0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic. Read 10631 times.
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.
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.
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?
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 speedI 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.
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.
....but the music still didn't sound right, the soundstage was flat with no low bass.
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!
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 don't think we're all Bozos on this bushttps://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=177847.0
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.
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.
