gets through, that's all that should matter. However, I've found that to be not immune either. This thread is about USB cables so I don't want to get too off optic, but we can discuss that if wanted.
-
Is it even remotely possible that something else was going on that - for a time - caused the audible loss of bass in your system?
Nothing changed except the cable. My speakers have a solid 34Hz low end and there is probably some room reinforcement below that. I should have said real low bass, you notice it when it isn't there. I didn't notice a change in bass between the JMaxwell USB and the Hapa Aero USB so any change is cable and system dependent.
Read the Hapa Audio Aero USB reviews, I don't think we're all Bozos on this bus
https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=177847.0 (https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=177847.0)
-
I’m a big fan of measurements although “the proof is in the pudding”. The reason is that test equipment is several orders of magnitude better at finding differences. There will be no difference between functioning USB cables. I’m talking about audio performance measurements, like THD, SNR, IMD, etc. — same data, same equipment, different cable, same result. There are USB Audio tests out there (search and ye shall find) that prove this, but they are unnecessary since it’s like proving digital does what digital does — lossless transmission of data. The reason I brought up clocking is due to the ridiculous claims made by some manufacturers to sell ineffective products, such as reducing “USB jitter”. I’ll leave citing specific examples to others on this thread, but a simple search for “USB cable reduces jitter” will show the prevalence of such claims.
Please try having someone else switch cables (or lie and say they did). At a least single blind will possibly prove that you hear a difference play-to-play due to many factors, regardless of switching cables. Thanks for your detailed reply!
The measurements have been done (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXuBsdmEOAs&t=315s) as I'm sure you've done them too.
-
I don't think we're all Bozos on this bus
https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=177847.0 (https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=177847.0)
Maybe not, but there's always room in the clown car. :D
Just kiddin'. If you heard it, then you heard it.
-
Zoom, I don't need a blind or double blind test to tell me that in the shoot out of 4 usb cables that 2 sounded ear piercing bright and one was not really listenable as it was bright and thin sounding. Another sounded muffled and flat. One sounded spectacular and one of the bright ones was overly detailed. We had 4 people who heard the differences. The differences were not subtle. This was with a $6000 Luxman DAC. I also have a Chord Qutest and USB cable differences are easily heard.
-
A few years ago while trouble shooting no sound from my music server the first thing I tried was to switch USB cables, it was the easiest possible solution. After a few reboots and checking the WASAPI configuration the server was working again but the music still didn't sound right, the soundstage was flat with no low bass. Then I remembered the Schiit PYST was still in the loop, after replacing the USB cable back to the JMaxwell the magic was back. That was a totally blind test.
None of the USB cables I have used claimed to lower jitter.
A blind test is when you don't know the configuration, so that wasn't really a blind test. What DAC? Does it run from USB power? Maybe the first cable was defective as far as the GND/+5V wires or connections. USB cables don't change the data, so it can't be that. If the data was erroneous, the DAC should mute.
-
We're in agreement as far as data transfer and integrity is concerned. In 99.9999% cases with any USB cable that passes the class specification, can and will transmit TBs worth of data without any issues. Not even a single error. It just works...We're in 100% agreement there.
I'm not even pushing for USB cables sounding different. However, I will say that all the asynchronous USB implementations I've found on DACs are not as immune to upstream changes as I would have hoped! Why is it that the presence of the Jitterbug (or not) makes no difference in transfer speeds or causing/fixing errors in data transfer, yet markedly changes the sound in those DACs. Jitterbug, like the USB cable, is also a passive cable, although with filters. Still, even if it was an active device...why should the sound change either way!? There should be no change since data was perfectly being transmitted before without any issues. Yet, the sound changes.
With Jitterbug, people either say no difference with or without, or that they do hear a difference. Amongst the people that do hear differences (in their systems), I've found that they all describe the change in sound almost always the same, regardless of whether they think the change in sound is less or more musical/better, or if they think the sound is more or less accurate to the recording than before. They mostly describe the sound field in the same way, regardless of their interpretation of it and how that fits with what they want out of their system. I do hear the same consistent changes in sound every time and I honestly wish I didn't. I also don't think I'm making this is up in my head (more on it later).
People (such as on ASR) have conducted tests with and without Jitterbug and the measurements rarely show any differences. You mentioned THD, SNR, IMD, etc...
So IMO this is how you can interpret and proceed with the matter. If one assumes that any changes in the sound are entirely made up by the listener and none of it is real, then case closed. There is nothing to discuss. However, if one assumes that these differences are real and do pass blind testing, then you have 2 ways of interpreting those measurements:
1) Our ears/brain are very sensitive to those subtle changes that one would think wouldn't matter on those graphs, but yet we can resolve those tiny difference.
2) We're currently measuring the wrong things. Some measurement category(s) is being missed which is causing these differences, and we're either ignoring it or are oblivious to it.
___________________
As far as blind test are concerned, I haven't done any with USB cables as I'm doing these tests by myself and I don't have a method of being able to conduct them blind by myself. However, I have come up with ways to do some blind testing with ethernet and network setups. It's not USB, but it's similar to asynchronous USB in the sense that the incoming clock should not matter and as long as the data gets through, that's all that should matter. However, I've found that to be not immune either. This thread is about USB cables so I don't want to get too off optic, but we can discuss that if wanted.
Actually, I was going to go down the psychology path on this one. Expectation bias, etc. This is why fancy cable makers abhor double blind listening tests because 99% of the time they reveal charlatanism.
I've used stuff like the "jitterbug" (ironic name because it can't possibly affect jitter) to prove my point many times. What I do is simply alternate then skip one switch, so the cables/devices are then the opposite. Almost every time, the listener claims the benefits of the product they THINK is playing! That's no joke. It's actually difficult to reveal the results because people don't like being told they were fooled.
-
The measurements have been done (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qXuBsdmEOAs&t=315s) as I'm sure you've done them too.
Thanks for the link.
-
A blind test is when you don't know the configuration, so that wasn't really a blind test. What DAC? Does it run from USB power? Maybe the first cable was defective as far as the GND/+5V wires or connections. USB cables don't change the data, so it can't be that. If the data was erroneous, the DAC should mute.
I should have been more clear in my description. After troubleshooting the computer music server glitch I completely forgot I switched USB cables. The music server and USB/SPDIF converter are on the bottom shelf, none of the cables can be seen so there are no visual clues what cable is plugged in. It seemed like a blind test to me.
I use a Van Alstine Fet Valve Hybrid DAC with the SPDIF input plugged into a Kingrex UC384 Asynchronous USB/SPDIF converter powered by an Acopian Linear Regulated PS with 1.5 mV RMS ripple.
The music server (https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=177495.msg1867916#msg1867916) USB out is handled by a Paul Pang USB 3.0 V2 card powered by a 5v Acopian Linear Regulated PS with 1 mV RMS ripple. The card uses the NEC uPD720202 chip along with a low jitter TCXO audio grade silver digital output transformer. The NEC uPD720202 chip is still used in current USB cards.
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=227556&size=xlarge)
(https://www.audiocircle.com/image.php?id=227557&size=xlarge)
The +5v connection is not used in my setup, in fact the JMaxwell USB cable is data only with no power leg.
I watched the Audio Science Review "Do USB Cables Make an Audible Difference (Kimber Kable Review)?" but the title is misleading. The title should have been "Do USB Cables Make an Measurable Difference". The answer, as noted many times in the video, is no - they all measure perfectly. Ego, they all sound the same. Reminds me of a Julian Hirsch (https://www.soundandvision.com/content/reconsidering-julian-hirsch) review.
I was hoping that Cherry USB or DAC DAC 2 customers would add their comments regarding USB cables but perhaps they are wisely keeping their heads down.
-
I should have been more clear in my description. After troubleshooting the computer music server glitch I completely forgot I switched USB cables. The music server and USB/SPDIF converter are on the bottom shelf, none of the cables can be seen so there are no visual clues what cable is plugged in. It seemed like a blind test to me.
I use a Van Alstine Fet Valve Hybrid DAC with the SPDIF input plugged into a Kingrex UC384 Asynchronous USB/SPDIF converter powered by an Acopian Linear Regulated PS with 1.5 mV RMS ripple.
The music server (https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=177495.msg1867916#msg1867916) USB out is handled by a Paul Pang USB 3.0 V2 card powered by a 5v Acopian Linear Regulated PS with 1 mV RMS ripple. The card uses the NEC uPD720202 chip along with a low jitter TCXO audio grade silver digital output transformer. The NEC uPD720202 chip is still used in current USB cards.
<photos removed>
The +5v connection is not used in my setup, in fact the JMaxwell USB cable is data only with no power leg.
I watched the Audio Science Review "Do USB Cables Make an Audible Difference (Kimber Kable Review)?" but the title is misleading. The title should have been "Do USB Cables Make an Measurable Difference". The answer, as noted many times in the video, is no - they all measure perfectly. Ego, they all sound the same. Reminds me of a Julian Hirsch (https://www.soundandvision.com/content/reconsidering-julian-hirsch) review.
I was hoping that Cherry USB or DAC DAC 2 customers would add their comments regarding USB cables but perhaps they are wisely keeping their heads down.
I’ll address your points more later, but thank you for taking the time to put your reply together. Very well done!
Ripple is only one of many factors that determine power supply performance, but how various specifications affect the device being driven is dependent on the quality of the device’s design. Only the highest quality designs will perform to spec with “junk power”, but just know that it’s possible. My recent designs have multi-tiered power conditioning internally, so there’s no need to worry about a noisy power supply.
-
Actually, I was going to go down the psychology path on this one. Expectation bias, etc. This is why fancy cable makers abhor double blind listening tests because 99% of the time they reveal charlatanism.
I've used stuff like the "jitterbug" (ironic name because it can't possibly affect jitter) to prove my point many times. What I do is simply alternate then skip one switch, so the cables/devices are then the opposite. Almost every time, the listener claims the benefits of the product they THINK is playing! That's no joke. It's actually difficult to reveal the results because people don't like being told they were fooled.
I think there are a lot of genuine bogus products that don't cause any change. In those scenarios, sure, the manufacturers would not prefer anyone do any such testing and in fact they will avoid discussion of the tech, specs, and measurements. That's certainly one group.
Although, I think amongst the collective of sensible customers and manufacturers who've been doing this for a long time, they generally do put out non-bogus products (i.e. they cause a change) and the customers generally can tell if they are certain YES, this is doing something vs. "guys, I think or feel like it may be doing something...but I think I'm shooting in the dark"
Perfect example (yet again) is of Jitterbug. I have 2 of these. Audioquest for example recommends that their primary use is in the chain (computer's USB output -> Jitterbug -> DAC). However, they've also recommended that you can plug in a second one to an unused port for further SQ improvement. I've always felt and written that Jitterbug in the chain with all of my DACs have caused some change in sound. However, when plugging a second one to an empty unused port and then plugging and unplugging it with the music playing, I don't feel much confidence that any change happens. Of course, not everyone will want to admit that or go through such experiments. Still, I think that amongst the more experienced and skeptical listeners/tech curious crowd, we do get a good handle on whether things make a difference or do not.
I've somewhat moved on from "whether things make a difference or not" from the early years of listening when I was still developing my listening skills and gaining testing experience. For the past few years, the more interesting for me has been "what does the difference mean"? In playback settings fidelity, neutrality, and accuracy in reproduction are a high priority for me. So when a product comes along that's supposed to be inert in its influence in the chain causes a change, I'm more interested in finding out whether the sound is now more or less accurate and whether this change toward more or less accuracy corresponds proportionally or inversely with my enjoyment or interpretation of SQ.
Make no mistake that I'm still skeptical of manufacturers (from boutique to even some big ones - including the 'big' one we have on this forum itself). I've asked them MANY times on this forum and elsewhere: why their products are sensitive to such changes and not immune currently and also what they could do to make things more immune to changes elsewhere. Responses can vary from "it shouldn't be happening", "I don't know", or "Use whatever sounds good"...rarely do I ever get a satisfactory explanation. BTW this wouldn't be a case of just myself imagining this. So many other customers would say the same thing and in fact the manufactures themselves will poll the customers what they think offers the best SQ or what's their "preferred" connection/arrangement (as to not make their product look bad).
It makes me question whether the manufacturers are aware of the full picture and are purposefully hiding the explanation to not make their products look bad, or whether they too are not fully aware of some of the aspects.
This is why I haven't bought a new audio product in over 5-6 years. So many new areas, such as network switches and stuff. Some will say that they make no difference. Meanwhile, other listeners and the manufacturer will say that YES there a difference AND it makes the SQ better. However, the problem arises when they can't explain the tech or provide any measurements. it's either 3 things:
1) They are knowingly lying outright.
2) They don't want to reveal their secrets, but are aware of the full picture.
3) They don't really have a full grasp of things.
I was astonished when I was reading some of the comments by the manufacturers of the EtherRegen during its development. One of them (superdad?) said that we don't fully understand all of it, but to our ears its an improvement over previous product, so we're still going to release it...I couldn't believe that. You are the manufacturer! You are the one group that should know. Otherwise, how can you say with confidence if whether any changes you cause are for the better and not for worse!?
I'll follow up on the blind testing and best practices for them, got to run for now.