# USB cable and Sound Quality



## olblueyez

I read that sound quality is not affected by expensive USB cables Then I read a better USB cable can help to isolate noise and prevent drop-outs and loss of information when streaming to your dac. Choose one please. Here is one for you.

 500 bucks!

 Synergistic Tricon USB

http://www.thecableco.com/prodListing.php?cat=95&man=44


----------



## JamesL

I don't know how gold-plated tips are any better than nickel-plated, but I will pay a couple extra dollars for a durable, well-made cable.

 I wonder how wire gauge, shielding, and ferrite cores affect the performance of a usb cable. 
 I think I recall reading that thicker gauge wires are spec'd for longer lengths, but I can't remember. 
 If anybody knows, care to fill me in?


----------



## olblueyez

I know this sounds crazy but I prefer the way my dac sounds with a cable that doesn't have the ferrite attached.


----------



## SleepyOne

There is definately a difference between the freebie USB cable that came with my DAC and the kimber. The freebie cable sounds muddy. I probably should as an experimnet try out other normal cheap USB cables to see whether kimber is really better or not.


----------



## Akabeth

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *JamesL* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I don't know how gold-plated tips are any better than nickel-plated, but I will pay a couple extra dollars for a durable, well-made cable.
 ------
 I think I recall reading that thicker gauge wires are spec'd for longer lengths, but I can't remember._

 

I agree with both of your points 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 Firstly, I usually buy better cables for build quality (durability, finish) and longer lifetime (gold plated tips). I haven't been around long enough to justify buying very upscale cables; things like that $500 cat5 short-cable threw me off with this part in audio. If there was ever a cable that could reduce latency, I'm sure many online gamers in the world would own these.

 Then secondly, I also read something along the lines of *thicker gauge = less resistance* somewhere.


----------



## krmathis

I am cable believer myself...
 So even if I have not compared USB cables myself, I have the strong mind that there may be differences.


----------



## Lapwing

Anyone who actually believes a fancy USB cable will sound better than a cheapo needs to go back to school. USB cables transfer DIGITAL DATA, 0s and 1s, thus it's *PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE* for a the cable medium to impact the sound quality in any way shape or form. The *ONLY* factor that should go into buying a USB, or optical, or HDMI cable, (digi cable-etc), is it's sturdy enough to hold up normal wear and tear. 


 Let me repeat: [size=large]*It's PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for a "higher quality" USB cable to make your signal sound better. Either the digital signal is intact and it works, or it's not intact and it doesnt work (IE: you hear nothing at all)*[/size]

 If you claim otherwise you will forever admit yourself to easily deceived by placebo.


----------



## olblueyez

Cheap optical cable can increase jitter. Is there a way to know for sure all the proper 1s and 0s are reaching your dac? I also thought noise or EMI could travel through a USB cable since it carries power as well as data.


----------



## olblueyez

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Lapwing* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Anyone who actually believes a fancy USB cable will sound better than a cheapo needs to go back to school. USB cables transfer DIGITAL DATA, 0s and 1s, thus it's *PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE* for a the cable medium to impact the sound quality in any way shape or form. The *ONLY* factor that should go into buying a USB, or optical, or HDMI cable, (digi cable-etc), is it's sturdy enough to hold up normal wear and tear. 


 Let me repeat: [size=large]*It's PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE for a "higher quality" USB cable to make your signal sound better. Either the digital signal is intact and it works, or it's not intact and it doesnt work (IE: you hear nothing at all)*[/size]

 If you claim otherwise you will forever admit yourself to easily deceived by placebo. _

 

Im not doubting you but can you explain it to us in greater detail? Also can you explain why it could make a difference with a COAX digital cable but not a USB?


----------



## Lapwing

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *olblueyez* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Im not doubting you but can you explain it to us in greater detail? Also can you explain why it could make a difference with a COAX digital cable but not a USB?_

 

If the COAX cable is used to transmit a digital signal it wont effect the audio/video quality. The only artifact you will get is what's called "macroblocking" which happens when the medium's bandwidth is degraded to a point where the decoder cannot understand what the 1s and 0s are. The end result you experience with video is what looks like chopped up and scrambled blocks of colors instead of the video, with audio it's even more noticeable - your DAC chokes on the missing data and you'll hear very noticeably loud chirps and gaps in your music. You've probably heard this to a much smaller degree if you've ever bumped an older model CDROM while it's ripping an audio disc. In newer DACs and ripping apps this is problem is totally negated with signal buffers, if the DAC or ripping program notices a missing piece of data it fills in the gap with buffered data. 

 Again, a digital signal will either work or it won't work. When it doesnt work it's VERY noticeable. It's impossible for your sound to be colored in anyway by a digital medium.


----------



## Lapwing

On a side note, I'm completely flabbergasted by the incredible price gouging some companies (*coughs* MOnster) put on their HDMI digital cables. A $5 generic HDMI cable will provide the exact same quality HD video/audio as a $250 HDMI, this has been confirmed by many professionals.


----------



## Lapwing

BTW:

 Macroblocking occurs only with lossy encoding. When your signal stream is raw data the end result of degraded data is blacked out video or completely silent audio.


----------



## olblueyez

Ok, so you are saying a coax can degrade the data stream and send misinformation to the dac. If the USB buffer on the receiving end receives incorrect data then where does the correct data come from, does it go back to the computer to fill in the blanks if you will? Your saying I should hear nothing if if it screws the pooch?


----------



## Lapwing

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *olblueyez* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Ok, so you are saying a coax can degrade the data stream and send misinformation to the dac. If the USB buffer on the receiving end receives incorrect data then where does the correct data come from, does it go back to the computer to fill in the blanks if you will? Your saying I should hear nothing if if it screws the pooch?_

 

I'm saying if the coax cable transfers a digital signal it behaves exactly the same as a usb/hdmi/optical cable, they will all suffer from the same artifacts or degradation. 

 I'll quickly step you through the process of digital buffering:

 A digital signal leaves your source (a computer or CD player) and is pumped into the cable as a stream of 1s and 0s.
 The signal reaches your DAC (or ripping program, etc.) and is recorded into a buffer (usually a couple of seconds). This means the audio you hear is a couple of seconds behind the real time of your source signal. When the DAC or computer program notices a gap in the digital signal it reads from the recorded buffer and fills in the gap and refills the buffer. If the gap in data is larger than the buffer you will hear the difference as silence. 

 Have you ever used a portable CD Player before? Modern day ones has the exact same kind of buffer system. When you first load a disc into them you'll hear it spin up really fast, this is when it's filling the buffer. If you smack the CD Player and make the laser skip the data on the CD your buffer will compensate. Try smacking it a lot for a long time, eventually the audio will skip into silence. It's a very noticeable effect.


----------



## myinitialsaredac

Lapwing, 

 Not to disregard you or anything, but there was actually a study conducted a while back on different HDMI cables and whether or not they could pass a 1080p/1080i/or 720p signal over a given length. I dont understand the finer points but the results did show that certain lengths of different cables experienced bit drop and could not transfer 1080 signals over 6 feet. Heres the article for you to gaze at - The Truth About Monster Cable, Part 2 (Verdict: Cheap Cables Keep Up...Usually). 
 If there are differences in quality of HDMI cables, why then would there not be bit drop, electrical interference, or even bandwith choke or whatever it may be, on a USB cable?

 Dave


----------



## Lapwing

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *myinitialsaredac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Lapwing, 

 Not to disregard you or anything, but there was actually a study conducted a while back on different HDMI cables and whether or not they could pass a 1080p/1080i/or 720p signal over a given length. I dont understand the finer points but the results did show that certain lengths of different cables experienced bit drop and could not transfer 1080 signals over 6 feet. Heres the article for you to gaze at - The Truth About Monster Cable, Part 2 (Verdict: Cheap Cables Keep Up...Usually). 
 If there are differences in quality of HDMI cables, why then would there not be bit drop, electrical interference, or even bandwith choke or whatever it may be, on a USB cable?

 Dave_

 

This article regards very long cables which are to be installed inside walls. It's well known that EM interference degrades electrical signals and cables which carry digital signals are no exception to this. The point in hand though, is that when a digital signal fails due to interference is fails completely, it's an utter break in the connection, a gap in the data stream. The result is a very noticeable loss of video or audio. EM interference on a digital cable WILL NOT "color" the data (the music or movie) in any way... your video WILL NOT look more vibrant or clear, your audio WILL NOT sound better in any way with better cables... the only thing better shielded digital cables will help prevent is complete video/audio loss. Thus if you use a cheap digital cable without experiencing any gaps in your video/audio you're set and any more expensive better shielded cable is entirely unneeded and a waste of money.


----------



## tubaman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Lapwing* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This article regards very long cables which are to be installed inside walls. It's well known that EM interference degrades electrical signals and cables which carry digital signals are no exception to this. The point in hand though, is that when a digital signal fails due to interference is fails completely, it's an utter break in the connection, a gap in the data stream. The result is a very noticeable loss of video or audio. EM interference on a digital cable WILL NOT "color" the data (the music or movie) in any way... your video WILL NOT look more vibrant or clear, your audio WILL NOT sound better in any way with better cables... the only thing better shielded digital cables will help prevent is complete video/audio loss. Thus if you use a cheap digital cable without experiencing any gaps in your video/audio you're set and any more expensive better shielded cable is entirely unneeded and a waste of money._

 

How about vibration? Is it possible that vibration travels from the computer to the DAC and cause some kind of distortion, even when the data transfer is "complete?"


----------



## rds

Most DAC chips have a small amount of memory that holds something like 256 samples. The DAC plays the samples in first in first out order and the timing is clocked by the DAC. 
 The computer constantly tops up the sample memory on the DAC so it doesn't run out. 
 For a DAC like the Alien DAC (uses USB power), it might be worth considering how well the cable transmits power.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *SleepyOne* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_There is definately a difference between the freebie USB cable that came with my DAC and the kimber. The freebie cable sounds muddy. I probably should as an experimnet try out other normal cheap USB cables to see whether kimber is really better or not._

 

Posts like yours are what is confusing people on the issue... because they are utter nonsense.

 With a digital cable, either it transfers the data, or it has gaps in. Little dropouts. There is NO alternative. A cheap cable CANNOT sound muddy or distorted.

 How many times do many different users here have to say this, before people will understand? I think you all need to make yourselves a nice hot drink, and spend the afternoon reading up on how digital signals in general work, with regards to USB/coax etc etc.


----------



## tomb

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *joshd* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Posts like yours are what is confusing people on the issue... because they are utter nonsense.

 With a digital cable, either it transfers the data, or it has gaps in. Little dropouts. There is NO alternative. A cheap cable CANNOT sound muddy or distorted.

 How many times do many different users here have to say this, before people will understand? I think you all need to make yourselves a nice hot drink, and spend the afternoon reading up on how digital signals in general work, with regards to USB/coax etc etc._

 

I agree with rds's post above - the USB cable can make a huge difference in terms of S/N ratio and interference, if the DAC is USB-powered. I've measured up to a 20dB difference in S/N ratio between a run-of-the-mill cable and one that's shielded with chokes on both ends.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tomb* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I agree with rds's post above - the USB cable can make a huge difference in terms of S/N ratio and interference, if the DAC is USB-powered. I've measured up to a 20dB difference in S/N ratio between a run-of-the-mill cable and one that's shielded with chokes on both ends._

 

Yes, possibly with a DAC that runs from the USB bus's power, I can see the merit of a better cable. (But possibly not $500 better...?)


----------



## olblueyez

And if its not USB powered?


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *olblueyez* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And if its not USB powered?_

 

Then so long as you are not getting dropouts, more expensive cable makes absolutely no difference. At all.


----------



## SleepyOne

Have you considered the possibility the freebie UBS cable that came with my DAC may not be well made (up to standard etc), maybe that explains the difference in sound. And there is a difference between the freebie and the kimber. I am not saying kimber is great or anything - I still need to try out other normal UBS cables - but I am saying that it is possible to have a difference. Maybe this is due to timing (use of iron beads, silver plating etc) or noise or losses or whatever, no idea, this is what I hear. And frankly the result was a surprise to me too, maybe you should experiment to work out why. 

 As for the next question, cost and worth it or not, well I still have not decided. I need to investigate first.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *SleepyOne* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Have you considered the possibility the freebie UBS cable that came with my DAC may not be well made (up to standard etc), maybe that explains the difference in sound. And there is a difference between the freebie and the kimber. I am not saying kimber is great or anything - I still need to try out other normal UBS cables - but I am saying that it is possible to have a difference. Maybe this is due to timing (use of iron beads) or noise or losses or whatever, no idea, this is what I hear. And frankly the result was a surprise to me too, maybe you should experiment to work out why. 

 As for the next question, cost and worth it or not, well I still have not decided. I need to investigate first._

 

Cheaply made or not, a poor quality will not and CANNOT sound "muddy".

 You may have got breaks/dropouts in the audiostream, sure.


----------



## SleepyOne

I am going to get a belkin USB and if it sounds fine, then that will point towards the conclusion that my freebie usb cable is defective.


----------



## joshd

I'd have thought that people producing USB DACs would include a cable that is within spec and doesn't drop out.. :-/


----------



## SleepyOne

Me too but the world isn't perfect, hence existance of Watchdog on TV. And this is only a freebie that came with DAC so don't expect too much...


----------



## Andrew_WOT

What about jitter and transmission errors?
 BTW, some interesting thread here, seems like some hear clear sonic difference between different USB cables.
Anyone do any USB Cable Comparisons
 I probably wouldn't go as far as shelling out $500 for USB cable, but using some nice Belkin instead of el-cheapo cable that came with Stello DA100 was an inexpensive investment for some peace of mind.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Andrew_WOT* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What about jitter and transmission errors?
 BTW, some interesting thread here, seems like some hear clear sonic difference between different USB cables.
Anyone do any USB Cable Comparisons
 I probably wouldn't go as far as shelling out $500 for USB cable, but using some nice Belkin instead of el-cheapo cable that came with Stello DA100 was an inexpensive investment for some peace of mind._

 

Man, most posts in that thread were trying to point out that it makes no difference.

 People who say things like:
  Quote:


 I could hear a difference. The Kimber was darker. The Belkin a tad brighter. Range and bass seemed similar but I preferred the Kimber. 
 

Are either massive liars, possibly trying to persuade people to buy the cable because they work for the company? I don't know.


 OK, I read the comments about it changing the leading edge, etc etc etc. It is possible for some bits to recorded incorrectly as a 0 or 1. This would happen randomly. Whatever cable you use, if it messing the data bad enough to change bits from 0 to 1 or vice versa, or mess up the timing because of accentuated jitter, it is NOT going to only affect the highs, leaving the bass intact.

 The errors would be all over the frequency range, and there would be SKIPS AND DROPOUTS.


----------



## tubaman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *joshd* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Posts like yours are what is confusing people on the issue... because they are utter nonsense.

 With a digital cable, either it transfers the data, or it has gaps in. Little dropouts. There is NO alternative. A cheap cable CANNOT sound muddy or distorted.

 How many times do many different users here have to say this, before people will understand? I think you all need to make yourselves a nice hot drink, and spend the afternoon reading up on how digital signals in general work, with regards to USB/coax etc etc._

 

I think you may be the one who is confused. Your reasoning is : I can't think of any reason why digital cables can make a difference unless they are defective, so they don't make a difference. And then you call what people hear utter nonsense, and the advocate of digital cables conspirators (including every published audio magazine) ("either massive liars, possibly trying to persuade people to buy the cable because they work for the company?")

 I took the trouble to take the brand new stock USB cable that came with my DAC1 USB from the plastic bag to compare with my Kimber hoping that I can sell the Kimber for a few bucks and use the freebie. Unfortunately, after a brief listening session of familiar music, I find the Kimber to be better. It wasn't night and day. I'd actually call it a 0.5% difference. However, for the money, it's worth it. And I didn't have to listen particularly hard to find a difference. I hate it when I have to listen hard to distinguish any difference; it distracts from the music. But what bothers me more ... see first paragraph.


----------



## olblueyez

Only 0.5? Can you boost it up to about 30 percent so I can sell my wife on the Kimber?


----------



## tubaman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *olblueyez* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Only 0.5? Can you boost it up to about 30 percent so I can sell my wife on the Kimber?_

 

If you also swap the fuses with Audiophile ones you can have 1% better performance for about $100. 

 To be fair the difference of Kimber and stock is not big; apart from vibration control, the main point of tweaking is the fun of it.

 I remember comparing an Acoustic Research coax (~$25) with a Kimber DV-60 (~$180 used) and they sounded distinctly different. Right now I use Blue Jeans coax because I can live with it.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tubaman* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_To be fair the difference of Kimber and stock is not big, and, *quite possibly invented by my brain to justify the expensive cable I have bought.*_

 

?

 Untill I have the money to get an outboard DAC, and someone lends me an expensive cable, I will not believe there is a difference untill I actually think I can hear one myself. (In which case I will be massively confused, for the reasons gone over earlier in the thread.)

 EDIT: maybe you should try looking at the poll. Look how few people agree with you. Do think all the cheap-o/belkin people are wrong? No, they just know how digital audio works.


----------



## tubaman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *joshd* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_?

 Untill I have the money to get an outboard DAC, and someone lends me an expensive cable, I will not believe there is a difference untill I actually think I can hear one myself. (In which case I will be massively confused, for the reasons gone over earlier in the thread.)

 EDIT: maybe you should try looking at the poll. Look how few people agree with you. Do think all the cheap-o/belkin people are wrong? No, they just know how digital audio works._

 


 I did look at the poll, and I was under the impression that the purpose of having a poll is to have people cast votes according to their own individually formed opinion/impression. I don't need to sell Kimber to anyone (although I did sell my spare lately, coincidentally); just simply wanted to discuss what the OP wanted to discuss - whether different USB cables can sound different. And I find that they do. Also I did qualify my opinion. 

 If I am not mistaken, the poll only asks which USB cable you use. It's not clear whether the Belkin users have heard Kimber or other choices. Such polls should be taken in with caution because there are always biases (evidently).

 BTW I don't need to justify anything, if I find the Kimber to be the same as the stock USB cable, I'd just sell the Kimber and pocket the money; take a small loss for my "mistake."


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *joshd* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_?
 Untill I have the money to get an outboard DAC, and someone lends me an expensive cable, I will not believe there is a difference untill I actually think I can hear one myself._

 

Do I understand this right? You don't have USB DAC or ever tried any other than el cheapo USB cable, yet consider yourself in a better position to question credibility of people who did hear the difference and trying to rationalize what they hear.


----------



## joshd

@tubaman: No, the poll is about USB cables in relation to sound quality, as is the first post. If people have been voting for what they are using, then they have not read the thread properly.

 @Andrew_WOT: Yes. You understand it perfectly. You do not need to own something to understand how it works. For example, you own a car, I do not. But if you say your car can fly, I do not have to own a car of my own to disbelieve you.


----------



## tubaman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *joshd* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_@tubaman: No, the poll is about USB cables in relation to sound quality, as is the first post. If people have been voting for what they are using, then they have not read the thread properly.

 @Andrew_WOT: Yes. You understand it perfectly. You do not need to own something to understand how it works. For example, you own a car, I do not. But if you say your car can fly, I do not have to own a car of my own to disbelieve you._

 

Don't know about flying, but if I were "only" paying 4-5 times more than a normal car, I guess it should be able to self-park. 

YouTube - LS460 parallel parking automatically! DRIVENmag.com


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Andrew_WOT* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Do I understand this right? You don't have USB DAC or ever tried any other than el cheapo USB cable, yet consider yourself in a better position to question credibility of people who did hear the difference and trying to rationalize what they hear._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tubaman* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Don't know about flying, but if I were "only" paying 4-5 times more than a normal car, I guess it should be able to self-park. 

YouTube - LS460 parallel parking automatically! DRIVENmag.com_

 

Oh good god... whatever next?!

 Well, maybe next it will cars that drive themselves too. As a race, we really are lazy.


----------



## jernmo

As josh and lapwing have noted, Digital is on or off. I have a very good understanding of the workings of digital transports, and cabling. Think of it this way. Your USB cable is capable of sending any digital data. Audio, video, binary files, and text. If sending these zeros and ones through an inferior cable changed the sound or content, it would have to change the zeros and ones. Your word documents would turn out changed, and your pictures would be altered. 

 Now that being said it is technically possible to affect those zeros and ones. That is why a "cheap-o" usb cable should not be used, nor should one that requires ferrite beads (or chokes) as they are not intended to be used as part of the USB standard. Any high quality USB cable should be Shielded to reduce electrical interference. Another issue is quality of the casing. A high quality cable should be more flexible and less susceptible to electrical interference and physical damage.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *jernmo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Now that being said it is technically possible to affect those zeros and ones. That is why a "cheap-o" usb cable should not be used, nor should one that requires ferrite beads (or chokes) as they are not intended to be used as part of the USB standard. Any high quality USB cable should be Shielded to reduce electrical interference. Another issue is quality of the casing. A high quality cable should be more flexible and less susceptible to electrical interference and physical damage._

 

But, as defined in their standard, USB cables do NOT have to be shielded, since they use differential signalling. Like cat network cabling.


----------



## jernmo

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *joshd* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_But, as defined in their standard, USB cables do NOT have to be shielded, since they use differential signalling. Like cat network cabling._

 

True, and honestly the big reason for a Ferrite Bead anyway is to reduce noise from a noisy source. So if your CDP, PC, etc has a poorly controlled/maintained signal, then it might be beneficial to have a ferrite bead. So for comparison sake it is appropriate to test like cables.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *jernmo* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_True, and honestly the big reason for a Ferrite Bead anyway is to reduce noise from a noisy source. So if your CDP, PC, etc has a poorly controlled/maintained signal, then it might be beneficial to have a ferrite bead. So for comparison sake it is appropriate to test like cables._

 

The ferrite bead is only beneficial if the USB DAC runs off the USB hub power, as the choke smooths the power a bit. (Although the dac should have it's own stabilisation circuits inside it as well anyway.)


----------



## tubaman

I saw this today: 

ramblings computer based audio

 So, $459 USB cable > $69.95 and $65 USB cables 

 Comments?


----------



## Aimless1

The article is a link from the Ridge Street Audio web site ridgestreetaudiodesigns.com/. It is the only article I could locate regarding their USB cable. I did also find a forum (can't locate it now) where a "group" was referred to that tested this and other cables. Certainly have to question the bias and origins of the article and test "group". The web site clearly states that Ridge Street took a usb cable they like and then shielded it. No new technology. So, unless massive shielding improves the audio transmission then this cable is no better than any other one IMHO.


----------



## tubaman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Aimless1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The article is a link from the Ridge Street Audio web site ridgestreetaudiodesigns.com/. It is the only article I could locate regarding their USB cable. I did also find a forum (can't locate it now) where a "group" was referred to that tested this and other cables. Certainly have to question the bias and origins of the article and test "group". The web site clearly states that Ridge Street took a usb cable they like and then shielded it. No new technology. So, unless massive shielding improves the audio transmission then this cable is no better than any other one IMHO._

 

Hi, which article are you talking about? Could you be more specific?


----------



## Aimless1

Sure, it's your link "ramblings computer based audio"


----------



## tubaman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Aimless1* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Sure, it's your link "ramblings computer based audio"_

 

I was actually under the impression that Positive Feedback Online is an independent, online audio review site.


----------



## Aimless1

I question all reviews and all review sites. Reviewers seem to have their own biases and/or seem way too comfortable with particular manufacturers. Not familiar with this particular site.


----------



## olblueyez

Maybe some one could make heads or tails of this document?

USB.org - Cable Assembly Test Requirements

 Or this group of documents.

http://www.usb.org/developers/docs


----------



## Aimless1

Those sure look like government documents, don't they. Good luck!

 Here is the forum thread I found regarding comparing Ridge Street to Cryo Parts to Kimber: Anyone do any USB Cable Comparisons

 You can draw your own conclusions. This was the only other reference I could find to the Ridge Street cable.


----------



## olblueyez

What do you guys think about this thread?

USB Cables | Computer Audiophile


----------



## myinitialsaredac

Olblueyez,
 Very nice read, I think eliminating digital jitter is impossible, and that USB cables can make a difference if and only if:
 The cable is not working properly (i.e. perfectly as it should) such as bits arent arriving, bits become flipped, it is subject to the switching power supply of a computer, or whether or not there are ferrites.

 That is my take, but I am not an expert, this is information I have gathered. As far as eliminating jitter by switching cables I believe it lies more in the "USB receiver chip, dac and digital filters" and thereby is improbable to be eliminated by a cable.

 Dave


----------



## olblueyez

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *myinitialsaredac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Olblueyez,
 Very nice read, I think eliminating digital jitter is impossible, and that USB cables can make a difference if and only if:
 The cable is not working properly (i.e. perfectly as it should) such as bits arent arriving, bits become flipped, it is subject to the switching power supply of a computer, or whether or not there are ferrites.

 That is my take, but I am not an expert, this is information I have gathered. As far as eliminating jitter by switching cables I believe it lies more in the "USB receiver chip, dac and digital filters" and thereby is improbable to be eliminated by a cable.

 Dave_

 

I suppose there is no way to find out if those unfortunate conditions exist unless you try the cables out first hand?


----------



## myinitialsaredac

I have tried a number of USBs including the belking gold, the headroom, and the kimber. 
 Yes there is an audible difference. No I don't have the know how to explain it scientifically, but what I know is that none of these cables works "perfectly" and the kimber was the most "perfect" of the bunch but because they all dont work "properly (perfectly)" this is where the improvement comes. I cannot say whether it is from flipped bits, the ferrites, the interference, or what but there is a difference. 

 As far as optical, There is also a difference here in cables. But it is not because of 1's and 0's it is because the cables do not work properly "perfectly". This is where the room for improvement comes.

 Yes I am in agreement that if cables worked properly (perfectly) then a 1 will sound the same through any cable as will a 0. But this is unfortunately not so.

 Dave


----------



## olblueyez

How much of an improvement did you get from the Kimber?


----------



## myinitialsaredac

To my ears, the improvement was definately audible. The bass seemed more controlled (tighter), the soundstage widened a bit, and overall just lead to a more joyous listening expierence. 
 However, as you can see, I currently use a monster optical cable as my digital interconnect as it has what I percieve as a lot of airiness and an even wider soundstage. 
 I have not done a side by side of the kimber and any optical, but they likely yield similar results if the optical is good.

 Dave


----------



## olblueyez

You got me thinking and I dug an optical cable and adapter out of my giant box of cables and conected my dac using optical and I like it. Could all be in my head but I seem to be getting simular results, more air and larger sound stage. Is there a parrot in the room?


----------



## myinitialsaredac

=D Glad you gave it a try,

 I prefered the sound of the optical, it seems to give every note a bit more realistic decay also. Its a different sound than the USB but it is to my taste over my system.

 Dave


----------



## krmathis

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *olblueyez* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What do you guys think about this thread?

USB Cables | Computer Audiophile_

 

Seems to be a hot topic over there as well.


----------



## olblueyez

I went to order a right angle adapter and optical cable last night. Turns out I had put two of the optical cables in my cart instead of one. So now I have one adapter and 2 cables comming.


----------



## uhcmos1

possibly with a DAC that runs from the USB bus's power, I can see the merit of a better cable.


----------



## skamp

_Reason is not automatic. Those who deny it cannot be conquered by it. Do not count on them. Leave them alone._ - Ayn Rand

 [size=xx-small](Yes, I admit, I got that quote from the last episode of _Criminal Minds_





)[/size]


----------



## wynn

I think there is an different between using a better USB cable, but you might not notice the different or the different is too small for you.


----------



## Nicolas2305

just compare the amount of connections in HDMI vs USB (more bits mean more possible bit loss) and at the end, I don't think few lost bits over HDMI would be that bad in a 52" tv or one bit lost once in a while over your USB connection will be audible. It's not like a hiss or something like that.


----------



## Scrith

There is a thread on this topic every 3 months or so, it seems.

 Summing up previous posts: I did not believe that USB cables made a difference, and voiced considerable skepticism about them on numerous occasions here. I finally broke down and got one (a Monster cable of some sort) just to prove everyone wrong. I subjected it to blind tests on both myself and my wife. Guess what? We could both tell the difference. I then went nuts and spent around $50 on a Cryoparts cable, which in blind tests also proved to be slightly better.

 Believe what you want. That is my experience. Blind tests (the only tests I trust in matters such as cables) have proven it for me after a tremendous amount of skepticism on my part.


----------



## Xan7hos

gold tip = prevents/slows oxidation

 personally, i'd get something that has just enough length (from my computer tower USB port to the top of my desk, about > 1 meter/4 feet), and perhaps a choke core (EMI/RFI filter). Definitely something that can be gotten for cheap!


----------



## jrosenth

From this thread: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f46/us...atters-371033/

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *audioengr* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Since I am an industry expert on the subject of USB audio and electrical engineer with 30 years of digital interface design experience, I though I would set the record straight.

 All of you that believe that no errors take place on a USB cable that is proper length (< 5m), are absolutely correct.

 On the other hand, all of you that believe that USB cables cannot color the sound of streaming playback are dead wrong, in fact they do. The effect that the cable has is called dielectric absorption and dispersion. This adds jitter to the signal as it is detected at the receiver. Cables with ferrites will actually add more jitter due to limiting bandwidth of the cable, so this is not advised. Longer cables and cables with larger than normal conductor gauge will also add jitter because of skin-effect and losses. The very best sounding USB cables will be short, use Teflon/air for dielectric and use very thin conductors for the signals, properly annealed Silver being the best.

 If you dont understand jitter, then you know very little about quality digital audio. Do some searches on the forums and you will learn a lot. Getting quality results from digital audio is primarily about reducing and maintaining low jitter. Second order effects are D/A quality and preamp/analog stage noise and distortion. 

 Those that claim jitter is a non-issue have never heard a decent digital source IMO. We are all at different levels in our audio quest, but it is good to understand the fundamentals. This way, you know what kinds of things will actually make significant improvements.

 Steve N.
 Empirical Audio_

 

-

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *audioengr* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Dielectric absorption is when the dielectric (insulation) in the cable charges due to the changing signal, but it resists discharging completely. It "holds onto" some residual charge. This can easily be measured with the right instrumentation. This absorption of charge is a kind of electrical "sponginess" of the insulator, like a sponge soaking up water, but does not release all of it when it is squeezed. The effect is that the transient signals encounter a sort of "inertial resistance" and tend to "spread" in time as a result, adding signal distortion and ergo jitter.

 This also happens in capacitors. This is why a ceramic capacitor in the analog signal path sounds much worse than a polystyrene cap in the signal path.

 As for the USB interface and it's rejection of incoming jitter, this depends entirely on the implementation. Even Asynch interfaces can be affected by incoming jitter. Even reclockers can be affected to some extent, although less so than typical interfaces.

 Most of the digital designers, including me, that are convinced that they have finally tackled the jitter imuunity problem end up eating our hats because the problem is still there to some extent. It is one of the hardest nuts to crack IMO.

 Steve N.
 Empirical Audio_


----------



## Tea

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *myinitialsaredac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes I am in agreement that if cables worked properly (perfectly) then a 1 will sound the same through any cable as will a 0. But this is unfortunately not so._

 

But if the USB cable can't work properly, how can a USB harddisk work without fault ? Because if a single bit of data(0/1) error, then all the rest of the following data should be wrong ?


----------



## FallenAngel

Looks like the exactly same arguments bouncing back and forth.

 Yes, a cable can make a difference, digital or analog. Yes, it does send 1 and 0 (actually, it send waves of existing or non existing signal, voltage). That wave is interpreted into 1 and 0. Since almost all USB audio is streamed, it must arrive at a perfect time (quite fast and very precise). When it does not, it is called jitter - a timing irregularly that forces the receiver to work outside of perfect conditions which obviously degrades its performance. Simple enough? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 As all of the ways to ignore/prevent/fix, whatever, I'll leave that up to you to figure out.


----------



## jrosenth

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *FallenAngel* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Yes, a cable can make a difference, digital or analog. Yes, it does send 1 and 0 (actually, it send waves of existing or non existing signal, voltage). That wave is interpreted into 1 and 0. Since almost all USB audio is streamed, it must arrive at a perfect time (quite fast and very precise). When it does not, it is called jitter - a timing irregularly that forces the receiver to work outside of perfect conditions which obviously degrades its performance. Simple enough? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

great summary


----------



## brandnewgame

The only way it could be true is if USB hard disks (etc) have error correction while USB DACs don't (due to latency?). I still don't believe colouration of the types suggested in this thread is possible.


----------



## icebird144

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *FallenAngel* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Looks like the exactly same arguments bouncing back and forth.

 Yes, a cable can make a difference, digital or analog. Yes, it does send 1 and 0 (actually, it send waves of existing or non existing signal, voltage). That wave is interpreted into 1 and 0. Since almost all USB audio is streamed, it must arrive at a perfect time (quite fast and very precise). When it does not, it is called jitter - a timing irregularly that forces the receiver to work outside of perfect conditions which obviously degrades its performance. Simple enough? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 As all of the ways to ignore/prevent/fix, whatever, I'll leave that up to you to figure out._

 

Thanks for the summary.

 So, in a hypothetical situation. If the DAC has a large enough buffer, then it can store up (maybe 1-2 second) of audio, so if the jitter occurs, it can use the buffer and fix the problem. Considering USB 2.0 has a bandwidth of 480Mpbs, it shouldn't be a problem in terms of bandwidth.
 So anyone know if any of the higher end DACs has this function? If so, then we can use a less than perfect cable?


----------



## icebird144

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *brandnewgame* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The only way it could be true is if USB hard disks (etc) have error correction while USB DACs don't (due to latency?). I still don't believe colouration of the types suggested in this thread is possible._

 

I think USB hard disks do have error detection and correction (at least it's not hard to implement one, while it is extremely valuable). All you need to do is to have a CRC or some checkpoint, and if it fails, then you can resend the data. But DAC can't really do that because you need the data in real-time. That's the main difference between the two.

 The jitter part makes sense to me, but I believe that's the only reason for colouration. 

 If I'm wrong, feel free to correct me =)


----------



## FallenAngel

Yes, there are buffers on the DACs except they are never 1-2 seconds long, they are usually _tiny_, storing milliseconds.

 Properly implemented buffering (and better yet, having a dedicated receiver which will store data, check for errors and correct them before sending anything to the DAC) would eliminate jitter from that transmission; but that still leaves the data being sent from the digital receiver to the DAC. This shoud be done in I2S and which runs off both the word clock and the serial clock and makes it a lot better for data transmission.

 Yes _icebird144_, if you use a buffer or simply sent data faster than needed (to make up for error correction overhead) with the DAC buffer understanding this, you've found a good way to solve the problem and you not only don't need a good cable, you barely need a good transport, in comes the $30 ChainTech AV-710 which with a good DAC will sound just as good as a $1000 CD player.


----------



## tomb

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *icebird144* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Thanks for the summary.

 So, in a hypothetical situation. If the DAC has a large enough buffer, then it can store up (maybe 1-2 second) of audio, so if the jitter occurs, it can use the buffer and fix the problem. Considering USB 2.0 has a bandwidth of 480Mpbs, it shouldn't be a problem in terms of bandwidth.
 So anyone know if any of the higher end DACs has this function? If so, then we can use a less than perfect cable?_

 

Re-read what FallenAngel posted. It's a timing issue. Even if the DAC chip had a buffer, it will still be storing timing information that could be good or bad. There's no way for the DAC to reference it to something else - except its own clock (or wherever) when the data arrived. If that's off, then storing it in a buffer isn't going to make it any better.

 There is something talked about in terms of packeted data that might keep the proper timing signal with the packets, but it's way above my head. Try reading the thread in the Computer Audio section, "USB Cable Matters!

 There are some great lessons in that thread - both about data transmission and timing relative to audio and also about some upset people with rigid thinking.


----------



## Godziltw

I think whether an expensive or cheap USB cable won't reduce or introduce jitter to the transmitted signal. Jitter is introduced by the source and can only corrected by the receiving end (DAC).


----------



## jrosenth

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Godziltw* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I think whether an expensive or cheap USB cable won't reduce or introduce jitter to the transmitted signal. Jitter is introduced by the source and can only corrected by the receiving end (DAC)._

 

What do you make of our friend the professional audio engineer's posts on the previous pages?

 Honestly, I get a little tired of folks just making claims with no supporting evidence, particularly when counterarguments and detailed explanations have already been marshaled against a given claim. Then the next dude hops in the thread and makes the same claim without referring to those explanations or counterarguments.


----------



## bmwpowere36m3

So it boils down to timing, correct? If the cable is subpar or whatever it might lead to timing errors between the source and the DAC, known as "jitter". And that's what colors the "sound"?

 The 0's and 1's that get sent can only be interpreted as 0's and 1's, and there are no differences between one "1" and another "1".... it's a timing issue between the 1's and 0's only, right?

 Unless the cable is soo bad that the DAC can't tell if its a 1 or 0.


----------



## linuxworks

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *joshd* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_?

 Untill I have the money to get an outboard DAC, and someone lends me an expensive cable, I will not believe there is a difference untill I actually think I can hear one myself. (In which case I will be massively confused, for the reasons gone over earlier in the thread.)_

 

I won't even BELIEVE my ears.

 my ears are connected to my brain. my brain runs logic but ALSO run emotion programs 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 therefore, you need test equip since those don't have emotions and have no 'stake' in the outcome.

 my view is that usb cable means 100% nothing to the sound and that if your source is jittery, your output will be.

 I won't waste time 'auditioning' datacomm cables since its a fool's errand to me. I do realize a LOT of people in high end don't think and only want to 'feel' and have their wallets emptied that way. fine for them; just not me.

 I haven't heard any diff in ANY spdif interconnect. maybe I should feel lucky that I don't need to overspend on copper or plastic.


----------



## linuxworks

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *jrosenth* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_What do you make of our friend the professional audio engineer's posts on the previous pages?_

 

there is no consensus that I've heard.

 various 'audio engineers' also believe in magic.

 so it means nothing. a LOT of high end is fake hocus pocus anyway. many so-called high end designers are just modern day snake oil salesman.


----------



## smuh

Thanks to Lapwing and all the others that try to explain the basics, but it seems this is just becomming another audiophile phenomenom that we will be unable to explain or messure... 

 USB cables are now part of the religion of audophila... whohooo! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	





 Will my el-cheapo USB cable sound better if I put a Kimber sticker on it?


----------



## linuxworks

also, here's a tidbit to think about.

 you can make 'n' digital copies and the bits still stay in place. you can go from DAT to DAT to DAT (yes, I started my digital days back when DAT taping just came out and all us tapers were concerned about this new thing called 'jitter') and you don't lose data and nothing, not even timing, is lost. timing is entirely based on original encoding at the source and not the cables, at least in a semi-buffered semi-realtime scheme like usb. 

 I used to build boxes that killed scms and allowed consumer decks to do digital transfers (of works they had rights to, of course). but it removed the politics from the DAT taping medium and now you could get bit-perfect copies as long as SCMS=00 (2 zeroes). if a tape had scms=00 on it, then any copy could be copied by even a consumer deck (iirc). anyone who wanted to 'GPL' (before there even was a GPL) their work would set the scms to 00 and then the tape would be easily copyable.

 what if 100 people made serial copies of that tape? would copy 100 be the same as 1?

 yes. in fact, even if you had 'wet noodles' as your interconnects, you'd still get all the bits there or not, no inbetweens. (OT: if you worried about data loss, you worried about using non-60meter tapes on audio drives. data/dds drives could handle thin 90meter tape but not the audio DAT mechanisms (has to do with tensioning) and so you'd get digital 'buzzsaw' as your data loss!)

 the moral is that the ONLY place jitter has any say in things is at the last final d/a stage. you could have a long long chain of source-DAT-DAT-DAT...DAC and only the final DAC stage 'counts' for jitter. all - ALL - the previous 100 chains of d-d interconnect DO NOT MATTER. there never is data loss along the interconnects and there is enough timing (self-timed) to get things to work. the only time you need master clock is for smpte (many things that need sync when mixed). self-clocked spdif is Just Fine(tm) and has been since day-1.

 what I'm also saying is that a collection of data (packet, whatever word you want) has to be buffered (ie, received) by the last DAC stage and then decoded. the days of 'pure realtime' are long gone and elasticity exists in buffering in software, firmware and even pure hardware.

 in the usb case, you receive data, then you SELF CLOCK IT to your own local analog stages (ultimately). its YOU to blame (the local board and system) for jitter in this case, NOT THE CABLES!'

 the cables are way too far away in the buffering of things to matter, guys. at least in the usb case.


----------



## myinitialsaredac

Linux, 
 That is an interesting view point. However you still have to assume that usb cables are using swings of voltage to transfer data. Any cable that uses electricity is going to be affected by dielectric dispersion and absorption, or the dielectric being unable to fully drain so instead of a 101 you get a 111 because the voltage is not dropping instantaneously and you have almost a half voltage before the next swing which can be misread. On the order of 44100 swings a second you can get some nasty foulups. You also need to account that most dacs run in isochronous adaptive mode, so there is no error correction or two way communication. You can also end up with slight differentials in timing between the bits in a packet caused by the cable before it reaches the buffer, so your only buffering data that already has a fair amount of jitter. 

 This does not mean go out and buy a ridiculous usb cable for 500$ but don't get one with horrid dielectrics.

 Dave


----------



## linuxworks

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *myinitialsaredac* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Linux, 
 That is an interesting view point. However you still have to assume that usb cables are using swings of voltage to transfer data. Any cable that uses electricity is going to be affected by dielectric dispersion and absorption, or the dielectric being unable to fully drain so instead of a 101 you get a 111 because the voltage is not dropping instantaneously and you have almost a half voltage before the next swing which can be misread._

 

ALL the usb errors I have gotton have been due to windows software or bad hardware or even a faulty controller (design). almost never is the actual *implementation* flakey. it works or it does not. it delivers bits there, somehow the receiver can pick the bits out and then save them to something (camera, flash card, disk, sound device, or even keyboard/mouse!).

 usb is very very asynch (not isoch like firewire is). with all the slop that is designed into the protocol, you'd think that 'bit timing' would not be one of the things that would affect data delivery.

 the ideal thing would be to have 'timestamps' labeled with each single data sample. duh! you'd think that would be obvious, right? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 they do that in a LOT of datacomms (my field of work) but they don't do that in audio. you have to extract clock from the data, in consumer spdif.

 but even with noise and such on the cable, usb is differential (for one thing) so its already pretty immune to a lot of 'cable things' that make one cable better than another.

 once the frames or packets are pulled off the wire, they have to be assembled into data samples and assigned their own timestamps (so to speak) in timing. note WHO is doing this! this is AT the usb receiver side of things. he receives a datagram, he opens (time goes by), he strips off headers and checksums and other protocol stuff (time still going by) and then he gets enough data for send THAT to the 'internal dac' and THIS is where timing really matters.

 and the waveform on the usb cable matters about..... 0%. its digital, guys, and a LOT of trash can be on a digital signal and the bits STILL seem to get thru.

 again, I've personally seen something close to this 100-digital-deck chain (grin) and the bits really do get there. that says a lot about how GOOD spdif really is. people need to give more credit to those that designed this since it has been doing a pretty OK job of things all these years.

 I would care more about long long cable length, but this is for ALL usb (even more important is my remote usb disk!) 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 as long as the cable is within spec and the receivers are doing their jobs, the bit delivery works Just Fine(tm).

 blame the dac or its stages. stop blaming cables in the digital world.


----------



## jurgen1

I found an interesting discussion about jitter in this long thread with Dan Lavry and some folks from Apogee.

PSW Recording Forums: Dan Lavry => Proper word clock implementation

 I recommend anyone interested in the subject of jitter to read it entirely. Many differing opinions are shared there about jitter in passive components such as cables, resistors, capacitors, etc., but unfortunately that thread was closed before some important questions about the subject were able to be answered.


----------



## linuxworks

as an aside, wouldn't it be fun if usb audio went faster than 1.1 speeds?

 lets assume a tcp-like connection (grin). you have sequencing, timestamps, timeouts and retries. all the basic things you need to keep a serial connection 'going'.

 the trick would be to have a transmission speed far exceeding the data output speed. this gives you enough time to truly do NAKs (I didn't get your last frame, please resend) and be really a reliable transport.

 burst at 10x the speed, maybe. send a packet (with error detection, no need for error -correction- as much anymore with retries now in the protocol) and then you have some 'slop time' that can be used (or not) if needed for retries or whatever. for the next 10n timeframes, the dac is going to be 'slowly' clocking out that data at its own local rate.

 this would give near 100% isolation between timing (elasticity) of source and sink.

 will the industry ever do this?

 usb audio isn't like this, today. but its still not a pure realtime 'hot off the presses' kind of datalink, either.

 usb1.1 is yesterday's news. everyone can run at 2.0 speeds today and even 2.0 is fast enough to allow some retries (some) and still not lose data.

 I bet eventually there will be true 2.0 speed audio devices and then there shall be NO excuse for 'cable magic' on those


----------



## myinitialsaredac

Linux, 
 Usb audio is not asynch in almost all implementations. It is isochronous adaptive. There are no retries, this differs from usb harddrives or the like using bulk mode transfer where timing doesnt matter at all, just the correct bits. Most of the time the bits do arrive correctly ie a stream of 101010101 would arrive just as that 101010101, but it could be 1 wait 0101 wait 01 wait 01 i.e. have jitter. This could be caused by the dielectrics being unable to drain fast enough to go from 1 to 0. In a perfect situation the dielectrics could drain instantly, but in our limitations instantaneous motion is impossible (i.e. the speed of light). 

 As for the 2.0 data the best of all worlds would be to implement a 2.0 data speed with a huge buffer that is many seconds, and uses bulk mode transfers with an offboard ultra clock. Actually a company is already doing this, I just dont remember which one, but I believe the dac was between 3000$ and 5000$. They neglect to inform you what chip they use also.

 Cheers,
 Dave


----------



## paradoe

I will buy a gold-plated, for the possible difference...


----------



## olblueyez

I just cant spend money like that on a USB cable when there are so many tubes to buy! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 But ya never know, maybe when the wife isn't looking.


----------



## tps

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *linuxworks* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_blame the dac or its stages. stop blaming cables in the digital world._

 

I'm just about to receive what will be my first high quality USB DAC, a Benchmark DAC1 PRE. IMHO, the cable induced jitter is probably small compared to the OS induced jitter with USB audio, so my guess is that, since the cable's contribution to total jitter is probably small, any gains made at this point might be swamped out by the jitter problems which still remain. Therefore, I think "blame the DAC" is probably the most fruitful view, hence my choice of Benchmark, a company who has put a lot of effort into eliminating the audible effects of interface jitter.


----------



## tubaman

usb

 It looks like Benchmark doesn't really care, or at least recommend, more exotic digital cables; just look at what they sell at their website. I do like my DAC1 USB enough with stock cords, but I like enjoy the sound even better after I integrated the various tweaks, including digital cables. I'd like to think it as that Benchmark has got the part they care/can rationalize covered, but there are other elements to Hi-fi.


----------



## dura

People here seem to concentrate on the digital signal and how that is corruptable or not. 
 But there is more on that cable then just the ones and zeroes; all kinds of noise that also enters the receiving component and might disrupt analogue feedbackstages. 
 A perfect cable would only transmit the digital signal and no noise at all. All extra noise, like RF might give audible distortion further in the chain.
 Of course this effect is as much dependent on the architecture of the receiving components as on the noise sent through the cable.
 Seems to me an acceptable explanation of why 
 usb-cables can sound different; the noise might disrupt analogue stages further up in the chain.


----------



## myinitialsaredac

Saying that usb cables can affect the sound doesn't mean you need to get the most expensive one. I believe in sound differences and would just opt with a belkin 2.0 gold. 

 Interesting input dura, another possibility.

 tps, why not try a different usb cable, such as a belkin, and see if you experience a difference, most of us try to get the most out of a system, and if there is a positive benefit within 25$ it seems worthwhile to me, especially on truly high-end systems.

 Dave


----------



## donunus

Does anyone have a link of where to buy the non ferrite kimber usb cable?


----------



## SleepyOne

Here is a link to the more expensive silver USB cable:

http://www.musicdirect.com/product/85484


----------



## plonter

recentely getting into computer audio, and it sound really fantastic with a simple 10$ usb cable. but despite that,i still got myself a kimber usb cable,as i feel i owe it to my system. 
 for me, the solution for the cable "dillema" was always to get a decent (not the most expensive) cable,whatever it is digital or analog, just for peace of mind and knowing that my system gets a proper interconnecting.
 it is too bad to let the interconnects be a bottleneck in a system.


----------



## scootermafia

All I know is, the claim people pose that because an ordinary cable can transfer files intact without corrupting them, that it can stream audio just as well. That's a crock of crap, they're not the same method of data transfer.


----------



## leveller1642

He was rude and utterly obnoxious but i miss him- oldblueyes i salute you. 

 I have so many USB cables I won't be buying any more for a while. I find them in the rubbish.


----------



## K3cT

Mine has this inscription its body along with a certification sticker:

 hi-speed USB Revision 2.0 Shielded 28AWG/2C + 24AWG/2C UL E305668 Type CM 75C CSA LL204790


----------



## Nirmalanow

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *donunus* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Does anyone have a link of where to buy the non ferrite kimber usb cable?_

 

I bought one a short while ago and it came with removable ferrites so you could take them off and put them on again to try it both ways. I purchased mine from Music Direct. I ended up preferring it with the ferrites on.

 Edit: This was the regular Kimber USB cable, not the newer silver version which appears to not have ferrites at all.
 The one I got with removable ferrites is here:
http://www.musicdirect.com/product/81375


----------



## john11f

I bought myself a Kimber Kable USB and noticed the difference immediately and I don't consider my ears to be really good in noticing small differences in sound quality.


----------



## ert

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *scootermafia* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_All I know is, the claim people pose that because an ordinary cable can transfer files intact without corrupting them, that it can stream audio just as well. That's a crock of crap, they're not the same method of data transfer._

 

True, however many people also claim that isochronous USB transfer (ie audio) is vulnerable to cable design because there is no error correction, unlike with data transfers used in external drives. However, isochronous does use CRC checks, although the specification does not guarantee that all packets sent can be checked on time. IIRC, one white paper I read said the typical bit loss in such applications is less than 1 in 10^10, basically irrelevant. It's also fairly trivial to test this in USB cables so I have to wonder why non of the audiophile cables don't just come out and say their cables have a bit error rate of 1 in X.


----------



## melomaniac

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Lapwing* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Anyone who actually believes a fancy USB cable will sound better than a cheapo needs to go back to school._

 

okay, I edited the red all caps shouting out. it was causing jitters on my screen.  

 but joking apart: yes, there are upper limits in terms of physical properties. there often isn't as much improvement with higher expenditure. but nonetheless you do have to admit that there are shoddy cables, suffering from quality control issues or crimping or any number of other issues, so the fact is that many people have in fact experienced an improvement in going from free (or supercheap) cables, whether USB or power, to something that is put together well and to exacting standards.

 please maintain a level of civil and rational discourse before turning on the all-shout fonts...


----------



## revolink24

I understand that there may be some benefits to a $30 USB cable. $2800 USB cables are just insane though.


----------



## therager

Would there be any merit to the idea that perhaps the cable/wire quality might affect not the digital signal but the neutral ground instead? Aren't all grounds on a system interconnected? Not sure how USB works on a physical level so this might be an insane thought. Any correlation there? Im thinking that may add noise but not necessarily coloration in the audio itself, but perhaps this is part of what people are hearing?
  Am I completely wrong here?
  (I dont have one and im just thinking of getting a USB audio interface, so I cant actually perform the "ear" test yet).
  One more thought, if you could convince yourself (by paying money or whatever other mental mechanisms you could think of) that your car was cooler than it is, that your wife was hotter, that your income was enough, wouldn't you do it too??? If money can buy you happiness then why not? Go for it!
  If you can listen to that music just as beautifully (and without noise) with the cheap USB cable, then you area already there too  (and saved some cash for something else)!
  Happy listening folks!
  -ff


----------



## weibby

haters gotta hate.
   
  All who disagree just want to disagree because they don't bother to try it out.
  There is a difference, whether the price is worth it or not, well thats up to person to decide.
   
  But if you don't try it, A/B it..you have no right to claim that there is "no difference" because you have to be deaf to say it ain't so.


----------



## K3cT

Quote: 





weibby said:


> haters gotta hate.
> 
> All who disagree just want to disagree because they don't bother to try it out.
> There is a difference, whether the price is worth it or not, well thats up to person to decide.
> ...


----------



## Rdr. Seraphim

Now, don't go and try to have a rational discussion or something like that... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 (said tongue in cheek, light humor, albeit with a dose of reality) 
  
  Quote: 





weibby said:


> haters gotta hate.
> 
> All who disagree just want to disagree because they don't bother to try it out.
> There is a difference, whether the price is worth it or not, well thats up to person to decide.
> ...


----------



## JRG1990

I tried it out to see if i could hear a difference i used a E7 and it's stock cable and this lindy 1, http://www.lindy.co.uk/05m-premium-gold-usb-cable-type-a-to-mini-b/37660.html , the E7's stock cable is thinner and longer and has 2 ferrites on it, probley isn't using a copper core aswell, the result was the lindy cable had a slightly more fuller sound, maybe with more higher end equipment the difference might be bigger but i can't imagion with any equipment its a massive difference in sound worth hundreds of pounds, personally il stick with cables in the £20-40 price range, i was looking at the higher end usb cables and this is how wireworld is marketing there's,
   
  Quote:


> It's not just 1's and 0's, it's the timing!!  There is a fundamental difference between the transfer of computer data and digital audio signals. Computers are able to transfer digital data without loss, because the data moves in the robust form of blocks, which do not depend on specific timing between the sending and receiving devices. However, digital audio signals are continuous streams of data, which are quite fragile, since the digital processor must remain perfectly locked onto the timing of the signal to avoid data losses.
> The Limitations of digital audio processors and cables create timing errors known as jitter, which remove portions of the audio signal and replace them with noise and distortion. Cables tend to round off the square waveforms of the signal, making them less clear to the processor, thus increasing jitter. This rounding effect varies greatly among cables and a truly superior digital audio cable can make great improvements in sound quality.
> WireWorld digital audio cables utilize unique designs specifically developed to minimize jitter by providing sharper, cleaner leading edges on the digital waveform. At each price level, they provide the lowest jitter available, producing distinct improvements in clarity, image focus, smoothness and dynamic range.
> WireWorld USB cables feature a unique flat design that reduces jitter to provide improved sound quality in media server, PC audio, and other digital music applications. Our unique flat cable design not only improves performance, but it allows you to connect digital music devices over longer distances – for instance, a laptop PC across the room from the home theater system.


 
   
   
   Whether theres any truth in that i don't know.


----------



## Prog Rock Man

Sorry, but i have yet to see anything that rules out placebo/psychoacoustic/purchase justification as good reasosn why one USB cable can sound slightly different from another.


----------



## JRG1990

Any1 seen the usb cable reviews on http://www.whathifi.com , here's 1 http://www.whathifi.com/Review/Audioquest-Forest-USB-15/ , it says Quote:


> The AudioQuest Forest is very affordable by standalone cable standards, and it offers all-round improvements over bundled cables.
> 
> Detail levels are markedly improved, there’s greater precision and punch, and a general upgrade in musical expressiveness.


 
   and this 1 http://www.whathifi.com/Review/Wireworld-Ultraviolet-5-USB/ ,
   
  Quote: 





> The gains in low-end body and punch, midrange spaciousness and detail, and high-end smoothness alone are significant.


 
   
  Can they really hear them differences.


----------



## dvw

I am not going to debate the USB cable's effect on sound, but I am going to explain how USB works. 
  USB's data are packetized. This means all the 1 and o are packaged together as a single message. This works like your Internet connection. 
  If we use water as an analogy, USB data does not pass through the wire like a pipe. But it is more like the water is packaged in a bottle and then passed down the line.
  So if you take the bottled water home in a Mercedes and it tasted better then a Honda carried water, then a boutique USB cable might be for you. For me I can't tell the difference.


----------



## scootermafia

Those USB cable reviews cracked me up a while back just because the writers were savagely beset upon by anti-cablers.  There's so many <$100, well engineered, machine made USB cables out there like the Cardas Clear and Furutech GT2 that it's not a huge risk to try one out.


----------



## scootermafia

Quote: 





dvw said:


> I am not going to debate the USB cable's effect on sound, but I am going to explain how USB works.
> USB's data are packetized. This means all the 1 and o are packaged together as a single message. This works like your Internet connection.
> If we use water as an analogy, USB data does not pass through the wire like a pipe. But it is more like the water is packaged in a bottle and then passed down the line.
> So if you take the bottled water home in a Mercedes and it tasted better then a Honda carried water, then a boutique USB cable might be for you. For me I can't tell the difference.


 
   
  USB data is only in packets for block mode data transfers, like connecting up a hard drive and sending files.  This is a huge misconception.  For USB audio it is in streaming mode, so things are time sensitive and easily corrupted, compared to other sorts of USB connections.  Digital data despite being "0's and 1's" can have the signal change and/or lose data, it's not literally 0's and 1's going through the cable but a square wave.  It's more like drinking water from a cup vs. an old shoe.


----------



## dvw

Quote: 





scootermafia said:


> Quote:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
  USB2.0 is about 500Mbps, USB3.0 is around 5Gbps, Audio streaming at high res is 12Mbps. How does audio stream sync to the time? There is a major rate mismatch here.
  Here's the USB audio spec.
   
  www.usb.org/developers/devclass_docs/audio10.pdf
  There is a tutorial on Silabs. You'll need to google for AN295.


----------



## Prog Rock Man

Quote: 





scootermafia said:


> Those USB cable reviews cracked me up a while back just because the writers were savagely beset upon by anti-cablers.  There's so many <$100, well engineered, machine made USB cables out there like the Cardas Clear and Furutech GT2 that it's not a huge risk to try one out.


 

 What Hifi have also given 5 star reviews to some very cheap cables, such as from the ebay seller ThatCable.


----------



## mahesh

I have a Kimber usb ag and i am very happy with it ,before i had a stock usb with my benchmark dac 1 usb, I think good usb makes sound different "better"? yes it does.


----------



## Prog Rock Man

Quote: 





mahesh said:


> I have a Kimber usb ag and i am very happy with it ,before i had a stock usb with my benchmark dac 1 usb, I think good usb makes sound different "better"? yes it does.


 


  But Elias Gwin from Benchmark has stated that any cable will do. Assuming the likes of jitter is actually audible and is a sound degredation problem, the DAC deals with it anyway. So you may feel better about your cable, but it does not work any better than another USB.


----------



## JRG1990

What effect does the matrial used in a usb cable have on the sound, if silver is used instead of copper would the signal get to the dac quicker (less resistance).


----------



## Prog Rock Man

Possibly, but in a difference that is so marginal that it makes no difference. What tends to happen is the audiophile finds a potential difference and exaggerates it into something that could be audible. Then they are able to attribute 'differences' between cables to the cable.
   
  But then when all of these 'differences' are hidden and only the ear is used, the 'differences' disappear.


----------



## kboe

I've used Kimber USB cables, NuForce, and a myriad of standard USB cables.  There differences not only between the nicer ones, but the cheaper throw aways as well.


----------



## MrProggie

As long as the HDMI cable is built to specifications and cost 3 dollars it's just as good as a cable costing 80 dollars built by Monster or Kimble. I do prefer the cable got goldplated connectors and shielding.


----------



## meltedspider

I've got the Furutech GT2 cable and I'm super happy with it, I've done a comparison with the stop cable and it my be a placebo affect but I'm defintaley glad I bought it !  Good build quality for sure.  Just makes you feel better, with better components and all!


----------



## tagosaku

Quote: 





kboe said:


> I've used Kimber USB cables, NuForce, and a myriad of standard USB cables.  There differences not only between the nicer ones, but the cheaper throw aways as well.


 


  By any chance, have you tried Wireworld? I was thinking of Kimber, but they have a similar price entry model.


----------



## Bricolage

This is ridiculous. USB cables are DIGITAL. As long as the data is being checked on both sides of the connection the data is IDENTICAL. Bit per Bit. USB is more than fast enough to push the data. 
   
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Serial_Bus#Data_packets
   
  USB is NOT analog so if something does interfere with the signal the data will be sent and again and your audio will either skip or stop completely. It is not possible for the audio to have small, subtle effects such as opening up the soundstage or having better treble.


----------



## 00940

Quote: 





bricolage said:


> This is ridiculous. USB cables are DIGITAL. As long as the data is being checked on both sides of the connection the data is IDENTICAL. Bit per Bit. USB is more than fast enough to push the data.
> 
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universal_Serial_Bus#Data_packets
> 
> USB is NOT analog so if something does interfere with the signal the data will be sent and again and your audio will either skip or stop completely. It is not possible for the audio to have small, subtle effects such as opening up the soundstage or having better treble.


 

  
  Please... we have so many threads on USB cables going and the same errors are repeated again and again and again. So, let's say it again:
   
  - In all USB audio devices, the data is not error corrected and data is not resent in case of errors. All the USB audio protocols are isochronous (be they synchronous, adaptive or asynchronous) and isochronous transfers do not allow for error correction (see http://mprolab.teipir.gr/vivlio80X86/usb11.pdf , pt 8.7 and http://www.usb.org/developers/devclass_docs/audio10.pdf , pt 3.3 and following).
   
  - There is room for subtle effects in the USB chain as most USB audio receivers (synchronous and adaptive) generate their system clocks on the basis of the timing of the arriving USB packets. Depending on the receiver, the jitter of this system clock can go from a few ns to ms (not a typo). This jitter will affect the accuracy of the digital to analog conversion.
   
   
  However, that doesn't mean that, in my view, cables are likely to have an effect. The big trouble with USB audio is that the quality of the clock inside the source computer isn't guaranteed at all ; I suggest reading the discussion starting here: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/417785/yes-virgina-there-is-a-difference-in-usb-cables/150#post_7254553


----------



## ert

There are analytic instruments that can measure jitter in digital transmission cables down to levels that are relevant to audio data.  The lack of such measurement information from boutique USB cable makers suggest that either they do not understand how to measure jitter (in which case they should not be making cables) or that there is no difference in the transmission characteristics between the boutique cables and the cord on your USB mouse.  Consider that any company having such measurements (verified by an independent testing lab) would basically own the market.


----------



## BrucYSN

So there is a common understanding that when a USB/Coax is transferring a digital signal, the quality of the cable would not affect the quality of the signal( let's say the length of the cable is under 1.5m )? However, when transferring a analog signal, the conclusion is different? 
   
  The reason why is that I'm Looking for a pair of IC for my CD Transport, Although I would like to have decent quality Cable, it might have its use later.


----------



## monoethylene

Quote: 





brucysn said:


> So there is a common understanding that when a USB/Coax is transferring a digital signal, the quality of the cable would not affect the quality of the signal( let's say the length of the cable is under 1.5m )? However, when transferring a analog signal, the conclusion is different?
> 
> The reason why is that I'm Looking for a pair of IC for my CD Transport, Although I would like to have decent quality Cable, it might have its use later.


 

 Wthout a doubt and after doing a blind A/B comparison, my roomate heard a difference between different USB cables whereas I didnt hear it.  I speak of a high end one and a standard one. Nevertheless the difference is based on the shielding IMO, not the data transport itself..


----------



## Chromako

I have some background in electronics and RF research, so I'll contribute what I can. The answer is Yes and No. (this is long, sorry)
   
*For the "No:"*
   
  As far as the USB signal goes, the important thing is that the bits arrive properly and on time. Since there is some error correction in USB, one or two bits being lost isn't a big deal. Yes, there might be a few tens of microseconds of additional latency, but any USB interface will have a small buffer. So, as long as the cable is of reasonable quality, there's no problem. 
   
  Data problems then will be mostly limited to Jitter (since USB has error correction, and lost bits are very rare as it is anyway). A cable will NOT have an effect on the jitter. That's an issue with the clock. So get a reclocker (Hiface, etc, and give that clean power). A cable won't help you here. 
   
  Why? Given the physics behind the electrical signals, at 480 MT/s (megatansfers per second) on a single-channel serial link (USB 2.0), any reasonable cable <15 ft won't affect the timing. Make a ridiculous run of 100 metres unbuffered, and you might run into issues. *At 10GT/s, yes, there are issues with reflection, timing, and such weirdness* (hence with Thunderbolt's active cabling), and with parallel cables running at 100MT/s+. Neither of which apply to USB 2.0. Much less USB 1.1. 
   
   
   
*Now, for the "Yes:" Cheaper cables can introduce NON-DATA problems. *
   
  RF interference for one. A cable is an antenna. So an improperly shielded USB cable may introduce RF interference. Not anything at an audible frequency (the cable is much too short to get any apreciable low-frequency RF). However, higher frequency RF MAY introduce weirdness in the DAC module. So, moral is, make sure the cable is shielded (and the shield is grounded, which any decent cable will). Ferrites do help, in theory. I put my own on. I'm unsure if it made a difference, but they look cool. If you want to be extra cautious, get a USB 3.0 cable. There's more shielding on those.
   
  Want to be extra sure? Make a homemade faraday cage and route as much of the cable through it. For extra peace of mind, just put the entire transport in a faraday cage, and make sure your building has a fancy matrix electrical earthing system, or that your hifi system has its very own grounding rod 
   
  But, the biggest problem is that USB comes with a 5V electric power feed. That is coming from a noisy place (your computer). This will affect most transports. Solution? Cut the red wire inside the USB cable, and feed in your own clean 5V power. You need the other three and the foil wrapping. Your cable has foil/metal braided wrapping, right? Any reasonable cable will. 
   
*Moral?* Get a decent cable. No need for any ridiculous 30USD (internet price) things. What you get from any boutique ones (cough, Monster or Audioquest) is nice looks and bragging rights. The most important thing to remember here is that USB has error correction and any latency (microseconds) introduced will be nullified in the transport's buffer, if the buffer is properly compliant with standards.
   
  But a consideration: *placebo really is significant in the enjoyment of music. And with DBTs, there is a "confirmation bias" to watch out for. *Science has that problem all the time. So from a psychologic and neurological standpoint, if it sounds "better" to use uber-fancy cables, go for it, even if it's simply due to placebo!


----------



## monoethylene

Hm.. I dont think that it is the non-data problem but the shielding and building..My experience..okee the one of my roomate..
   
  (and the shield is grounded, which any decent cable will). Thats the point to talk about


----------



## scootermafia

One thing I've found is that if you don't connect the connector shells together with the shield, my DAC will go nuts 
  I wonder if Thunderbolt will ever be used in the distant future for super high res audio transfers.  Its data rate is pretty insane though, more than what you'd need.


----------



## somestranger26

Quote:


scootermafia said:


> I wonder if Thunderbolt will ever be used in the distant future for super high res audio transfers.  Its data rate is pretty insane though, more than what you'd need.


 

 I doubt thunderbolt will ever come close to USB in ubiquity. I believe it's doomed to the fate of firewire due to the way Apple is using it on its products while every other company and peripheral manufacturer is going USB 3. USB 2 is already more than adequate for 384kHz/32-bit audio.
   
  On an unrelated note, I have found USB cables to affect the sound quality -- I went from a monoprice cable to a Wireworld Ultraviolet and now a Furutech GT2 and the difference between the GT2 and Monoprice is too great for even the biggest cable skeptic to deny or claim is placebo. People need to try it for themselves instead of demanding scientific proof of upgraded cable efficacy.


----------



## allhifi

olblueyez said:


> I know this sounds crazy but I prefer the way my dac sounds with a cable that doesn't have the ferrite attached.



And you'd be right ! In fact, it should (does it?) sound much more "open"; lost its mushy, boomy bass and increased clarity and definition ?

To a Google search, and find a recommended USB cable for Computer Audio. In fact, if you care to try before you buy, consider the Audioquest "Carbon"  USB cable -either through an accommodating dealer or through The Cable Company who charges a small fee for a cable evaluation.

You don't need "Golden Ears" or esoteric hi-fi gear. If you have kids, wife/girlfriend or buddy's around -ask them what they hear !
If they same the same thing, guess what, cables not only make a difference, but often times a profound one ! The "Carbon" is one that I'll bet you (and others) say ...  "Oh, my, my" ... 

Enjoy.

 pj


----------

