# High Quality USB Cable for USB DAC?



## ath1337

Does anyone know if it's worth buy a "high" quality USB cable to connect a PC/Laptop to USB DAC? I'm looking for a cable to connect an EMU 0202 USB to my laptop. I read somewhere that the best USB cable you can buy is the Tricon USB by Synergistic Research, but they aren't available online, there is no price listed, and the store locater does not work (I don't know what the big secret is?). It's probably too expensive anyway (My guess is around $100).

 What about the Belkin Home Theater USB 2.0 Cable? Belkin

 or Monster Cable Performance Digital USB 2.0 Audio Cable Buy Monster Cable Performance Digital USB 2.0 Audio Cable at Musician's Friend 

 Does anyone know if these have any different cables have any effect on the audio quality?


----------



## wavoman

I have done a lot of research on this, including a lot of reading of the USB spec. High priced USB cables are not worth the money in general. Cheap USB cables however can lead to audible errors.

 And some manufacturer's care about video quality, or meeting shielding requirements more than audio quality.

 I would NOT buy the Belkin or the Monster, certainly not at Musician's Friend (which has been horrible shipping the AT AD2K's to several of us this week).

 The manufacturer Newnex is fully certified and quite cheap. Available at usbstuff:

USB 2.0 Cables Active Extensions and Angled Cables from Newnex


----------



## nd4speed

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *wavoman* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have done a lot of research on this, including a lot of reading of the USB spec. High priced USB cables are not worth the money in general. Cheap USB cables however can lead to audible errors.

 And some manufacturer's care about video quality, or meeting shielding requirements more than audio quality.

 I would NOT buy the Belkin or the Monster, certainly not at Musician's Friend (which has been horrible shipping the AT AD2K's to several of us this week).

 The manufacturer Newnex is fully certified and quite cheap. Available at usbstuff:

USB 2.0 Cables Active Extensions and Angled Cables from Newnex_

 

Belkin seems to make pretty good fully rated cable; what don't like about them?


----------



## vo_obgyn

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ath1337* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Does anyone know if it's worth buy a "high" quality USB cable to connect a PC/Laptop to USB DAC? I'm looking for a cable to connect an EMU 0202 USB to my laptop. I read somewhere that the best USB cable you can buy is the Tricon USB by Synergistic Research, but they aren't available online, there is no price listed, and the store locater does not work (I don't know what the big secret is?). It's probably too expensive anyway (My guess is around $100).

 What about the Belkin Home Theater USB 2.0 Cable? Belkin

 or Monster Cable Performance Digital USB 2.0 Audio Cable Buy Monster Cable Performance Digital USB 2.0 Audio Cable at Musician's Friend 

 Does anyone know if these have any different cables have any effect on the audio quality?_

 

I have one of these in my setup:

Kimber Mini BUS 0.5M @ HeadRoom - Right Between Your Ears

 The cable is very well made and I use it in my system:

 EAC > Foobar2000(ASIO4ALLv2) > RSA Predator > Shure SE310/Senn HD580's

 Does it make an audio difference? I think so, but some do not find that it matters much. Some do, however.


----------



## JamesL

As long as the usb cable is within specs, it should make no difference in sound quality over short distances. 

 Its pretty much the same thing as sending a music file between two computers... all data is intact. Although i think usb transfer has some type of data-correction protocol.


----------



## trickywombat

A poorly made cable will make a big difference - intermittent connections, dropouts, etc.

 Cables that are well made and up to spec will sound the same between each other.

 Just get the cheapest cable that's USB 2.0 certified that's well-constructed.


----------



## wacomme

What are examples of well made cables?


----------



## Pangaea

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *vo_obgyn* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I have one of these in my setup:

Kimber Mini BUS 0.5M @ HeadRoom - Right Between Your Ears

 The cable is very well made and I use it in my system:

 EAC > Foobar2000(ASIO4ALLv2) > RSA Predator > Shure SE310/Senn HD580's

 Does it make an audio difference? I think so, but some do not find that it matters much. Some do, however. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 


 I think this one is a safe bet. I have 2. Some would argue that an "audiophile usb cable" is not worth it, but these are reasonably priced and offer good shielding with a high quality build. I wouldn't recommend them at $100+ but there approx $40 price is reasonable.


----------



## ath1337

After reading this review Kimber Kable: Kimber USB Review | Computer Audiophile

 I think I'm going to go with the Kimber Cable.


----------



## Quaddy

reason i went against kimber and ended up with the cryo-parts, is that kimber has inbuilt ferrite cores which are, from a certain school of thought, deleterious to the realtime stream, fine for data transfer

 see this quote from the proprietor of empirical audio

 the cryo parts usb cable is founded from an already decent quality usb cable, cryo'd and then wrapped with ers paper and an expensive carbon shielding which will pay dividends in terms of external noise fields.


----------



## wavoman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_reason i went against kimber... is that kimber has inbuilt ferrite cores which are, from a certain school of thought, deleterious to the realtime stream, fine for data transfer

 see this quote from the proprietor of empirical audio_

 

Quaddy is right, and Steve (Empirical) is right -- it's not just a "school of thought", it is a strong suggestion from the USB spec folks. I have posted this in other threads, sorry to repeat, from usb.org:


> Q. What are the most common signal quality design mistakes?
> 
> A: Signal Quality is a mandatory test. See the signal quality test description for details. Most problems are the result of EMI "control" components like ferrite beads mounted on the signal lines. Often, these manage to destroy the integrity of the signal as well as make emissions worse.


from:

USB.org - USB FAQ


 Kimber has ferrite beads. Some Bekin's have it too. A reasonable price line Newnex does not, and Newnex has been certified by usb.org. See my first answer to the OP for a link to buy.

 Before I knew all this I bought the Kimber. It sounds identical to the Newnex, so the beads don't hurt it. But it did cost me 3 times as much.

 It's not that beads will hurt for sure, but usb.org suggests controlling EMI without using them, so it upsets me that Kimber did resort to them. That's all. No logic here, just emotion.

 But $15 cable sounded as good as $45. I have a $1 cable that sounds poor, btw, so not all cables sound the same. The $1 cable has beads, but it looks and feels like the junk it is.


----------



## Garret Jax

CHALLENGE:

 Can any of you provide any proof whatsoever that a USB cable can have any effect on digital audio passing through it? I think you're all reciting old wives' tails (or old nerds' tails). If what you all say is true, than USB backup hard drives would routinely be corrupted - not because the hard drive breaks (which is common) but because, given the vast amount of data being transferred, statistically speaking if it's at all likely that an error can be transmitted and not detected (and corrected), there's no way USB backups would work. Yet they do! OOOH AHHHH!

 This is a call out, mother ******!!! Make your case, or admit you're wrong and beg for mercy.

 -Garret

 PS: this is all in good fun


----------



## Quaddy

garret, we are talking about real time digital streams as in music being transferred across said cable to a very fine implement such as a dac, no one is arguing that its mission critical for a hard drive to have such a quality cable for the mere purpose of storing and using data files.

 its like comparing a telecoms companies policy of always on broadband. if you read their smallprint, most if not all actually *dont* guarantee you data (adsl) down the line, they only are willing to provide a high percentage of QOS and uptime for voice.

 reason being voice is robust compared with 1's and 0's

 this can be equated to the differences between storage and streaming of music which is more finicky and prone to error, streaming is not as error adaptive as even broadband (with its interleaving) and plain ol' data storage, which often has the host OS to deal with blips, CRC redundandcy checks or alike.

 its not a case of having to prove it one way or the other, if it was i am sure we would ask you non-believers to prove that it *doesnt* have a beneficial outcome with using a higher quality/noise rejecting cable

 its simply a case of peace of mind for most, i know it is with me, having spent a lot of money on a dac, hours and hours of managing music and the highest quality interconnects etc etc, i will sleep easier knowing i spent a few more bucks on a cable that is less likely to have a negative affectation on my music listening!


----------



## Chri5peed

Yeah, in this instance it is cable quality.

 If you buy something not a default Ratshack $3 lead, but spend a bit more, you can expect better overall build-quality and a more stable signal/mirror of data which went in.



 In fact my Zen came with a good USB lead. It has quality connectors/it is shielded and gray.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



 The same connection as my DAC.


----------



## wavoman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Garret Jax* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_CHALLENGE:

 Can any of you provide any proof whatsoever that a USB cable can have any effect on digital audio passing through it? I think you're all reciting old wives' tails (or old nerds' tails). If what you all say is true, than USB backup hard drives would routinely be corrupted - not because the hard drive breaks (which is common) but because, given the vast amount of data being transferred, statistically speaking if it's at all likely that an error can be transmitted and not detected (and corrected), there's no way USB backups would work. Yet they do! OOOH AHHHH!_

 

USB disk reads and writes have error-correcting and re-tries built in. No problem. This has nothing to do with USB digital audio transmission, which has hard real-time constraints -- deliver the bitstream in time as the music plays.

 This comes up over and over again. I'm gonna have to dig up a bad cable and do a demo somewhere.


----------



## cconnaker

Hi guys - I've heard from a few sources that the Synergistic Tricon USB cable is actually work the $800 it sells for. That's pretty steep so I am trying to get my hands on one before I take the plunge. 

 I really do like the Kimber USB cable though.


----------



## cerbie

$800?! At the $40 price of the Kimber, you're paying for aesthetics. There's no voodoo. It's just a matter of having acceptable quality. Once you hit, "good enough," there really is no room to move up. Those Newnex cables look pretty nice.


----------



## OutdoorXplorer

i am using sony's full copper usb cable which cost me approx usd35 for the link between my pc and rsa predator. it sound great...


----------



## olblueyez

70 dollar usb cable? Must be some good stuff.


----------



## wacomme

Other than not using a cheap USB cable, there doesn't appear to be any definitive answer whether a $15 or $800 cable will make any difference to the quality of the sound. Perhaps, then, the $15 is my best choice. 

 Michael


----------



## tk3

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *OutdoorXplorer* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_i am using sony's full copper usb cable which cost me approx usd35 for the link between my pc and rsa predator. it sound great..._

 

Did you notice any improvement against the stock cable you were using before?


----------



## Garret Jax

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_garret, we are talking about real time digital streams as in music being transferred across said cable to a very fine implement such as a dac, no one is arguing that its mission critical for a hard drive to have such a quality cable for the mere purpose of storing and using data files.

 its like comparing a telecoms companies policy of always on broadband. if you read their smallprint, most if not all actually *dont* guarantee you data (adsl) down the line, they only are willing to provide a high percentage of QOS and uptime for voice.

 reason being voice is robust compared with 1's and 0's

 this can be equated to the differences between storage and streaming of music which is more finicky and prone to error, streaming is not as error adaptive as even broadband (with its interleaving) and plain ol' data storage, which often has the host OS to deal with blips, CRC redundandcy checks or alike.

 its not a case of having to prove it one way or the other, if it was i am sure we would ask you non-believers to prove that it *doesnt* have a beneficial outcome with using a higher quality/noise rejecting cable

 its simply a case of peace of mind for most, i know it is with me, having spent a lot of money on a dac, hours and hours of managing music and the highest quality interconnects etc etc, i will sleep easier knowing i spent a few more bucks on a cable that is less likely to have a negative affectation on my music listening!_

 

But at the hardware controller level, the USB ports do not know what type of data is being sent, do they? Unless the USB controllers have 'integrity' mode and 'speed' mode, where 100% accuracy is not mandated, then what you're saying is irrelevant - the USB controller that reads/writes on the wire does not have any clue what the 1's and 0's are being used for, so it ALWAYS ensures 100% accuracy.


----------



## Garret Jax

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *wavoman* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_USB disk reads and writes have error-correcting and re-tries built in. No problem. This has nothing to do with USB digital audio transmission, which has hard real-time constraints -- deliver the bitstream in time as the music plays.

 This comes up over and over again. I'm gonna have to dig up a bad cable and do a demo somewhere._

 

I don't need a cable demo, I need a link to the part of the USB specification where it says real-time data does not have to be 100% accurate. It's not that I think you're all full of hot air, but I would like to see some definitive evidence, and only relevant sections of the USB spec would qualify here. Otherwise it's just so much hearsay.


----------



## OutdoorXplorer

yes, interference was immediately disappeared upon changing this usb cable comparing to those standard usd3 usb cable.






  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *tk3* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Did you notice any improvement against the stock cable you were using before? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_


----------



## Quaddy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *OutdoorXplorer* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_yes, interference was immediately disappeared upon changing this usb cable comparing to those standard usd3 usb cable.




_

 






 get those ferrites off there - t'is blasphemy!


----------



## OutdoorXplorer

may i know why? i thought it suppose to reduce emi..  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_





 get those ferrites off there - t'is blasphemy! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_


----------



## Quaddy

yes it does indeed reduce emi by a small percentage see a few posts back - its low level at the end of the day and no-one is pretending that it manifests itself in a overt way but this may well go on at a low level


----------



## Chri5peed

Lol, I thought those type of _ferrite beads_ were just rubbish cable shorteners.


----------



## gyrodec

Garret - I personally have serious doubts a USB cable can sound different, but there is a clear difference between streamed audio and data moved to an external HD. For streamed audio the digital clock is sent encoded in the timing of the data pulses. If there is noise, the clean transient edge of the signal will be degraded and this WILL add jitter to the clock part of the signal. Block mode data transfer, as used by HDs, obviously does not have any clock part and so is much more robust from a noise stand-point. The EMU 0404 USB DAC also uses a bluck-mode scheme, and that might be one of the reasons so many people think it sound great. 

 Does the timing jitter from a cheap USB cable produce audiable affects - ??? Does an expensive USB cable actually provide better noise surpression and hence lower jitter - ??? Does the lower jitter give you better sound - ??? However, there is a real difference between data transfer and streaming audio.


----------



## DefectiveAudioComponent

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_reason i went against kimber and ended up with the cryo-parts, is that kimber has inbuilt ferrite cores which are, from a certain school of thought, deleterious to the realtime stream, fine for data transfer
 ._

 

That cryo cable (the middle one) looks exactly like the stock 0404USB usb cable.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Garret Jax* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I don't need a cable demo, I need a link to the part of the USB specification where it says real-time data does not have to be 100% accurate. It's not that I think you're all full of hot air, but I would like to see some definitive evidence, and only relevant sections of the USB spec would qualify here. Otherwise it's just so much hearsay._

 

Just read section on 
Isochronous Transfers


----------



## Garret Jax

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gyrodec* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Garret - I personally have serious doubts a USB cable can sound different, but there is a clear difference between streamed audio and data moved to an external HD. For streamed audio the digital clock is sent encoded in the timing of the data pulses. If there is noise, the clean transient edge of the signal will be degraded and this WILL add jitter to the clock part of the signal. Block mode data transfer, as used by HDs, obviously does not have any clock part and so is much more robust from a noise stand-point. The EMU 0404 USB DAC also uses a bluck-mode scheme, and that might be one of the reasons so many people think it sound great. 

 Does the timing jitter from a cheap USB cable produce audiable affects - ??? Does an expensive USB cable actually provide better noise surpression and hence lower jitter - ??? Does the lower jitter give you better sound - ??? However, there is a real difference between data transfer and streaming audio._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Andrew_WOT* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just read section on 
Isochronous Transfers_

 

Thanks guys!


----------



## nd4speed

I imagine those cables with Ferrite donuts on them are indicative of a cable with inadequate shielding to begin with. I personally avoid those.

 I find it difficult to swallow paying big bucks for those after-market USB cables that I know have standard run of the mill stranded copper conductors and the shielding that is more for "cosmetic" purposes.

 Can anyone that has done A/B listening tests between a "good" (preferably clear with foil/braid shielding you can see) but reasonably priced, off the shelf USB cable and an after-market "boutique" cable chime in about SQ differences?

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *wavoman* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Quaddy is right, and Steve (Empirical) is right -- it's not just a "school of thought", it is a strong suggestion from the USB spec folks. I have posted this in other threads, sorry to repeat, from usb.org:



			Q. What are the most common signal quality design mistakes?

 A: Signal Quality is a mandatory test. See the signal quality test description for details. Most problems are the result of EMI "control" components like ferrite beads mounted on the signal lines. Often, these manage to destroy the integrity of the signal as well as make emissions worse.
		
Click to expand...

from:

USB.org - USB FAQ


 Kimber has ferrite beads. Some Bekin's have it too. A reasonable price line Newnex does not, and Newnex has been certified by usb.org. See my first answer to the OP for a link to buy.

 Before I knew all this I bought the Kimber. It sounds identical to the Newnex, so the beads don't hurt it. But it did cost me 3 times as much.

 It's not that beads will hurt for sure, but usb.org suggests controlling EMI without using them, so it upsets me that Kimber did resort to them. That's all. No logic here, just emotion.

 But $15 cable sounded as good as $45. I have a $1 cable that sounds poor, btw, so not all cables sound the same. The $1 cable has beads, but it looks and feels like the junk it is._

 

That's because it most likely is (a standard OEM USB cable, albeit with cryo treatment).
  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *DefectiveAudioComponent* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That cryo cable (the middle one) looks exactly like the stock 0404USB usb cable._


----------



## Quaddy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *nd4speed* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_That's because it most likely is (a standard OEM USB cable, albeit with cryo treatment)._

 

definitely, cryo-parts doesnt pretend otherwise, they literally take a well made usb cable and add ers paper and carbon fibre shielding.

 when i receeve the cryo-parts shielded cable i will gladly document any improvements over bog standard cables, if any.

 i am experiencing dropouts ATM with the standard cable, which is causing the dac1 to lose its signal via usb and flashing with front panel diagnostic errors until it goes into standby, which is occasionally disrupting my listening

 i as quite sure i have near field interference from various power supplies running in close quarters to my rig so this is why i am after carbon/ers shielded cable for DAC1 and also after ERS paper to cover the more sensitive devices to see if it improves chain stability

 we'll see...


----------



## nd4speed

Great, thanks Quaddy; looking forward to see how it fairs in your setup.


----------



## lbcliff

Expecting A/B test.


----------



## Quaddy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *lbcliff* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Expecting A/B test._

 

say again ?


----------



## lbcliff

Quaddy, expecting your comparison between cryo-parts and standard one


----------



## Quaddy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *lbcliff* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Quaddy, expecting your comparison between cryo-parts and standard one_

 

oh righ no prob, i thought you may be doing an A/B yourself!

 just as soon as the bits in my sig all go dark grey, meaning i have them

 then i can crack on, the cryo was shipped a good few days ago now, but can take 10 days coming to U.K, with customs.

 even when i receive the USB i am not going to do the A/B as i am using horrendous veiled sen hd555 at the moment, and want to wait for my denons, in the next fortnight hopefully.

 if i can honestly determine a beneficial difference, either in stability from dropouts or sound, both idealy, then i *may* see about getting hold of the tricon usb and see if its a load of bullshine!


----------



## lbcliff

Cheers Quaddy


----------



## obobskivich

to be honest, USB is like digital audio (I don't think cables make a difference in any audio system, especially digital, let me qualify with that), it either works or it doesn't, period

 meaning avoid the super cheap cables that don't work, as a result of no shielding, or other crap like that, but the cables will not provide coloration to the sound, as its a digital signal being passed end to end (if you can hear a difference, well, from an IT and computer science standpoint, its impossible)

 granted I'm not saying buyin lamp cord or a $1 POS cable, but I'm saying that $50+ is wasteful


----------



## fjf

I'm sure there is a cryo-usb ca


----------



## Quaddy

we arent talking about coloration, like a normal IC, if you read the thread its more to do with are there different qualities and more robust cables out there?, that can do the job better!

 i recently re-wired my internal telephone lines with cat6, an NTE5 triple diode faceplate utilizing the master port and my broadband estimate survey ( before moving in and after ) jumped from 1mbit to 5mbit! so qualities of cabling do indeed make a difference to 'digital' streams

 please only state that $50 is wasteful if you have tried one and know that yourself, dont just assume the outcome based on your own biases/opinions, this is what am awaiting to 'judge' to myself, and will not be so proud as to tell people if indeed it is all snake oil - if so, then i can come and "x2" your post 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	









 p.s how do you feel about the $800 tricon usb cable?


----------



## fjf

Double post!


----------



## Chri5peed

The rule is to get an 'equals' cable rather than a 'negative' cable. No such thing as a 'plus' cable.

 What I mean is to get a cable able to transmit a signal with no loss. None boost the signal[this'd be the non-existant 'plus' cable].


----------



## obobskivich

and what I'm saying is, going from cheapy cables, that do the job, to expensive cables, that do the job, its not going to change, unless your setup has tons of EMI, or has to go a very far distance

 as far as "cat6 made my data xmit faster", it has nothing to do with cable quality, cat6 can handle higher bandwidth than cat3 (standard telecom wiring), meaning better speeds

 I understand wanting an "equals" cable, but my point is, all of them will be equals cables, as long as they conform to the standards of USB cables

 and yes you could say I've compared them, given that I've used USB cables ranging from $0.50 to upwards of $50 in various systems, there is no difference, its just data from point A to point B (its like saying, lets buy a more expensive ethernet cable, to get the data end to end, there is no logic or benefit, going to Cat6 over Cat5E won't improve things either, except for exceptionally long runs (near the limits of ethernet long) due to slightly larger conductors, but in terms of "your data is being sent, better", no, its either the data you wanted, or no data at all, the cable doesn't re-arrange or lose bits)


----------



## Chri5peed

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *obobskivich* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I understand wanting an "equals" cable, but my point is, all of them will be equals cables, as long as they conform to the standards of USB cables_

 

I didn't mean it to be simplified as much, those terms basically mean; _5p Ratshack_, _decent_ cable and a super-human one.


 I bet they'd all conform to a standard, but one has parts which will more readily break and be more prone to inteference.


----------



## Luminette

definitely interested in hearing your experience with the cryo-parts cable, Quaddy


----------



## ericj

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_i recently re-wired my internal telephone lines with cat6, an NTE5 triple diode faceplate utilizing the master port and my broadband estimate survey ( before moving in and after ) jumped from 1mbit to 5mbit! so qualities of cabling do indeed make a difference to 'digital' streams_

 

Apples & oranges. 

 DSL is a technology that allows you to transfer data over infrastructure that was designed to carry audio. It requires a huge effort on the part of the DSP in your DSL adapter just to make it work at all. 

 Also, unless it actually said 'category 3' on it, I'm guessing your phones were wired with uncategorized UTP, with just a few twists per foot. 

 The old Bell company didn't really do a good job of educating it's workforce about the importance of twisted pairs. there are even eras during which some regions were wiring telephones without using a discrete pair. If you then had a problem with your phone line - like you were hearing stuff from someone elses phone line - they would just grab a wire from some other pair for half of your "pair".

 My parents can never have DSL because their phone line actually spans two completely separate bundles. At the pole they have one wire in one cable and one in another. One of them actually used to be 3000 feet longer than the other. Qwest could fix this, but, they won't. They decided it would be cheaper to cut my parents a check for everything they spent money on trying to get DSL, including the cost of the dsl router they bought from someone else. 

 It's a minor miracle that DSL works at all for anybody in old construction. Improving it by replacing a few hundred feet of wire is easy. If you're lucky, you can do it yourself and not have to pay the phone company to do it. 

 USB on the other hand was designed to work a particular way with particular hardware. The interface is *for usb, not for telephones, and so is the cable. If the cable meets USB spec at all, and you're not in some extreme situation - you're not next door to a guy using a plasma torch - it will carry the data just as well as a more expensive cable.


----------



## Quaddy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ericj* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_ it will carry the data just as well as a more expensive cable._

 

i hear you, thats fair enough, we can all agree to disagree.

 to digress, i am in the UK btw, not sure how our infrastructure compares with you guys, all i do know is that i advise on taking out the bell wire, as it introduces all sorts of noise into the system. but then again the US may not even have that legacy product from the electromechanical days still in common implementation.

 it is different, i am not meaning to suggest otherwise, simply an analogy.

 again, if you look, i havent been suggesting that there is a cable that is superhuman in itself, i have merely been talking about adding or removing elements that can be of help or of detraction from the usb specification everyone seems to be quoting.

 eg, removing ferrites
 eg, adding ers/emi rejection material

 its not in question, at least i hope its not, that streaming musical data is more picky than tranferring 1/0 data with inbuilt/hostOS error correction algorithims

 thats all i am saying, but you guys keep taking us back to step one by intimating that a super deluxe trick cable is overkill for USB specification, correct. IF. using that USB cable for normal intended use, whats the harm in protecting your investment by beefing up your usb run between source and expensive DAC for the good willed purpose of a more stable realtime streaming music connection?


----------



## ericj

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_i have merely been talking about adding or removing elements that can be of help or of detraction from the usb specification everyone seems to be quoting.

 eg, removing ferrites
 eg, adding ers/emi rejection material_

 

Uh, ferrites *are* EMI rejection material. 

 The ferrite bead provides a choke point for high frequency noise. Basically, beginning at some high frequency and increasing from there, signals passing through conductors near the ferrite will have increased impedance. 

 It is most useful for assuring for example that your shielding isn't really more of an antenna for introducing RF noise into the ground. 

 It should also be noted that a lot of gear is going to have a ferrite bead on each signal line right on the other side of the female connector. Sometimes inside the body of the connector itself. 

 At any rate, streaming audio data to a usb device is not more difficult. usb audio is isochronous, which means that bandwidth and transmission times are guaranteed for each packet. 

 The integrity of the data isn't guaranteed, but, almost all usb audio devices are operating at usb 1.1 speeds, which means that any usb 2.0 compliant cable has at least 10 times more signalling bandwidth than the device could possibly use. 

 Major differences in audio quality are going to have a lot more to do with the usb device than the cable.


----------



## indianbraker

"Major differences in audio quality are going to have a lot more to do with the usb device than the cable." true for anything related to audio equipment.


----------



## olblueyez

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_reason i went against kimber and ended up with the cryo-parts, is that kimber has inbuilt ferrite cores which are, from a certain school of thought, deleterious to the realtime stream, fine for data transfer

 see this quote from the proprietor of empirical audio

 the cryo parts usb cable is founded from an already decent quality usb cable, cryo'd and then wrapped with ers paper and an expensive carbon shielding which will pay dividends in terms of external noise fields._

 

I dont have a Kimber but I have both with and without the Ferrite and im going to go ahead and say without sounds better. Would I bet my life on it? No way! It does seem a tad more dynamic and detailed. I also noticed that upsampling to 96 or 192 produced an unacceptible veil as apposed to NOS and I beleive this has dissapeared without the ferrite as well. Im comparing usb cables, I think I have finally lost my marbles!


----------



## The-One

Well I thought that playing music from pc is a digital process where binary 0101 is sent to DAC which doesn't degrade like analogue signals? I mean any bit of string can get the 01s across. It's like the HDMI cables, any cable will do because it's all digital.


----------



## royalcrown

I plugged in a 100 dollar cable into my printer. I think the highs got a little bit muddled.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *The-One* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Well I thought that playing music from pc is a digital process where binary 0101 is sent to DAC which doesn't degrade like analogue signals? I mean any bit of string can get the 01s across. It's like the HDMI cables, any cable will do because it's all digital._

 

Exactly. The whole advantage of digital signals is the 0's and 1's are easily recognisable by hardware despite interferance on the line.

 EDIT: also, USB uses http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Differential_signalling , and so it does not actually matter about interference on the line, since a perfect signal can be recontructed at the other end of the cable.


----------



## ericj

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *olblueyez* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I dont have a Kimber but I have both with and without the Ferrite and im going to go ahead and say without sounds better. Would I bet my life on it? No way! It does seem a tad more dynamic and detailed. I also noticed that upsampling to 96 or 192 produced an unacceptible veil as apposed to NOS and I beleive this has dissapeared without the ferrite as well. Im comparing usb cables, I think I have finally lost my marbles! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 


 All that ferrite is doing is preventing RF noise from contaminating the power ground via the shielding. 

 It has precisely zero impact on the data signal. 

 I think a lot of people confuse ultrasonic noise with air and detail.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

I just must repost this link.
  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Andrew_WOT* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Just read section on 
Isochronous Transfers_

 

Yes, it's 0s and 1s, and it's susceptible to data drops as there is no errors correction, so cable does matter. Good quality ferrite bead-less Belkin should be sufficient.


----------



## ericj

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Andrew_WOT* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I just must repost this link.


 Yes, it's 0s and 1s, and it's susceptible to data drops as there is no errors correction, so cable does matter. Good quality ferrite bead-less Belkin should be sufficient._

 

I know that it's isochronous without error correction, but you have to understand that this is differential signalling. 

 The difference between 1 and 0 isn't +v and ground, it's +v and -v. It's very, very, very unlikely for ambient RFI and EMI to flip the voltage of a bit. 

 The common-mode rejection is also extremely high. What they mean by "common-mode" is that noise that is introduced by RF or EM means is going to be common across both signalling conductors. Due to the electrical characteristics of a differential signal pair, any interference that is common to both wires negates itself.

 I would like to hear how any of you think the ferrite bead might impede low-speed and full-speed usb data transfer.


----------



## myinitialsaredac

Question, someone said that theres isnt bit drop on digital cables.... there was a test on this a while back, take a gander -
The Truth About Monster Cable, Part 2 (Verdict: Cheap Cables Keep Up...Usually)

 So if we can assume bit-drop occurs in HDMI, why not in USB that has no data correction or two-way communication with the bus? Bit o' food for thought.

 Dave


----------



## ShadowVlican

if the USB cable is good enough for my external hard drive... then it is, by far, good enough for a measly USB audio device

 if it weren't.. then the external hard drive market wouldn't exist


----------



## Quaddy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ericj* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I would like to hear how any of you think the ferrite bead might impede low-speed and full-speed usb data transfer._

 

we don't. at least i dont, i am sure it doesnt.

 i was talking about its possible affectation on real time audio stream, not the speed of robust 'data' tranfers.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ericj* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The common-mode rejection is also extremely high. What they mean by "common-mode" is that noise that is introduced by RF or EM means is going to be common across both signalling conductors. Due to the electrical characteristics of a differential signal pair, any interference that is common to both wires negates itself._

 

Exactly. If your cable conforms to USB standards, then there is absolutly no reason to upgrade it to a crazily priced one. USB cables use differential signalling for this very reason, so the cables can be very cheap. The same is true for network cabling. Back in the day when networks used coax which had to be shielded, the wiring was incredibly expensive. Cat-type network cables are NOT shielded, and nor are USB cables, because there is just no need for it.


----------



## olblueyez

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Andrew_WOT* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I just must repost this link.


 Yes, it's 0s and 1s, and it's susceptible to data drops as there is no errors correction, so cable does matter. Good quality ferrite bead-less Belkin should be sufficient._

 

Funny you should say that because my dac came with a Ferrite beaded cable and I replaced it with Belkins best cable which has no beads. I think it was about 15 bucks.


----------



## ericj

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_we don't. at least i dont, i am sure it doesnt.

 i was talking about its possible affectation on real time audio stream, not the speed of robust 'data' tranfers._

 

So, you mean a single post on a web forum somewhere that says "Ferrites slow edge-rates" but doesn't explain any theory behind that? 

 From a guy who calls isochronous transfers "real-time", and hints that he perhaps has no idea what 'isochronous' means. 

 It means that time slots are guaranteed. Not that the data moves at a constant rate. 

 You perceive the audio as a constant stream because there aren't gaps in the playback of a given stream, but it IS packetized and it IS transmitted in short bursts. 

 The ferrite bead, in conjunction with other properties of the connection, creates a low-pass filter. 

 This means that signals below a certain frequency are passed without attenuation, and signals above that frequency are attenuated. I'm simplifying here - there's a curve, and math to describe where that curve starts and at what point the signal is attenuated 50%, but the concept you have to understand here is that the impedance ("resistance") is not ohmic - it is not the same for all frequencies. 

 And the ferrite beads you find on some USB cables are active at frequencies well above the 12mhz signal of full-speed USB. 

 Ferrites are not appropriate for high-speed USB, but i don't think any high-speed usb audio devices even exist. It's possible, but unnecessary.


----------



## anadin

So are you saying a USB cable with ferrites is better.


----------



## ericj

I'm saying it won't, can't possibly, degrade the sound. 

 Most usb1.1 devices have ferrites just the other side of the female B connector anyhow.


----------



## Quaddy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *anadin* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So are you saying a USB cable with ferrites is better._

 

no, the opposite buddy;

 without ferrites for dacs (audio streaming)

 with ferrites for power cables (to supress electrical interference into the device)


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_no, the opposite buddy;

 without ferrites for dacs (audio streaming)

 with ferrites for power cables (to supress electrical interference into the device)_

 

It doesn't make a difference... so long as you are not experiencing dropouts, then upgrading your cable cannot POSSIBLY make ANY difference to the sound.

 If you have bought an expensive cable, with crazy shielding etc, you have been fooled. The USB protocol has been desinged specifically NOT to need shielded cables.

 EDIT: And so long as both your cheap cable and super-expensive cable perform with no dropouts, any difference you hear is PURELY placebo.


----------



## Quaddy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *joshd* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_It doesn't make a difference... so long as you are *not experiencing dropouts*, then upgrading your cable cannot POSSIBLY make ANY difference to the sound._

 

*i was experiencing dropouts* hence me trying a slightly more expensive cable with some additional external shielding to try

 i have quite a lot of near field interference emanating from multiple powerful power supplies in the vicinity, and an AC hum in my mains to boot

 the new cable with its carbon shielding and some ERS paper covering the end connections has made it drop out less, it used to be four times a session, now its once a day sometimes not at all.

 plus, i never claimed it would make any difference to the sound, just transmission robustness! although i am waiting for my headphones to burn in fully to be able to review any differences between them on this thread for those who are interested. (it does sound good!)


----------



## ericj

If i were experiencing dropouts, the first thing i'd try is sorting out what plugs into which usb controller or hub.

 you know, make sure it's not sharing a hub with a wifi dongle and a harddrive. 

 and then there was my motherboard that turned out to have faulty usb ports. filling that superfluous 1x pci-e slot with a usb card and using those ports instead made a big difference.


----------



## starcat

USB transfers data. If you can transfer your other bits like images and anything else which you can check and confirm that all data is in place after a copy from A -> B, then, the same happens while sending (audio) bits over the USB to your DAC. If the cable conforms to the standard, no data can get lost, nothing. Otherwise what would happen while copying data from an iternal to an external drive?? We are not talking analog audio here but a cabling standard for transfering (lossless) data!


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *starcat* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_USB transfers data. If you can transfer your other bits like images and anything else which you can check and confirm that all data is in place after a copy from A -> B, then, the same happens while sending (audio) bits over the USB to your DAC. If the cable conforms to the standard, no data can get lost, nothing. Otherwise what would happen while copying data from an iternal to an external drive?? We are not talking analog audio here but a cabling standard for transfering (lossless) data!_

 

When streaming audio, the DAC acknowledges reciept of packets but does NOT ask for a re-send of missing ones. USB is not designed as a time critical transfer, so why it is used for audio at all is a little odd. (Whereas I think firewire IS time critical, and would be much better suited?) USB DACs also do not sync timings with the host, and so you can get some nasty jitter sometimes.

 Anyway, so long as the cable conforms to standards, data loss should not happen.

 EDIT: What would be wrong with having DAC's use some built in memory, and a proper usb bus, so you could guarantee data integrity as far as the DAC, and then it can do it's stuff out of that memory buffer?
 EDIT EDIT: I guess there'd be massive lag when playing/stopping/pausing :-/


----------



## cerbie

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *starcat* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_USB transfers data. If you can transfer your other bits like images and anything else which you can check and confirm that all data is in place after a copy from A -> B, then, the same happens while sending (audio) bits over the USB to your DAC. If the cable conforms to the standard, no data can get lost, nothing. Otherwise what would happen while copying data from an iternal to an external drive?? We are not talking analog audio here but a cabling standard for transfering (lossless) data!_

 

Losses can and do happen going to and coming from your external drive. The device then goes and asks for those packets to be resent, finding them not to match CRC.

*joshd*: the greatest problem would be need for custom drivers. The benefit of USB audio as we have it is that if an OS has USB audio device class support, and has done even the most rudimentary testing of that feature, you can plug in, and it works. USB is a terrible interface for streaming, but Intel made it cheap to build, added it to their chipsets, and it was royalty-free.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *cerbie* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_*joshd*: the greatest problem would be need for custom drivers. The benefit of USB audio as we have it is that if an OS has USB audio device class support, and has done even the most rudimentary testing of that feature, you can plug in, and it works. USB is a terrible interface for streaming, but Intel made it cheap to build, added it to their chipsets, and it was royalty-free._

 

The problem not inherent to USB but transfer mode used. Asynchronous mode should not have these limitations and some cards support it, Audigy 2NX comes to mind first.


----------



## cerbie

I was under the impression that no isonchronous modes offered error checking and retry like plain old data transfer types do. Asynchronous mode will be superior (though software-side support is iffy, AFAIK), but I thought it still just took the packet as they came, in terms of data quality.


----------



## 1UP

Dunno if anyone's already posted this - Gordon Rankin from Wavelength Audio

 "Look there are 2 cables inside a USB cable. There is the DATA differential pair that must be designed for traffic up to at least 12Mhz and the POWER cable which is VBUS 5V's and Ground.

 I have like tons of cables now and some do sound different. But remember it will be device dependent.

 All of the PCM27xx devices require VBUS to determine the computer is there. This means there is current running from the computer to the USB Device via the POWER side of the cable.

 Other devices like the TAS1020 look for signal on the DATA portion of the cable only. Therefore the VBUS is not used and only the Ground connection on the POWER side is used.

 On the DATA side termination on the Device side or endpoint will have an effect on transmissions. I usually get the 5M cables put them on a couple of computers with my USB analyzer on the DAC side and check for errors.

 It's not suggested to use a 5M with streaming audio. These cables were meant for low speed devices. 2M and under for audio will make all the difference in the world.

 With the POWER side being used it can bleed noise from the computer into the dac.

 It would be nice if you could switch the VBUS signal on the computer side from VBUS to Ground if your device doesn't use it.

 Anyways another thing about the POWER side of the cable is that noise from the computer can end up on the device. The cable should do all it can to make sure that doesn't happen.

 It's best like all aspects of this hobby to try this stuff before you buy it.

 Remember using these expensive cables on a hard drive is worthless they are in Block mode not Streaming and will not be effected by the use of costly cables.

 Thanks
 Gordon
 J. Gordon Rankin "


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *1UP* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Anyways another thing about the POWER side of the cable is that noise from the computer can end up on the device. The cable should do all it can to make sure that doesn't happen._

 

Then surely the "higher quality" the cable, the more accurately it will conduct the computer's noise to the device?

 Since no proper USB DACs use the USB hub power, then there are NO noise problems with a USB cable. It is NOT possible for interference to manifest as audible noise after conversion. All it could possibly do is create breaks in the bitstream, which people do get.

 I am not saying you should use cheap crap, just a cable that is built properly, and doesn't give breaks in the stream. Paying $800 for a cable is, frankly, absoluely stupid. I bet the guys that make them (for $50?) are laughing 24/7.


----------



## Andrew_WOT

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *joshd* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Since no proper USB DACs use the USB hub power, then there are NO noise problems with a USB cable._

 

I beg to differ, some very well regarded do. Plus if you read the previous post carefully enough you would see that powered or not it will still use power line to detect the computer presence.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Andrew_WOT* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I beg to differ, some very well regarded do. Plus if you read the previous post carefully enough you would see that powered or not it will still use power line to detect the computer presence._

 

Ones that are powered entirely by USB could face problems from this, but if they have their own power, I very much doubt noise on the USB power line would create noise in the analogue output. (Although, I am no electrical engineer, and don't fully understand what goes on inside a typical DAC)


----------



## wavoman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_no, the opposite ...
 without ferrites for dacs (audio streaming)_

 

This is absolutely correct and has been discussed in dozens of posts here before. usb.org makes it absolutley clear that ferrite beads should not be used for streaming audio, since they can cause timing problems. Manufacturers use them anyway to pass emission tests, even good companies like Kimber. But they should not. 

 This is not file transfer. All the bits can arrive correctly, but if the timing is off the sound will be off. The usb receiving side can and will miss edge transitions if you use a crap cable with big ass ferrites.

 From: Test and Measurement World


> _The USB spec discourages the use of ferrite beads because they may slow a data signal’s edges to where a USB device no longer recognizes bits_


Techniques for ESD Immunity in USB Devices - 11/1/2000 - Test & Measurement World

 Use SEARCH here and read all the posts devoted to debunking this file transfer analogy. Its bits PLUS timing. The same is true for S/PDIF.

 A $10 to $20 USB cable from a certified manufacturer will be fine. More money is a waste, as others have said. But a junk $2 cable might not be good enough.

 Here is a inexpensive fully-certified manufacturer that does not use ferrite beads: Newnex

Newnex USB 2.0 Cables Angled Extensions

 Added: I normally agree with everything *ericj *posts, but not this time. It is _not _one nut-job on a forum somewhere saying that ferrite beads can cause edge problems, it is the usb committee itself. I posted this earlier in the thread, but here it is again:

 From usb.org: 

_What are the most common signal quality design mistakes?

 A: ... Most problems are the result of EMI "control" components like ferrite beads mounted on the signal lines. Often, these manage to destroy the integrity of the signal as well as make emissions worse._

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

 Now ericj says this issue will not effect audio streaming, and I am sure that there are many ferrite beads that don't, and that often he is correct (in fact I proved this to myself, since as I posted earlier I can't tell the difference between a Kimber with beads and a Newnex without). But many of us have had SQ problems with real cheap USB cables that have beads, and a $10 upgrade fixed it. Could it be mass placebo effect? Doubt it. I believe that some beads do slow reception during audio streaming.


----------



## joshd

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *wavoman* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_This is not file transfer. All the bits can arrive correctly, but if the timing is off the sound will be off. The usb receiving side can and will miss edge transitions if you use a crap cable with big ass ferrites._

 

Would the ferrite slow it all equally (I can't see that making a difference) or introduce jitter?


----------



## wavoman

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *joshd* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Would the ferrite slow it all equally (I can't see that making a difference) or introduce jitter?_

 

Modern USB DACs re-clock on their side so jitter is not an issue. 

 If an edge is missed then some bits get flipped, that's all. Won't usually be audible, but can be IMHO (others disagree, but I think I 've heard it). Would be random, not systematic, even if the ferrite's effect was a constant slowdown (which it would not be necessarily). There's a lot going on in the processing on both sides, so there is plenty of slop built in to the spec (a time window) to get the next bit across. A slowness just increases the probability of a miss some time.


----------



## scmitzer

so could I just ask if digital signals sent through the air amount to no data loss also as this is concern for me? cheers


----------



## scmitzer

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ericj* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_So, you mean a single post on a web forum somewhere that says "Ferrites slow edge-rates" but doesn't explain any theory behind that? 

 From a guy who calls isochronous transfers "real-time", and hints that he perhaps has no idea what 'isochronous' means. 

 It means that time slots are guaranteed. Not that the data moves at a constant rate. 

 You perceive the audio as a constant stream because there aren't gaps in the playback of a given stream, but it IS packetized and it IS transmitted in short bursts. 

 The ferrite bead, in conjunction with other properties of the connection, creates a low-pass filter. 

 This means that signals below a certain frequency are passed without attenuation, and signals above that frequency are attenuated. I'm simplifying here - there's a curve, and math to describe where that curve starts and at what point the signal is attenuated 50%, but the concept you have to understand here is that the impedance ("resistance") is not ohmic - it is not the same for all frequencies. 

 And the ferrite beads you find on some USB cables are active at frequencies well above the 12mhz signal of full-speed USB. 

 Ferrites are not appropriate for high-speed USB, but i don't think any high-speed usb audio devices even exist. It's possible, but unnecessary._

 

so can the same be said for digital signals being sent through the air that there is no loss of signal cheers


----------



## daglesj

I've been using ferrites on my USB cables for some years now. I notice no noticable difference with them on or off. I use them cos I have so many kicking around.

 I also use them inside my PC on all the power leads from the PSU into the MB and components.

 As for the cables? I have dozens of them. I just select the ones of the thickest guage and the most robust looking construction and go with that.

 Folks are really sweating the small things. It either works or it doesnt. From what some folks say you'd think they were hearing food mixer noises from their speakers rather then just digital audio.


----------



## nauxolo (Feb 19, 2018)

Did the electric good really cry the fruit?


----------



## Kobra

Interesting thread 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 I've been reading quite a lot about USB cables and it's use in high end music systems. Can't decide which group to join -those who firmly believes usb cables has no affect on audio, or those who do 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Without putting my own hand in to the debate, let me quote Jeff Day at Positive Feedback Online:

  Quote:


 Summary and Conclusions

 The Locus Design Group Axis ($549 USD for 6ft) and Polestar ($249 for 6ft), and the CryoParts Custom Cable ($69.95 for 6ft) are the first high-performance USB cables I have tried in my Hi-Fi rig. I'm a little surprised by how much difference a USB cable can have on the overall sound of a system—it can make or break the sound of your system. The influence of a USB cable on the sound of a system is quite large, being more like the magnitude of a speaker cable than that of an interconnect.

 I can't really recommend the CryoParts USB cable (sorry guys). It doesn't really strike me as being very good sonically or musically, and I'm afraid if you bought it you'd be disappointed. I think you're better off dishing out the extra cash for the Polestar, which will in all likelihood completely blow you away.

 The combination of the overall balance of your system and your tastes will determine whether the Polestar or Axis USB cable will give you the best performance. A laid back system that needs a little ‘waking up' may be best served by the Axis cable. Or a listener that listens at very low volumes may benefit from the Axis' extra resolution. Sonically the Axis is in a class by itself, excelling in resolution, imaging, soundstaging, soundspace, and the like. Musically the Axis is very good, but not as good as the Polestar.

 My favorite in this group is the Locus Design Group Polestar, and by quite a significant amount. It is warmer and more natural sounding than either the Polestar or CryoParts USB cables. The Polestar provides a richer and more natural string timbre, with clear timbral distinctions and a sense of textures that I found to be just right. It better conveys those essential musical elements that make up the overall musical experience, presenting the music as more believably life-like—and less electronic sounding—across a wide variety of musical genres and varying recording quality. The Polestar really is a remarkable product, and one that unfailingly serves the music, making it a stone-cold bargain at $249. Way recommended! 
 

You can read the entire article here


----------



## gregorio

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kobra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Interesting thread 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I've been reading quite a lot about USB cables and it's use in high end music systems. Can't decide which group to join -those who firmly believes usb cables has no affect on audio, or those who do 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

It's not a question of belief, it's the simple basics of how digital information works. The USB cable retailers/manufacturers know they can't advertise their cable will make your music sound better so they come out with bogus reviews to convince the unwary.

 All that is being transferred through USB is digital data, zeros and ones. Ask the USB cable retailers to tell you what electronic circuitry is present in the cable which can analyse and change the exact zeros and ones which will result in the data being converted to a warmer or tighter sound quality. There isn't any, it's just a cable passing zeros and ones! The article you posted a link to goes on about sonic quality without ever mentioning that sonic quality is irrelevant to digital data. The article reads well and sounds logical but is based on complete ignorance about how digital audio works. As an audio professional it makes me more than a little angry to see such complete drivel being passed off as fact in such a blatant and authoritive manner, purely for the purposes of deliberately mis-leading the public into buying useless products in which the author has a vested interest. Please don't let these charlatans get away with it, or your money!

 Unless you have audio software which can apply precise mathematical algorithms to the digital data, there is no way the audio which comes out of your DAC can be changed to sound better. This is not a belief but a simple statement of fact. If you can hear audio coming out of your DAC the USB cable is working and does not need replacing. Getting a better quality USB cable will not and can not make the resultant audio any better quality.

 G


----------



## daglesj

I think a lot of this confusion over USB cables is mainly due to the old hifi makers who are seeing their market share dissapear to high quality but low cost computer equipment.

 Hifi makers dont like folks paying very little for good quality gear. It goes against everything they stand for. How dare folks pay just $2 for a cable when we can sell the same thing with a bit of 'hifi voodoo' sprinkled on it for $200.

 So now we are seeing the same oold FUD applied to computer gear that they used to apply to hifi gear (usually OEM gear with a new label on it) to justify the huge markup.

 You have been warned.


----------



## Kobra

All this talk about the usb cables effect on the audio quality, does the same apply to power cords? How about interconnects and speaker cables?

 As a former computer technician I find it somewhat hard to come to terms with the statement that different usb cables sounds differently 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





 However, I've read some rather good articles about the subject and understand that the cables shielding _might_ affect its sound characteristics. Some say _"a usb cable is a usb cable"_. Others say that a usb cable works differently depending on its use. In data transfer to a external HDD, the cable doesn't matter -but in a audio streaming situation it does...

 In the same line of thoughts I wonder how can it be that a different power cord affects a speakers bass output 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 To me, _"a power cord is a power cord"_. I do however acknowledge that a good shielded power cord will resolve any humming, hiss and static from the sound. I guess the same applies to a usb cable and that's were the different sonic signatures comes to play. Or does it?

 Could it simply be that Hi-Fi manufacturers have found yet another way of stealing our money 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I will try to find a local dealer with a good stock of different usb cables and try it for myself... 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 ...by the way, I guess this type of discussions were all over the scene a few decades ago when high end speaker cables started to appear


----------



## gregorio

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Kobra* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_However, I've read some rather good articles about the subject and understand that the cables shielding might affect its sound characteristics. 

 In data transfer to a external HDD, the cable doesn't matter -but in a audio streaming situation it does..._

 

All very logical apart from one simple fact, the USB is not passing any audio, so it's sound characteristics are completely irrelevant. Why do you think that data transfer to external HDD makes no difference what USB cable you use but streaming digital audio data does? What is the difference between a stream of zeros and ones going to your HDD and a stream of zeros and ones going to your DAC?

 What is the next thread after this one, which make of Hard disk sounds better to stream your digital audio from? It's no less of a valid question than which USB cable sounds better.

 G


----------



## Roseval

Bits are bits. If our transmission is reliable, we receive exactly the same bits as has been send.
 But we are not talking about sending bits from a computer to a hard disk, we talk audio. In case of a stone age protocol like SPDIF it is simple, the bits are the signal and the sample rate is derived from the speed at which the bits are pouring in. Any variation in the bit rate will cause a fluctuation in the DA conversion (jitter).
 USB is a more complex protocol but again it send the signal as bits and the sample rate is derived from the data. There are claims that USB could induce input jitter and this might map to sample rate fluctuations in the DA conversion.
 I do not claim that cables will make a difference but I do claim that looking at the bit part only is neglecting the other half of the equation: the timing.
 That’s the paradox of digital audio, the signal is represented in bits, the timing is (most of the time) derived from a clock, an analogue device with all of its analogue imperfections.

 A rather interesting discussion about the merits of high end digital cables can be found here: PSW Recording Forums: Dan Lavry => Why longer is generally better for an S/PDIF Digital Cable


----------



## Kobra

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gregorio* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_All very logical apart from one simple fact, the USB is not passing any audio, so it's sound characteristics are completely irrelevant. Why do you think that data transfer to external HDD makes no difference what USB cable you use but streaming digital audio data does? What is the difference between a stream of zeros and ones going to your HDD and a stream of zeros and ones going to your DAC?

 What is the next thread after this one, which make of Hard disk sounds better to stream your digital audio from? It's no less of a valid question than which USB cable sounds better.

 G_

 

Please understand that I'm only quoting others - it's not my words. I'm very much on the fence regarding usb cables and audio. My earlier posts in this thread is just my way of "thinking out loud" so I can come to a understanding.


----------



## Curly19

No one has yet mentioned the Locus Design uber USB cable, the Nucleus. $1150 for 3 feet.


----------



## frankR

Anyone who spends more then $10 on a USB cable is a sucker. IMO.

 The encoded audio data sent over a $10 cable can not possibly sound any different then sent over a $100 or $1000 one.


----------



## acetylcholine

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gregorio* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_All very logical apart from one simple fact, the USB is not passing any audio, so it's sound characteristics are completely irrelevant. Why do you think that data transfer to external HDD makes no difference what USB cable you use but streaming digital audio data does? What is the difference between a stream of zeros and ones going to your HDD and a stream of zeros and ones going to your DAC?

 What is the next thread after this one, which make of Hard disk sounds better to stream your digital audio from? It's no less of a valid question than which USB cable sounds better.

 G_

 

USB audio specifications are based on a 'streaming' system, which is different from a 'block' based system used in conventional data transfer.


----------



## gregorio

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Roseval* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_In case of a stone age protocol like SPDIF it is simple, the bits are the signal and the sample rate is derived from the speed at which the bits are pouring in. Any variation in the bit rate will cause a fluctuation in the DA conversion (jitter).
 USB is a more complex protocol but again it send the signal as bits and the sample rate is derived from the data. There are claims that USB could induce input jitter and this might map to sample rate fluctuations in the DA conversion.
 I do not claim that cables will make a difference but I do claim that looking at the bit part only is neglecting the other half of the equation: the timing.
 That’s the paradox of digital audio, the signal is represented in bits, the timing is (most of the time) derived from a clock, an analogue device with all of its analogue imperfections.

 A rather interesting discussion about the merits of high end digital cables can be found here: PSW Recording Forums: Dan Lavry => Why longer is generally better for an S/PDIF Digital Cable_

 

Again, all very logical sounding but complete nonsense. Have you ever heard of a PLL? A phase locked loop (Phase-locked loop - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) eliminates the jitter, so there are no fluctuations in the DA conversion. Jitter during transfer is a complete non-issue, a red herring. Advertising of expensive digital cables often mention jitter but conveniently forget to mention that it doesn't matter because the PLL removes it all!! BTW, VCOs are used to generate the timing signals in PLLs, not an analogue clock.

 Also, nice link, which in fact states the complete opposite of what you are implying. The page you linked to was where a Steve N (who is also on this site) explains why his digital cables are better. The rest of the thread contains posts by audio professionals who absolutely destroy virtually every argument put forth by Steve N. It was one of the best debunking of a cable manufacturer I've ever seen and poor Steve N had to run away with his tail between his legs once he realised that he had made a mistake by trying to fool the professionals the way he fools consumers. Here is what Dan actually wrote in that thread:

 "This article is a bunch of nonsense! Longer is NOT better. SHORTER IS BETTER! That is unless you are the one selling cables, and you charge a lot and by the foot 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Check the website of that Empirical Audio guy:
Home : Empirical Audio
 You will quickly understand that he stands to benefit from that B.S.

 For a 1 meter SPDIF he charges 419.99$
 For a 1.5 meter SPDIF he charges 549.99$
 For a 2 meter SPDIF he charges 679.99$

 You will find B.S. “explanations” such as:
 “The Bitmeister uses a patented technology that allows the conductors to be 50% bare. Bare conductors cause less dispersion (smearing) in the digital signal” than fully insulated conductors, reducing jitter in the digital signal".

 “Pure 99.99% Perfect Crystal Silver conductors in
 a custom stranded configuration enhance high-frequency response
 by minimizing skin-effect and stranding effects”.

 What a bunch of self serving nonsense 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 Regards
 Dan Lavry
 www.lavryengineering.com"

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *acetylcholine* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_USB audio specifications are based on a 'streaming' system, which is different from a 'block' based system used in conventional data transfer._

 

And what difference does it make? In the case of a HDD the data is stored in an on-board buffer before being written to the disk and in an audio output device the data is stored in an on-board buffer before being sent to the PLL and then on to the DAC.

 G


----------



## .Sup

This looks very decent: QED One USB Cable - Planet Gizmo


----------



## daglesj

You know its funny but the cable guys and the hifi guys all go on and on about jitter. If you beleived what they said about it you'd expect any digital audio to sound like a coffee grinder.

 But I always ask them (Steve N included) "well if its so bad then how do you quantify it or describe it as part of the listening expereince? What should I be listening for? Its all sounded pretty good for me these past 20 years!"

 It all goes very very quiet at that point. Its just FUD to charge you more.


----------



## Chri5peed

^ Yeah, you'd think jitter was some mystical force. Apparently my Optical S/PDIF is overflowing with it.


----------



## somestranger26

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *daglesj* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You know its funny but the cable guys and the hifi guys all go on and on about jitter. If you beleived what they said about it you'd expect any digital audio to sound like a coffee grinder.

 But I always ask them (Steve N included) "well if its so bad then how do you quantify it or describe it as part of the listening expereince? What should I be listening for? Its all sounded pretty good for me these past 20 years!"

 It all goes very very quiet at that point. Its just FUD to charge you more._

 

Laughing my ass off at the coffee grinder analogy, there's far too much focus on jitter, especially after reading about the PLL linked above. I can't believe how stalwartly some people defend digital cables since the sound coloration thing is out the window when you're talking 1's and 0's. Personally I don't notice a difference with analog cables either, I have a cheap as can be mini-RCA cable and there's absolutely no difference with the BJC in my setup. There's certainly nothing wrong with spending a few dollars on a cable with nice build quality and looks though.

  Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Chri5peed* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_^ Yeah, you'd think jitter was some mystical force. Apparently my Optical S/PDIF is overflowing with it._

 

Don't forget that your signal is destroying itself through internal reflection, the plastic fibers aren't optically conductive enough, and your wireless router is talking to it with RFI.


----------



## Mik

I have a short Locus Design Axis USB cable connecting my Trends UD-10.1 to my laptop. I have some experience picking out subtle differences in sound quality and while I haven't done any real tests yet I can say there are no obvious improvements that I can hear compared to the cable that came with the Trends.

 However, my setup isn't the best for comparing usb cable quality yet since the cable goes into a usb to spdif converter and a spdif cable from Blue Jeans cable goes into my dac. I'm hoping to try out an Ayre usb dac later this year and then I would be able to conclusively say there's no audio quality difference between usb cables.

 As of now I would say if you're concerned about the audio quality of your freebie usb cable, get a $20 Belkin cable and be done with it. Like most expensive cables, the Locus Axis is impressive to look at and has quite a bit of bulk to it, but I'd recommend spending the money on speakers, a dac, preamp, amps, and rca/xlr interconnects first (and probably in that order). Digital interconnects would be way down the list.

 For me, it was worth buying to confirm that it makes no difference. If any of you want to try it in your system to see if it does anything for you, feel free to make me an offer for the cable.


----------



## Mik

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gregorio* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Jitter during transfer is a complete non-issue, a red herring. Advertising of expensive digital cables often mention jitter but conveniently forget to mention that it doesn't matter because the PLL removes it all!! BTW, VCOs are used to generate the timing signals in PLLs, not an analogue clock._

 

 Quote:


  Originally Posted by *daglesj* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You know its funny but the cable guys and the hifi guys all go on and on about jitter. If you beleived what they said about it you'd expect any digital audio to sound like a coffee grinder.

 But I always ask them (Steve N included) "well if its so bad then how do you quantify it or describe it as part of the listening expereince? What should I be listening for? Its all sounded pretty good for me these past 20 years!"_

 

I can't say I'm an expert on jitter or digital audio transports, but I can say that all of the usb audio implementations I've heard so far are very audibly inferior to a cd player. I find a good cd player to be much crisper sounding. All sounds decay faster and have more attack or punch to them. All usb audio blurs the sound. It's very noticeable in my system. I suspect the difference in sound quality is differing levels of jitter in the usb stream compared to the internal jitter in the cd player. I suppose there could be other factors, but jitter sounds like the most likely reason for the difference I'm hearing (especially since I tried other usb cables and found no difference). Digital audio from a transport connected through optical also sounds similar to usb audio in my system.

 I want to get usb audio to sound as good or better than my cd player because I much prefer the convenience of playing music on my computer, but so far I haven't been able to get the audio quality there yet.


----------



## daglesj

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Mik* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I can't say I'm an expert on jitter or digital audio transports, but I can say that all of the usb audio implementations I've heard so far are very audibly inferior to a cd player. I find a good cd player to be much crisper sounding. All sounds decay faster and have more attack or punch to them. All usb audio blurs the sound. It's very noticeable in my system. I suspect the difference in sound quality is differing levels of jitter in the usb stream compared to the internal jitter in the cd player. I suppose there could be other factors, but jitter sounds like the most likely reason for the difference I'm hearing (especially since I tried other usb cables and found no difference). Digital audio from a transport connected through optical also sounds similar to usb audio in my system.

 I want to get usb audio to sound as good or better than my cd player because I much prefer the convenience of playing music on my computer, but so far I haven't been able to get the audio quality there yet._

 

You know what I think your problem is? Its not the gear. No, not the gear.

 It's you.

 You are trying soooo hard to listen to the hardware, you are forgetting the most important part. Just listening to the tunes instead. You are worrying about stuff that really isnt that important and its spoiling your enjoyment. 

 Its not your fault, you've been told that this kind of thing should happen, mainly by people who sell $800 digital cables and $2000 DACs.

 There is a huge difference. Once you listen to the music rather then the hardware it sounds 1000000 times better. 

 There is no better upgrade or tweak. And its free.


----------



## Curly19

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Mik* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_I
 I want to get usb audio to sound as good or better than my cd player because I much prefer the convenience of playing music on my computer, but so far I haven't been able to get the audio quality there yet._

 

I'm with you, Mik.


----------



## Quaddy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *daglesj* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You know what I think your problem is? Its not the gear. No, not the gear.

 It's you.

*You are trying soooo hard to listen to the hardware, you are forgetting the most important part. Just listening to the tunes instead.* You are worrying about stuff that really isnt that important and its spoiling your enjoyment. 

 Its not your fault, you've been told that this kind of thing should happen, mainly by people who sell $800 digital cables and $2000 DACs.

 There is a huge difference. Once you listen to the music rather then the hardware it sounds 1000000 times better. 

 There is no better upgrade or tweak. And its free._

 

thats fair enough, but this is an audiophiles forum as well, and the term audiophile doesnt mean someone who _*just*_ listens to the music, it entails all the kit and kaboodle also.

 all this i enjoy immensely.


----------



## daglesj

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_thats fair enough, but this is an audiophiles forum as well, and the term audiophile doesnt mean someone who *just* listens to the music, it entails all the kit and kaboodle also.

 all this i enjoy immensely._

 

Yes but there is a big difference between enjoying the kit and always worrying about it and feeling its in some way deficient and therefore ruining everything. 

 By all means feel the need to think an upgrade is needed from time to time but some folks let it become all encompassing. 

 The ultimate aim after all is to enjoy the music. 

 If it isnt then time to find a new hobby.


----------



## Mik

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *daglesj* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_You know what I think your problem is? Its not the gear. No, not the gear.

 It's you.

 You are trying soooo hard to listen to the hardware, you are forgetting the most important part. Just listening to the tunes instead. You are worrying about stuff that really isnt that important and its spoiling your enjoyment._

 

If you don't care about better audio, why are you on head-fi? I consider the music coming from my cd player to sound much better than from my computer. Even so, 99% of the audio I listen to comes from my computer because it's much more convenient. I can assure you I enjoy listening to music on my computer, and have been doing so long before there were mp3s. I also think it's reasonable to try to improve things when they're not as good as I know they can be. I enjoy that part too. This is a hobby after all.


----------



## daglesj

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Mik* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_If you don't care about better audio, why are you on head-fi? I consider the music coming from my cd player to sound much better than from my computer. Even so, 99% of the audio I listen to comes from my computer because it's much more convenient. I can assure you I enjoy listening to music on my computer, and have been doing so long before there were mp3s. I also think it's reasonable to try to improve things when they're not as good as I know they can be. I enjoy that part too. This is a hobby after all._

 

In that case thats fine...it read quite different to me.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 I do think sometimes its a good thing to remember why it is we do this rather than just the kit.


----------



## acetylcholine

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gregorio* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_And what difference does it make? In the case of a HDD the data is stored in an on-board buffer before being written to the disk and in an audio output device the data is stored in an on-board buffer before being sent to the PLL and then on to the DAC.

 G_

 

My previous comment was in response to you comparing the transfer of data between USB HDDs and USB audio devices. The two kinds of transfer specifications are very different. 

 What you have mentioned is a system whereby data is stored in a buffer before being 'reclocked' and sent to the DAC. This is only present in relatively expensive DACs. Try reading this article for more info on how a USB receiver works : The D/A diaries: A personal memoir of engineering heartache and triumph

 On a side note, I am just writing this from a technological standpoint because many people have misconceptions on the common implementations in USB DACs. Personally, I feel that spending excessively on an 'audiophile' grade USB cable is silly because the money spent can be used to upgrade other components of the system, resulting in more perceivable improvement.


----------



## audioengr

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Curly19* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_No one has yet mentioned the Locus Design uber USB cable, the Nucleus. $1150 for 3 feet. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

The best USB cable on the planet IMO. Locus-Design knows what they are doing for sure.

 Steve N.
 Empirical Audio


----------



## audioengr

The difference between a cheap USB cable performance and a really good USB cable performance is the amount of jitter that it adds. Jitter is added through several mechanisms:

 1) losses
 2) Inter-symbol interference (ISI)
 3) reflections due to impedance discontinuities

 All of these have an effect at the USB receiver.

 Now, whether or not this affects the audio stream depends on the USB interface. If it is an optimally implemented Asynchronous or block-transfer protocol, then the jitter does not matter. It is buffered at the receiver just like a disk drive or printer. The master clock is in the receiving device.

 However, if it is a Adaptive-mode USB protocol, then it is sensitive to the jitter as this is passed through a PLL that recovers the clock. The master clock from the computer is used. The USB cable will have an effect in this case.

 This does not mean that one USB protocol will necessarily sound a lot better than the other. All three USB modes be excellent, with jitter on the threshold of audibility. The ultimate performance depends on the clock quality and implementation.

 Steve N.
 Empirical Audio


----------



## gregorio

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *audioengr* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_The difference between a cheap USB cable performance and a really good USB cable performance is the amount of jitter that it adds. Jitter is added through several mechanisms:

 1) losses
 2) Inter-symbol interference (ISI)
 3) reflections due to impedance discontinuities

 All of these have an effect at the USB receiver.

 Now, whether or not this affects the audio stream depends on the USB interface. If it is an optimally implemented Asynchronous or block-transfer protocol, then the jitter does not matter. It is buffered at the receiver just like a disk drive or printer. The master clock is in the receiving device.

 However, if it is a Adaptive-mode USB protocol, then it is sensitive to the jitter as this is passed through a PLL that recovers the clock. The master clock from the computer is used. The USB cable will have an effect in this case.

 This does not mean that one USB protocol will necessarily sound a lot better than the other. All three USB modes be excellent, with jitter on the threshold of audibility. The ultimate performance depends on the clock quality and implementation.

 Steve N.
 Empirical Audio_

 

Jitter on the threshold of audibility, what are you talking about? I've never read such rubbish. I take it you have proof of this and jitter measurements for the cable you are peddling with comparisons of the jitter caused by cheaper cable?

 I would also like you to explain how reflections in the USB cable are going to have any audible impact on sound quality whatsoever.

 Perhaps you'd like to explain how a PLL recovers the clock from the computer, rather than the originating ADC or masterclock. And while you're at it explain how a PLL does not reject the jitter caused during digital transfer, in whatever USB mode.

 I don't know what your three points above refer to but it's nothing to do with digital audio, it's complete nonsense. I would have hoped that you had seen the error of your ways when Dan Lavry destroyed your arguments and exposed you as the charlatan you are. Instead, you've decided to come here to try to fool the consumers as the professionals saw right through you. 

 If it were up to me I'd have people like you fined or imprisoned for spouting pseudo scientific BS in a deliberate attempt to mis-lead consumers into buying your stupidly priced cable which have no benefits whatsoever, except to your bank balance.

 I look forward to your answers to my questions above but we both know that you will do or say anything to avoid answering with accurate facts and figures.

 G


----------



## daglesj

Here we go again......the FUDmeister strikes back!


----------



## Quaddy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gregorio* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Jitter on the threshold of audibility, what are you talking about? I've never read such rubbish. I take it you have proof of this and jitter measurements for the cable you are peddling with comparisons of the jitter caused by cheaper cable?

 I would also like you to explain how reflections in the USB cable are going to have any audible impact on sound quality whatsoever.

 Perhaps you'd like to explain how a PLL recovers the clock from the computer, rather than the originating ADC or masterclock. And while you're at it explain how a PLL does not reject the jitter caused during digital transfer, in whatever USB mode.

 I don't know what your three points above refer to but it's nothing to do with digital audio, it's complete nonsense. I would have hoped that you had seen the error of your ways when Dan Lavry destroyed your arguments and exposed you as the charlatan you are. Instead, you've decided to come here to try to fool the consumers as the professionals saw right through you. 

 If it were up to me I'd have people like you fined or imprisoned for spouting pseudo scientific BS in a deliberate attempt to mis-lead consumers into buying your stupidly priced cable which have no benefits whatsoever, except to your bank balance.

*I look forward to your answers to my questions above but we both know that you will do or say anything to avoid answering with accurate facts and figures.*

 G_

 

_funny that_, i posed a question to you earlier on another thread, i re-emphasized it twice, you blatantly ignored it, because it suited you to do so, because i guess (as it hasnt been clarified) that you had zero experience with the cables you were trashing or claiming to speak for

*pot and kettle!!*

 perhaps you would do well to go here inbetween all your slander and OTT personal attacks.

 gregorio spouted: "_If it were up to me I'd have people like you fined or imprisoned_"...

 ...calm down dear, its just a commercial!


----------



## gregorio

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_funny that, i posed a question to you earlier on another thread, i re-emphasized it twice, you blatantly ignored it, because it suited you to do so, because i guess (as it hasnt been clarified) that you had zero experience with the cables you were trashing or claiming to speak for

*pot and kettle!!*

 perhaps you would do well to go here inbetween all your slander and OTT personal attacks.

 gregorio spouted: "If it were up to me I'd have people like you fined or imprisoned"...

 ...calm down dear, its just a commercial! 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	


_

 

Here we go! Get your facts straight, I replied to your question on page 64 of that thread, so don't go insulting me because you can't read or can't be bothered.

 I'm really sorry that you can't tell the difference between someone challenging the claims of a retailer and someone who is a retailer. I've got no products to sell and no reason to convince anyone of anything, beyond getting the truth or exposing a lie. This retailer (Steve N) has been caught on various professional audio forums peddling false information in a blatant attempt to sell bogus products.

 If you think what I said was slanderous then prove it! Of course, at the same time you would have to prove slander against Dan Lavry and a whole bunch of other industry professionals, or didn't you bother to read my quote from Dan Lavry on page 7 of this thread?

 If you can't tell the difference between what I'm doing and what Steve N is doing, either you are a scam artist yourself or you don't care if head-fi members get scammed. Either way, you are a waste of space.

 Please tell me this isn't true and that you've just mis-understood this thread and my intentions!

 G


----------



## MacedonianHero

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *ath1337* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Does anyone know if it's worth buy a "high" quality USB cable to connect a PC/Laptop to USB DAC? I'm looking for a cable to connect an EMU 0202 USB to my laptop. I read somewhere that the best USB cable you can buy is the Tricon USB by Synergistic Research, but they aren't available online, there is no price listed, and the store locater does not work (I don't know what the big secret is?). It's probably too expensive anyway (My guess is around $100).

 What about the Belkin Home Theater USB 2.0 Cable? Belkin

 or Monster Cable Performance Digital USB 2.0 Audio Cable Buy Monster Cable Performance Digital USB 2.0 Audio Cable at Musician's Friend 

 Does anyone know if these have any different cables have any effect on the audio quality?_

 

My brother is a Professional Engineer (Electrical) and is a design consultant for several well known electronic OEMs (over 10 years of experience) and based on his recommendation, there is NO difference as a USB cable (like an HDMI cable) carries a digital signal. There would be a difference for analog cables like RCA cables. 

 So go with the cheapest you can find that won't fall apart.

 Cheers.


----------



## DefectiveAudioComponent

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *audioengr* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_3) reflections due to impedance discontinuities

 All of these have an effect at the USB receiver.

 Steve N.
 Empirical Audio_

 

Know what, Steve? I went ahead and bent one of my usb cables sharply. No audible effect despite "reflections in the cable".
 If anyone else can hear a difference due to bending usb cables, I'd be glad to hear about that.


----------



## Quaddy

@defective, i hope you are joking, as impedance has nothing to do with the physical angle of a cable per say.

 @gregorio, i like how if someone is of a different opinion to you, you term them "as a waste of space" and that i am a "scam artist" for having my own opinion, thats a great community ethos you bring, you seem to get personal a lot and rather quickly.

 i think my feedback and credentials at this site more than speak for themselves, and i dont take kindly to being called names by someone who likes to shutdown debate so quickly with immature and counter-productive labelling.

 so please take your own advice, and: "_don't go insulting me because you can't read or can't be bothered_" 

 your 'tests' with borrowed valhalla speaker cable sound interesting, where can we all see the review and comparison of this cable and how it fared against all the other high end cables you have used but conveniently cannot remember the names of? 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



*
 'Q'*


----------



## DefectiveAudioComponent

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_@defective, i hope you are joking, as impedance has nothing to do with the physical angle of a cable per say._

 

Well, obviously I am joking, because there is no way that bending the usb cable can affect the sound. But in fact, that's the reflection-theory that (I *guess* that he) refers to, to avoid sharper turns than 45 degrees for usb signals on printed circuits boards. It's also entirely unclear how a different cable design could affect this non-problem. But of course, fixing a non-problem is very easy since one doesn't have to do anything at all.


----------



## audioengr

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *MacedonianHero* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_My brother is a Professional Engineer (Electrical) and is a design consultant for several well known electronic OEMs (over 10 years of experience) and based on his recommendation, there is NO difference as a USB cable (like an HDMI cable) carries a digital signal. There would be a difference for analog cables like RCA cables. 

 So go with the cheapest you can find that won't fall apart.

 Cheers._

 


 If we are expounding credentials, then fine, here are mine:
About Empirical Audio : Empirical Audio

 25 years doing digital design and engineering design management in the computer industry. Designed the first massively scalable parallel supercomputer. Design-team lead on the Pentium II. 22 Patents issued. Worked for Intel for 16 years. Unisys, then Sperry Univac for 3.

 Look, I know what I'm talking about here, so dont insult me. I dont have time to debate this. I'm sharing my knowledge, take it or leave it, I dont care. 

 Similar issues occur with digital coax cables. Here is a white paper I wrote for Positive-feedback with the analysis:

spdif

 Steve N.
 Empirical Audio


----------



## DefectiveAudioComponent

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *audioengr* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Look, I know what I'm talking about here, so dont insult me. I dont have time to debate this. I'm sharing my knowledge, take it or leave it, I dont care. 

 Empirical Audio_

 

Postive feedback is not a scientific journal, if we are speaking about knowledge sharing rather than opinion sharing (no need for scientific evidence for opinions).... do share your *credible* sources if you like. You have shared nothing yet. With your vast knowledge, some hard evidence to back up your unusual and hard-to-believe claims should be easy to find.

 EDIT: Since you are su busy, Steve, I'll help you out a bit. Start with explaining and showing the problem that you are trying to fix. Something in the lines of... "It is well known that X is a problem (insert any sources that agree with that here). You can easily hear that X is a problem if you do Y" (insert procedure for hearing the problem yourself). X is (explain X here)."


----------



## gregorio

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *audioengr* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Look, I know what I'm talking about here, so dont insult me. I dont have time to debate this. I'm sharing my knowledge, take it or leave it, I dont care. 

 Similar issues occur with digital coax cables. Here is a white paper I wrote for Positive-feedback with the analysis:

spdif

 Steve N.
 Empirical Audio_

 

Sorry you haven't got the time to debate it, or provide answers to any of the questions posed. As I said in my earlier post, I didn't expect you to answer them anyway!

 Thanks for that link Steve. Here is a link to a thread which exposes your link as a complete bunch of self serving BS:

PSW Recording Forums: Dan Lavry => Why longer is generally better for an S/PDIF Digital Cable

 G


----------



## Quaddy

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gregorio* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Sorry you haven't got the time to debate it, or provide answers to any of the questions posed. As I said in my earlier post, I didn't expect you to answer them anyway!

 Thanks for that link Steve. *Here is a link to a thread which exposes your link as a complete bunch of self serving BS:*

PSW Recording Forums: Dan Lavry => Why longer is generally better for an S/PDIF Digital Cable

 G_

 

how does that thread so definitively expose it as BS? i read it and cant see, sure there are varying opinions, but there are no conclusions drawn, its one persons word against another, its childish, like his link is better than your link.

 some people believe wikipedia to be 100% factual because it can be linked to 
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




 also, worryingly, you seem to hold dan lavry on some kind of pedestal if its his word you are treating as gospel.

 far better to say that there is no definite answer and give them both benefit of the doubt, unless you are in a position to clearly conclude absolute factual judgement?


----------



## DefectiveAudioComponent

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *Quaddy* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_far better to say that there is no definite answer and give them both benefit of the doubt, unless you are in a position to clearly conclude absolute factual judgement?_

 

No. It's Steve who says he has a solution to some kind of problem. It is up to him to show that the problem exists, and how we can easily verify that. Then, he has to show that his solution has some chance of fixing the problem. But first, the problem. There is so far no reason to believe that his gear is any better than any cheap cable from the store.

 And by the way, he could easily share this information with us, if there is indeed a problem and a solution. Because, for his engineering effort (if in fact there is one) he needs to have a setup where the problem can be heard, and another (with his fix) where it can't be heard. He just needs to tell us what the systems consist of, and what to listen for.

 (That's just the first step, though, but it would be a start)


----------



## audioengr

Quote:


  Originally Posted by *gregorio* /img/forum/go_quote.gif 
_Sorry you haven't got the time to debate it, or provide answers to any of the questions posed. As I said in my earlier post, I didn't expect you to answer them anyway!

 Thanks for that link Steve. Here is a link to a thread which exposes your link as a complete bunch of self serving BS:

PSW Recording Forums: Dan Lavry => Why longer is generally better for an S/PDIF Digital Cable

 G_

 


 I have met Dan Lavry, so I can understand this response. I do not believe he even read the white-paper carefully. There are a lot of designers with huge egos in this industry.

 The article says nothing at all about my products. In fact, many cable manufacturers have stopped offering 0.5m and 1.0m digital cables just because of this article. If you contact the editor of UHF (Ultra-Hi-Fidelity) in Canada, you will find that he read this article many years ago and being suspicious of it, he designed and carried-out a double-blind test with a number of digital cables (without my knowledge). The results of this AB/X verified my anaysis and conclusions. He visited my suite at CES one year and gave me a copy of the article, which was printed in his magazine, giving me full credit. You can contact Gerard, the editor of UHF here:
Ultra High Fidelity Magazine

 So, I think this exposes Dan Lavry. It was a cheap shot IMO. The emperors clothes are off.

 Steve N.
 Empirical Audio


----------



## tyrion

This thread is closed for now. There is way too much in the way of personal attacks and I need to see if it can be cleaned up.


----------



## Playstation

The usb dac I'm looking at Has it's own power supply. Was wondering if 10ft is too long for a usb audio cable. Will be plugging it into a PS4.


----------

