# What's the best USB audio cable for the money?



## Mediahound

What's the best USB audio cable for the money?
  
 I've been using a generic 3 Meter one for a while and don't really believe USB cables make much if any difference in audio quality, however, I'm getting some drop outs and do need to go that distance. 
  
 So, I'm looking for a more robust than generic USB cable to go from my computer to the DAC.
  
 Any suggestion?


----------



## Stapsy

I am big fan of the Belkin gold USB that came with my Off Ramp 5.  It is 5m long, costs ~$20 and sounds very good.  In my opinion a USB cable can impact SQ in the following areas:
  
 1. Does it run within spec (which surprisingly a lot of audiophile company cables do not)
 2. Separating the dirty 5v power or splicing in clean 5v if your DACs USB interface requires it
 3. Minimizing reflections. I have read the best lengths for this are intervals of 1.5m
  
 I had an Audioquest Cinnamon that sounded very different from the Belkin Gold (in a bad way).  Once I cut the 5v on the Audioquest the two sounded the same, and I have become somewhat of a crazed audiophile for this kind of stuff.


----------



## Mediahound

stapsy said:


> I am big fan of the Belkin gold USB that came with my Off Ramp 5.  It is 5m long, costs ~$20 and sounds very good.  In my opinion a USB cable can impact SQ in the following areas:
> 
> 1. Does it run within spec (which surprisingly a lot of audiophile company cables do not)
> 2. Separating the dirty 5v power or splicing in clean 5v if your DACs USB interface requires it
> ...


 
  
 Thanks. Is this the cable you are speaking of?:
  
 http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00062UKIY/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00062UKIY&linkCode=as2&tag=tt-20&linkId=I7YN5XUJAOGD44OC


----------



## Stapsy

Yep thats the one. Go with a shorter length if you can as it seems to make a slight difference. As I say I have yet to hear anything better than the Belkin Gold.


----------



## Mediahound

Thanks. I unfortunately have to go 10 ft due to the distance between my computer and the DAC. 
  
 I'll give this cable a try, the price seems right.


----------



## Speedskater

Blue Jeans Cable is very serious about selling good tested digital cables.
  
 http://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/data-cables/index.htm


----------



## Mediahound

mediahound said:


> Thanks. Is this the cable you are speaking of?:
> 
> http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B00062UKIY/ref=as_li_tl?ie=UTF8&camp=1789&creative=390957&creativeASIN=B00062UKIY&linkCode=as2&tag=tt-20&linkId=I7YN5XUJAOGD44OC


 
 Received the Belkin USB today, so far so good!


----------



## TwoEars

If you're looking for a serious USB cable you could have a look at this:
  
 http://www.moon-audio.com/b-m-c-pure-usb-1.html
  
 BMC is a very serious german engineering company and they are not into snake oil, they would only make something like this if they could measure that it actually works.


----------



## bfreedma

twoears said:


> If you're looking for a serious USB cable you could have a look at this:
> 
> http://www.moon-audio.com/b-m-c-pure-usb-1.html
> 
> BMC is a very serious german engineering company and they are not into snake oil, they would only make something like this if they could measure that it actually works.


 
  
 That's a solution in search of a problem that doesn't audibly exist..


----------



## TwoEars

bfreedma said:


> That's a solution in search of a problem that doesn't audibly exist..


 
  
 Of course it does. Different equipment (especially on the motherboard where the usb port is) can have differerent ground potential or ground hum.
  
 When you're using a USB cable you're connecting a device that is notorious for having unclean GND (a computer) to your audiophile DAC, which is very sensitive to ground hum.
  
 Filtering this ground hum is just one of the things this cable does.
  
 Will you hear? Maybe, maybe not. But the question was "best usb cable for the money" and I'm telling you now that this USB cable will beat any $2000 gold plated beryllium USB cable on the market, and it will do it using science.


----------



## bfreedma

twoears said:


> bfreedma said:
> 
> 
> > That's a solution in search of a problem that doesn't audibly exist..
> ...




If you say so. 
Still waiting for any of these companies to post proof of audible improvement. I'll be first in line to buy one if they ever can/do so.

The platitude that audiophile electronics are more sensitive to these issues than other electronics isn't validated and doesn't really make sense. Are you suggesting that audiophile electronics manufacturers are intentionally building poor electrical systems.

Funny how this is never an issue in data centers where data accuracy and availability is regulated in many industries and the penalties are measured in 6 digits.


----------



## TwoEars

bfreedma said:


> Funny how this is never an issue in data centers where data accuracy and availability is regulated in many industries and the penalties are measured in 6 digits.


 
  
 It is never an issue in date centers because they don't do digital to analogue conversion 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




  
 As long as you keep everything in the digital domain all is well and dandy.
  
 The problem is when you convert to analogue because everything is referenced to ground, especially unballanced outputs are sensitve to ground hum. But also balanced ones actually since the signal outputted from for instance a sabre chip is "single ended" but then made "balanced" with the use of an internal differential amplifier.
  
 Now - I don't have a usb cable like that myself. I actually use toslink, but that's mostly for other purposes and that it fits my system.
  
 But if used USB and had a $3000 DAC, $3000 amp and $9000 speakers I'd be picking up a cable like that.


----------



## Mediahound

twoears said:


> If you're looking for a serious USB cable you could have a look at this:
> 
> http://www.moon-audio.com/b-m-c-pure-usb-1.html
> 
> BMC is a very serious german engineering company and they are not into snake oil, they would only make something like this if they could measure that it actually works.




I would never consider a USB cable that expensive. If signal is getting through fine without without interference, that's all that matters to me.


----------



## bfreedma

twoears said:


> bfreedma said:
> 
> 
> > Funny how this is never an issue in data centers where data accuracy and availability is regulated in many industries and the penalties are measured in 6 digits.
> ...




Again, I still see no evidence of audible improvement being presented. My gear falls roughly in line with what you listed but I see no need to invest in something that won't make an audible improvement. 

As stated before, if objective data is presented supporting this cable's claimed capabilities, I'll buy one that day.


----------



## Stapsy

mediahound said:


> Received the Belkin USB today, so far so good!


 
  
 Glad you are enjoying it.  I see no real reason to go for anything else
  


twoears said:


> If you're looking for a serious USB cable you could have a look at this:
> 
> http://www.moon-audio.com/b-m-c-pure-usb-1.html
> 
> BMC is a very serious german engineering company and they are not into snake oil, they would only make something like this if they could measure that it actually works.


 
  
 Active circuit manipulation scares me.  Sounds like the Audioquest Diamond.
  
 If you really wanted to spend that much I think you would be better off with something like the Offramp 5 and ShortBlock USB filter.


----------



## TwoEars

> If you really wanted to spend that much I think you would be better off with something like the Offramp 5 and ShortBlock USB filter.


 
  
 This is true as well.
  
 In all honesty if you're worried about ground hum or loops then a short USB cable (say 1-1.5m) and something like the ShortBlock USB should be all you need.
  
 And I think something like the ShortBlock USB should be super easy and cheap to make yourself....
  

 The signal needs a ground refence, but that refence can easily come from each side of the USB cable rather than to be shared.
  
 So if you make a USB cable with the ground pin unconnected, then each side will use it's own GND as the reference.
  
 I very much suspect that this is what they've done and are selling for $200....


----------



## blitzxgene

twoears said:


> This is true as well.
> 
> In all honesty if you're worried about ground hum or loops then a short USB cable (say 1-1.5m) and something like the ShortBlock USB should be all you need.
> 
> ...


 
 I had the short block until just recently, but I'd run my setup with the ground and 5V pins taped that went into the computer, so only the center data pins were doing anything. Short block still had an agreeable effect on the data lines, whatever it was. Sound became more dynamic and had better prat, more consistently. I only sold it because the perfectwave mk2 and the direct stream cannot use it/does not affect it.
  
 I'ma say it was: *Magic*


----------



## 65535

I usually use ground noise from the computer as an indicator that the DAC design isn't very good. The USB input should be completely isolated from the DAC and from the analog output stage. In a bus powered device proper filtering should be done.
  
 I have a HRT Music Streamer HD and even driving 100' cable runs through a sensitive professional theater sound system didn't get any noise out of even notoriously noisy Windows laptops on a switching power supply. Even with a maxed amp and sensitive headphones I can't get any noise out of it.
  
 Anyways, I use cables from http://www.usbfirewire.com/ because they sell short lengths and angled connectors, Belkin cables are excellent, Monoprice does a great job. The USB spec is specific and easy to follow for a manufacture.


----------



## blitzxgene

There wasn't any noise exactly, as the master 7 did not power usb from the computer, but a haziness to the sound. The effect taping the pins had was to increasing space between instruments and better imaging. Instruments and voices solidified more. I do agree that it's not the best design for something so expensive, but the fix was easy and cost almost nothing. I'm looking forward to being able to ignore such things in the future though.


----------



## Muskokaphotog

From what I read, all the logic seemed to suggest that there wouldn't be any difference between a generic cable and anything else. Until I broke down and bought one for about $60 or so. The music is clearly brighter and more detailed. It depends, of course, on the rest of your system. It won't make any difference to iPod music played on $50 headphones. But through my Arcam rDac and to my Sennheiser HD800, there is a big difference. I wouldn't spend much more unless I had ultra expensive equipment. But logic also suggests that all parts of your system should be at the same level. It is also true that the latest isn't always the greatest.


----------



## watchmania




----------



## Safarix

Signal in USB cable is digital, and data packets are protected by 16-bit CRC.
 If data packet gets thru with correct CRC when using $1 cable, $1000 cable would not make any difference.


----------



## crazychile

I think we're still at a point where very few people understand all the issues that relate to USB audio performance. I have one of these on order:
  
 http://uptoneaudio.com/products/usb-regen
  
 It seems to be a better alternative than spending a lot of money on USB cables. If you go to the CA forums the feedback seems to be nearly 100% positive from the people that own them. I don't work for Uptone, I just thought someone would be interested in considering an alternative to improving USB performance.
  
 Thanks.


----------



## cel4145

muskokaphotog said:


> From what I read, all the logic seemed to suggest that there wouldn't be any difference between a generic cable and anything else. Until I broke down and bought one for about $60 or so. The music is clearly brighter and more detailed. It depends, of course, on the rest of your system. It won't make any difference to iPod music played on $50 headphones. But through my Arcam rDac and to my Sennheiser HD800, there is a big difference. I wouldn't spend much more unless I had ultra expensive equipment. *But logic also suggests that all parts of your system should be at the same level.* It is also true that the latest isn't always the greatest.




Not true. Logic dictates that spending more money doesn't always yield more benefit. It may just yield higher costs.


----------



## WraithApe

crazychile said:


> I think we're still at a point where very few people understand all the issues that relate to USB audio performance. I have one of these on order:
> 
> http://uptoneaudio.com/products/usb-regen
> 
> ...


 
  
 USB data transfer (and audio data is no different to any other data being trasmitted) is fully understood - so much so that there shouldn't even be any need for a thread like this to exist!
  
 Even if there were evidence that jitter and other phantasms could cause any kind of audible degradation, it wouldn't be subtle - bits in error are not going to result in harsh treble or thin bass, they'll result in clearly audible artifacts such as glitches and signal break-up. Quote from the article linked above: "No, 'bits are bits' really does not apply when pursuing the audio summit." Why not exactly? I'm a software engineer by trade and it's my experience that unless you're into quantum computing, bits are very much bits. If this were not the case, no-one would be able to write predictable, testable code - or encode music digitally for that matter!


----------



## cel4145

wraithape said:


> USB data transfer (and audio data is no different to any other data being trasmitted) is fully understood - so much so that there shouldn't even be any need for a thread like this to exist!
> 
> Even if there were evidence that jitter and other phantasms could cause any kind of audible degradation, it wouldn't be subtle - bits in error are not going to result in harsh treble or thin bass, they'll result in clearly audible artifacts such as glitches and signal break-up. Quote from the article linked above: "No, 'bits are bits' really does not apply when pursuing the audio summit." Why not exactly? I'm a software engineer by trade and it's my experience that unless you're into quantum computing, bits are very much bits. If this were not the case, no-one would be able to write predictable, testable code - or encode music digitally for that matter!




+1

People attribute changes in audio quality due to USB cables that makes absolutely no sense if one understands how the data is sent over the cable.


----------



## jologskyblues

> bits in error are not going to result in harsh treble or thin bass


 
 I actually experienced this but it was caused by a faulty USB port.


----------



## crazychile

jologskyblues said:


> > bits in error are not going to result in harsh treble or thin bass
> 
> 
> 
> I actually experienced this but it was caused by a faulty USB port.


 

 According to some of the other posters, you were probably imagining this. Because bits are bits and you wouldn't hear any music if everything wasn't perfect.


----------



## WraithApe

*sigh*
  
 Digital technology is predicated on the fact that a bit is a fundamental unit of data having precisely two states, with no scope for grey areas. Some apparently prefer to believe in ghosts in the machine rather than accept psychology plays any part in what they hear.


----------



## jologskyblues

To clarify my earlier post, I was referring to specifically to hearing harsh treble and thin bass. And no, I was not imagining things because the differences were so glaringly obvious.

Most likely the issue I was experiencing was because something was wrong with the 5V USB power delivery rather than having the "wrong bits" which I mistakenly quoted.


----------



## crazychile

wraithape said:


> *sigh*
> 
> Digital technology is predicated on the fact that a bit is a fundamental unit of data having precisely two states, with no scope for grey areas. Some apparently prefer to believe in ghosts in the machine rather than accept psychology plays any part in what they hear.




I understand digital technology perfectly well. Most of what you have stated is correct on a very basic level. Unfortunately your premise is flawed because it only looks at one ingredient in the soup. You've completely ignored the impact of power management, oversampling and digital filtering effects, how data integrity is maintained pre and post conversion, and many other variables. It's the combined effects from all of these that impact sound quality. 

There is also a big difference between static and rapidly changing data. Yes, if something is corrupted or missing it will either not work at all, or work intermittently. But digital music is not the same as opening a Word document. If you understand how the entire digital conversion process really works with audio, then you realize how there is effectively guess work being performed that fills in the gaps between the points that are known. This is an oversimplification, but when you understand digital audio, you understand the impact that seemingly insignificant variables have on effecting the amount of guess work or filling in of the gaps that takes place when converting the 1s and 0s. 

Another way of looking at it would be similar to the differences between a lossy and lossless file of the same recording. The MSB or Macro info is going to be comparable between the two, but the LSB or micro details won't. In my experience, the micro details are what make the music sound "live" rather than just a pattern of notes.

I still hold firm on my original position that USB as it relates to audio is not fully understood. USB was never originally designed as an interface for digital audio. More than a few manufacturers have openly admitted that they have made refinements to their designs to bring the performance closer to other more established means of data transmission. This is a learning process that evolves over time.

I am a skeptic of marketing claims and don't own any high priced cables (digital or analog), or any magic tuning pucks to place on my gear. However, i can often hear subtle, repeatable differences when variables are changed. I can't always explain them, but try to keep an open mind rather than saying they don't exist, because they can't be explained from the knowledge we currently have.


----------



## WraithApe

crazychile said:


> I understand digital technology perfectly well. Most of what you have stated is correct on a very basic level. Unfortunately your premise is flawed because it only looks at one ingredient in the soup. You've completely ignored the impact of power management, oversampling and digital filtering effects, how data integrity is maintained pre and post conversion, and many other variables. It's the combined effects from all of these that impact sound quality.
> 
> There is also a big difference between static and rapidly changing data. Yes, if something is corrupted or missing it will either not work at all, or work intermittently. But digital music is not the same as opening a Word document. If you understand how the entire digital conversion process really works with audio, then you realize how there is effectively guess work being performed that fills in the gaps between the points that are known. This is an oversimplification, but when you understand digital audio, you understand the impact that seemingly insignificant variables have on effecting the amount of guess work or filling in of the gaps that takes place when converting the 1s and 0s.
> 
> ...


 
  
 Perhaps you could point out where in the USB specification it says that the standard is insufficient for the transfer of audio data?
  
 Despite these attempts at obfuscation, the fact remains that digital information transmission is content agnostic - it doesn't matter whether the information encoded prior to transmission is audio, visual or textual; at the point of transmission it just comes down to packets of data. So yes, there is no difference between a digital music file and a Word document in that respect. I'm well aware that A/D and D/A conversion + perceptual coding are complex issues but that's muddying the water when the focus is purely on data transfer, not pre- or post-transfer conversion and processing. Native USB CRC enables a virtually bit-perfect transfer via cables conforming to the USB standard; what's done with that data on receipt, or prior to being transmitted, really isn't the issue here.


----------



## Jabbah

crazychile said:


> I understand digital technology perfectly well. Most of what you have stated is correct on a very basic level. Unfortunately your premise is flawed because it only looks at one ingredient in the soup. You've completely ignored the impact of power management, oversampling and digital filtering effects, how data integrity is maintained pre and post conversion, and many other variables. It's the combined effects from all of these that impact sound quality.




And exactly how are any of those relevant when discussing data transmission cables?



> There is also a big difference between static and rapidly changing data.




What is "static data" in the context of data transfers?



> But digital music is not the same as opening a Word document.




From the point of view of the cable, what exactly is the difference between a stream of bits representing audio and a stream of bits representing other data?



> If you understand how the entire digital conversion process really works with audio, then you realize how there is effectively guess work being performed that fills in the gaps between the points that are known. This is an oversimplification, but when you understand digital audio, you understand the impact that seemingly insignificant variables have on effecting the amount of guess work or filling in of the gaps that takes place when converting the 1s and 0s.




Wow, could you fit any more condescension in a single paragraph? I think you would benefit from reading up on Nyquist-Shannon sampling theorem. This video may also help:

https://youtu.be/cIQ9IXSUzuM

Hint: There is no guess work, for a given set of samples there is a unique solution to reconstruct the wave form.



> Another way of looking at it would be similar to the differences between a lossy and lossless file of the same recording. The MSB or Macro info is going to be comparable between the two, but the LSB or micro details won't. In my experience, the micro details are what make the music sound "live" rather than just a pattern of notes.




All bits in a bit stream have equal probability of being flipped. The least significant bit doesn't magically become more susceptible because we call it the LSB. It is impossible for a cable to affect the "micro details" and not the "macro details".



> I still hold firm on my original position that USB as it relates to audio is not fully understood. USB was never originally designed as an interface for digital audio.




USB audio is very well understood and it most certainly was designed with the inclusion of streaming audio interfaces, that's exactly what isochronous endpoints are in the spec for.



> More than a few manufacturers have openly admitted that they have made refinements to their designs to bring the performance closer to other more established means of data transmission. This is a learning process that evolves over time.




News flash: company claims something is really difficult but that they have refined their offering to make it better than cheaper rivals.



> I am a skeptic of marketing claims and don't own any high priced cables (digital or analog), or any magic tuning pucks to place on my gear. However, i can often hear subtle, repeatable differences when variables are changed. I can't always explain them, but try to keep an open mind rather than saying they don't exist, because they can't be explained from the knowledge we currently have.




We can explain it from the knowledge we currently have; it's called expectation bias.


----------



## crazychile

Hey guys, my apologies if what I wrote came off as condescending.  This is supposed to be in the spirit of healthy debate.  I’m not trying to start a p!ss!ng contest here. My only agenda that anyone reading the thread might CONSIDER that maybe there’s more to this than just  1s and 0s and the promise of perfect sound forever.  Plenty have stated their opinion on one side of the issue, I just wanted to present the other side.
  
 My final response in this thread  for anyone who cares is this… take a look at the white papers from http://www.usb.org/developers/whitepapers/ :
  
“USB 3.0 Jitter Budgeting”: If usb.org has taken the time to write a paper about jitter and the methodology used to model the data that is used to improve the jitter margin, then maybe this has an effect on system performance?
  
“Managing Connector and Cable Assembly Performance for USB SuperSpeed”  is an interesting read that covers EMI and RFI in addition to other topics. Is it reasonable then to conclude that how a USB cable is constructed (and the materials used) might have an effect on EMI and RFI?
  
 This paper also refers to the USB specification that defines a  90 ohm nominal impedance. How many cables on the market are at or near this spec (or contribute to the total load that is generated by the  I/O receivers + cable). How many companies even specify what the impedance of their cables are? Maybe then if a cable deviates from 90 ohms it could technically perform it’s basic functions yet still be a variable regarding  the overall performance?
  
 And just maybe if someone were to come out with a gadget (like the one I mentioned in my first post) where one of the objectives were to bring the incoming signal closer to this 90 ohm ideal impedance, then is it possible that this might actually  make a verifiable difference in the sound?


----------



## Jabbah

crazychile said:


> “USB 3.0 Jitter Budgeting”: If usb.org has taken the time to write a paper about jitter and the methodology used to model the data that is used to improve the jitter margin, then maybe this has an effect on system performance?
> “Managing Connector and Cable Assembly Performance for USB SuperSpeed”  is an interesting read that covers EMI and RFI in addition to other topics. Is it reasonable then to conclude that how a USB cable is constructed (and the materials used) might have an effect on EMI and RFI?


 
  
 You do realise that those papers are for generic data transfers at high speeds eg 5Gbps? Jitter in a data stream will not lead to jitter in audio, it will lead to a bad CRC and the packet being rejected. Same with cable performance, any issues will lead to packet rejection. Digital data transfer is incredibly robust, it cannot lead to corruption of the data as any packets that do not match the CRC will be rejected. This goes as much for audio data as any other data.
  


> And just maybe if someone were to come out with a gadget (like the one I mentioned in my first post) where one of the objectives were to bring the incoming signal closer to this 90 ohm ideal impedance, then is it possible that this might actually  make a verifiable difference in the sound?


 
  
 No, all the bits in an data stream (audio or otherwise) are equal, it is impossible for digital data streams to be affected in a way that would change the dynamics of the audio. Digital corruption is very well understood and the only outcome with a very poor cable with digital streaming data (isochronus endpoint) is that the odd data packet will be dropped. Streaming audio is at such a low data rate compared to the rates that USB is capable of, that if you are suffering from dropped packets then there is likely a catastrophic failure in the cable.


----------



## CanadianMaestro

A USB data cable is not a good fix for jitter issues, even over longer distances. So save the $$ and instead explore DACs with vanishingly low jitter values.


----------



## CanadianMaestro

I found that DH Labs or the Furutech ADL does well for computer USB-to-DAC/HP amp connection. And relatively cheap.


----------



## cel4145

jabbah said:


> No, all the bits in an data stream (audio or otherwise) are equal, it is impossible for digital data streams to be affected in a way that would change the dynamics of the audio. Digital corruption is very well understood and the only outcome with a very poor cable with digital streaming data (isochronus endpoint) is that the odd data packet will be dropped.




Crazychile, you need to listen to what he's saying here. And it's the same thing that others have said before. *If* data corruption happens, it CANNOT result in the types of audible differences that people attribute to better USB cables. This is very flawed cause and effect reasoning.


----------



## Tablix

The only answer is placebo affect, nothing more.  You think recording studios spend more than the absolute minimum for a USB cable? This whole topic of the thread is pointless.  The ONLY reason to spend more than $10 is cable length or durability, and considering 99% of users never move their cables, durability doesn't even enter the equation either.


----------



## CanadianMaestro

Fck placebo and anyone's preaching about how much one should spend. If a component makes my system damn musical, i don't give a schiit about the science behind that gear. I just enjoy my music. And nobody tells me how much I should spend on any of my gear.


----------



## Tablix

Your money, spend it how you like. I am just saying a recording studio isnt going to spend $100 on a USB cable, so why should you.  After all your USB cable is going to improve the data you bought from them,  /sarcam.off


----------



## CanadianMaestro

The goal of pro rec studios is different than the goal of hobbyist home audio, especially computer audio, where USB is most relevant. Pro studios, or the ones I am familiar with, spend tons of dough on getting an unadulterated, uncolored signal. Power conds, analog ic's.

Sorry for my inflammatory remark.


----------



## StanD

canadianmaestro said:


> The goal of pro rec studios is different than the goal of hobbyist home audio, especially computer audio, where USB is most relevant. Pro studios, or the ones I am familiar with, spend tons of dough on getting an unadulterated, uncolored signal. Power conds, analog ic's.
> 
> Sorry for my inflammatory remark.


 
 A pro studio is a business and has a budget. They do not waste money on cables made from unobtainium. Most of their wiring is of standard lines/impedances, many times 600 Ohms. They use good quality affordable cable.The total lengths of cable they use would put them out of business if they used some of the overblown hype ridden overpriced cable that some audiophiles hyperventilate about.


----------



## CanadianMaestro

stand said:


> A pro studio is a business and has a budget. They do not waste money on cables made from unobtainium. Most of their wiring is of standard lines/impedances, many times 600 Ohms. They use good quality affordable cable.The total lengths of cable they use would put them out of business if they used some of the overblown hype ridden overpriced cable that some audiophiles hyperventilate about.




You should email exactly what you wrote, to Astoria Studios, DG, and others, run by very competent engineers responsible for some of the most beloved recordings ever put on media, like Dark Side of the Moon, countless jazz classics, etc. then wait for a response from them, should be very eye opening. The idea of using $10 cabling or whatever behind and in front of electronics costing hundreds of thousands, is really sensible....


----------



## Tablix

USB is not an analogue cable, the end. I have worked in maybe 20 studios, and data cables are data cables.  When it comes to an XLR cable they will spend the money, but when it comes to data they understand that data either arrives or it doesn't.  USB is transferring data, the weak link is the DAC or the ADC, and not the cable.
 EDIT: I am not claiming to have worked with Pink Flyod, but I have worked with numerous local bands and recorded my own tracks.... and at no time have I used anything but a generic USB cable.


----------



## StanD

canadianmaestro said:


> You should email exactly what you wrote, to Astoria Studios, DG, and others, run by very competent engineers responsible for some of the most beloved recordings ever put on media, like Dark Side of the Moon, countless jazz classics, etc. then wait for a response from them, should be very eye opening. The idea of using $10 cabling or whatever behind and in front of electronics costing hundreds of thousands, is really sensible....


 
 I've been to many pro stodios in NYC. They have vast amounts of wire connecting many inputs, sends, boards and so on. The lengths of wires are astounding and they are not going to waste hundreds of thousands of dollars on needless wire that does nothing useful. The wires they use cost far less than $10 per foot. They buy wire on large spools and have their techs do the work wiring their panels and runs.


----------



## CanadianMaestro

I agree about the importance of the DAC.....and also the importance of reducing noise emitted from source components' power supplies, analog and digital. That's where critical cabling and conditioning can accrue good returns on the investment. Not USB.


----------



## Tablix

studios use ADC, ie they record analogue sound and convert it to digital files.  The files are then the "master" copy of the recording which is then transferred to CD or saved in digital on a hard disc.  This is data, not a sound. You cannot affect the data by the transfer method via USB.  This moves into the realms of PC tech stuff that I really cannot explain as its not my area of expertise, but I would love for someone to prove otherwise. If you send a packet of data containing "11101100011" from A to B you either get "11101100011" or you get nothing at all, ie a corrupt packet.  
  
 I am not a pc expert or a professional recording engineer, but in my experience any change you are hearing is subjective bias (placebo).


----------



## CanadianMaestro

Question, from my own ignorance.

Why would a rec studio use a USB cable for anything? 

Performer > mike > analog signal > analog recorder 
Then for digital media.... AD converter thru to ....?

Cheers


----------



## CanadianMaestro

tablix said:


> studios use ADC, ie they record analogue sound and convert it to digital files.  The files are then the "master" copy of the recording which is then transferred to CD or saved in digital on a hard disc.  This is data, not a sound. You cannot affect the data by the transfer method via USB.  This moves into the realms of PC tech stuff that I really cannot explain as its not my area of expertise, but I would love for someone to prove otherwise. If you send a packet of data containing "11101100011" from A to B you either get "11101100011" or you get nothing at all, ie a corrupt packet.
> 
> I am not a pc expert or a professional recording engineer, but in my experience any change you are hearing is subjective bias (placebo).




Got it. Posted my Q a split sec after this.
Thx


----------



## Tablix

completely correct, analogue sound into PC via your ADC (interface) and stored digitally.  from there you "may" do a backup to a 2nd HD which in my situation is via USB to an external HD so I can take it home so I can do mastering.


----------



## CanadianMaestro

This is great! Learning new stuff about studio recording!


----------



## Tablix

And just for info I use a pretty standard Belklin USB cable that costs about $20, and nobody has ever questioned the quality of my final edits.


----------



## CanadianMaestro

Now....why on earth would anyone question the q of your mix?


Off to listen, then stretch...


----------



## CanadianMaestro

Happy 4th July to all friends unfortunate enough to live in the USA!


----------



## curbfeeler

@Mediahound Willful ignorance is not a substitute for experience or empirical exploration. A USB cable makes an audible difference.


----------



## MHzTweaker

I skimmed through this thread hoping to find some information about people's personal subjective experience with various USB cables.
  
 What I seemed to find is a pissing contest as to whether the question is even valid.
  
 Okay, I'm not criticizing but I really could use some useful information for you see I have just purchased a Gustard X20-U to use with my SOtM PCIex USB 3.0 card I just also received.
  
 I am really not in the market for some kind of ultra expensive wire made from metal mined from the moons of Jupiter that shifts bits through a dimensional portal to my DAC.
  
 What I would like to know is are there any USB cables in the $100 range or less that are preferred and why?
  
 Many thanks.....


----------



## MHzTweaker

mhztweaker said:


> I skimmed through this thread hoping to find some information about people's personal subjective experience with various USB cables.
> 
> What I seemed to find is a pissing contest as to whether the question is even valid.
> 
> ...


 
  
 Any comments on these cables?
Analysis Plus Purple Plus USB http://www.ebay.com/itm/Analysis-Plus-Purple-Plus-USB-Audiophile-Quality-USB-Cable-1-meter-/361312968398?hash=item541fee5ece:g:ZyEAAOSwrklVcKbj
Dyson Audio Data Influx 2.0 http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Handmade-Dyson-Audio-Data-Influx-2-0-Audiophile-USB-DAC-Cable-1-Meter-/261818839748?hash=item3cf59e72c4:g:AXAAAOSwpdpVabko
Straightwire USB-Link http://www.amazon.com/Straightwire-USB-Link-Audiophile-Grade-Digtial/dp/B019ECUMZ2/ref=sr_1_6?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1457128665&sr=1-6&keywords=audiophile+usb+cable&refinements=p_n_feature_keywords_five_browse-bin%3A7800924011
Pangea Audio - USB cable - PCOCC & 4% silver - 1 Meter http://www.ebay.com/itm/Pangea-Audio-USB-cable-PCOCC-4-silver-1-Meter-/262305114565?hash=item3d129a69c5:g:028AAOSwNSxVVOID
  
  
 Thanks


----------



## ambrose1985

Several more choices here : 
  

Curious usb 280mm Hugo LinkForza Audio Works Copper Series Twin USBWywires Silver DIGITAL AUDIO CABLESSilver Dragon USB Cable by Moon Audio
  
 Am getting the Curious cable myself for my office setup and my home setup is using the cable from FAW


----------



## Safarix

Seems like you are looking for the most expensive cable.  So if your definition of "best" includes price, buy the most expensive cable.
  
 For those who prefer to pay less, but still get the same results, try AmazonBasics cable.
 It's a very simple cable.
http://pinoutsguide.com/SerialPortsCables/usb_cable_pinout.shtml
 Data packets (up to 1023 bytes) in USB are protected by CRC16. If CRC check fails, receiver does not ACK it and transmitter sends the data packet again till ACK is received (data was not corrupted).
  
 If you read this far, you can think what would happen if your $5000 cable alters the bits.
  


> The maximum length of a standard USB cable is 5.0 meters (16.4 ft). The primary reason for this limit is the maximum allowed round-trip delay of about 1500 ns. If a USB device does not answer to host commands within the allowed time, the host considers the command to be lost.


----------



## ambrose1985

safarix said:


> Seems like you are looking for the most expensive cable.  So if your definition of "best" includes price, buy the most expensive cable.
> 
> For those who prefer to pay less, but still get the same results, try AmazonBasics cable.
> It's a very simple cable.
> ...


 
  
 Actually no, I am not. If there is a cheaper option that I can try, I don't mind. 
  
 At the very least, I'm hearing a difference with the FAW cable (after A/B-ing with the stock cable that I have) that I bought so I'm thinking of trying other brands. Curious Cables _appaarently_ has raving reviews and prices are not that bad so I was thinking of trying that. The Wywires cost higher actually : 
  
Platinum Priced from $899
Silver Priced from $499 (classic)
Blue Priced from $249


----------



## theveterans

Stright Wire PSYT USB cable is silver plated copper wire for only $20 which I think is a bargain value given the fact that custom USB cables with silver plated copper wires cost 10x more.
  
 I use it to feed to my iUSB 3.0 Micro which then goes to my DAC via Gemini cable.


----------



## Senni

Audioquest Black Diamond. Stunning Cable. Got it myself.


----------



## motberg

mhztweaker said:


> Any comments on these cables?
> Analysis Plus Purple Plus USB http://www.ebay.com/itm/Analysis-Plus-Purple-Plus-USB-Audiophile-Quality-USB-Cable-1-meter-/361312968398?hash=item541fee5ece:g:ZyEAAOSwrklVcKbj
> Dyson Audio Data Influx 2.0 http://www.ebay.com/itm/New-Handmade-Dyson-Audio-Data-Influx-2-0-Audiophile-USB-DAC-Cable-1-Meter-/261818839748?hash=item3cf59e72c4:g:AXAAAOSwpdpVabko
> Straightwire USB-Link http://www.amazon.com/Straightwire-USB-Link-Audiophile-Grade-Digtial/dp/B019ECUMZ2/ref=sr_1_6?s=pc&ie=UTF8&qid=1457128665&sr=1-6&keywords=audiophile+usb+cable&refinements=p_n_feature_keywords_five_browse-bin%3A7800924011
> ...


 

 I have just recently installed a 0,5M Pangea and really surprised, seems on the same details level as my PPA cables. In my system the Pangea would be preferable to the iFi Gemini, Supra, Furutech, Curious, and a couple others that I have also tried.


----------



## dmbr

motberg said:


> I have just recently installed a 0,5M Pangea and really surprised, seems on the same details level as my PPA cables. In my system the Pangea would be preferable to the iFi Gemini, Supra, Furutech, Curious, and a couple others that I have also tried.


Wow, I'm surprised to hear that! What's your setup?


----------



## motberg

dmbr said:


> Wow, I'm surprised to hear that! What's your setup?


 

 Hi - yep. I was surprised also (actually the past few years less than 50% of system changes I made resulted in what I was generally expecting..)
 ... the setup listed in my profile is pretty current.. dedicated fanless PC, LPS's, batteries, various USB do-dad's, etc.. things were much simpler way back before CD's


----------



## MHzTweaker

motberg said:


> I have just recently installed a 0,5M Pangea and really surprised, seems on the same details level as my PPA cables. In my system the Pangea would be preferable to the iFi Gemini, Supra, Furutech, Curious, and a couple others that I have also tried.


 
  
 That's reassuring.  I have a .5 Meter Pangea due to arrive in 2 days and my new DAC a couple days behind it.


----------



## che15

I have and heard a few hi end USB cables and my favorite is the Lavricables made of 2 separate cables one for the power and one for the data. 
 Inside each cable there are 4 solid silver condunctors. compared to kimber silver USB cable , cardas, wireworld, audioquest and my previous favorite
 the silnote all silver USB cable the Lavri sounds cleaner without sounding analytical or harsh, it sounds more dynamic with better attack and more detail.


----------



## essentiale

I'm currently using the USB cable from Amazonbasics...


----------



## dmbr

I picked up the Pangea Audio 24 ga solid silver 0.5 Meter cable for $40, and I too found it preferable to the ~$100 iFi Mercury. I found it a little softer and more detailed; a subtle but distinctly more enjoyable upgrade.

 I've also tried Audioquest Evergreens, which both the Mercury and Pangea blow away. 

Thanks, great rec!

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B005AUH8SM/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awd_.DfcxbMCXQ30F


----------



## motberg

In case you guys did not see this, it is a little summary by iFi of some of the USB data transfer problems (that seemingly have only been discovered over the past 2 years or so?).
 http://www.audiostream.com/content/usb-audio-gremlins-exposed-beyond-1s-and-0s-ifi-audio#QgIkEkqSf7VzXPWa.97


----------



## Mediahound

I still think for the price, the Belkin Golds mentioned above cannot be beat, and I now use those with the Schiit Wyrd. I've heard more expensive cables and the Belkin's sound best to me and are a fraction of the price. They seem to have less digital glare, which I like. 
  
 I've learned that getting the digital signal transmitted is not the issue, any USB cable can do that fine.  You don't need silver USB cable to do that, it does nothing for the sound. 
  
 It's the interference and noise rejection capabilities of a cable that makes a difference and gives a smoother, more pure sound. 
  
 Speaking of Pangea, I don't really like that brand in general as they are just the house brand of Audio Advisor although I do have a couple of their 14se MKII power cables, but I only bought them because they have Cardas copper in them for a fairly good price, and I like Cardas. (They perform well in my system btw).


----------



## Safarix

mediahound said:


> I've learned that getting the digital signal transmitted is not the issue, any USB cable can do that fine.  You don't need silver USB cable to do that, it does nothing for the sound.
> 
> It's the interference and noise rejection capabilities of a cable that makes a difference and gives a smoother, more pure sound.


 
  
 You just contradicted yourself.


----------



## gregorio

ambrose1985 said:


> Actually no, I am not. If there is a cheaper option that I can try, I don't mind.
> At the very least, I'm hearing a difference with the FAW cable ...


 
  
 As USB cables do not affect the sound, if you are hearing a difference that's because the price/appearance of the cable is leading you to believe the cable sounds better.
  
 The answer to your question, "What's the best cable for the money?" is; an AmazonBasics cable. Actual sound quality doesn't get any better than that, at ANY price! If however you're not interested in actual sound quality but in how much the price/appearance of a cable might help you to believe that the sound is better, then obviously "the best cable for the money" for you personally is the prettiest, most expensive one you can afford, as Safarix already told you!
  
 G


----------



## lbbef

For those that do not believe in USB cables, let me have a go at explaining to you why USB cables make a difference.

First a short background about my experience on USB cables. I'm the type of person who only believes in cables or whatnot only after I have heard them and can hear differences between them. 

When I first started out, I tried a few different USB cable but could not tell the differences between them. After all, its just digital data right?

But recently after trying a few USB cables, I have heard differences between them. So I went on to do research as to why digital cables would make a difference in sound.

If you think about it, any digital signal is an analogue signal. Digital data is just 0s and 1s. In a perfect world, that would be a perfect square wave. But in analogue electronics, it's hard to keep a square wave perfect to the DAC. Jitter, noise, reflection, etc... will affect the integrity of the square wave. The square wave is still able to transmit the 0s and 1s over, but wont be perfect.

This is measurable, the signal integrity can be measured into an eye pattern.

For a good illustration, have a look at this article:
http://www.onsemi.com/pub_link/Collateral/AND9075-D.PDF


----------



## Safarix

More stuff to google:
   confirmation bias
   crc


----------



## lbbef

It's not confirmation bias but rather science. Why not post some arguments and proof as to why USB cables don't make a difference? Confirmation bias is when you ignore information that is opposite from what you believe in. But I don't ignore those information, rather, please put some arguments and information out so that we can have a proper intellectual discussion.

There is a difference between data integrity and signal integrity. The data integrity is still there, there is not error in the digital data thus no need for redundancy. However, signal integrity is still compromised. For example, maybe +5V represents logic one. But in a real world system, the signal would vary at maybe around 4.9V. It is still recognized as logic one, but the signal is not perfect.

Ignoring the fact that there is a difference between data and signal integrity itself could be a confirmation bias.


----------



## theveterans

This thread will be locked soon if these arguments keep showing...
  
 The thread is supposed to be the best featured USB cable for a specific price range, not whether silver plated wires, etc, etc make a difference in sound.


----------



## lbbef

theveterans said:


> This thread will be locked soon if these arguments keep showing...
> 
> The thread is supposed to be the best featured USB cable for a specific price range, not whether silver plated wires, etc, etc make a difference in sound.




I see. My bad. I didn't realize that this was supposed to be a debate free sub forum.

Personally have not tried a wide range of USB cables, so can't really comment on their cost performance.

But from my experience with China hi-fi/head-fi, their products (amps, cables, etc...) usually have amazing value for the money.


----------



## gregorio

Quote:


lbbef said:


> So I went on to do research as to why digital cables would make a difference in sound.


 
  
 I don't really understand why, when you did your research, you seem to have only researched the 15 or so year old marketing pseudo-science? If you're going to go to the trouble of researching in the first place, why not go that extra step beyond pseudo-science and try to understand the whole/real picture?
  


lbbef said:


> But in analogue electronics, it's hard to keep a square wave perfect to the DAC. Jitter, noise, reflection, etc... will affect the integrity of the square wave.


 
  
 I agree entirely! It's relatively easy to see and measure the common and fairly significant degradation in the integrity of the square waves, no argument from me here at all! But where are the rest of the facts?
 There is one type of marketing pseudo-science which is just completely made up nonsense, explained using scientific (or scientific sounding) wording/terminology but the type of marketing pseudo-science demonstrated here is more sophisticated and far more effective in my opinion. Jitter, noise, skin effect, etc., are all real scientific phenomena, not pseudo-science at all!! But (and it's a huge "but"!), by stopping there, by going off at a tangent from this point and not continuing with the rest of the actual facts, this real science is perverted into pseudo-science! The lies/falsehoods are not so much in what is actually stated but in what has not been stated, it's a lie of omission. This, in my opinion, is far more effective marketing pseudo-science than just the made up nonsense!
  


lbbef said:


> The square wave is still able to transmit the 0s and 1s over, but wont be perfect. .... In a perfect world, that would be a perfect square wave.


 
  
 No! In a perfect ANALOGUE world that square wave would be perfect. In the analogue world there is only an analogue audio signal, any degradation in that analogue signal is a degradation which is output to the speakers/headphones. However, we're not talking about the analogue world, we're talking about the digital world. In the digital world, that analogue signal (square waves) is not the audio signal, it's just a representation of digital data and nothing directly related to the audio signal at all! These square waves can be distorted/degraded to hell and back, it makes no difference whatsoever. Provided the square waves are not obliterated entirely and can be recognised as being at least vaguely square shaped, the data they represent can be recovered perfectly, just as perfectly as if the square wave were perfect! This is the fact which is so conveniently missing from the marketing and is what makes it pseudo-science. And, what an absolutely astonishing fact to omit, because this fact is the WHOLE REASON WHY digital audio was invented in the first place!!! It's because we don't live in a perfect analogue world that digital audio was invented (to circumvent those imperfections), if we did live in a perfect world with perfect square (or any other shaped) analogue audio signals there would be no point/reason for digital audio to exist!
  
 Yes, jitter, noise, etc., does exist but the story/facts don't end there. We can't just say they "exist" period, let's buy a cable which removes/reduces them, for two reasons: 1. The more expensive cables don't actually reduce jitter or noise any better than cheap ones such as the AmazonBasics but whether they do or don't is irrelevant anyway because, 2. There's the rest of the story/facts: Even DACs 20 and more years ago employed circuitry which filtered out the jitter and noise to below audibility and DACs of the last decade or so have improved even further and filter it out to 100-1000 times below audibility! This is all relatively easy to measure, although a little involved and cable companies gamble on the fact that extremely few consumers will bother. Instead, they rely entirely on visual appeal, price and pseudo-science to affect your perception, so that you (hopefully) perceive an audible improvement where there is no difference anywhere even remotely approaching audibility. The problem is exacerbated by the fact that once this perception has been experienced, some/many will believe it to be reality. Some will believe this so absolutely, that no amount of reason, logic or proven facts will shake their belief and, as their belief is so absolute, any justification of that belief is valid, regardless of whether or not it's actually true or even in some cases of how utterly ridiculous it is!
  
 Everyone is entitled to their belief. If you are happy with appearance, price and marketing pseudo-science affecting your perception, then that's entirely your choice and I personally have absolutely no problem with that at all. But, why lie about it? When advising others, why regurgitate marketing pseudo-science and lie, at least by omission, to justify what you enjoy? Why not just tell the truth and say; "USB cables do not affect SQ but the experience of buying, owning and/or using expensive pretty cables can, for some people, enhance the enjoyment of their listening experience"? Obviously, we know why they don't generally say this, it's for the same reason as many religious extremists don't just go off and be a hermit somewhere but feel the need to recruit new members. Fortunately though, audiophile extremists don't go round killing those who don't agree with their philosophy, they just try to explain they have better gear and super-human hearing or failing that, flame or ignore them and go off in a huff! 
  
 G


----------



## chry5alis

My two cents based on personal experience..

Really unimpressed with my 2m supra usb cable, I find it unwieldy, flat, muddy, and boring. This is after about 50hr burn in.

A great alternative is the yulong cu2 usb cable I bought from a fellow head-fier. Its more difficult for me to use due to the shorter length 1m, but I persevere with it because there is a noticable difference in sound quality. More sparkle, sharper definition


----------



## motberg

gregorio said:


> As USB cables do not affect the sound, if you are hearing a difference that's because the price/appearance of the cable is leading you to believe the cable sounds better.
> 
> The answer to your question, "What's the best cable for the money?" is; an AmazonBasics cable. Actual sound quality doesn't get any better than that, at ANY price! If however you're not interested in actual sound quality but in how much the price/appearance of a cable might help you to believe that the sound is better, then obviously "the best cable for the money" for you personally is the prettiest, most expensive one you can afford, as Safarix already told you!
> 
> G


 

 I just bought one of these and will compare with my stock in a few weeks...


----------



## Mediahound

gregorio said:


> Quote:
> 
> No! In a perfect ANALOGUE world that square wave would be perfect. In the analogue world there is only an analogue audio signal, any degradation in that analogue signal is a degradation which is output to the speakers/headphones. However, we're not talking about the analogue world, we're talking about the digital world. In the digital world, that analogue signal (square waves) is not the audio signal, it's just a representation of digital data and nothing directly related to the audio signal at all! These square waves can be distorted/degraded to hell and back, it makes no difference whatsoever. Provided the square waves are not obliterated entirely and can be recognised as being at least vaguely square shaped, the data they represent can be recovered perfectly, just as perfectly as if the square wave were perfect! This is the fact which is so conveniently missing from the marketing and is what makes it pseudo-science. And, what an absolutely astonishing fact to omit, because this fact is the WHOLE REASON WHY digital audio was invented in the first place!!! It's because we don't live in a perfect analogue world that digital audio was invented (to circumvent those imperfections), if we did live in a perfect world with perfect square (or any other shaped) analogue audio signals there would be no point/reason for digital audio to exist!
> 
> Yes, jitter, noise, etc., does exist but the story/facts don't end there. We can't just say they "exist" period, let's buy a cable which removes/reduces them, for two reasons: 1. The more expensive cables don't actually reduce jitter or noise any better than cheap ones such as the AmazonBasics but whether they do or don't is irrelevant anyway because, 2. There's the rest of the story/facts: Even DACs 20 and more years ago employed circuitry which filtered out the jitter and noise to below audibility and DACs of the last decade or so have improved even further and filter it out to 100-1000 times below audibility! This is all relatively easy to measure, although a little involved and cable companies gamble on the fact that extremely few consumers will bother. Instead, they rely entirely on visual appeal, price and pseudo-science to affect your perception, so that you (hopefully) perceive an audible improvement where there is no difference anywhere even remotely approaching audibility.




Take this with a grain of salt since he is reviewing a $400 USB cable here but: 

"*The signal that moves along a USB cable isn’t digital – it most definitely is NOT ones and zeroes – but an electrical-pulse representation of those ones and zeroes. This analogue signal is therefore prone to disturbance from EMI emanating from the host computer and electrical noise arrive over the air, otherwise known as RFI. Greater vulnerability to noise can degrade a cable’s ability to do its job: transfer data from computer to DAC*.

Digital audio transfer from computer host to DAC uses the isochronous transfer method that doesn’t specify the error-correcting data packet resends of the bulk transfer method used for moving files i.e. when data packet arrival timing is inconsequential to the outcome.

In the digital audio world, meeting the USB cable specification is only part of the ‘better sound’ equation. The cable geometry, materials used – the conductor, the dielectric and termination plugs – and shielding all influence the cable’s immunity to electrical noise pollution, the rise times of the electrical pulses being carried and the arrival timing of those pulses."


From: http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2015/09/curious-for-the-curious-a-knockout-usb-cable-from-australia/


----------



## gregorio

mediahound said:


> "*The signal that moves along a USB cable isn’t digital – it most definitely is NOT ones and zeroes – but an electrical-pulse representation of those ones and zeroes. This analogue signal is therefore prone to disturbance from EMI emanating from the host computer and electrical noise arrive over the air, otherwise known as RFI. Greater vulnerability to noise can degrade a cable’s ability to do its job: transfer data from computer to DAC*.
> 
> The cable geometry, materials used – the conductor, the dielectric and termination plugs – and shielding all influence the cable’s immunity to electrical noise pollution, the rise times of the electrical pulses being carried and the arrival timing of those pulses."


 
  
 I'm not sure you correctly read my post. If you had, then you would realise that I agree with all of what I've quoted, with the exception of the sentence I've underlined! 1. In any normal situation, even up to fairly extreme situations, an AmazonBasics cable is NOT vulnerable to noise, etc., and 2. Even if there were more noise and the analogue square waves were degraded, it does NOT affect sound quality, that's the whole point of digital audio! A USB cable's job is to transfer data from computer to DAC, not transfer a perfect square wave. These are two different things! A cable which allows electrical noise pollution and inaccurate rise times can still do it's job, perfectly! So even if we assume the AmazonBasics cable does allow more noise pollution and inaccurate rise times, we still end up with NO audible SQ differences. And, just to rub salt into the wound, there's no evidence presented to support the assumption that the AmazonBasics cable is more vulnerable to noise, etc., unless of course you consider pseudo-scientific innuendo to be "evidence"!
  
 G


----------



## lbbef

gregorio said:


> Quote:
> 
> I don't really understand why, when you did your research, you seem to have only researched the 15 or so year old marketing pseudo-science? If you're going to go to the trouble of researching in the first place, why not go that extra step beyond pseudo-science and try to understand the whole/real picture?
> 
> ...


 
 It isn't just a few people making claims that USB cables do make a difference. My ears just can't lie. Many of my friends, both head-fi and hi-fi have tried and could hear a difference. The difference is not subtle and I am confident of passing a double blind test. I too was puzzled, so I am researching and trying to get to the bottom of this debate that is going on forever. Digital electronics is not as simple as you think it is. You will probably need to read Computer Science or Computer Engineering for you to understand digital electronics. That is why I am researching into things like USB receiver designs, how DAC works, etc...
  
 Unlike analogue electronics, digital electronics are more complicated and are made up of many components. Controllers in digital electronics (the one that handles your digital bit data) are made up of logic gates, which are in turn made up of transistors, which are analogue components. You must understand that the data will still maintain its integrity as its easy to represent data in analogue terms. But when this imperfect signal goes through your digital circuits (which are made up of analogue components), the output will not magically become perfect.
  
 Hard drives etc don't need a perfect signal as eventually the output is stored as + and -. However, this is different in a DAC's case. The output is not just max voltage and min voltage, it can be anywhere between the two. This imperfect output will eventually be fed into your amplifier and headphones. Even though much effort has been done to reduce jitter, etc... it will not be perfect. It is nature. You can only reduce it with your anagloue circuits but you cannot eliminate it 100%.
  
 This is why a digital cable is still a analogue cable.
  
 But I do believe that if the DAC can be designed to minimise the differences between USB cables. If the data can be stored at the DAC and the signal reconstructed, I believe that the USB cable will not make much of a difference, However, this will probably make the DAC design even more complicated and expensive, which will not go well with cosumers.
  
 Now that I have understood why DACs are affected by imperfect signal integrity. My next step would be to research into material sciences to understand how different cables affect the signal integrity.


----------



## FunkyMonkey909

From personal experience - having moved from a stock USB to 400USD DH Labs cable, there was *some* improvement but very, very light. Tried it both in my dac and usb/spdif interface.
 I'm a cables guy - I can vouch for a difference quality speaker cables, interconnects, and power cables make. With USB cables, I'm not so sure about the value added, so I don't plan to spend my $$$ in this area.


----------



## gregorio

Your post typifies a number of the most common audiophile misconceptions:
  
 Quote:


lbbef said:


> It isn't just a few people making claims that USB cables do make a difference.


 
  
 The number of people who believe in something fallacious does not affect whether it's actually fallacious or not. At one time many thought the earth was flat, even more thought the earth was the centre of the universe.
  
  Quote:


lbbef said:


> My ears just can't lie.


 
  
 This is a really big one. Your ears lie ALL the time. Every piece of audio content you have ever purchased (music recordings, TV or films) depends on the fact that your ears lie! Stereo itself is an illusion, which means it depends on your ears lying and stereo is just one of a considerable number of illusions which me and thousands like me around the world have employed for many decades. When you listen to a rock or pop recording do your ears lie to you and make you think you are listening to some sort of group performance or do they tell the truth, that none of the musicians performed together? When you watch a film, do your ears lie to you and make you think that what you're hearing actually occurred during the filming or do your ears tell you the truth, that probably more than 90% of what you're hearing was manufactured weeks/months after the film was shot, in completely different locations and by (mostly) different things and people?
  
  Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lbbef* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> 
> You must understand that the data will still maintain its integrity as its easy to represent data in analogue terms. But when this imperfect signal goes through your digital circuits (which are made up of analogue components), the output will not magically become perfect.


 
  
 I do understand that. What you don't seem to understand is that it makes no difference! The quality of the zeros or ones passing through say a logic gate is irrelevant, as long as the quality is sufficient so that a "zero" can be distinguished from a "one" (or an "on"/"off" state) it does not matter whether those ones and zeros are high quality, poor quality or anywhere in between, the data itself will still be perfect (!) regardless of the quality/condition of those zeros and ones.
  
  Quote:


lbbef said:


> Hard drives etc don't need a perfect signal as eventually the output is stored as + and -. However, this is different in a DAC's case. The output is not just max voltage and min voltage, it can be anywhere between the two. This imperfect output will eventually be fed into your amplifier and headphones.


 
  
 Here you are confusing the digital input of the DAC with the analogue output. The input to the DAC chip is digital, it's a discrete set of values defined by binary data (+ and - or ones and zeros). The quality of those ones and zeros is irrelevant, the only thing which is relevant is that it can be recognised as a one or a zero. These discrete values are then converted into a continuously varying voltage (waveform) by the DAC chip and from that point on, this signal is no longer digital data and is subject to the usual rules of analogue audio signals (where any distortion/interference in the analogue signal is distortion/interference in the audio output passed down the chain). Obviously, a USB cable's job is completed before this conversion takes place, it is transferring digital data (via a square wave), NOT the analogue audio signal which will be output to your amplifier and headphones!
  
  Quote:


> Originally Posted by *lbbef* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> 
> Even though much effort has been done to reduce jitter, etc... it will not be perfect. It is nature.


 
  
 Although I completely agree with this statement, it is exactly as I mentioned earlier, only half the story/facts, in fact it's really only a third of the story!
  
 Jitter does affect the accuracy with which the DAC can convert the digital data into a continuously varying voltage and it can't be eliminated perfectly. The question is therefore; How much do we need to reduce jitter? The answer, if we're talking about perfect sound quality, is to below an audible level. Even fairly cheap DACs are able to achieve this, in fact, even fairly cheap DACs commonly achieve jitter reduction many times below audibility. Notice that this jitter reduction occurs in the DAC, after the signal has exited the USB cable, so any jitter occurring in the cable is subject to this same jitter reduction! The other third of the story/facts, is as I've mentioned before; although there is always pseudo-scientific hyperbole/marketing explaining why a particular "boutique" USB cable should reduce jitter they never any provide comparative measurements which prove they reduce jitter relative to say an AmazonBasics or any other cheap but well made USB cable.
  
 So, one third of the story is that jitter does exist and does degrade audio fidelity, one third of the story is that it's inaudible and therefore doesn't matter and the last third is that boutique USB cables don't reduce jitter anyway! And, just in case some are concerned about the second "third" of the story. Even if you believe you do have hearing 100 or so times better than an average normal person, that doesn't change anything because the amount of USB cable caused jitter (after reduction in the DAC) is below the resolution of even the best speakers/headphones to reproduce.
  
 G


----------



## lbbef

You can't seem to understand my explanation. All your understanding on digital electronics are wrong. Please understand properly how digital electronics work before writing about incorrect facts.
  
 You must understand that everything digital is actually an analogue circuit. 0 and 1 is just a way of encoding data. We usually represent this using voltages (for ex 1 = 5V. 0 = 0V)
  
 A transistor cannot recognise what is 0 and 1. It will take an input voltage and output accordingly.
  
 Let me give you an example.
 A transistor takes a 0V-5V input with a 9V supply.
 In a perfect world, 0V input will result in 0V output, 5V will result in 9V output.
 But as the world is not perfect, your logic 1 will not be 5V, but could be 4.7V, sometimes 4.6V, etc...
 If you feed it 4.6V, it will output 8.28V.
 If you feed it 4.7V, it will output 8.46V.
  
 Which is why the quality of the 0s and 1s matter.
 Digital circuits are made up of logic gates. Logic gates are made up of transistors.
 A transistor cannot differentiate between 0 and 1. It cannot understand and read 0 and 1.
 It only takes an input and output based on the input.
  
 I hope you can understand this before we go on with discussions on anything else.


----------



## gregorio

> Originally Posted by *lbbef* /img/forum/go_quote.gif
> 
> If you feed it 4.6V, it will output 8.28V. If you feed it 4.7V, it will output 8.46V.
> 
> Which is why the quality of the 0s and 1s matter.


 
  
 If you feed it 4.6V, it will output 8.28V. = 1
 If you feed it 4.7V, it will output 8.46V. = 1
 and
 If you feed it 5V, it will output 9V which also = 1
  
 Which is why the quality doesn't matter!
  
 G


----------



## lbbef

gregorio said:


> If you feed it 4.6V, it will output 8.28V. = 1
> If you feed it 4.7V, it will output 8.46V. = 1
> and
> If you feed it 5V, it will output 9V which also = 1
> ...


 
  
 8.28V is not = 1. It is = 0.92. The resulting signal will be inaccurate, that is why it is important to feed a signal with good quality into your transistors.
  
 Let's use a simple R2R DAC design.
 The output of these transistors will be fed into the R2R DAC, which are made up of just resistors.
 This will result in an inaccurate analogue signal, which will be fed into your amplifier and headphones.
  
 That is why it is important to have a good quality signal!


----------



## gregorio

lbbef said:


> 8.28V is not = 1. It is = 0.92. The resulting signal will be inaccurate, that is why it is important to feed a signal with good quality into your transistors.


 
  
 There is no 0.92 in binary logic. Zero or one are the ONLY permissible results. 8.28V = 1. Therefore the resulting signal will be absolutely perfectly accurate!!!
  
 G


----------



## lbbef

It's a waste of my time and effort trying to reason with you when you just don't understand how digital electronics work. This is physics, not something that I made up. 

Like I said, digital electronics is not something that is easily understood and is often misunderstood. To fully understand digital electronics, you need to major in computer engineering or computer science.

A DAC can't tell that 8.7V is one. It will take 8.7V in and output an imperfect output signal. The output will be close to one, but is still inaccurate.


----------



## manpowre

lbbef said:


> It's a waste of my time and effort trying to reason with you when you just don't understand how digital electronics work. This is physics, not something that I made up.
> 
> Like I said, digital electronics is not something that is easily understood and is often misunderstood. To fully understand digital electronics, you need to major in computer engineering or computer science.
> 
> A DAC can't tell that 8.7V is one. It will take 8.7V in and output an imperfect output signal. The output will be close to one, but is still inaccurate.


 
  
 Its funny to see what Headmania.com wrote about letting the USB cable stay connected, and sound better after hours and days !
 https://headmania.org/2015/08/18/schiit-yggdrasil-dac-review/
  
 Let me quote:
 "One thing that I have to point out before the comparison is that Analog Dac also sounds considerably better if you leave it continuously on. Actually, it also takes 2-3 days before it stabilizes and sounds at its best. Another annoying thing about it is that if you unplug the usb cable and interconnects it also looses from the sound quality as it becomes flatter and less visceral. You have to wait for another ~2 hours after you plug them back in. Don’t get me wrong, Analog Dac still sounds very good even when cold, but not at its full potential."
  
 Digital compnents exist of analog pieces. Sure let them warm up and get its work start and stabilize and allow the components to settle with temperature.
  
 When in fact that the "good" cables for 400 dollars are a good sales trick.. why should a guy that invested 2500 dollars in a DAC, 2000 dollars on a laptop, 5000 dollars on a Amp, and another 5000 dollars on loudspeakers, and another 2000 dollars on analogue cables (Im not arguing against analogue cables, thats an entire different discussion). lets sell this guy a 500 dollar USB cable. use some silver and good connectors (which you can find in cables that cost 25 dollars).
  
 In fact the issue is not the cable, but the 8khz noise and impedance and how good the cable can transfer a bit-perfect signal on the DAC's clock signal. 
  
 The discussion never goes into how is the DAC's affected by the 8khz noise ? Because its hard to measure. I searched this up, and only a few guys ever did that. And you dont see that as a reference in eg. headmania.com.


----------



## manpowre

mediahound said:


> Take this with a grain of salt since he is reviewing a $400 USB cable here but:
> 
> "*The signal that moves along a USB cable isn’t digital – it most definitely is NOT ones and zeroes – but an electrical-pulse representation of those ones and zeroes. This analogue signal is therefore prone to disturbance from EMI emanating from the host computer and electrical noise arrive over the air, otherwise known as RFI. Greater vulnerability to noise can degrade a cable’s ability to do its job: transfer data from computer to DAC*.
> 
> ...


 
  
 The sound is still transferred in Async mode even in Isync version ! The error check is either: Keep packet or drop it. No new packet will arrive to replace it if its dropped, as clock continues from DAC, and new packet of audio. Jitter is the sender device's ability to send the packets along with the clock from the DAC.
  
 The 8khz noise has been proven to be able to measure and affect the dac chip. It is very low, max 20-30 desibel from silent floor. If the DAC is affected by 8khz noise, and amplified through a 250w mono block, it can me measured. But only if DAC is affected by it. Most high-end dac's reduce the noise on the 8khz area before sending digital signal to DAC chip. Therefore it can't or barely measured on the analogue output. Atleast so little that it can't be audible. I have a Sabre Oppo DAC, where I can hear a 8khz mono tone appear on the right channel and distortion on left channel when Amp is cold. Once warmed up, it plays out on both channels.


----------



## Articnoise

lbbef said:


> It's a waste of my time and effort trying to reason with you when you just don't understand how digital electronics work. This is physics, not something that I made up.
> 
> Like I said, digital electronics is not something that is easily understood and is often misunderstood. To fully understand digital electronics, you need to major in computer engineering or computer science.
> 
> A DAC can't tell that 8.7V is one. It will take 8.7V in and output an imperfect output signal. The output will be close to one, but is still inaccurate.


 
  

 I agree it’s a big waste of time! They will never understand that there is no 1 and 0 in analogue streaming of digital data. The difference between digital cables is not something that is only revealed in audio it’s the same when streaming movies from the internet or a Blu-ray player.


----------



## manpowre

articnoise said:


> I agree it’s a big waste of time! They will never understand that there is no 1 and 0 in analogue streaming of digital data. The difference between digital cables is not something that is only revealed in audio it’s the same when streaming movies from the internet or a Blu-ray player.


 
 Actually its not the same as streaming from internet or mvoie from blueray player. 2 different protocolls from async audio stream on usb. Thats the thing. and a 0 and 1 is not just a 0 and 1. It also the impedance on cable, and the wavelength the 0 and 1 is being carried on. this is why long cables doesnt work well. And the clock signal from DAC in async mode is not something you have on HDMI or stream from internet. As if the playing unit is off with the clock, you get jitter, and if a packet is corrupt is not resent as with TCPIP transmission.
  
 But packet dropouts is possible to measure on the analogue side atleast.


----------



## gregorio

manpowre said:


> and a 0 and 1 is not just a 0 and 1.


 
  
 Either it is just 0s and 1s, in which case it's binary digits (digital) or it's not just 0s and 1s, in which case it's not binary digits (digital). If it's not just 0s and 1s (and therefore not digital), you are obviously going to need something other than a Digital to Analogue Converter because by definition, a DAC only converts digital (binary digits)! I can't see what is so difficult to understand here?
  


manpowre said:


> It also the impedance on cable, and the wavelength the 0 and 1 is being carried on. this is why long cables doesnt work well.


 
  
 Either a USB cable has been appropriately designed to carry a USB signal or it hasn't. If it hasn't, then by definition it is either not a USB cable or it is a faulty USB cable! AmazonBasics USB cables (for example) have been appropriately designed to carry USB signals, are rarely faulty and do indeed carry USB signals perfectly adequately.
  
 Yes, there are different protocols used to transfer digital audio, some generic digital data protocols and some specific to digital audio data. If a DAC is a USB DAC, then by definition it must be able to resolve binary digits from a USB signal, IE., It must be able to resolve binary digits from imperfect square waves. The same is true whatever other protocols the DAC has been designed to accept; SPDIF, AES/EBU or HDMI for example.
  
 G


----------



## lbbef

You are an audio engineer, not a computer engineer.

A DAC in analogue domain does not convert and accept 0(eg. 0V) and 1(eg. 5V) It accepts a wide range of voltages between 0V and 5V.

When my computer is back, I'll draw up a circuit diagram of a binary input DAC and you'll understand what we mean.

And how would you explain the results of the various double blind tests that people have done on USB cables?


----------



## Mediahound

gregorio said:


> Either it is just 0s and 1s, in which case it's binary digits (digital) or it's not just 0s and 1s, in which case it's not binary digits (digital). If it's not just 0s and 1s (and therefore not digital), you are obviously going to need something other than a Digital to Analogue Converter because by definition, a DAC only converts digital (binary digits)! I can't see what is so difficult to understand here?
> 
> 
> Either a USB cable has been appropriately designed to carry a USB signal or it hasn't. If it hasn't, then by definition it is either not a USB cable or it is a faulty USB cable! AmazonBasics USB cables (for example) have been appropriately designed to carry USB signals, are rarely faulty and do indeed carry USB signals perfectly adequately.
> ...


 

 Yes, it's a stream of digital bits (1's and 0's) but there is an intermediate state that can occur before the signal is so corrupt it cannot be read and cuts out. There is circuitry in the DAC which tries to repair a broken data stream by buffering and error correction but this is based on best possible estimates and is not necessarily exactly what is sent. You might experience noise or micro noise which would affect the sound while the hardware is working overtime doing a number of re-tries trying to repair the bitstream and doing error correction over and over, which can affect the audio quality. This is why different USB cables (and USB audio clean up devices) can and do affect the audio you end up hearing.


----------



## gregorio

mediahound said:


> Yes, it's a stream of digital bits (1's and 0's) but there is an intermediate state that can occur before the signal is so corrupt it cannot be read and cuts out.


 
  
 I'm not sure what you mean by this? There is always a signal and there is no "intermediate state", digital by definition is only 0s or 1s, there are no other "states".
  


mediahound said:


> There is circuitry in the DAC which tries to repair a broken data stream by buffering and error correction but this is based on best possible estimates and is not necessarily exactly what is sent.


 
  
 Actually, error correction is generally excellent and well below audibility, at least until there are so many errors that the error correction is overwhelmed.
  


mediahound said:


> You might experience noise or micro noise which would affect the sound while the hardware is working overtime doing a number of re-tries trying to repair the bitstream and doing error correction over and over, which can affect the audio quality.


 
  
 1. Noise (micro or otherwise) does not affect the digital data, that's the point of it being digital in the first place!
 2. The hardware isn't "working overtime", it's either working within specification or it's not working correctly.
 3. Error correction is not repeated ad infinitum.
  


mediahound said:


> This is why different USB cables (and USB audio clean up devices) can and do affect the audio you end up hearing.


 
  
 No, this is why different USB cables (and USB clean up devices) cannot affect the audio you end up hearing!
  
 G


----------



## Mediahound

gregorio said:


> I'm not sure what you mean by this? There is always a signal and there is no "intermediate state", digital by definition is only 0s or 1s, there are no other "states".
> 
> 
> Actually, error correction is generally excellent and well below audibility, at least until there are so many errors that the error correction is overwhelmed.
> ...




Nope. As the noise increases in the digital stream the redundancy must also increase in order to receive an error free signal. This decreases the amount of information you can send per unit time (capacity). The signal can drop out, yes, but also the signal to noise ratio of the analog output can be degraded, changing the sound detrimentally. 

Here's a short video which basically outlines how it works:


 [VIDEO]http://youtu.be/cBBTWcHkVVY[/VIDEO]


----------



## CanadianMaestro

I agree with gregorio above. Packets of 0's and 1's.
  
 The components should have low jitter. Cables cannot correct errors in timing due to poor design of digital/analog processors. So no point in spending lotsa money on USB cables.
  
 My USB cable is Furutech's Formula-2 from Parts Connexion in Canada. Inexpensive and reliable at 0.5m length for my floor system.


----------



## CanadianMaestro

mediahound said:


>


 
  
 Curious from your signature: Did the Cardas Clear cable make a significant difference on your 800? Costs almost as much as the 800 on some sites!


----------



## Mediahound

canadianmaestro said:


> Curious from your signature: Did the Cardas Clear cable make a significant difference on your 800? Costs almost as much as the 800 on some sites!




 It sure did. But check eBay because you can get it for a lot less.


----------



## gregorio

mediahound said:


> Nope. As the noise increases in the digital stream the redundancy must also increase in order to receive an error free signal. This decreases the amount of information you can send per unit time (capacity).


 
  
 True but we're still well below 0.5% of the maximum 480mb/s bandwidth of USB 2 (for say uncompressed redbook digital audio)!
  


mediahound said:


> The signal can drop out, yes, but also the signal to noise ratio of the analog output can be degraded, changing the sound detrimentally.


 
  
 You (and your linked video) demonstrates how even the complete loss of the digital signal has no effect on the data recovery and therefore has no effect on the eventual analogue outputs. Noise which doesn't affect the DACs ability to differentiate between a 0 and a 1 has no effect, data transmission is perfect and there are no errors to correct. Noise which is so great it obliterates the bit change threshold is effectively the same as a complete loss of signal, it has to be error corrected and therefore also has no effect on the eventual analogue output! The exception of course is where the noise obliterates the signal (or the signal is lost) for a long enough duration to overwhelm the error correction, then there will be an affect on the eventual analogue output.
  
 G


----------



## CanadianMaestro

mediahound said:


> It sure did. But check eBay because you can get it for a lot less.


 

 In what way? Tighter bass? Smoother treble?


----------



## Mediahound

canadianmaestro said:


> In what way? Tighter bass? Smoother treble?




See: http://www.head-fi.org/t/589805/cardas-clear-headphone-cable/60#post_12421290


----------



## manpowre

Once you loose packets, you will hear the clicking in the sound.. very clearly.


----------



## CanadianMaestro

manpowre said:


> Once you loose packets, you will hear the clicking in the sound.. very clearly.


 

 It would take a very poorly designed or damaged player/DAC/cable to do that.


----------



## Mediahound

gregorio said:


> True but we're still well below 0.5% of the maximum 480mb/s bandwidth of USB 2 (for say uncompressed redbook digital audio)!
> 
> 
> You (and your linked video) demonstrates how even the complete loss of the digital signal has no effect on the data recovery and therefore has no effect on the eventual analogue outputs. Noise which doesn't affect the DACs ability to differentiate between a 0 and a 1 has no effect, data transmission is perfect and there are no errors to correct. Noise which is so great it obliterates the bit change threshold is effectively the same as a complete loss of signal, it has to be error corrected and therefore also has no effect on the eventual analogue output! The exception of course is where the noise obliterates the signal (or the signal is lost) for a long enough duration to overwhelm the error correction, then there will be an affect on the eventual analogue output.
> ...


 

 You should really  read this: http://www.audiostream.com/content/qa-john-swenson-part-2-are-bits-just-bits#ojlqyK1ii9lLd6Lh.97
  
 This discussion probably belongs more in the Sound Science forum though so lets get back to discussion of USB cables here.


----------



## chry5alis

I often think of my usb cable as a big firehose with two sexy fireman on either side. 

The fireman to my left is straight and is vehement that my data flow is just 1s and 0s. The fireman to my right he is winking and saying if I try some increased data flow I will really really like it hell yeah there is a difference. I never thought I would suck another guy off but there you go I did and I have to say that I discovered I like one usb cable over another usb cable because deep down it just feels right.

There are some folks in this world that protest too much I guess its what they think they believe, without actually having a try to see if they are right or not


----------



## Currawong

The benefits of a well-made USB cable are going to be in noise isolation, since we know now that the differences, if any, are likely to be the result primarily of reducing the amount of noise entering the components, which can interfere with the resulting output. Probably nothing to do with the digital aspect of it at all.


----------



## Mediahound

chry5alis said:


> My two cents based on personal experience..
> 
> Really unimpressed with my 2m supra usb cable, I find it unwieldy, flat, muddy, and boring. This is after about 50hr burn in.
> 
> A great alternative is the yulong cu2 usb cable I bought from a fellow head-fier. Its more difficult for me to use due to the shorter length 1m, but I persevere with it because there is a noticable difference in sound quality. More sparkle, sharper definition


 

 I really like the Supra USB cable in my system. It's one of the few USB cables that is not an astronomical price yet separates the power lead from the signal lead and has a good noise rejection design and build quality. Plus, not made in China.
  
 It's also what UpTone Audio uses and recommends here: http://uptoneaudio.com/blogs/news/20068483-usb-regen-updated-amazing-bass-all-unshipped-orders-will-be-the-latest
  
 They even show it being used with their Regen product image on their website: 
  

  
  
 Sounds really sweet and smooth to me, with great definition and bass.


----------



## CanadianMaestro

Furutech USB cable. Lotsa shielding for noise isolation, separate power/signal paths.


----------



## Mediahound

canadianmaestro said:


> Furutech USB cable. Lotsa shielding for noise isolation, separate power/signal paths.


 

 I've heard good things about Furutech in general.


----------



## CanadianMaestro

^ Their USB cables are gorgeous. And they work fine. Good values imho.
 Never understood how some USB cables can cost close to 1K.
  
 Their power cord plugs and IECs are uber-expensive and I'm not so sure they beat cheaper connectors, for performance.


----------



## EuropeanEar

canadianmaestro said:


> Furutech USB cable. Lotsa shielding for noise isolation, separate power/signal paths.


 

 I'm also using the Furutech ADL Formula 2 USB cable.  What Hi-Fi Best USB cable, Awards 2011 and recommended by many as a budget solution.  Definitely sounds more dynamic, more musical than a $5 generic USB cable.


----------



## LoryWiv

I have a moderately priced, $50 WireWorld ultraviolet usb cable connecting my Win 7 PC to my RAL REX-KEB03 DAC / Amp with a USB mini B input. I won't claim it transforms the DAC / Amp. but absence of extraneous hum and clarity seems improved beyond "placebo" compared to my prior $5 generic cable. I would like something similar for my iFi iDSD Micro which runs a standard USB 3.0 A male --> USB A female extension cable, but  the available stock options all seem to be USB A --> B variations. USB 2.0 A male --> female extension would probably be fine too. Right now I'm using a generic extension cable, it does the job adequately but interested in trying something a level up without getting crazy expensive. Any suggestions welcomed.


----------



## JesseA

Wireworld starlight 7 was my happy place for its price/performance ratio.


----------



## Mediahound

^ I didn't like Wireworld. For the price, it sounded worse than lower costing options in my system.


----------



## LoryWiv

jessea said:


> Wireworld starlight 7 was my happy place for its price/performance ratio.


 
 Thanks for the suggestion,*JesseA*. On their order page it only offers terminations A - -> B, but I suppose I can call them to ask for a A male to A female.
 Cheers.


----------



## craigk49

The proof is in the pudding. The only way to proove your belief as to whether there is an audible difference is to put one in your system and listen. 

Incredibly easy to do with minimal risk. Buy something like a Wireworld Starlight 7 on Amazon. Put it in your system and listen. 

You will have the luxury of testing for a while as Amazon will let you return purchase within 30 days. Leave the Starlight hooked up for 3 weeks. Then put your old cable back in.

If you find you are still happy with the old cable, return the Wireworld for a no questions asked refund. I suggest you keep the packaging just in case. 

If you keep the cable, it's worth more if you want to sell it so you can get the more expensive cable. Or, if you return it, you will feel better if you don't screw the seller. 

Theory and arguments can't substitute for firsthand experience.


----------



## EuropeanEar

There are four sorts of USB transfers: _Bulk_, _Isochronous_, _Interrupt_, and _Control_.  Bulk (the one used for data transfer to a hard drive) and Interrupt are reliable, error correcting ones.  The CRC mismatch is immediately followed by negative acknowledgement; the receiver is telling the transmitting device to resend the packet.
  
 USB-Audio uses three of the aforementioned four types; Isochronous, Interrupt and Control.  Isochronous was designed for real-time data transfer between host and device where data-delivery rate is considered more important than data integrity.  It works at a guaranteed data rate but with possible data loss.  There is error detection but no error correction (resend mechanism) in place.  In other words, there is no guarantee of delivery, erroneous packets or frames get dropped.  The applications of isochronous endpoints are responsible for error detection and handling.
  
 Now, the most important part: *all audio data is transferred over Isochronous transfers*.
  
 Consequently, EMI noise, USB ports, computer quality, USB cables, RFI, USB signal cleaning devices, transfer speed, and even operating systems all contribute to audible effects.


----------



## ColtMrFire

I have three USB cables. Everytime I swap them out I hear differences. There was one pricey USB cable I had that I thought sounded worse than my stock one until I upgraded DACs... Then it sounded better. Go figure.


----------



## leeperry

the shortest, breaking the +5V pin whenever possible.


----------



## Jozurr

coltmrfire said:


> I have three USB cables. Everytime I swap them out I hear differences. There was one pricey USB cable I had that I thought sounded worse than my stock one until I upgraded DACs... Then it sounded better. Go figure.


 
 Which ones do you have and which ones do you consider the best?


----------



## ColtMrFire

jozurr said:


> Which ones do you have and which ones do you consider the best?




I have the stock USB cable that came with my Audio engine D1 DAC/amp combo. When I upgraded to a Schiit Modi 2 DAC, I ordered a PYST USB cable from Schiit as well. First I used the pyst on the Modi for a while. One day got curious and swapped it for the old stock cable and I actually preferred the sound of the stock...it sounded smoother. To be fair, that cable had much more burn in time. But I kept using it. A head fi member sold me an LH labs 1G USB cable, more expensive than the pyst, but I got it cheap. I tried it, but it did not sound as good as my original stock cable! I was pretty baffled because I figured it was a much better cable.

Then I upgraded to a Schiit Bifrost 4490 DAC. I tried all three cables with and here's where things got interesting, because I expected the same results I got with the Modi 2 DAC. Why wouldn't I? Bits are bits right? Well I was stunned. The pyst now sounded MUCH better than the stock. Then I tried the LH labs 1G and it was slightly better than the pyst but it blew the stock out of the water. More detailed, dynamic, more soundstage... Everything improved.

Doesn't make much sense but thats what happened.


----------



## johnnyb

craigk49 said:


> The proof is in the pudding. The only way to prove your belief as to whether there is an audible difference is to put one in your system and listen.


 
  
 I totally agree with this.  Some time ago I had done all my headphone listening using a NAD CD player to headphone amp. After moving to FLAC and USB, it always bothered me that I could never attain the same sound quality that the CD transport gave me.  I added a USB to SPDIF interface to my setup.  Better, but still didn't do it for me.  I did side by side comparisons using my CD player to SPDIF to my DAC and headphone amp. Then I'd swap that for the USB interface -- a good component (Gustard U12) -- and I was always coming up wanting.
  
 Finally I decided to see if a better USB cable helped.  Purchased a Pangea. Plugged it in and could immediately tell the difference. Warmth, presence.  Suddenly I didn't have to worry about what I was missing with my old CD player.  Doesn't make any sense that it would make that much of a difference, but now I'm a believer.  I'm sure it probably takes a certain level of quality of equipment (and perhaps an obsessive personality) to hear these things, but now I wouldn't go back to a standard cable for anything.


----------



## jwssum

a stock cable vs a custom one makes hardly any difference... right


----------



## theveterans

jwssum said:


> a stock cable vs a custom one makes hardly any difference... right




Accessories such as iFi iPurifier makes way more difference than using esoteric cables IMO.


----------



## Blueshound24

Agreed. And also the UpTone REGEN as well.


----------



## manpowre

The best USB transport you can get is the Intona USB Isolator. Fully galvanized isolation between host computer and the DAC. Also they have a great precise oscillator to retime the packets together with the DACs timing.
  
 http://intona.eu/en/products
  
 I use it with Schiit Yggdrasil, and Oppo HA-1. Both works fine with it, and both have significant increase in soundquality. Just more precise instrument separation and bass is very precise. Without it, bass is sloppy, and mid-range is not so separated between instruments. Also it protects the DAC from any power surge through USB, and eliminates any ground humming issue,
  
 Expencive cables doesnt eliminate challenges on USB standard, it reduces the challenges slightly. purifier and recclockers are great products too, but just doing small part. Intona unit takes care of them all!


----------



## Blueshound24

I've been watching the Intona very closely on CA, it sounds like a solid product and will be my next purchase.


----------



## Joeybgood

Looking for folks input.. I currently have an AQ Carbon USB cable.. decent cable to be sure... I run it into my Uptone Regen which feeds my YellowTec PUC2 Lite converter then AES/EBU into my Yggy(Mike's fav preferred input btw)  I thought about picking up a higher quality(or at least more expensive..lol) such as Curious or AntiCables etc ... Just not that sure with the Regen and PUC2 inbetween my cable and my Yggy that the increased expenditure will yield much(it any) of an audible improvement. I am not tech savvy enough to discern on an scientific level whether it should be or not so I'm asking if anyone knows from experience (or on a technical level) if you believe this is something I should bother investing in. Much tks!! Joe


----------



## motberg

joeybgood said:


> Looking for folks input.. I currently have an AQ Carbon USB cable.. decent cable to be sure... I run it into my Uptone Regen which feeds my YellowTec PUC2 Lite converter then AES/EBU into my Yggy(Mike's fav preferred input btw)  I thought about picking up a higher quality(or at least more expensive..lol) such as Curious or AntiCables etc ... Just not that sure with the Regen and PUC2 inbetween my cable and my Yggy that the increased expenditure will yield much(it any) of an audible improvement. I am not tech savvy enough to discern on an scientific level whether it should be or not so I'm asking if anyone knows from experience (or on a technical level) if you believe this is something I should bother investing in. Much tks!! Joe


 
 I would first upgrade the power supply for the Regen (if you are using the stock PS presently). I think different USB cables may give you some different flavor, but not necessarily a cost effective improvement over what you have currently. From what I have read about the Yggy sound, you may prefer the W4S Recovery reclocker, which would probably be a cheaper net cost for the upgrade. You can sell off either the Regen or the Recovery after you make your selection, however both will benefit significantly from a power supply upgrade. Many of those USB cables can be returned after trial, so if you do not mind dealing with that type stuff, just research in advance which suppliers honor their commitments for the return policy.


----------



## Joeybgood

motberg said:


> I would first upgrade the power supply for the Regen (if you are using the stock PS presently). I think different USB cables may give you some different flavor, but not necessarily a cost effective improvement over what you have currently. From what I have read about the Yggy sound, you may prefer the W4S Recovery reclocker, which would probably be a cheaper net cost for the upgrade. You can sell off either the Regen or the Recovery after you make your selection, however both will benefit significantly from a power supply upgrade. Many of those USB cables can be returned after trial, so if you do not mind dealing with that type stuff, just research in advance which suppliers honor their commitments for the return policy.


 
 Thanks for the info. I have all my gear plugged into PS Audio PerfectWave power bases . They clean up the 'dirty' AC nicely.


----------



## Al59

Hi , does anyone tried FURUTECH GT2 Pro USB ? Looking for decent cable for my Sennheiser HDVD800. Or GT2 will be enough ? Any thoughts ? Thanks.


----------



## ceverson70

So I want to go from standard USB(2.0 or 3.0) to an audio jack (3.5mm) for a reasonable price. Any suggestions?

Here's why:
iPhone uses lightning port, but there is now a powered USB adapter. Then I can connect the USB to audio to my headphone amp, which would provide better sound quality then built in jack but still let me charge my phone


----------



## Mediahound

ceverson70 said:


> So I want to go from standard USB(2.0 or 3.0) to an audio jack (3.5mm) for a reasonable price. Any suggestions?
> 
> Here's why:
> iPhone uses lightning port, but there is now a powered USB adapter. Then I can connect the USB to audio to my headphone amp, which would provide better sound quality then built in jack but still let me charge my phone


 

 You still need a DAC. Something like the Audioquest Dragonfly or Chord Mojo are suggestions.


----------



## GRUMPYOLDGUY

Any recommendations for a short (<1.5ft) well built, shielded USB cable micro B to microB (OTG)?

Sent from my E5803 using a highly trained, special forces carrier pigeon


----------



## Whitigir

This is the best Copper material USB cables to my understanding, using UPOCC copper with the largest sizes 20AWG cores, and a lot of all other good stuff. It was made for only one purpose...to achieve the best sound quality using Copper as the materials.


----------



## Tom-s

In search of an USB A/B cable for my DAC i stumbled upon the Belkin Gold series.
 It looks like these have been discontinued. What is the commonly accepted alternative?


----------



## Mediahound

tom-s said:


> In search of an USB A/B cable for my DAC i stumbled upon the Belkin Gold series.
> It looks like these have been discontinued. What is the commonly accepted alternative?


 

 Not discontinued as far as I can tell: http://amzn.to/2eG6oLC


----------



## Tom-s

I couldn't find it on the Belkin website anymore.
 Might be it's discontinued in Europe. Oh well, Amazon it is.


----------



## Lord Raven

I am looking to buy a USB A to USB B Micro cable for Chord Mojo, can you please help? I need a length of maybe half meter.


----------



## ngominhhoang132

Cant help but giggle at this thread. I really admire G for having much patience to argue with these people


----------



## Smileyko

twoears said:


> If you're looking for a serious USB cable you could have a look at this:
> 
> http://www.moon-audio.com/b-m-c-pure-usb-1.html
> 
> BMC is a very serious german engineering company and they are not into snake oil, they would only make something like this if they could measure that it actually works.


 

 Thanks TwoEars: I just pull the trigger for this 5 mins after I read your post. Can't wait. Cheers!


----------



## chicken beer

Wireworld Starlights and Ultraviolets are very good. Other than that, I had a Moon Audio Silver Dragon before, it's very clean and premium sounding, but I think I prefer copper-based cables overall.
  
 I don't think USB cables will make a big difference as long as it's not too crappy.


----------



## Whitigir

chicken beer said:


> Wireworld Starlights and Ultraviolets are very good. Other than that, I had a Moon Audio Silver Dragon before, it's very clean and premium sounding, but I think I prefer copper-based cables overall.
> 
> I don't think USB cables will make a big difference as long as it's not too crappy.




It actually does, and sometimes even more than your headphones cables. It depends, but yeah, the copper USB cables sound great , just as long as it is solid conductor and of good purity


----------



## chicken beer

whitigir said:


> It actually does, and sometimes even more than your headphones cables. It depends, but yeah, the copper USB cables sound great
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

 Yes. Cable upgrades are usually much more subtle than mods. To me, connection upgrade don't worth the money if they cost 16% more than the gear itself. 3% and 10% are the sweet spots.


----------



## Whitigir

chicken beer said:


> Yes. Cable upgrades are usually much more subtle than mods. To me, connection upgrade don't worth the money if they cost 16% more than the gear itself. 3% and 10% are the sweet spots.




I agree with your term, hence I have never upgraded my cables to be so expensive. Until I have Utopia, it deserves a silver-gold cables to me . My favorite voicing for USB cables is Pure copper and then silver gold. Pure silver sounds great, but it feel cold IMO.


----------



## chicken beer

whitigir said:


> I agree with your term, hence I have never upgraded my cables to be so expensive. Until I have Utopia, it deserves a silver-gold cables to me
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
 Yes! It's slightly cold and very revealing, good for some very light music.


----------



## drbluenewmexico

grumpyoldguy said:


> Any recommendations for a short (<1.5ft) well built, shielded USB cable micro B to microB (OTG)?
> 
> Sent from my E5803 using a highly trained, special forces carrier pigeon


 
  
 Audio-Technica AT-EUS1000otg/0.15 USB Cable OFC Digital Audio 0.15m (JTK)
 ( 191889069702 ) available on eBay from Japan about 4 " long for portable connections,
 they have full size ones also for higher prices


----------



## chicken beer

whitigir said:


> I agree with your term, hence I have never upgraded my cables to be so expensive. Until I have Utopia, it deserves a silver-gold cables to me
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 

 I forgot to ask, just for curiosity which type of cable did you select to pair for your Utopia? I probably won't be able to purchase such legit headphone for now though!!


----------



## Whitigir

chicken beer said:


> I forgot to ask, just for curiosity which type of cable did you select to pair for your Utopia? I probably won't be able to purchase such legit headphone for now though!!




It depends on your sources. Utopia is such natural and neutral headphones, so cables upgrades will have to be taken into account of your sources. I am using WM1Z and TA-ZH1ES, both is warm sounding with awesome soundstage. I chose Silver-gold.


----------



## chicken beer

whitigir said:


> It depends on your sources. Utopia is such natural and neutral headphones, so cables upgrades will have to be taken into account of your sources. I am using WM1Z and TA-ZH1ES, both is warm sounding with awesome soundstage. I chose Silver-gold.


 
 Oh my. That's great stuff you got, great stuff!


----------



## Whitigir

chicken beer said:


> Oh my. That's great stuff you got, great stuff!




Thank you sir! While we are at it, Silver-gold USB cables is a perfect Interconnect for Walkman to TA-ZH1ES Amp as well. I upgraded my whole system through and through , even Powercord, and the Walkman cradle


----------



## chicken beer

whitigir said:


> Thank you sir! While we are at it, Silver-gold USB cables is a perfect Interconnect for Walkman to TA-ZH1ES Amp as well. I upgraded my whole system through and through
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
  
 That's amazing. The TA-ZH1ES is quite new and looks very sleek! I am currently considering to switch my own system to a great DAC and a Schiit Mjolnir 2 amp, but haven't got the $ to do so,,,


----------



## Whitigir

chicken beer said:


> That's amazing. The TA-ZH1ES is quite new and looks very sleek! I am currently considering to switch my own system to a great DAC and a Schiit Mjolnir 2 amp, but haven't got the $ to do so,,,




TA-ZH1ES is a digital amp, it has S-master to do decoding, and great headphones amplifier circuitry. As a whole package, it can replace a stack of 2 pieces, a Separated DAC and an individual amplifier. However, it only offer RCA pre-in/out for analog connections. It is an indication that it does not have dedicated built toward analog pre-in/out IMO. I don't have the need to try it, or to test it out. However, I do know one thing that if you connect analog pre-in via RCA, it will convert this analog into digital and then back to analog again, so it can upscale your sources with DSEE HX and DSD remastering engine.


----------



## chicken beer

whitigir said:


> TA-ZH1ES is a digital amp, it has S-master to do decoding, and great headphones amplifier circuitry. As a whole package, it can replace a stack of 2 pieces, a Separated DAC and an individual amplifier. However, it only offer RCA pre-in/out for analog connections. It is an indication that it does not have dedicated built toward analog pre-in/out IMO. I don't have the need to try it, or to test it out. However, I do know one thing that if you connect analog pre-in via RCA, it will convert this analog into digital and then back to analog again, so it can upscale your sources with DSEE HX and DSD remastering engine.




I see, that's a good thing I guess the upscaled sound will work best being decided again with the DAC engine.


----------



## pofdstudios

Well Cnet has this to say: https://www.cnet.com/news/when-are-expensive-cables-worth-it/
  
 Quote: USB (and Lightning)
 It seems the cable manufacturers, finding that you, dear readers, are too smart to buy their mumbo-jumbo about HDMI cables, have moved on to fleecing audiophiles on USB cables. Yep, USB cables. There are even reviews about how, after upgrading to a $1,000-plus USB cable, the sound on their USB Digital Audio Converter (DAC) "came alive" or something. Ahhh, expectation bias.
 I'm also including Lightning because they're effectively just USB cables, with a fancy proprietary Apple nubbin at the end.
 As far as the data going across it, USB is also a dumb tube. It won't improve video or audio quality.
 The exception is with USB cables used to charge devices. Not all USB cables can charge devices at the same rate. I've actually found this, anecdotally, and Wirecutter did some extensive testing and found the same thing.
 Among different USB cables, some will allow more current to make it from the charger to the device. Better-made cables can pass more amps (a measure of electric current) than poorly made cables. So if you want to charge your devices as fast as your charger and device allow, make sure you get a decent USB cable. What's decent? That Wirecutter test liked a $1.23 Monoprice cable best.
 Over time, power throughput can wane. If you crumple up your cables, the minuscule wires inside can get damaged, reducing current flow. I've had some cheap one that lasted, and I've had some expensive ones that didn't. Keep in mind, I'm a digital nomad, so my cables probably get more abuse than most.
 If there's something wrong with your USB cable, or you're trying to pass more data than that cable can handle, you can get dropouts or pops in the audio when using a USB DAC. A different, working, cheap cable is all you need.
 But, to repeat: an expensive USB cable isn't going to make your audio sound better, your pictures look better, or your printouts look sharper.


----------



## Whitigir

pofdstudios said:


> Well Cnet has this to say: https://www.cnet.com/news/when-are-expensive-cables-worth-it/
> 
> Quote: USB (and Lightning)
> It seems the cable manufacturers, finding that you, dear readers, are too smart to buy their mumbo-jumbo about HDMI cables, have moved on to fleecing audiophiles on USB cables. Yep, USB cables. There are even reviews about how, after upgrading to a $1,000-plus USB cable, the sound on their USB Digital Audio Converter (DAC) "came alive" or something. Ahhh, [COLOR=0066CC]expectation bias[/COLOR].
> ...




Those were some mindless words out of some random people who had 0 experiences in high quality audio and USB cables for the matter. But believe what you must, I know what I hear, period


----------



## Noobzilla

Just read through the entire thread (well, skimmed or skipped through the 0/1s and whatnot war). Still looking for best USB cable mini that's under $70. My choice right now is AudioQuest Cinnamon. Of course, if I dont hear audible difference then lucky for me I will just return and save myself money. Tired of this ongoing "it's just data" vs "it does make a difference" war. I'm going to try it myself!! 
  
 Before anyone tells me that cables don't make a difference, I have to say it does (at least for my headphone cables... not sure about USB yet). I bought a $7 ebay cables for my headphones and I am very well surprised how much crappier it sounded. 
  
 Anyways, any recommendation on USB cable mini under $70 besides the Cinnamon? 
  
 Thanks!


----------



## Blueshound24

Granted I haven't tried a lot of USB cables except for cheap ones like the Schiit PYST USB, Supra USB and a cheap Audioquest, but by far the best USB tweak I have experienced has been the UpTone REGEN and Intona. Especially the Intona with huge improvements in black background, wide and DEEP soundstage, separation, tone, texture, etc. I feel like I can almost walk around and between all the band members!


----------



## Noobzilla

Did my roundup of USB mini cables between $35-$70. Saw other brands but didn't find mini USB or no reliable dealer in the U.S.
  
 Audioquest Forest ~$35
Supra ~$40
Viablue ~$50
 Audioquest Cinnamon ~$65
  
  


blueshound24 said:


> Granted I haven't tried a lot of USB cables except for cheap ones like the Schiit PYST USB, Supra USB and a cheap Audioquest, but by far the best USB tweak I have experienced has been the UpTone REGEN and Intona. Especially the Intona with huge improvements in black background, wide and DEEP soundstage, separation, tone, texture, etc. I feel like I can almost walk around and between all the band members!


 
  
 I'm curious to try REGEN. Haven't read any bad review about it. Going for Audioquest Jitterbug instead since I bring my dac/amp to work each day.


----------



## motberg

noobzilla said:


> Just read through the entire thread (well, skimmed or skipped through the 0/1s and whatnot war). Still looking for best USB cable mini that's under $70. My choice right now is AudioQuest Cinnamon. Of course, if I dont hear audible difference then lucky for me I will just return and save myself money. Tired of this ongoing "it's just data" vs "it does make a difference" war. I'm going to try it myself!!
> 
> Before anyone tells me that cables don't make a difference, I have to say it does (at least for my headphone cables... not sure about USB yet). I bought a $7 ebay cables for my headphones and I am very well surprised how much crappier it sounded.
> 
> ...


 
 https://www.amazon.com/Pangea-Audio-cable-solid-silver/dp/B005AUH8SM
  
 I have one of these Pangea AG in 0.5M - and if I switch it into my system it sounds similar to my preferred models from PPA.
 I have tried quite a few; Curious, Elijah, Supra, Furutech, iFi, etc. and most those seemed flat/dark/congested comparatively to the PPA (except the Curious which appeared to cause a lack of coherence) - but the Pangea AG really surprised me, so I recently bought another at 2 meter for another system I am working on, but have not yet tried the 2M model. 
  
 My profile is fairly up to date with the rest of my equipment.
  
 I think it make sense to get as short a cable as possible, and take care of how you route it around power supplies or other possible sources of EMI.


----------



## Noobzilla

motberg said:


> https://www.amazon.com/Pangea-Audio-cable-solid-silver/dp/B005AUH8SM
> 
> I have one of these Pangea AG in 0.5M - and if I switch it into my system it sounds similar to my preferred models from PPA.
> I have tried quite a few; Curious, Elijah, Supra, Furutech, iFi, etc. and most those seemed flat/dark/congested comparatively to the PPA (except the Curious which appeared to cause a lack of coherence) - but the Pangea AG really surprised me, so I recently bought another at 2 meter for another system I am working on, but have not yet tried the 2M model.
> ...




I've been looking those and read good things about them, but I couldn't find it in mini B version.


----------



## Selbi

Is there anything I need to look out for when buying a micro USB to micro USB cable, to be used with my phone and a portable DAC/amp combo? Or will any cable do?
  
 I've read something about USB OTG but I don't know if audio devices need it as well.


----------



## arthurl

I can recommend Monoprice usb cables for cheap/reliable gold plated alternative


----------



## Nearbuds

Supra USB 2.0


----------



## RoyDays

I had 3 different cables and all 3 sound different (BIG DIFFERENCE). And different cables do/create/influence different sound characteristics! Always the same bs about who wins or has reason...who is very important, who got studio experience, or bla bla bla. Ego mania.
We are people that want to get the best audio sound out of a system (where the USB cable play a role and definitely make a difference), so who cares if it comes from drops, ones or zeros, or resistance or wire properties... the question is based on a fact more than proved, cables sound different. So what cables are the best based on the different experiences from all users, not to discuss how much everyone knows about technical data. Placebo effect can work once you are not completely conscious about the facts, but when you are consciously aware of it, come on.


----------



## leonnoelimagery

Placebo effect is one of the reasons that some might think that one cable might be better than another IMHO. Yes, y'all can do blind testing but for the case, we are actively (subconsciously) looking for a difference even when there might be none whatsoever. I agree that the quality of the cable can change how the information is being relayed to your DAC but for the better or worse, I think it is purely subjective. Call me shallow, but looks play an important role in my selection of cables.  
  
 Here's a story; when I bought my DAC with the AQ Jitterbug and AQ Cinnamon USB, hooked it all up and listened and was pretty satisfied. However along the way, I was auditioning other (lesser quality) DACs and figured that my "good" DAC was lacking in SQ. I began to second guess my multi-thousand dollar purchase. After much tinkering, I removed the AQ Jitterbug for ****s and giggles, et voila, soundstage and dynamics improved dramatically. That's my story of how $50 killed $X000. (I re-purposed the Jitterbug to a usb powered DAC and it worked great for that senario). So to sum it up, try before you buy!


----------



## Whitigir

You guys who is debating the cables and whether or not it bring the differences, had any of you tried to compare personally ? If you never compared, how come your opinion be validated ? I had came to the conclusion that there are 3 groups of people to take on cables debate

1/ throwing blank opinions without experiences whatsoever, based on speculations from others similar folk, and rather pay a couple bucks than hundreds dollar

2/ people who can not hear the differences, or their system is not capable of revealing it, either way they can not come to a solid conclusion

3/ people who has a capable system, and ears to observe the differences, and most of these people all agree that cables do bring the differences. That is why the majority of Summit-fi people are taken by the cables market. Then to extend this even further, there will be how pure and stable the electricity in their power is.

You got the vibe....it just bothers me so much about the people in the (#1) who always Come up with all the ridiculous ideas to deny the effects


----------



## LazyListener

whitigir said:


> You guys who is debating the cables and whether or not it bring the differences, had any of you tried to compare personally ? If you never compared, how come your opinion be validated ? I had came to the conclusion that there are 2 groups of people to take on cables debate
> 
> 1/ throwing blank opinions without experiences whatsoever, based on speculations from others similar folk, and rather pay a couple bucks than hundreds dollar
> 
> ...


 

 Those are 3 groups of people.
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




  
 I agree.  I wish people with no experience would stop giving advice.
  
 BTW, I think the best usb audio cable for the money is the cheapest you can find.  (This is only a guess.)


----------



## Mr Rick

lazylistener said:


> Those are 3 groups of people.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
  
 Actually, the very best is the one that reaches from one piece of gear to the other. Anything less will seriously degrade sound quality.
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	



  
 I KNOW this from experience!!


----------



## AverageGuyNC

mr rick said:


> Actually, the very best is the one that reaches from one piece of gear to the other. Anything less will seriously degrade sound quality.:evil:
> 
> I KNOW this from experience!!




I believe high quality cables can make a difference or make it sound different at least, but expensive doesn't mean better/best. I watched z reviews on you tube video snake oil and you, where a guy sent in a $700 usb cable that would not even work with a lot of the dacs and the guy had to use it on his printer


----------



## EuropeanEar

noobzilla said:


> well, skimmed or skipped through the 0/1s and whatnot war.


 
 The only reason going into those details is that smart asses keep repeating the "only 0s and 1s" nonsense.  Which is a dead giveaway how little they know about USB audio data transfer.  They mistakenly believe that it works the same way as they copy data from a hard drive to another.  It does not.


----------



## Whitigir

europeanear said:


> The only reason going into those details is that smart asses keep repeating the "only 0s and 1s" nonsense.  Which is a dead giveaway how little they know about USB audio data transfer.  They mistakenly believe that it works the same way as they copy data from a hard drive to another.  It does not.




That is exactly it !


----------



## EuropeanEar

averageguync said:


> …a guy sent in a $700 usb cable that would not even work with a lot of the dacs and the guy had to use it on his printer


 
  
 It's true that even some of the more expensive USB cables are not capable of USB 2.0 transmission rates.  That guy should have returned the useless cable and purchased a decent one.


----------



## AverageGuyNC

europeanear said:


> It's true that even some of the more expensive USB cables are not capable of USB 2.0 transmission rates.  That guy should have returned the useless cable and purchased a decent one.




He won it in a raffle at a meet haha. Then couldn't even use it for his dac without problems. He wanted to sell it but felt guilty I think. He sent it in for the YouTube guy to examine. I would probably email the company that made it, but it was a special 25th anniversary edition so can't even get a replacement (I'm guessing)


----------



## EuropeanEar

averageguync said:


> I would probably email the company that made it, but it was a special 25th anniversary edition so can't even get a replacement (I'm guessing)


 
  
 A special 25th anniversary USB cable that doesn't work, sweet.  Just out of curiosity, what company/model was that?


----------



## AverageGuyNC

europeanear said:


> A special 25th anniversary USB cable that doesn't work, sweet.  Just out of curiosity, what company/model was that?




Purist audio, here's the video I'm referring to.

https://youtu.be/KWb2yxWx8YA


----------



## EuropeanEar

averageguync said:


> Purist audio, here's the video I'm referring to.
> 
> https://youtu.be/KWb2yxWx8YA


 

 OK, this was painful to watch.  Not too elegant to argue with someone not present but since it's a public video here's my $0.02:
  
 After the funny snake oil intro the guy doesn't support his point with any data at all.  He keeps repeating how pissed he is, his opinion on that ******** USB cable, he is cussing but he doesn't say anything substantial to prove it.
  
 Error checking.  Perhaps he should be noted at this point that it is error checking _without_ error correction.  USB audio is *not* how the printer works.  He should know this if he really has a background in computer networking as he claims.
  
 IUT Audio purifier cable: after all the tests of the cable he provides no details about test methods and presents no measurements.  No proof, we just have to take his word.  Typical.
  
 RCA cable: _“At least it got power it can do something.”_  Wow dude, is this your reasoning?
  
 Nothing but cheap talk for 18 minutes in a video that was recorded with a head camera that makes me dizzy watching.
  
 It's also worth to mention that the difference between USB cables is smaller than his $1,500 setup could easily reveal.


----------



## BWV656 (Oct 1, 2017)

EuropeanEar said:


> OK, this was painful to watch.  Not too elegant to argue with someone not present but since it's a public video here's my $0.02:
> 
> After the funny snake oil intro the guy doesn't support his point with any data at all.  He keeps repeating how pissed he is, his opinion on that ******** USB cable, he is cussing but he doesn't say anything substantial to prove it.
> 
> ...



Would you please point me to youtube videos or blog articles or whatever that explains in technical detail how different USB cables can change the sound but not the data? Has anybody measured these changes? I am not here to argue but to learn.


----------



## Mediahound

BWV656 said:


> Would you please point me to youtube videos or blog articles or whatever that explains in technical detail how different USB cables can change the sound but not the data? Has anybody measured these changes? I am not here to argue but to learn.



Here's one: http://www.digitalaudioreview.net/2016/05/gordon-rankin-on-why-usb-audio-quality-varies/

Especially the section interviewing Gordon Rankin (who invented asynchronous USB audio).


----------



## EuropeanEar

BWV656 said:


> Would you please point me to youtube videos or blog articles or whatever that explains in technical detail how different USB cables can change the sound but not the data?



Mediahound was faster than me. 
Besides his source, this is also worth a read: http://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/why-usb-cables-can-make-a-difference/


----------



## Hanuman

Interesting review citing usb data that may be of interest.  I can concur although usb SQ may be system dependent, it's beyond opinion. 

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/lightharmonic/1.html


----------



## EuropeanEar

Hanuman said:


> I can concur although usb SQ may be system dependent, it's beyond opinion.



This pretty much applies to any component's SQ.


----------



## Hanuman

It's so relative until you either see Gordon Rankins research and actually believe him, or if you do your own A-B and hear and (experience) a difference.


----------



## AverageGuyNC

Hey all, I have been using a $5 Tripp Lite usb with no problems. Tried a $105 LH Labs usb (I got mine used for $19). It sounded a little different, so can confirm there IS a difference, but not a huge one between cables. Neither superior, just different.

Got a problem though, at first there was a hum or hiss in the background. I let it play for several days to break it in and the background noise is gone, but now it distorts when the bass hits. It doesn't even have to be much bass really. And it doesn't do it with the other usb. It's going from pc to a Schiit Yggy (gen 3 usb). Is there a way to possibly fix this? Having trouble contacting LH Labs customer service email. May get a Schiit Eitr eventually tho.


----------



## EuropeanEar (Nov 7, 2017)

AverageGuyNC said:


> Got a problem though, at first there was a hum or hiss in the background. I let it play for several days to break it in and the background noise is gone, but now it distorts when the bass hits.



The hum could be a ground loop caused by the PC.  The distorted bass suggests a defective and/or totally out of specs USB cable.


----------



## Houba

Moon audio make good USB cable upgrade but what do they worth in comparison to the best out there?


----------



## AverageGuyNC

https://www.dysonaudio.com/collecti...a-influx-2-0-audiophile-usb-dac-cable-1-meter

Is a solid core USB (or any other IC) better than a stranded one?

This looks like a pretty good one to me and not all the expensive as cables go. Any opinions on this one vs other <$100 USB cables?


----------



## LazyListener

IMHO, the primary advantage of a stranded wire vs solid wire is flexibility of the cable.  Also, I believe a cable used to transmit an all-digital signal doesn't really benefit as much, if at all, from some of the fancy construction and shielding used with cables designed for analog signal transfer.  But truthfully, IDK What I'm talking about, so take what I said with a massive boulder of salt.


----------



## EuropeanEar

LazyListener said:


> Also, I believe a cable used to transmit an all-digital signal doesn't really benefit as much, if at all, from some of the fancy construction and shielding used with cables designed for analog signal transfer.


There is no such thing as "all-digital signal" transmission, only analogue representations of a digital signal.


----------



## AverageGuyNC

So not much advatage/benefit using a solid wire as far as transferring signal quality goes? That was probably my main question.


----------



## EuropeanEar

AverageGuyNC said:


> So not much advatage/benefit using a solid wire as far as transferring signal quality goes?


I think USB cable quality depends on way more variables than the choice could be simplified to solid/stranded wire.  Materials used, geometry, insulation all play an important role.

Also, instead of a 1m USB cable, you might want to buy a 1.5m one.


----------



## AverageGuyNC

EuropeanEar said:


> I think USB cable quality depends on way more variables than the choice could be simplified to solid/stranded wire.  Materials used, geometry, insulation all play an important role.
> 
> 
> 
> Also, instead of a 1m USB cable, you might want to buy a 1.5m one.



He only lists the 1m size, you have to send him a message if you want a different size. He says 4N purity, I know on stranded cables offer 7N (Maybe better idk?). But it is made with silver too. Not sure about how great that copper sleeve is, but it looks pretty cool IMO. I've been considering his stuff for a while. It looks to be great quality and is reasonably priced. And what little I can find from owners are all very positive. His high end ICs have no shielding.  He thinks they sound better with out it?


----------



## LazyListener

EuropeanEar said:


> There is no such thing as "all-digital signal" transmission, only analogue representations of a digital signal.


PCM is an all-digital signal and when transmitted over a USB cable qualifies as an all-digital signal transmission.  An "analogue representation of a digital signal" would be an analog signal (continuous waveform), not a digital signal.

My main point with my previous post is that all those fancy materials, design, and shielding in a USB cable have little, if any, benefit, and probably no perceivable audio benefit, when digital signals are being transmitted over such short distances.  Digital signals over short cable runs are virtually immune to audible noise or interference.  Sure, digital signals can have errors and timing issues, but that is typically caused/mitigated by the interconnected devices.  The cable is simply a dumb pipe used to transfer the signal.  Digital signal will weaken over longer runs causing signal drop outs, but repeaters or active cables can help with this.  Even then, noise and interference aren't the issue.

Now, if we're talking about analog signal (waveform) being transmitted over cables, then yes, better materials and shielding can help.  But even then, you don't need to go overboard in order to get maximum audible benefit.  An inexpensive, but good quality, shielded cable is all that's needed.  Exotic materials/design don't add any audible benefit.

Signal integrity can be measured (input vs output) with any cable as the transfer medium.  Most "differences" people hear between cables, especially ones transferring digital signals, are sorry to say, "in their head."  I mean, if the measured output signal is identical to the measured input signal, then what else can explain these "differences" people hear?

BTW, did the thread starter ever define what he/she means by "best?"  I don't recall.  Been a while since I read this thread.


----------



## musicmaker

I highly recommend the Chord c-usb cable. Sensibly prices and excellent price/performance and build quality.
https://www.thecableco.com/c-usb.html

Went through more pricey exotic cables and went back to the chord.


----------



## EuropeanEar

AverageGuyNC said:


> He only lists the 1m size, you have to send him a message if you want a different size.


The 1m length could be a problem.  Unlike the interconnects where the shorter the better, USB audio cables have to be 1.5m long in order to avoid the reflection issue.


----------



## EuropeanEar

LazyListener said:


> An "analogue representation of a digital signal" would be an analog signal (continuous waveform), not a digital signal.


That's exactly what it is in the USB audio cable; an analog signal.  Technically, it is a binary transmission in the form of an analog voltage.  A series of 0s and 1s transferred as *square waves* (instead of sine waves) detected by the receiver only when they pass a certain voltage threshold.  The all-digital "zeroes and ones" only exist on an abstract, mathematical level in the DAC chip.  In reality, the "digital" USB cable is just another analog cable.



> Most "differences" people hear between cables, especially ones transferring digital signals, are sorry to say, "in their head."


Well, it could be and obviously I cannot prove otherwise but I think there's more to this.  When different people hear the same thing listening to the same USB cable it suggests that something must be there.

Honestly, do you believe that people who share the same experience listening to an USB cable are victims of self-hypnotism or a collective hallucination of some kind?  I'm not provoking you, would really like to know.


----------



## Winston67

Can I ask an only semi-related question?  My DAC is connected to my desktop via a powered hub.  If I were to introduce something like an Audioquest Jitterbug (or something comparable like an iPurifier 2) just to see what happens, where in the chain should it go?  Between DAC and USB hub, or between desktop (source) and USB hub?


----------



## bfreedma

EuropeanEar said:


> That's exactly what it is in the USB audio cable; an analog signal.  Technically, it is a binary transmission in the form of an analog voltage.  A series of 0s and 1s transferred as *square waves* (instead of sine waves) detected by the receiver only when they pass a certain voltage threshold.  The all-digital "zeroes and ones" only exist on an abstract, mathematical level in the DAC chip.  In reality, the "digital" USB cable is just another analog cable.
> 
> 
> Well, it could be and obviously I cannot prove otherwise but I think there's more to this.  When different people hear the same thing listening to the same USB cable it suggests that something must be there.
> ...




Yes, until objective evidence indicates otherwise, though I consider it to be placebo effect (which all humans are subject to), not self-hypnotism or hallucination.   I'll be first in line for a "high end" USB cable if objective evidence is produced by an independent study.


----------



## LazyListener (Mar 20, 2018)

EuropeanEar said:


> That's exactly what it is in the USB audio cable; an analog signal.  Technically, it is a binary transmission in the form of an analog voltage.  A series of 0s and 1s transferred as *square waves* (instead of sine waves) detected by the receiver only when they pass a certain voltage threshold.  The all-digital "zeroes and ones" only exist on an abstract, mathematical level in the DAC chip.  In reality, the "digital" USB cable is just another analog cable.
> 
> 
> Well, it could be and obviously I cannot prove otherwise but I think there's more to this.  When different people hear the same thing listening to the same USB cable it suggests that something must be there.
> ...



I think you are confusing analog signal with electrical signal.  Yes, both analog signals and digital signals are transferred with voltage fluctuations, but that doesn't mean a digital signal is analog.  I agree the cable is not "digital" and never said it was.  There's no such thing as a digital or analog cable.  Digital or analog refers to the signal, not the cable or other medium of transfer.

Just because people hear the same thing doesn't prove that the cable is making that difference.  As soon as you introduce human hearing into the equation you are introducing a plethora of subjectivity and brain games.  Could be the cable, but there are ways to objectively measure if the cable is changing the signal in any way that could be audible.  "Hearing" is not a scientific or objective testing method.  I'm just saying if the input signal and output signal (on the ends of the cable), which can be measured, are identical measurements beyond any thresholds of human auditory perception, then yes, it's not the cable that's changing the sound.  In such cases, could be a number of other things, all most likely related to the human brain.  The power of suggestion is real, too.  If someone posts how they "hear" a new cable online, some will be susceptible to hearing it the same way when they finally audition it, simply because what they had read about it beforehand influences their perception of the sound.


----------



## AverageGuyNC

EuropeanEar said:


> The 1m length could be a problem.  Unlike the interconnects where the shorter the better, USB audio cables have to be 1.5m long in order to avoid the reflection issue.



I had never heard of reflection issues,  I learn something new every day. Thanks

And he will make them whatever length you want, you have to let him know how long. I guess he mainly gives the 1m so you kinda have an idea where the price starts at.


----------



## AverageGuyNC (Mar 21, 2018)

And I was really not trying to get into a "cable quality matters" debate. I hear a difference in usb cables. Nothing major, just sounds a little different. I have a pretty good system and wanted to upgrade my $6 cable I'm using now. Wanted to stay under $100 (1.5m). Was curious what you guys (I'm not that experienced) thought of that cable as far as build? It looks like a great cable with high end(ish) materials for a decent price. Does it look like that to you guys or am I missing something important? Thank you for you opinions and help!


----------



## AverageGuyNC

Winston67 said:


> Can I ask an only semi-related question?  My DAC is connected to my desktop via a powered hub.  If I were to introduce something like an Audioquest Jitterbug (or something comparable like an iPurifier 2) just to see what happens, where in the chain should it go?  Between DAC and USB hub, or between desktop (source) and USB hub?



Are u saying the dac gets it's signal from a usb hooked into a usb hub? I thought that was supposed to be a bad idea? But anyways, I'm pretty sure you would hook it up after the hub and before the dac. There would likely be some info from the manufacturer included with item or on their website. Most have an email or can contact them thru Facebook even (I've contacted Audeze and IFI this way, and others non audio related) and they usually answer within a day. Hope this helps!


----------



## AverageGuyNC

musicmaker said:


> I highly recommend the Chord c-usb cable. Sensibly prices and excellent price/performance and build quality.
> https://www.thecableco.com/c-usb.html
> 
> Went through more pricey exotic cables and went back to the chord.



It's a little more than I wanted to spend. And I don't like the way it looks that much. If it was for sure a major improvement , I would c insider it, but I think I can find one a little cheaper that I like just as much. Another one I am considering is DH labs silver son is USB. But it's kinda high.


----------



## squee116

EuropeanEar said:


> That's exactly what it is in the USB audio cable; an analog signal.  Technically, it is a binary transmission in the form of an analog voltage.  A series of 0s and 1s transferred as *square waves* (instead of sine waves) detected by the receiver only when they pass a certain voltage threshold.  The all-digital "zeroes and ones" only exist on an abstract, mathematical level in the DAC chip.  In reality, the "digital" USB cable is just another analog cable.
> 
> 
> Well, it could be and obviously I cannot prove otherwise but I think there's more to this.  When different people hear the same thing listening to the same USB cable it suggests that something must be there.
> ...


So what are you arguing?  When the data is transferred from start through the usb, to end, is it binary or not?  If the DAC takes in 1s and 0s, and uses this order of 1s and 0s to produce an analog wave, if the 1s and 0s are in the same order, regardless of the cost of the cable, how is the audio output affected?


----------



## musicmaker

AverageGuyNC said:


> It's a little more than I wanted to spend. And I don't like the way it looks that much. If it was for sure a major improvement , I would c insider it, but I think I can find one a little cheaper that I like just as much. Another one I am considering is DH labs silver son is USB. But it's kinda high.



I compared the chord to the DH labs silver sonic and preferred the chord for the bottom and high end rendering. The DH sounded a bit thin by comparison. Preferred the look of the DH but sound is a higher priority to me than cosmetics.


----------



## AverageGuyNC (Mar 21, 2018)

musicmaker said:


> I Preferred the look of the DH but sound is a higher priority to me than cosmetics.



Thanks for the input. Yeah sound is more important to me as well.  Hoping to find best of both worlds, and closer to 50-75 $ range. Will see!

Btw,  got to hear a LCD4 via a holo spring l3 dac with a blue GSX mk2 from MR Headamp himself at a meet not long ago in NC, that is the best system I've heard. Well, the sr009 with BHSE was about as good IMO. Both beat the Zana Dues w/Utopia but I like more bass than it had. If you hear soneone sneak in and listen to your gear for a little bit one night, it was the other guy lol!


----------



## daid1

can someone suggest me a micro usb to usb type a cable under 50 dollars? 
it is so much difference between supra or monoprice?
is different than an interconnect cable where shorter is better?

thanks in advance


----------



## AverageGuyNC

daid1 said:


> can someone suggest me a micro usb to usb type a cable under 50 dollars?
> it is so much difference between supra or monoprice?
> is different than an interconnect cable where shorter is better?
> 
> thanks in advance



I didn't know until told here and looked it up. From what I read, u want it to be at least 1.5 meters and no more than 5 meters (if I remember right)

Monoprice cables are a great value. Very good for their cost. The difference between a $5, 50, and 500 cable with just get arguments. I think there are slight differences. But you need a capable system to hear them. A $99 amp with $200 headphones is drastically different than a TOTL system. I upgraded basically everything except my usb, so considering a new one (and maybe a gen 5 usb on my Yggy!)


----------



## EuropeanEar

bfreedma said:


> Yes, until objective evidence indicates otherwise...   I'll be first in line for a "high end" USB cable if objective evidence is produced by an independent study.


I totally agree that any audible difference originates in a cause that could objectively be proven.  Here's the problem though.  Most of the time your perception way precedes the publicly available evidence.  I will not discard my perception just because what I hear is not (yet) proven by objective evidence produced by an independent study.

I was excited to hear the first CDs in the early 80s.  I _really_ wanted to like it but it turned out to be a total disappointment.  Sure there was no noise but it sounded terrible: dull, uninviting, flat.  The "evidence" was there (at least most people thought it was), digital sounded perfect on paper but in reality it didn't.  Early pro A/D converters sucked, early CD players' D/A converters sucked, and pro audio people needed time to learn their new tools.  It took long years to develop their tools and skills to make the CD sound great.

What I'm trying to say here is USB audio is too young for us to assume that we already know _everything_ about it.  Consequently, it is certainly possible that we hear something but it cannot be proven yet.


----------



## EuropeanEar

LazyListener said:


> I think you are confusing analog signal with electrical signal.


You're right, wrong choice of words, my bad.



> I agree the cable is not "digital"...  There's no such thing as a digital or analog cable.


This was exactly my point there.  I wanted to shed some light on one of the most common USB audio misconceptions. 



> As soon as you introduce human hearing into the equation you are introducing a plethora of subjectivity and brain games.  ...  "Hearing" is not a scientific or objective testing method. ... The power of suggestion is real, too.


True but we talking about our hobby.  If cannot share our subjective experiences we end up communicating exclusively with measurement graphs, diagrams, and math equations. Pretty boring, imho.


----------



## EuropeanEar

AverageGuyNC said:


> I hear a difference in usb cables. Nothing major, just sounds a little different. I have a pretty good system and wanted to upgrade my $6 cable I'm using now. Wanted to stay under $100 (1.5m).


This is the only thing that matters.  You hear a tiny difference and you want to improve your system's sound quality.  The budget is $100.  You might want to take a look at the Shunyata Venom USB Cable, there's a half-price promotion.


----------



## daid1

AverageGuyNC said:


> I didn't know until told here and looked it up. From what I read, u want it to be at least 1.5 meters and no more than 5 meters (if I remember right)
> 
> Monoprice cables are a great value. Very good for their cost. The difference between a $5, 50, and 500 cable with just get arguments. I think there are slight differences. But you need a capable system to hear them. A $99 amp with $200 headphones is drastically different than a TOTL system. I upgraded basically everything except my usb, so considering a new one (and maybe a gen 5 usb on my Yggy!)



Thanks for the answer 

So I'm wondering the reason why some good cable are very short, such as Elijah Konvertible (only for curiosity because they are out of my budget)


----------



## motberg

daid1 said:


> Thanks for the answer
> 
> So I'm wondering the reason why some good cable are very short, such as Elijah Konvertible (only for curiosity because they are out of my budget)



My perception of the length issue is that the 1.5m recommendation was made in reference to a SPDIF digital transmission, not USB...
Short USB is fine IMHO and personal experience.... 

In another forum was a discussion of a USB cable named Lush.. in the middle of that thread were some very knowledgeable folks discussing possible ways that a USB cable could technically affect the sound... very interesting reading if you do not mind wasting time sorting though all the normal forum hash accompanying this topic...


----------



## EuropeanEar

motberg said:


> My perception of the length issue is that the 1.5m recommendation was made in reference to a SPDIF digital transmission, not USB...


In most cases 1.5m "digital" cables sound a bit better than their 1m or shorter counterparts.  This is true for USB, SPDIF, and AES/EBU cables.  The theory is that a longer cable allows for internal reflections to be far enough out of sync as to not interfere with the data receiver.


----------



## motberg

EuropeanEar said:


> In most cases 1.5m "digital" cables sound a bit better than their 1m or shorter counterparts.  This is true for USB, SPDIF, and AES/EBU cables.  The theory is that a longer cable allows for internal reflections to be far enough out of sync as to not interfere with the data receiver.



Not in my experience... I had the .7m and 1.5m iFi Gemini cables and they both sounded identical in my setup..


----------



## EuropeanEar

motberg said:


> Not in my experience... I had the .7m and 1.5m iFi Gemini cables and they both sounded identical in my setup..


That's why I'm saying only your experience matters.  You don't hear any difference = no need to buy something more expensive.  You have just saved some money that could be used for another system improvement.  It's all good.


----------



## LazyListener

EuropeanEar said:


> True but we talking about our hobby. If cannot share our subjective experiences we end up communicating exclusively with measurement graphs, diagrams, and math equations. Pretty boring, imho.


I think we are mostly in agreement.  I never claimed "hearing" doesn't matter.  Ultimately, it's the only thing that does, even if it just placebo.  I'm just saying that if you have scientifically sound and proven methods of objectively measuring the signal, and the signal is measured on both ends of the cable, and is identical on both ends of the cable, then the cable itself cannot be affecting the sound (something else is, possibly even one's subjective opinions about the cable).


----------



## AverageGuyNC

daid1 said:


> Thanks for the answer
> 
> So I'm wondering the reason why some good cable are very short, such as Elijah Konvertible (only for curiosity because they are out of my budget)



 The other guys already replied, but wanted to add that most companies make a lot of different lengths of cables. No matter if expensive or not. And most times, the best cable is no cable, meaning the shorter the better. But there may be exceptions.


----------



## motberg

EuropeanEar said:


> That's why I'm saying only your experience matters.  You don't hear any difference = no need to buy something more expensive.  You have just saved some money that could be used for another system improvement.  It's all good.



I did not hear a difference between the 2 lengths of iFi Gemini which actually are not super cheap.

I did hear a difference between the PPA Audio double and single USB cables I am currently using vs. the Gemini, Furutech, Pangea, Curious, Supra, Uptone USPCB and Elijah I have had in my system.
The Pangea AG is the best value in my experience, and I would chose that vs. any of the above except for the PPA models.


----------



## EuropeanEar

LazyListener said:


> I think we are mostly in agreement.



I believe so.  



> I never claimed "hearing" doesn't matter.



You said that _"Could be the cable, but there are ways to objectively measure if the cable is changing the signal in any way that could be audible."_  Maybe the cable is not changing the signal at all but somehow contaminates the DAC with noise it picked up.  Or it could be something else, an entirely new phenomenon that we are absolutely unaware yet.

But you're right, that part of my answer should have been addressed to bfreedma, who said that he would be first in line for a "high end" USB cable if objective evidence was produced by an independent study.



> Ultimately, it's the only thing that does, even if it just placebo.



Exactly.  If my perception of a better sound quality results in greater enjoyment listening to music, I happily pay the price of the placebo that caused it.



> I'm just saying that if you have scientifically sound and proven methods of objectively measuring the signal, and the signal is measured on both ends of the cable, and is identical on both ends of the cable, then the cable itself cannot be affecting the sound...



I seriously doubt that it's ever the case with USB audio, a protocol that doesn't have error correction.


----------



## EuropeanEar

motberg said:


> ... 2 lengths of iFi Gemini which actually are not super cheap.


Tell me about it, I'm using the same cable.



> I did hear a difference between the PPA Audio double and single USB cables I am currently using vs. the Gemini, Furutech, Pangea, Curious, Supra, Uptone USPCB and Elijah I have had in my system.


PPA Audio double, which is coincidentally the most expensive one of your USB cables, right?


----------



## motberg

EuropeanEar said:


> Tell me about it, I'm using the same cable.
> 
> 
> PPA Audio double, which is coincidentally the most expensive one of your USB cables, right?



The PPA double is 1.8m and I think was the most expensive.. but possibly the best sounding I have tried in my setup is the PPA Single Red in 0.2m which is now immediately before the DAC (after a Recovery). This offered my system a better balance than the Curious, Elijah (and USPCB) in approximately the same length.
The Pangea AG is a similarly balanced/detailed presentation and I think would offer a nice point of reference to compare vs. a well built stock cable. 

In my experience, I did not hear any benefit to adhering to a 1.5m + length, and I was able to compare side by side with the original iFi Gemini (I had 2 of the .7m and 1 of the 1.5m). In fact I would probably prefer the Pangea AG 0.5m to the original Gemini 1.5m in my system if the position would be the cable leading directly into the DAC.  IFi makes good stuff, I have bought more than 10 iFi pieces and they always perform as advertised, but the original USB cables were not the best match for my preferences. 

My guess is I can replace the PPA 1.8m double with my Pangea AG 2m and maybe not notice due to the cable is positioned between the computer and the Recovery currently.

I do not think a premium USB cable is a good place to invest funds unless the rest of the system and room are already to your liking, and you have already tweaked interconnects, etc. to be going in the direction you prefer... but since I have tried a lot of these and am a bit surprised by the Pangea AG, I offer my experience to readers here looking to check if there is any value for them to pursue the USB cable matter further.


----------



## daid1

motberg said:


> The PPA double is 1.8m and I think was the most expensive.. but possibly the best sounding I have tried in my setup is the PPA Single Red in 0.2m which is now immediately before the DAC (after a Recovery). This offered my system a better balance than the Curious, Elijah (and USPCB) in approximately the same length.
> The Pangea AG is a similarly balanced/detailed presentation and I think would offer a nice point of reference to compare vs. a well built stock cable.
> 
> In my experience, I did not hear any benefit to adhering to a 1.5m + length, and I was able to compare side by side with the original iFi Gemini (I had 2 of the .7m and 1 of the 1.5m). In fact I would probably prefer the Pangea AG 0.5m to the original Gemini 1.5m in my system if the position would be the cable leading directly into the DAC.  IFi makes good stuff, I have bought more than 10 iFi pieces and they always perform as advertised, but the original USB cables were not the best match for my preferences.
> ...



If only there was a Pangea AG micro usb..


----------



## AverageGuyNC

Ppa cables are inexpensive right? Or am I looking at the right brand? U like pure ever cables?


----------



## Amberlamps

I have bought a few of these, Volutz usb cables, they look good and solidly built.

They are on amazon.co.uk

I bought 3.3ft and 6.6 ft versions and added small ferrite choke on both ends and im my opinion they are excellent usb to usb micro, the price has been slashed and the cables I got I reallu do think they are great, one word of warning, get some 3mm 5mm 7mm and 9mm ferrite chokes to clip onto the wires to nullify RFI interference.

Well worth buying these instesd of using generic cables, plus they are reinforced cables.

I hope this helps


----------



## daid1

AverageGuyNC said:


> Ppa cables are inexpensive right? Or am I looking at the right brand? U like pure ever cables?



eh sadly I think he refers to those one http://ppaproduct.blogspot.it/2013/07/usb-cable.html

can @motberg tell me if you tried the slim red? It cost around the same as the Supra, so I'm wondering which one is better


----------



## motberg

daid1 said:


> eh sadly I think he refers to those one http://ppaproduct.blogspot.it/2013/07/usb-cable.html
> 
> can @motberg tell me if you tried the slim red? It cost around the same as the Supra, so I'm wondering which one is better



Hi,

The PPA website I use is http://ppaproduct.blogspot.tw/
I have 2 red slims (0.3m and 0.5m) , my perception in my system is they offer a clearer presentation than the Supra, while the Supra was smoother, maybe more forgiving at the top end..

The Supra looks cool though  
... the iFi Gemini looks even cooler !

Especially if I needed a custom length or special connectors, then the PPA model would be preferred.. though I could not guarantee that the cable meets any type of USB specification.

If the stock Supra model suits your specific requirements, then you could be confident that brand offers a well engineered product that should retain its resale value. If I remember correctly, my Supra had some type of official-looking QC tag attached which, combined with the brand presence, would inspire confidence in the investment.


----------



## musicmaker

I just ran the cardas clear in my main system for some hours and took a listen. Absolute rubbish ! Highs are sibilant, the noise floor seems higher and just shouty overall. Switching back to the chord usb was a relief !
I'm curious about the Pangea Ag, it appears this cables is not in production anymore ?


----------



## musicmaker

I managed to get another cable I've been wanting to compare with my trusty Chord usb cable - Oyaide d+ class A. After a few hours on the cable, I just did some listening. The Oyaide is such a natural, spacious sounding cable with great details. Upper notes are smooth/refined and the bass has nice weight and true to the source. Love this cable and prefer it to the chord and kitsune usb cable. So much so, I just ordered its bigger brother,  Oyaide d+ class s made with rhodium plugs and bigger gauge connectors. The Oyaide is a usb cable done right and doesn't cost a fortune. Highly recommended ! If memory serves me right, it surpasses the DH labs silver sonic that I heard sometime ago. The silversonic make the upper midrange and treble a bit too prominent. 

Its important to test usb cables on a good system that is transparent to be able to really come to make a meaningful conclusion. I tested these on Headamp GS-X mkII with a  Kitsune Level 3 Holo dac fed from a singex su-1 using I2S. The singex is connected to my mac with the aforementioned usb cable. The Oyaide is a really really good cable and fantastic value. I dont get compensated for saying this. Just passing on a good product that I dont see mentioned that much.


----------



## EuropeanEar (Mar 28, 2018)

motberg said:


> I do not think a premium USB cable is a good place to invest funds unless the rest of the system and room are already to your liking, and you have already tweaked interconnects, etc. to be going in the direction you prefer...


You're right about this, experimenting with USB cables is definitely not a place to start. Assuming that they are both in specs, the SQ difference between a great USB cable and an average one is less than between two speaker cables or interconnects. Therefore, a good enough system is critical to reveal this difference.  In my experience, a carefully chosen $5,000-10,000 system is already capable of it. How I see it is that you owe yourself to test it at least if your gear is there.  If not, it's a non-issue for you.


----------



## simon740

musicmaker said:


> I managed to get another cable I've been wanting to compare with my trusty Chord usb cable - Oyaide d+ class A. After a few hours on the cable, I just did some listening. The Oyaide is such a natural, spacious sounding cable with great details. Upper notes are smooth/refined and the bass has nice weight and true to the source. Love this cable and prefer it to the chord and kitsune usb cable. So much so, I just ordered its bigger brother,  Oyaide d+ class s made with rhodium plugs and bigger gauge connectors. The Oyaide is a usb cable done right and doesn't cost a fortune. Highly recommended ! If memory serves me right, it surpasses the DH labs silver sonic that I heard sometime ago. The silversonic make the upper midrange and treble a bit too prominent.
> 
> Its important to test usb cables on a good system that is transparent to be able to really come to make a meaningful conclusion. I tested these on Headamp GS-X mkII with a  Kitsune Level 3 Holo dac fed from a singex su-1 using I2S. The singex is connected to my mac with the aforementioned usb cable. The Oyaide is a really really good cable and fantastic value. I dont get compensated for saying this. Just passing on a good product that I dont see mentioned that much.



Do you mean this cable: https://www.ebay.de/itm/NEO-OYAIDE-...109471?hash=item41dac3585f:g:bWYAAOSwV0RXwHVI


----------



## musicmaker

simon740 said:


> Do you mean this cable: https://www.ebay.de/itm/NEO-OYAIDE-...109471?hash=item41dac3585f:g:bWYAAOSwV0RXwHVI


Yes that's the one.


----------



## archy121

I'm currently using the Chord silver plus USB cable with Mini M-DAC and not really satisfied what I'm hearing. I feel I was hearing better using my old Denon dvd/cd player using same setup as DAC. More foot tapping musical.  

I would like to try to get better soundstage and clarity without spending too much. The DAC is connected using ecosse maestro interconnects to MF A3 dual mono amp. Listening is done through KEF RDM2 monitor speakers with a REL SUB or Fidelio X2. 

Currently I use a simple Lindy USB B (printer) female to USB Micro male adapter to connect the cable to the DAC from a PC. 

I'm wondering if this could be depreciating my sound quality ? 

Since buying the Lindy adapter I have discovered a dearer Audioquest adapter. Could swapping adapters help ?
Not sure if there is anything complicated going on in the adapters that could affect the signal quality. 

Last option is to buy a Micro USB DAC cable such as Supra - ie no adapter. Audioquest cinnamon is another one I have eyes on but can only afford it used at a discount. I need 1.5-2m in length. Any other cables worth considering around £50 mark ?


----------



## 439598

there might be slight difference between a cheap cable and less cheap cable but there is a big difference in sound between USB ports, the blue 3.0 and red 3.1 ports sound horrible and compressed compared to 2.0 ports. Anyone notice this too?


----------



## ACheah

hi guys,

what do you guys think about this cable?

http://www.belkin.com/au/p/P-F2CU051/


----------



## EuropeanEar

Acke said:


> ... there is a big difference in sound between USB ports, the blue 3.0 and red 3.1 ports sound horrible and compressed compared to 2.0 ports. Anyone notice this too?



On some PCs, you may have to update the USB motherboard driver to ensure they are compatible with USB 2.0.  However, some USB 2.0 devices do not work when connected to a USB 3.0 port.

Some USB ports have strange power management behavior. If you have power management options that include things like "Power Saver" mode, the USB port may not provide enough power to the DAC when the computer comes out of sleep mode.

It also helps disconnecting any unused USB devices (hubs, thumb drives, printers, and cameras) from your computer.


----------



## B1ll

I have a dead quiet system using the USB interface on my Yggy with gen5 installed. The USB cable is very well shielded and constructed, would recommend DR acoustics to anyone. Very happy with their interconnects.


----------



## yo2tup2

I tried a lot of them when I used a USB DAC .  I really liked the Revelation Audio Labs dual conduit and the top level Prana Labs.


----------



## kkl10

An active optical cable within your budget is probably the best way to connect through USB right now.

I'm using a pure optical cable from Lindy (not a hybrid cable like the Corning) and the electrical isolation really makes a world of difference with a PC.


----------



## LazyListener

kkl10 said:


> An active optical cable within your budget is probably the best way to connect through USB right now.
> 
> I'm using a pure optical cable from Lindy (not a hybrid cable like the Corning) and the electrical isolation really makes a world of difference with a PC.


Can you provide an example of a optical USB cable?  I'm only aware of USB cables consisting of metal conductor, as standard USB ports support.  I'm not aware of an optical USB port or cable.


----------



## kkl10 (Oct 24, 2018)

Active optical cables are primarily used to extend physical data connections between hardware over distances that traditional conductor-based cables cannot cover. Here's an overview of AOC. There are AOC for Ethernet, HDMI, Displayport, USB, etc.

You can simply google search "USB active optical cable" and you'll see plenty of examples from different vendors. You may have come across mentions of a "Corning USB optical cable." That's an example and it has been talked about for a while. There's a huge thread about it on the computer audiophile forum...

I was lucky enough to find this one from Lindy at only £110 or so. On the drop-down, you'll find several length options and the USB 2.0 adapter. Prices have been quite volatile. This is a pure optical cable, not a hybrid like the Corning, which preserves copper wiring for ground and power. I planned to just try it out for a while and return it, but the sonic improvement it brings (at least when fed with clean 5V DC from a battery, haven't tried the included AC adapter yet) is compelling me to keep it, even though it adds some unwelcome clutter on my desk and was more expensive than the cheapo Meridian Explorer 2 I'm using it with. Had to buy the cable together with their USB 2.0 adapter (luckily at a much lower price too) because the cable itself has no backward compatibility with USB 2.0 devices. Some vendors, like UniBrain, already include this adapter with the cable. I'm not sure if any USB 3.0 hub would work too... still have to try this.

These solutions are not very well known to consumers yet because they are primarily used in industrial or corporate environments, and tend to be very expensive. But they're being more talked about among us crazed audiophiles; the electrical isolation and imperviousness to EMI/RFI, etc, are of interest and do appear to make a big difference in USB connections, although I'm not sure what percentage of that improvement is down to those properties alone. Hopefully, vendors will eventually recognize this niche market and come out with much shorter cables (better stock psus would be better too, but that's probably asking too much to non-audiophile businesses).


----------



## bmichels (Oct 27, 2018)

Whats the best USB Audio cable for the money ?

May be I can help a little.  Indeed, I just  completed my tests for best connexion between my Aurender W20 and my Denafrips Terminator R2R DAC.

*- First I compared the 3 connections ( AES, Coax and USB) *with 3 cables from the same manufacturer (HifiCables.fr) using the same topology/technology.



Against all odds, the USB was the winner !  sound stage was wider than with coax nor AES.  This is un-expected since Aurender recommend AES rather than USB (the result can be very different with another Source/DAC combinaison)



*- Then, since USB was apparently the best connection (for my set-up) I tested 3 different USB cables *:  the "Aucharm" a low cost very good Chineese cable (50$) that was highly recommended by a tube amp manufacturer friend of mine, the HifiCable's  "Super Ultimate USB" (290 €), and a very expensive Synergetic research Galileo LE USB ( 2500 $) that use a separate transformer and other (marketing ??) gimics.

  

Again, the results were quite surprising:  I found that the HifiCable lacked some musicality (it was precise, but something was missing reducing the possibility to "get lost into the music") while the 2 others provided a very engaging experience and... I had a very hard time to differentiate them.  I guess that with a HP system the difference will have been obvious but with headphone the 50€ is super close to the 2500€ cable !  this may be due because a « headphone  » system do not offer the « spatial » criteria that can make the difference between a good cable and a very good cable.  So, I returned the 2500 € cable and... kept the 50 € cable.


So... I was quite disapointed by what was supposed to be a super-TOL USB cable... !  *May be someone can suggest another Super-TOL USB cable* that will really bring a substantial sound improvement over a good 50€ cable ? 


*- next step:  *I will test soon the "Curious cable" and also I will have made for me a specific Coax cable to give the SPDIF Coax connection a second chance against USB.




--> So, for me* the best USB Audio cable for the money is the "Aucharm" that you can get from China for 50€....*


----------



## Blueshound24

bmichels said:


> Whats the best USB Audio cable for the money ?
> 
> May be I can help a little.  Indeed, I just  completed my tests for best connexion between my Aurender W20 and my Denafrips Terminator R2R DAC.
> 
> ...





Do you have a link for the Aucharm?


----------



## bmichels

Blueshound24 said:


> Do you have a link for the Aucharm?



You can buy i*t here *for example


----------



## moriez

Nice comparo @bmichels

I like that you gave specific attention to finding out which input you prefer by using _one _manufacturer's cables. Also thanks for the link. For the money and with use of the two audio braincells, why not ^^
I'm using a Phasure Lush cable at the moment that you could try. Not a top dollar cable compared to your Galileo LE but that's in many ways unimportant. And because you want to try Curious next here's a good read if you didn't already.


----------



## Sound Eq

bmichels said:


> You can buy i*t here *for example



nice to read this, can I ask my laptop is alienware 15 R3 and it says the usb is is usb3.0 would that cable work the one from china


----------



## EuropeanEar

bmichels said:


> *May be someone can suggest another Super-TOL USB cable* that will really bring a substantial sound improvement over a good 50€ cable ?



I would be really interested if you hear a difference between the WireWorld Platinum Starlight 7 USB cable and the €50 one.


----------



## Sound Eq

kkl10 said:


> Active optical cables are primarily used to extend physical data connections between hardware over distances that traditional conductor-based cables cannot cover. Here's an overview of AOC. There are AOC for Ethernet, HDMI, Displayport, USB, etc.
> 
> You can simply google search "USB active optical cable" and you'll see plenty of examples from different vendors. You may have come across mentions of a "Corning USB optical cable." That's an example and it has been talked about for a while. There's a huge thread about it on the computer audiophile forum...
> 
> ...



is there such a cable to use with my laptop and chord qutest dac


----------



## Arniesb

EuropeanEar said:


> I would be really interested if you hear a difference between the WireWorld Platinum Starlight 7 USB cable and the €50 one.


When i get my Platinum i report here and yes This china cable is really good! Much better than Forest or Cinamon from AQ


----------



## kkl10

Sound Eq said:


> is there such a cable to use with my laptop and chord qutest dac



Any cable should work, but if you care about mobility they're not a convenient solution... unless you manage to order one with a custom length (Lindy takes custom orders for their USB AOC cables). Depending on the cable, USB backward compatibility might be an issue since many of these solutions focus on USB 3.0 and/or later. You might have to use the adapter I mentioned in the previous post to enable your USB 2.0 devices... normal USB hubs don't help in that regard.

Your dac has an optical input already. You might be better off using a good USB to optical converter instead... if such a thing exists..


----------



## Zinfin

468384 said:


> I have bought a few of these, Volutz usb cables, they look good and solidly built.
> 
> They are on amazon.co.uk
> 
> ...



Do ferrites have any downside?


----------



## bmichels

Look what I just received.  The mighty «  curioisnUSB Cable ». 


 
 

My USB tests can continue for best connection between my Aurender W20 and my Terminator R2R DAC ...

 

I will report


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 18, 2018)

bmichels said:


> You can buy i*t here *for example



hi i just received this *Aucharm *cable, and I do not know what to make of it, the bass impact got less than the stock usb cable that came with chord qutest, and i hear no difference in mids or highs, not happy with this new usb cable

does it need burn or in or something, as I feel with it the sound quality got not better and with less bass


----------



## bmichels

Sound Eq said:


> hi i just received this *Aucharm *cable, and I do not know what to make of it, the bass impact got less than the stock usb cable that came with chord qutest, and i hear no difference in mids or highs, not happy with this new usb cable
> 
> does it need burn or in or something, as I feel with it the sound quality got not better and with less bass



YES like all cable it needs burning, but I am surprised and sorry for you that it does not sound as good as mine sound.  May be it is not the same model ?


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 18, 2018)

bmichels said:


> YES like all cable it needs burning, but I am surprised and sorry for you that it does not sound as good as mine sound.  May be it is not the same model ?



i bought it from the link you sent on aliexpress

i hope it will get better if not who cares its not an expensive cable anyway


----------



## shultzee

bmichels said:


> Look what I just received.  The mighty «  curioisnUSB Cable ».
> 
> 
> 
> ...





Whats your take on the curious?


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 19, 2018)

at least after receiving the aucharm cable i am now a believer that usb cables do affect the sound, now with aucharm it added too much detail and little reduced the bass, and my goal from buying a usb cable was to get the opposite effect, as my hifiman he1000v2 already has enough detail when using stock chord qutest usb cable,

i am in search for a usb cable that keeps detail but adds more warmth and body with maybe more bass extension with good musicality, any advice for something that is reasonably priced up to 200 usd


----------



## bmichels (Nov 19, 2018)

So I could suggest the *Panatela Reserva USB Cable *from SABLON Audio, which is the exact opposite of the Curious Cable that I have: More Warm, and may be less details.

You can read a little about the SABLON USB digital cable in the conclusion of this review :

https://hometheaterreview.com/parasound-zdac-192khz-digital-to-analog-converter/?page=2

I hope this help...


----------



## Arniesb

Sound Eq said:


> at least after receiving the aucharm cable i am now a believer that usb cables do affect the sound, now with aucharm it added too much detail and little reduced the bass, and my goal from buying a usb cable was to get the opposite effect, as my hifiman he1000v2 already has enough detail when using stock chord qutest usb cable,
> 
> i am in search for a usb cable that keeps detail but adds more warmth and body with maybe more bass extension with good musicality, any advice for something that is reasonably priced up to 200 usd


Cable needs burn in. The better insulation of cable the more burn in it needs.


----------



## Sound Eq

bmichels said:


> So I could suggest the *Panatela Reserva USB Cable *from SABLON Audio, which is the exact opposite of the Curious Cable that I have: More Warm, and may be less details.
> 
> You can read a little about the SABLON USB digital cable in the conclusion of this review :
> 
> ...



thanks for the rec, i read bout this one 

https://stordiau.com/collections/ca...lush-2-usb-audio-cable?variant=12779952767085

anyone tried lush usb cable

also how is your impression bout curious cable


----------



## bmichels

Sound Eq said:


> thanks for the rec, i read bout this one
> 
> https://stordiau.com/collections/ca...lush-2-usb-audio-cable?variant=12779952767085
> 
> ...



Yes the LUSH might be even better for you.  Good pick.

As for the Curious cable, now that it is fully burn-in, I need to do thje comparaison with my other cable. Lack of time but so far, it sound good...


----------



## moriez

@Sound Eq, given your budget and needs I'm wholeheartedly recommending Lush. I have their first model and don't intend to upgrade to Lush^2. Because I went overboard financially that time I bought the Aucharm to hear if I can downgrade. Well, they're different. Lush is a pretty good name eventhough it could give the impression it's a bit warm with a risk of overly warm if you haven't heard the cable yourself. What stands out to me is where certain passages in music would sound harsh, bordering unlistenable with AQ Forest or Carbon and I prematurely suspect Aucharm as well, Lush just flows. On a bad day one could argue it rolls off top frequency, or something! I'm unable to describe but crazy enjoyable.

Mind the shown prices in their shop are ex VAT


----------



## Whazzzup (Nov 20, 2018)

No value but sounds great. Engaging, the chord Sarum t super array digital USB.

This is not for prudence but for fun. 

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-chord-company-sarum-t-digital-super-aray-usb-cable.884705/


----------



## voon

A proper, normal, shielded USB cable (on Ali, probably one from ugreen or other similar reliable brand). For USB in Audiomode (which has no error correction like USB Data transfer, where all cables are fine), chances to influence a transferred bit in a normal environment are still totally minimal ... and if one of them turns, chances you hear that one changed bit are very close to 0.


----------



## Sound Eq

Whazzzup said:


> No value but sounds great. Engaging, the chord Sarum t super array digital USB.
> 
> This is not for prudence but for fun.
> 
> https://www.head-fi.org/threads/the-chord-company-sarum-t-digital-super-aray-usb-cable.884705/





voon said:


> A proper, normal, shielded USB cable (on Ali, probably one from ugreen or other similar reliable brand). For USB in Audiomode (which has no error correction like USB Data transfer, where all cables are fine), chances to influence a transferred bit in a normal environment are still totally minimal ... and if one of them turns, chances you hear that one changed bit are very close to 0.



well I was always under the same impression as you, well to be honest the difference in sound between aucharum cable and stock is big and not small at all


----------



## Arniesb

moriez said:


> @Sound Eq, given your budget and needs I'm wholeheartedly recommending Lush. I have their first model and don't intend to upgrade to Lush^2. Because I went overboard financially that time I bought the Aucharm to hear if I can downgrade. Well, they're different. Lush is a pretty good name eventhough it could give the impression it's a bit warm with a risk of overly warm if you haven't heard the cable yourself. What stands out to me is where certain passages in music would sound harsh, bordering unlistenable with AQ Forest or Carbon and I prematurely suspect Aucharm as well, Lush just flows. On a bad day one could argue it rolls off top frequency, or something! I'm unable to describe but crazy enjoyable.
> 
> Mind the shown prices in their shop are ex VAT


Cable dont solve Everything. Warm usb cable is simply bad design cable... Its usually have bad materials, insulation and the result is ruined signal integrity


----------



## voon (Nov 20, 2018)

Sound Eq said:


> well I was always under the same impression as you, well to be honest the difference in sound between aucharum cable and stock is big and not small at all



You heard that yourself? Were both the same length? What you need isn't a silly expensive cable ... just a shortest possible well shielded properly made one .. those can be had under 10$ usually. But I'm not going to fight beliefs here  Maybe this helps: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/do-usb-audio-cables-make-a-difference.1887/


----------



## Arniesb

There should be no warm cable or something... IF there is warmth its Distorion going on, Dynamics and energy is killed and u get mellow sound...


----------



## Whazzzup (Nov 20, 2018)

I never heard a warm cable in the 4 or 5 I have tried, but hey that’s me and a few cables. If anything it’s more engaging sound is what I’m after. But ymmv and again Sarum is ridiculously expensive. However, there are even higher price points....


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 20, 2018)

voon said:


> You heard that yourself? Were both the same length? What you need isn't a silly expensive cable ... just a shortest possible well shielded properly made one .. those can be had under 10$ usually. But I'm not going to fight beliefs here  Maybe this helps: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/do-usb-audio-cables-make-a-difference.1887/



both are bout the same length, i wish what you say was the case as I am myself always skeptical especially for cables and such, well to be honest what bugged me is that I found the difference is big between stock and aucharm cable, 

Why I am not happy bout it is because now I know I need to have a better cable because of the difference I heard between auchuram and stock, and anyone can notice the difference in sound between both cables as its so obvious

for over 7 years i always never ever considered an after market usb cable, dam this changed now,forget people who say snake oil or whatever, its real usb cables affect sound period


----------



## moriez (Nov 20, 2018)

Arniesb said:


> Cable dont solve Everything.



Cables always solve everything. Come on, lesson #1
No seriously, what makes you say this?




> Warm usb cable is simply bad design cable... Its usually have bad materials, insulation and the result is ruined signal integrity





> There should be no warm cable or something... IF there is warmth its Distorion going on, Dynamics and energy is killed and u get mellow sound...



You seem to misinterpret what I wrote. The name of the cable could easily, perhaps wrongfully be associated with the meaning of the word lush. A certain level of warmth, smoothness, ease, flow which is my personal take on what I hear. All I can conclude is_ in comparison_ with the AQ Forest and Carbon the manufacturer chose a correct descriptor. Has a place in my setup but definitely not saying there isn't anything even more suitable to be had.




voon said:


> You heard that yourself? Were both the same length? What you need isn't a silly expensive cable ... just a shortest possible well shielded properly made one .. those can be had under 10$ usually. But I'm not going to fight beliefs here  Maybe this helps: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/do-usb-audio-cables-make-a-difference.1887/



I think that differences in sound between USB cables as with any other piece of gear doesn't have a whole lot to do with how they're priced. There are no rules. Only listen, decide. Opposite to what ASR is about? Measurements decide what can be heard? Correct me if I'm wrong.


----------



## FastAndClean

Mediahound said:


> What's the best USB audio cable for the money?


shorter one


----------



## Arniesb

moriez said:


> Cables always solve everything. Come on, lesson #1
> No seriously, what makes you say this?
> 
> 
> ...


I have 1forest cable listened carbon, cinamon they all neutral and very dynamic, but they all really noisy. It could be designers problem... You can see good usb cable makers make good shielding, Quality Insulation and separation of power line. Wireworld, Curious, double design cables deal with noisy power line very good, but Audioquest deal with usb like they are some rca cables... No protection to noise.
I have 1 usb cable it sounds much warmer something like you get from tube amp, but there is missing dynamics, missing energy for excange to mellow sound. I should receive Wireworld platinum so i find out soon how it improves noise, dynamics and probably dont sound distorted...


----------



## motberg

Arniesb said:


> I have 1forest cable listened carbon, cinamon they all neutral and very dynamic, but they all really noisy. It could be designers problem... You can see good usb cable makers make good shielding, Quality Insulation and separation of power line. Wireworld, Curious, double design cables deal with noisy power line very good, but Audioquest deal with usb like they are some rca cables... No protection to noise.
> I have 1 usb cable it sounds much warmer something like you get from tube amp, but there is missing dynamics, missing energy for excange to mellow sound. I should receive Wireworld platinum so i find out soon how it improves noise, dynamics and probably dont sound distorted...



...regarding shielding.. this does seem to be a possible source of the sound differences...
https://www.computeraudiophile.com/forums/topic/49648-lush2-share-your-configuration-experiences/


----------



## Sound Eq (Nov 24, 2018)

hello everyone,  any good usb b to usb c cable to use straight from chord qutest dac to my mac 2018, something within 100 usd range

i received my google chromcast, nah i did not like it compared to listening to usb

also when i compared my mac book pro 2018 with my alienware 15 , using on both audirivana, with my chord qutest --- ifi ican pro---hifiman he1000 v2, man the macbook won hands down . used on both setups the aucharm usb cable

i could not believe how macbook sounds a way better playback sound quality than my windows, def macs are best to get best playback quality period. i wanted to test tidal as well on both setup, again tidal sounded better from mac set up


----------



## EuropeanEar

FastAndClean said:


> shorter one


While this is true to your interconnect cable between your pre an power amp, a USB cable is a different animal.
https://darko.audio/2016/05/gordon-rankin-on-why-usb-audio-quality-varies/
https://positive-feedback.com/audio-discourse/why-usb-cables-can-make-a-difference/


----------



## EuropeanEar

voon said:


> What you need isn't a silly expensive cable ... just a shortest possible well shielded properly made one .. those can be had under 10$ usually. But I'm not going to fight beliefs here  Maybe this helps: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/do-usb-audio-cables-make-a-difference.1887/


In my experience, the order of cables' effect on sound quality (greater to smaller):

speaker cables
interconnect cables
power cables
USB cables
Trying to hear any difference between USB cables on a $99 DAC is pointless imho.


----------



## Roen

Mediahound said:


> What's the best USB audio cable for the money?
> 
> I've been using a generic 3 Meter one for a while and don't really believe USB cables make much if any difference in audio quality, however, I'm getting some drop outs and do need to go that distance.
> 
> ...


Corning Optical 10m - $109 USD.


----------



## Qute Beats

I'd been a long time believer that USB cable could make no difference and for last 5 years used a cheap generic of suitable length (e.g. amazon basics).  Bits are bits etc and I read articles that supported my belief.
Recently finally decided to try an audio cable on advice of trusted dealer and bought Audioquest Pearl.
The difference was significant, music more enjoyable, can hear details I'd not picked up before, just better in every way.
Now of course wondering if there are further gains to be had, or whether one just needs a good quality cable.

So has anyone used the AQ Pearl and moved on to better?  I'm willing to go up to around £100 if anyone has recommendations, would want another decent jump in SQ to make the spend worthwhile. Thanks.


----------



## attmci (Dec 11, 2018)

Blueshound24 said:


> Do you have a link for the Aucharm?


The cable (1.5m) was sold for 10 buck in China. But a Taiwanese guy sale the same thing for $33 on eBay. What a scam.

https://m.intl.taobao.com/detail/de...47.38.477b7e68HevpVZ&id=39638783042#modal=sku

But don't get me wrong, this is one of the best $10 cables $$ can buy.


----------



## attmci

Qute Beats said:


> I'd been a long time believer that USB cable could make no difference and for last 5 years used a cheap generic of suitable length (e.g. amazon basics).  Bits are bits etc and I read articles that supported my belief.
> Recently finally decided to try an audio cable on advice of trusted dealer and bought Audioquest Pearl.
> The difference was significant, music more enjoyable, can hear details I'd not picked up before, just better in every way.
> Now of course wondering if there are further gains to be had, or whether one just needs a good quality cable.
> ...


Try a blind test. You could be surprised.


----------



## Qute Beats

attmci said:


> Try a blind test. You could be surprised.


Blind test the two I have, the AQ is clearly better.  My son reached same conclusion.  Now that doesn't mean the AQ performs any differently to any other good quality data cable (the AQ was only £25), just that's it's better than what it substituted, so made me happy, but leaves me wondering if there is further improvement possible or not...


----------



## JohnIgel

Qute Beats said:


> I'd been a long time believer that USB cable could make no difference and for last 5 years used a cheap generic of suitable length (e.g. amazon basics).  Bits are bits etc and I read articles that supported my belief.
> Recently finally decided to try an audio cable on advice of trusted dealer and bought Audioquest Pearl.
> The difference was significant, music more enjoyable, can hear details I'd not picked up before, just better in every way.
> Now of course wondering if there are further gains to be had, or whether one just needs a good quality cable.
> ...



If you have good enough equipment you can hear difference between USB cables.  I was running the AudioQuest Cinnamon and heard a definite improvement when I upgraded to the AudioQuest Carbon, more detailed and dynamic.


----------



## bmichels (Dec 17, 2018)

OK, after one


bmichels said:


> Look what I just received.  The mighty «  curious USB Cable ».
> 
> 
> 
> ...



So... after more that one month of listening I can say that the Curious USB is a still at home.  So, it is a keeper  




Indeed, I find it offering quite a *good balance between analytic and warm musicality*.  And also, while not being cheap, I find it a very good deal at almost 1/10th the price of the Synergetic Research Galileo LE that I decided not to kept and did not impressed me so much. 

Indeed, I believe that with those +1000 $ cable, more than half of the price is Marketing gimmics, and that 500$ is the sweep spot...


----------



## Sound Eq (Dec 17, 2018)

bmichels said:


> OK, after one
> 
> 
> So... after more that one month of listening I can say that the Curious USB is a still at home.  So, it is a keeper
> ...



i am awaiting both curious usb cable and iso regen that will be used with my chord qutest and ifi ican pro---hifiman he1000v2

will update you once i get my package, lets see how curious cable will stand against the cheap aucharm usb cable that got recommended here for 30 usd, if i dont hear a difference then i will never ever buy into gears that are not making a real difference, and I will just change headphones as to me that is where the real difference is worth spending. But I was open minded and I went ahead and bought the curious cable and iso regen so that I can evaluate those recs myself

for me it was so difficult yesterday to hear a difference of using my ak se100 fed into my ifi ican pro, comparing it to my chord qutest to ifi ican pro setup, which made me wonder if i even needed the chord qutest


----------



## Arniesb

bmichels said:


> OK, after one
> 
> 
> So... after more that one month of listening I can say that the Curious USB is a still at home.  So, it is a keeper
> ...


Maybe change headphones to warmer ones than rather look at cables what have distortion?  in other words loss of energy and details. I have 1 cable and it sound very pleasant, but it sound like lot of things are missing on the sound... Personally im tired of warm gear, just lost details, resolution and realism to fix bad gear...


----------



## torii

oyaide has cables on amazon that are affordable and work well...at least for me they work well.
https://www.amazon.com/Oyaide-Neo-Class-USB-Cable/dp/B003TND8JA/


----------



## Sound Eq

just got iso regen and curious cable and i yes i can hear improvement, i will do comparisons tomorrow with and without


----------



## Arniesb

Sound Eq said:


> just got iso regen and curious cable and i yes i can hear improvement, i will do comparisons tomorrow with and without


Maybe you had some other cleaner before? Would be nice to see comparison betwen iso regen and some ifi usb cleaner... all in box solution of iso regen seems great.


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Anyone, who wants to hear if a USB cable could make a difference, can make rather cheap experiment. You`ll need 1 Schiit PYST USB, which is made by Straight Wire and costs $20 and 1 cheap "USB printer cable" which is made by somebody in China and could be bought in any local store for one dollar or something like that.

I used to be very skeptical about digital cables. But in my setup (MBP - Chord Qutest - Violectric V200 - Fostex TH-900) there is clear and undoubted difference between PYST and "printer cable". Printer cable sounds really awful. I`ve tried more expensive AuioQuest Cinnamon cable and it sounds better than PYST, but the difference is much smaller. Now I want to try something shielded to see if this can be even better.

From the point of price/performance ratio Schiit PYST is really good option for "audiophile USB cable".


----------



## Arniesb

Ragnar-BY said:


> Anyone, who wants to hear if a USB cable could make a difference, can make rather cheap experiment. You`ll need 1 Schiit PYST USB, which is made by Straight Wire and costs $20 and 1 cheap "USB printer cable" which is made by somebody in China and could be bought in any local store for one dollar or something like that.
> 
> I used to be very skeptical about digital cables. But in my setup (MBP - Chord Qutest - Violectric V200 - Fostex TH-900) there is clear and undoubted difference between PYST and "printer cable". Printer cable sounds really awful. I`ve tried more expensive AuioQuest Cinnamon cable and it sounds better than PYST, but the difference is much smaller. Now I want to try something shielded to see if this can be even better.
> 
> From the point of price/performance ratio Schiit PYST is really good option for "audiophile USB cable".


Ignorant people will say better metals dont sound better on usb cables, but it sure do. Better metals = better timing, better details, separation, speed. Honestly usb cables actually improve sound, sometimes like headphone cables is mostly different sound signature when same size gauge is considered.


----------



## TwoTrack

bmichels said:


> OK, after one
> 
> 
> So... after more that one month of listening I can say that the Curious USB is a still at home.  So, it is a keeper
> ...



Funny, I had the opposite experience.  I like the Curious but in my system the Galileo stomped all over it.  Maybe this is dependent on the gear you have.


----------



## TwoTrack

The Audioquest Diamond is very good.


----------



## bmichels (Jan 5, 2019)

TwoTrack said:


> Funny, I had the opposite experience.  I like the Curious but in my system the Galileo stomped all over it.  Maybe this is dependent on the gear you have.



Well I have to admit that I got tired spending a lot of time testing cables and equipments. So,* I made a big decision for 2019 : listening to my music rather than listening top my equipments... *

his is why I decided to settle with the Curious without doing an more A-B-A-B... between the cables, and all I can say is that I am happy with the Curious.


----------



## blackdragon87

I've had an Auqioquest Forest green cable for over 5 years. Love it, feel no need to upgrade it for now


----------



## Arniesb

blackdragon87 said:


> I've had an Auqioquest Forest green cable for over 5 years. Love it, feel no need to upgrade it for now


Very noisy, and grainy cable... you don't know what you're missing lol.


----------



## blackdragon87

Arniesb said:


> Very noisy, and grainy cable... you don't know what you're missing lol.



Which one do you recommend if i want to buy an upgrade to it?

Thanks


----------



## Arniesb

blackdragon87 said:


> Which one do you recommend if i want to buy an upgrade to it?
> 
> Thanks


Aucharm Chinese cable from Alliexpres is good start. Much less noisy and more organic, wireworld is well designed cables too for low price and for high. Any dual design cable is great too!


----------



## blackdragon87

Arniesb said:


> Aucharm Chinese cable from Alliexpres is good start. Much less noisy and more organic, wireworld is well designed cables too for low price and for high. Any dual design cable is great too!



Ok, thanks for the recommendation. I'll look into it


----------



## Arniesb

blackdragon87 said:


> Ok, thanks for the recommendation. I'll look into it


No problem.


----------



## blackdragon87

I actually might consider getting a Moon Audio Blue Dragon USB if I decide to upgrade. I've had a Blue Dragon headphone cable for my HD 600 for awhile now and have been quite impressed by it


----------



## TwoTrack

bmichels said:


> Well I have to admit that I got tired spending a lot of time testing cables and equipments. So,* I made a big decision for 2019 : listening to my music rather than listening top my equipments... *
> 
> his is why I decided to settle with the Curious without doing an more A-B-A-B... between the cables, and all I can say is that I am happy with the Curious.



I think listening to music is always the goal so I like your decision!

The Curious is very good and a bit of a bargain so I am sorry if I implied otherwise.  And not everyone wants to spend $2K on the Galileo usb cable.


----------



## TwoTrack

blackdragon87 said:


> I actually might consider getting a Moon Audio Blue Dragon USB if I decide to upgrade. I've had a Blue Dragon headphone cable for my HD 600 for awhile now and have been quite impressed by it



Drew's stuff is really good.


----------



## Redcarmoose

AudioQuest Carbon


----------



## blackdragon87

Actually just bought a Cinnamon Audioquest Cable and a Jitterbug usb filter as well. Looking forward to trying this combo on my system.


----------



## blackdragon87

TwoTrack said:


> Drew's stuff is really good.



Yes, I would agree with that


----------



## koven

torii said:


> oyaide has cables on amazon that are affordable and work well...at least for me they work well.
> https://www.amazon.com/Oyaide-Neo-Class-USB-Cable/dp/B003TND8JA/



I am using Oyaide Neo too, except class S. It sounds great. I am curious about the Lush^2 cable though.


----------



## bluesaint

Answer: No cable.  Use a hard adapter:  https://uptoneaudio.com/products/uspcb-a-b-adapter


----------



## motberg

bluesaint said:


> Answer: No cable.  Use a hard adapter:  https://uptoneaudio.com/products/uspcb-a-b-adapter



I have a few of those but in my system the short PPA cables sound better....


----------



## audiobomber

koven said:


> I am using Oyaide Neo too, except class S. It sounds great. I am curious about the Lush^2 cable though.


I kept the Oyaide Neo d+ Class A USB 2.0 cable and returned the more expensive Class S cable. Both are very detailed, but I preferred the Class A for its warmer, more organic sound vs. the bright Class S sound. This review describes what I hear in the Class A cable. http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/oyaide-neo-d-class-a-usb-20-cable/


----------



## silversurfer616

At the moment I have a MadScientist Black Magic and a Wireworld Starlight Platinum. The Black Magic has very good resolution and a relaxed sound. The Wireworld is extremely resolving and dynamic, almost too much as it makes me nervous and tense....too much detail to handle. I might get used to it but at the moment I prefer the Black Magic( New Zealand boutique cable maker) which is also considerably cheaper than the Wireworld.
In case you think cables don't make a difference, please spare me your opinion....I am not interested.


----------



## Arniesb

silversurfer616 said:


> At the moment I have a MadScientist Black Magic and a Wireworld Starlight Platinum. The Black Magic has very good resolution and a relaxed sound. The Wireworld is extremely resolving and dynamic, almost too much as it makes me nervous and tense....too much detail to handle. I might get used to it but at the moment I prefer the Black Magic( New Zealand boutique cable maker) which is also considerably cheaper than the Wireworld.
> In case you think cables don't make a difference, please spare me your opinion....I am not interested.


I agree. Its like Utopia when it comes to focus, dynamics and details... Copper cables should be must with starlight platinum.


----------



## allhifi

Speedskater said:


> Blue Jeans Cable is very serious about selling good tested digital cables.
> 
> http://www.bluejeanscable.com/store/data-cables/index.htm



Blue Jean Cable guys wouldn't know a great sounding/designed USB cable (or any other cable) if it hit them over their heads. 
They're about as "in-tune" as the deaf (dumb?) chaps at ... darn, forgot the name, oh, Audioholics. Talk about drinking too much (or not enough) !

Some people, just don't 'get-it' -and definitely don't hear what countless others (with ears) do.

DH Labs USB is quite nice, as is AQ 'Carbon'. I'll report on the the AQ 'Diamond' once received, this week some time. 
Oh, and perhaps XLO Ultra USB I've yet to audition (yet XLO has excellent analog cables: PRO, Ultra, Reference) 

WW-'S7' lacks 'clarity/resolution' -but does have a (overly) organic tonality that, although 'pleasant-sounding', is simply too 'rich' (colored) for High-Rez performance.
Although, it is better than the immensely disappointing Shunyata 'Venom' -possessed of even more coloration. 

pj

pj


----------



## allhifi

Stapsy said:


> Glad you are enjoying it.  I see no real reason to go for anything else
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Active Circuit Manipulation (AQ 'Diamond') ? You mean the insulation (DBS) bias system ? 
It's not connected in any way to the signal conductor's;  it simply 'saturates; the dielectric/insulation taking the insulating material out of the 'sound-quality altering' phenomenon a conductor's insulation is known to contribute.

pj


----------



## EuropeanEar

allhifi said:


> WW-'S7' lacks 'clarity/resolution' -but does have a (overly) organic tonality that, although 'pleasant-sounding', is simply too 'rich' (colored) for High-Rez performance.
> Although, it is better than the immensely disappointing Shunyata 'Venom' -possessed of even more coloration.



The Shunyata Venom has been on the market for a while 50% off.  I would consider it an entry-level, $99 USB cable with not too high expectations.  Shunyata's strong suit is power cables and power distributors.  Pretty decent cables in the Alpha series and some excellent ones in the Sigma for a lot of dough.


----------



## bequietjk

After using a ghent audio and monoprice usb cable ive noticed the variance in sound due to the cable used is significant anf plays a big role in the overall sound!

Does anyone have experience with:

Lavricables?
BMC's USB?
Forza Audio USB?
The new iFi Gemini 3.0?

Im looking to upgrade from my monoprice which seems to provide fair detail and warmth, at least in my system.  The cables i listed seem to be less noted than others (AQ line, Curious, Wireworld and even the Black Magic by Mad Scientist).

Thoughts?


----------



## Qute Beats

bequietjk said:


> After using a ghent audio and monoprice usb cable ive noticed the variance in sound due to the cable used is significant anf plays a big role in the overall sound!
> 
> Does anyone have experience with:
> 
> ...


not on your list, but Supra cables are very good and decent value, sounded better than previous AQ Pearl I had.  I'm now using a cheap optical which beats the Supra, try if you have the option.  Sorry I can't be of any help with your list..


----------



## bequietjk

@Qute Beats Thanks!  The exterior construction of the Supra looks very durable, up front.  I cant seem to find what the inner material is.  Copper wire? Silver?  Jenving.com claimed the science of impedence matching is there so i think thats an important element.  It's low cost is definitely attractive!


----------



## Qute Beats (Jun 19, 2019)

bequietjk said:


> @Qute Beats Thanks!  The exterior construction of the Supra looks very durable, up front.  I cant seem to find what the inner material is.  Copper wire? Silver?  Jenving.com claimed the science of impedence matching is there so i think thats an important element.  It's low cost is definitely attractive!


Believe it's copper.  Yes it's attractive with the white sleeve, fairly thick though not overly so, still flexible and has a good feel to it.  Cable has good shielding too.  Many rate it highly, of course as with all these things it's how it sounds to you.

edit: grabbed box out, actually colour describes as ice blue.  looks almost white.  back of pack does not mention wire metal (but if silver would expect them to say), states it has 1 twisted pair for data and 1 twisted pair for power, each individually screened to block RFI.  
Hope that helps.


----------



## Qute Beats

Qute Beats said:


> not on your list, but Supra cables are very good and decent value, sounded better than previous AQ Pearl I had.  I'm now using a cheap optical which beats the Supra, try if you have the option.  Sorry I can't be of any help with your list..


I bought a new PC to use optical, the lengths audio nuts will go to...


----------



## bequietjk

Of course!  Sometimes we turn into this ball of energy that drives towards better SQ not stopping for anything.  That's pretty much where I've been for the past couple years lol.  

Something I'd like to mention though is the implementation of USB 3.0 in the market and the iFi Merc and Gemini being 3.0.

My Singxer F1 only accepts 2.0, and I know the Matrix X-Spdif 2 can accept a USB 3.0 connector but not sure if it carries the properties of 3.0 functionality.

Anyway, just some thoughts.  Keeping the thread fresh!

Cheers


----------



## djyang0530

https://www.ebay.com/itm/Hi-End-OCC...var=453075871830&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649 
i think this is a nice cable for 20 bucks


----------



## Mediahound (Jun 20, 2019)

djyang0530 said:


> https://www.ebay.com/itm/Hi-End-OCC-silver-plated-USB-audio-cable-data-USB-hifi-cable-DAC-A-B-usb-cable/153216187084?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&var=453075871830&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649
> i think this is a nice cable for 20 bucks



Silver-plated could potentially be an issue.

See NASA study where they discovered used silver-plated copper cabling to have a 'red plague' corrosion: https://nepp.nasa.gov/DocUploads/97164203-A4FB-479A-A075C918D51DD81E/ESA Red Plague.pdf

Also Ray Kimber talking about it:


----------



## bequietjk

For real!?  I heard of this 'red plague' I think a few days ago.  That sucks because I built 4 AC cables made with silver plated copper!  All 12 AWG!

Ahff.  Time will tell I suppose.  

Btw I ordered a few cables...

The 3' cable matters USB 3.0  ($5)
https://www.amazon.com/dp/B00C7RUWCU/ref=twister_B00D0QZVYQ?_encoding=UTF8&psc=1

The 1' Startech USB 3.0 ($6)
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B004395680/ref=ppx_od_dt_b_asin_title_s01?ie=UTF8&psc=1

and WIREWORLD Chroma 8 USB 3.0 ($43)
https://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B07N2YCJMW/ref=ppx_yo_dt_b_asin_title_o00_s00?ie=UTF8&psc=1

I wanted to try a couple really cheap ones and those 2 seem to have some fair shielding, the typical kind.
The WIREWORLD is ultimately a test of it's design. 

Definitely looking forward to hearing these USB 3.0 cables.  And this is only made possible with the iFi iPurifier2 in my setup.  I believe my PPA V2 usb card is 3.0 as well.  I used a regular USB 3.0 printer cable that was like 5' long and it worked.

Can't wait!


----------



## bequietjk

@djyang0530 that does look like a nice cable...  At $20 it could be worth considering!


----------



## audiobomber

djyang0530 said:


> https://www.ebay.com/itm/Hi-End-OCC-silver-plated-USB-audio-cable-data-USB-hifi-cable-DAC-A-B-usb-cable/153216187084?ssPageName=STRK:MEBIDX:IT&var=453075871830&_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649
> i think this is a nice cable for 20 bucks


Looks really nice, but great looks don't mean great sound. Odd that there are no reviews.


----------



## bequietjk

Startech cable and Cable Matters USB 3.0 cables came in today.

First impressions:  Startling.  Incredible and totally unexpected.

Startech:  VERY revealing and a veil has been lifted from my audio.  More detailed and a slight brighter than the Cable Matters.
Cable Matters:  Just as startling as the Startech in resolution and unveiling.  A little warmer and sounds slightly more muted in comparison to the Startech.

It has to be something with the USB 3.0.  Truly.  I was not expecting this kind of change in the sound but it has happened and I won't be going to USB 2.0 that's for sure.

Both cables still need to be burned in I would say for at least 20 hours?  Maybe 50?  I don't know the length of time.

WIREWORLD comes in tomorrow.  I'll make sure to report some first impressions on that cable.


----------



## bequietjk

So the WW Chroma 8 is going back.  I just can't handle the sharpness and detail retrieval, this is just personal preference.

For the Chroma 8 it seems to bring a slight more detail and clarity to the sound.  Audio seems to be slightly tighter.  But I prefer a smoother and warmer sound like in that of the Startech cable.  Could it be the shortness in length of the Startech?  Not sure, but I think I'll be better off saving money towards that Gemini3.0 beast.


----------



## audiobomber

I've tried a bunch of cables in my headphone system (Vanguard & Ghent Audio dual head USB 2.0, iFi Audio freebie, Startech & Belkin 3.0 cables, in assorted 18", 3' and 6' lengths). I am now using this USB 3.0 A to B male adapter instead of a cable. Best sounding solution so far:
https://www.newegg.ca/p/36M-0009-000H5

Laptop > USB 3.0 adapter > iPurifier2 > USB B 2.0 female to USB mini male > Korg DS-DAC-100M.


----------



## cddc

interesting discussion


----------



## gnomen (Jul 31, 2019)

This IS an interesting discussion.  I have read through it for the last hour or two and found it very helpful.  There's not much else like it on the web, so thank you all for contributing.

I have just installed a new Chord Hugo TT2 driven by USB from an iMac.  Love the unit but at high volumes it can be a bit bright and hard compared to the original TT which it replaced.  I am thinking that the stock USB cable could be improved.  I am also thinking about a microrendu or other similar dedicated audio source between the Mac and the DAC, but that is a separate discussion.

Having read through the thread, it seems that Supra, Oyaide and Wireworld are well regarded by a wide number of people posting here.  Having emptied the wallet on the TT2 I don't want to go over the top right now, so Chord Sarum and similar will have to wait for another time.  If anyone has views on other USB cables I should also consider I would be very pleased to hear them. 

I don't think the digital source discussion is anywhere near finished yet so do hope this thread or a similar one keeps going.

Cheers


----------



## acguitar84

I've looked into this as well, and enjoyed this thread. I've also wondered about the Curious USB Cable and WyWires A/B litespd usb cables. I just recently purchased and RME Adi-2 DAC and I saw someone recommending the Oyaide Neo d+ Series Class S USB Cable as well (For the RME DAC).

I've never tried any "Audiophile" USB Cables. I just use the one that came with the RME, and use the one that came with the Woo Wa7 (Used it for Mimby as well).  So echoing the post above, anyone that has positive/or negative things to say about USB cable "upgrades" please chime in. Thanks!


----------



## CANiSLAYu

Can anyone recommend a budget USB A to USB C cable?  Looking to connect my PC directly to my KANN CUBE to use in DAC mode.  Only thing I've been able to see is the Audioquest USB A to C range.  Definitely looking at like <$100 USD.  Thank you!


----------



## Qute Beats (Jul 31, 2019)

gnomen said:


> This IS an interesting discussion.  I have read through it for the last hour or two and found it very helpful.  There's not much else like it on the web, so thank you all for contributing.
> 
> I have just installed a new Chord Hugo TT2 driven by USB from an iMac.  Love the unit but at high volumes it can be a bit bright and hard compared to the original TT which it replaced.  I am thinking that the stock USB cable could be improved.  I am also thinking about a microrendu or other similar dedicated audio source between the Mac and the DAC, but that is a separate discussion.
> 
> ...


I'm currently using Supra on my TT2.  Sounding fine, did not try the stock to compare.  I've used AQ Pearl before and the Supra is better.  I even added a bunch of ferrites to the AQ Pearl to try and improve things but was not happy with it.  I'll soon be on Optical though, which should be better again.

edit:  if you haven't already you should check out the TT2 thread.


----------



## Whazzzup

for the money? im out


----------



## Qute Beats

Whazzzup said:


> for the money? im out


fair enough, you're happy with where you are with TT and that's great.


----------



## Whazzzup (Jul 31, 2019)

Sorry thought it was a different thread. My USB cable not only provides a rfi bubble around my system but it gives off skittles on demand. But I digress. but for the money.....


----------



## Qute Beats

Whazzzup said:


> Sorry thought it was a different thread. My USB cable not only provides a rfi bubble around my system but it gives off skittles on demand. But I digress.


ever try toslink?


----------



## Whazzzup

At some point, yes. But no skittles so...


----------



## Qute Beats

Whazzzup said:


> At some point, yes


cool, back home soon and TT2 will on toslink, Qutest was better that way for me, hopefully new tt2 also.  tho' never hear the Sarum..


----------



## Whazzzup

It’s my antipodes sever preferred delivery is USB, tt preferred input is USB being galvanized. In essence perfect harmony.  Hope you too get skittles.


----------



## audiobomber

USB is technically superior to Toslink if both are properly implemented.


----------



## Redcarmoose

Maybe the only time someone would even consider USB cables on a upgrade would be when they felt they found the best headphone. 

I mean surely headphone upgrades would be more sensible and rewarding. Many of us do believe that “the whole system matters” but still there are going to be components of the system that play a larger role in success. I would think the USB cable sits on a very low tier, if not the lowest in importance?


----------



## Pokemonn

I use the Amazon Basics USB cable for Stax SR-007mk1 early version setup. I am very satisfied!


----------



## Whazzzup

Yes interconnects , hp, cables and USB should be the final components in your audio fondant. At that point your system will probably be able to reveal the changes or preferences of each for one to judge. This isn’t sound science is it so I’m safe to communicate this opinion?


----------



## Redcarmoose

Whazzzup said:


> Yes interconnects , hp, cables and USB should be the final components in your audio fondant. At that point your system will probably be able to reveal the changes or preferences of each for one to judge. This isn’t sound science is it so I’m safe to communicate this opinion?


The cable, tweak thread, not SS, so it’s OK! Lol.


----------



## gnomen

Qute Beats said:


> I'll soon be on Optical though, which should be better again.



I tried optical but it did not sound as good.  Roon could not recognise that the endpoint device was a Chord TT2 and consequently adjusted its output stream (I presume).  Hence I reverted back to USB, which does sound more open and airy, except for the hint of hardness at loud volumes which has sent me searching for a better USB cable.

BTW thanks for the pointer to the TT2 thread.  I have been following that for a while now and it has been helpful in forming my purchase decision.  Would recommend that thread to anyone.


----------



## gnomen

Whazzzup said:


> for the money? im out


Ha, ha!  I hope you are not "out" of the discussion Whazzzup, your contributions to this and other threads is really good.  If money were no object I would opt for the Chord Sarum cable you recommend but I need to get there in stages.  The cable you selected might in fact be the best value for money of all of them!


----------



## motberg

If I would have a problem with brightness, I would not try to tame it with a USB cable (though I remember the original iFi Gemini and Supra as having a more dark or neutral reaction in my system).

I have found the W4S Recovery device to be the most cost effective way to modify the USB signal. For my DAC's it has either stabilized the sound quality characteristics to their best performance or improved the sound by seemingly removing high frequency hash. I have always used a LPS with my Recovery devices (I think I have really dirty mains power here, so no wall-warts on the audio mains circuit) so that may be a good part of my success. https://wyred4sound.com/products/digital-converters/recovery (149 USD)

Someone mentioned previously the Uptone Audio adapter. I have tried a few of those and have found them very neutral, but not always practical for implementation or optimal for the sound preferred (darker than some cables I use). https://uptoneaudio.com/products/uspcb-a-b-adapter (35 USD)


----------



## Redcarmoose (Aug 2, 2019)

motberg said:


> If I would have a problem with brightness, I would not try to tame it with a USB cable (though I remember the original iFi Gemini and Supra as having a more dark or neutral reaction in my system).
> 
> I have found the W4S Recovery device to be the most cost effective way to modify the USB signal. For my DAC's it has either stabilized the sound quality characteristics to their best performance or improved the sound by seemingly removing high frequency hash. I have always used a LPS with my Recovery devices (I think I have really dirty mains power here, so no wall-warts on the audio mains circuit) so that may be a good part of my success. https://wyred4sound.com/products/digital-converters/recovery (149 USD)
> 
> Someone mentioned previously the Uptone Audio adapter. I have tried a few of those and have found them very neutral, but not always practical for implementation or optimal for the sound preferred (darker than some cables I use). https://uptoneaudio.com/products/uspcb-a-b-adapter (35 USD)



Strangely the AudioQuest Carbon does seem to be slightly brighter, than a drugstore USB cable? I use an 5 foot USB between my dock and the DAC/amp. There is an increase in resolution maybe, I still need to do some 2X blind tests? But the overall effect IS brightness, but not in a bad way?


----------



## Arniesb

Redcarmoose said:


> Strangely the AudioQuest Carbon does seem to be slightly brighter, than a drugstore USB cable? I use an 5 foot USB between my dock and the DAC/amp. There is an increase in resolution maybe, I still need to do some 2X blind tests? But the overall effect IS brightness, but not in a bad way?


Aq dont know how to make usb cables... Just move on.


----------



## Redcarmoose (Aug 3, 2019)

Arniesb said:


> Aq dont know how to make usb cables... Just move on.



Lol what? You have an AudioQuest Forest?

Lots and lots of us on Head-Fi use the Carbon? First I’ve heard of such slander! Lol I’m totally happy, not changing a thing.


----------



## jarcher

For low cost I really like Wireworld Starlight.  The new Micro B to A works really great with my Chord Mojo (super tight / secure connection) and sounds a lot better than the stock cable.  Retail price I think is less than $100.  

For my other hifi gear Ive really liked the XLO Ultraplus USB cable.  Very fast / dynamic and clear, but without harshness.  I think these are around $180 for 1M.  

I've always liked what I heard with Ansuz USB cables, but mostly out of my price league.  But if cost were no object, I'd probably use those.


----------



## gnomen

Just to report back here, I replaced my standard USB cables with Supra cables in both my home systems.  In my home office I run an original Hugo TT direct from iMac and listen via HD800s (stock standard).  The Supra made quite a difference - tamed the brightness and restored tonal balance.  In the big family room system I run the new Hugo TT2 from an iMac in an adjacent room, operated as a Roon Bridge and played through ATC active speakers.  In this setup the Supra made almost no difference, just a tiny removal of HF glare.  The cable it replaced did have RF chokes at either end so maybe there was less of a step change.
I summary, the Supra helped.  And for the price, the difference is worth it.


----------



## Arniesb

gnomen said:


> Just to report back here, I replaced my standard USB cables with Supra cables in both my home systems.  In my home office I run an original Hugo TT direct from iMac and listen via HD800s (stock standard).  The Supra made quite a difference - tamed the brightness and restored tonal balance.  In the big family room system I run the new Hugo TT2 from an iMac in an adjacent room, operated as a Roon Bridge and played through ATC active speakers.  In this setup the Supra made almost no difference, just a tiny removal of HF glare.  The cable it replaced did have RF chokes at either end so maybe there was less of a step change.
> I summary, the Supra helped.  And for the price, the difference is worth it.


Made not much difference in speakers setup cause speakers is nowhere near as resolving as top headphones... maybe thats why you cant pick up much  difference there...


----------



## bmichels

This is what I am using between my Ayrender W20 Server and my Denafrip Terminator DAC.


----------



## audiobomber

Arniesb said:


> Made not much difference in speakers setup cause speakers is nowhere near as resolving as top headphones... maybe thats why you cant pick up much  difference there...


i disagree with the "nowhere near" statement. In fact I hear bigger differences in gear and am much more picky about my speakers than my headphone systems. Yes, I hear a bit more low level detail via headphones, but soundstage is radically superior via speakers, and soundstage is one of the main differentiators in cable changes, as well as general SQ.


----------



## gnomen

Arniesb said:


> speakers is nowhere near as resolving as top headphones


Always possible, I suppose.  Here is a review of the speakers I use http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/atc-scm50-aslt-loudspeaker/?page=2
These speakers are easily good enough to show the difference between the TT and the TT2, and between different XLR cables.  More likely the USB cable that was replaced was not too bad.  If the USB cable is accurately transmitting the digital signal and not carrying any RF pollution, that might be the extent of the improvement possible.  
Then again, hifi continues to amaze us all with the improvements we never thought possible.


----------



## Ashah

JCAT reference as good as Curious has more shielding , heavy duty connectors separate connecters for power & Data very open that curious is I believe is solid silver JCAT 30% stranded silver very wide sound stage, airy big bass  I am using it with Gungnir DAC , MacMini ISI I Purifier 3 using it both with Quicksilver Headphone amp as well as with aux inputs of Kef LS 50W

Asghar


----------



## Strat1117

I’m fairly new to the streaming game, but I have to echo the sentiments of some earlier posters who recommended the Aucharm from China. It beat the living daylights out of the PYST/Straightwire and a plain (not gold series) Belkin, not to mention the freebie that came in the box with my audioengine d2 dac. PLUS, the construction quality makes everything else I’ve seen look like a toy (which wouldn’t mean a thing if it didn’t also sound good).  For ~$30 delivered on Amazon (sold by ZZH-KK), I would definitely call it a bargain.


----------



## nwavesailor

I am using a Supra USB 2.0 from a new 7th gen iPod touch to a Chord Qutest. I thought I'd try the inexpensive Furutech Formula 2 USB 2.0 to compare.

I did several back to back swaps with nothing changed other than cable A for cable B and back to A. With every cable swap, the Supra USB had a higher output from my amp / headphones than the Furutech.
The lower output level of the Fututech put me off  and I wondered if there was something being lost. Both USB cables received What-HiFi awards in 2011 and 2012.


----------



## Peti

I usually pick up an item and insert it into my system and live with it for a while to find out if it adds something positive to it. Sometimes the difference is stark and instantly obvious (for the better or worse) and in some cases I detect minor but still important changes on prolonged listening sessions. If there's no difference or the difference is negative back the item goes to the vendor. If I like what I hear, it is a keeper. I've learned a very important lesson spending time in this hobby: keep an open mind.

Currently I have a Lush2 usb cable and I'm quite content with the performance of it compared to my LH labs usb cable. Lower noise floor, more detail retrieval and somewhat wider and deeper soundstage. I wanted to hate this cable b/c it ain't cheap but after listening to it and putting back the LH labs usb cable, the differences were too obvious.


----------



## ScareDe2

Audioquest Coffee.


----------



## Strat1117 (Oct 18, 2019)

In the month or so since I last posted I’ve tried the well-known Belkin Gold (excellent), and the Acoustic BBQ (very good), but I’ve got a New Favorite:  MIT StyleLink Plus. I got a NOS 2m run of this discontinued cable for $75 on eBay. Search over for me. Best bass and best overall balance, with MIT’s signature infinite soundstage. only gripe is that it’s a little on the stiff side, but that’s a Just logistical issue that’s easily resolved. The sound is everything I could ever hope for from my admittedly modest streaming rig, and more.


----------



## Gazny (Oct 19, 2019)

I have tried a few cables, mostly no names nothing high end. But since I have gotten a _Chroma CablesUSB-A to USB-B By Dj TechTools _has been excellent for me because I get a blacker background.

EDIT:
This is the best usb cable for the money I have spent. I still look at others higher up but just speaking from my experience.


----------



## nwavesailor

Gazny said:


> I have tried a few cables, mostly no names nothing high end. But since I have gotten a _Chroma CablesUSB-A to USB-B By Dj TechTools _has been excellent for me



@Gazny be careful.............you could have your audiophile title stripped for posting about an inexpensive USB cable!


----------



## nwavesailor

Why would my 1 meter Supra USB 2.0 cable be a few db louder than a Furutech Formula 2 USB 2.0 cable when switching these 2 cables back to back?


----------



## bequietjk

Alright.  I'm ordering the Aucharm.  For $29, I MUST test this.


----------



## Redcarmoose

nwavesailor said:


> Why would my 1 meter Supra USB 2.0 cable be a few db louder than a Furutech Formula 2 USB 2.0 cable when switching these 2 cables back to back?


----------



## nwavesailor

Redcarmoose said:


>



Yeah! What's up with that, RCM???


----------



## PointyFox

Redcarmoose said:


>



If it's 50% quieter, then obviously the 1 bits are degrading to 0.5 bits.


----------



## EuropeanEar

nwavesailor said:


> Why would my 1 meter Supra USB 2.0 cable be a few db louder than a Furutech Formula 2 USB 2.0 cable when switching these 2 cables back to back?



Have you actually measured this or it just _sounds_ louder?


----------



## nwavesailor

No just by my ears. After doing A/B  3-4 times with the same result, that is what I heard.


----------



## PointyFox

nwavesailor said:


> No just by my ears. After doing A/B  3-4 times with the same result, that is what I heard.



USB cables DO have loss, and different cables could have different losses, so if the losses change the power going through the cable, even if just 1s and 0s, that may still affect the maximum amplitude of the signal when it is converted into analog.

Maybe.


----------



## bequietjk

I'm a firm believer in that everything matters.  It's simple, really.  And when you're an adventurer and you're on the quest for great sound, you gotta keep an open mind and willing to try new stuff, as well as experiment.  Consider measurements + trust your ears.


----------



## manueljenkin

I just made a post in Sound-science about my experience with USB cables! Feel free to contribute.

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/supra-usb-cable-and-my-findings-predictions.920120/

Thanks and Regards,
Manuel Jenkin.


----------



## Redcarmoose (Nov 28, 2019)

bequietjk said:


> I'm a firm believer in that everything matters.  It's simple, really.  And when you're an adventurer and you're on the quest for great sound, you gotta keep an open mind and willing to try new stuff, as well as experiment.  Consider measurements + trust your ears.



I remember one time I found my friend placing a single tiny paper sticker on the front of his $20,000 phono cartridge. The small dot, even smaller than a penny looked to be simply paper with some glue on the back. After studying it I smiled.

There was an ample amount of science in why the $60,000 turntable sounded great, there were many documented ideas about why the $10,000 phono preamp sounded special.

Before he played a record we had to put them through the record cleaning machine. Next after the record was dropped onto the platter a special super heavy outer ring was employed to hold the outer edges down. Next a spindle clamp screwed down to secure the record. At this point an anti static brush was used to remove any remaining static electricity. Next our attention was focused on the digital speed RPM meter. Of course a power regeneration system guaranteed that smooth peak-free stable and clean power would not interfere with the rotation speed.

Still 33.3 rpm needed to be documented first. An hour before the equipment had been turned on. As the needle was slowly lowered into place I realized the small piece of sticker on the needle meant something as it was the final piece of equipment in the owners mind.

Did that sticker do anything?

It did. It was the final assurance that he did everything humanly possible to achieve the best sound. Was it silly? Maybe so......but not really when you took notice of every detail of form with function in the room.

If he thought the sticker meant something, it did mean something.

Did it do something? Yes!


----------



## bequietjk

Has anyone had a go with this one? 

https://www.lavricables.com/line/ultimate/usb-ultimate/


----------



## allhifi

musicmaker said:


> I just ran the cardas clear in my main system for some hours and took a listen. Absolute rubbish ! Highs are sibilant, the noise floor seems higher and just shouty overall. Switching back to the chord usb was a relief !
> I'm curious about the Pangea Ag, it appears this cables is not in production anymore ?




Lol ! Yeh, Lardass cables are pretty crappy -from your remark I note it (Cardas) hasn't changed over the past 30+ years !

Perhaps the Cardas 'Clear' may be more accurately referred to as Lardass Crap/Creep? Oh, Cardas Smear ! 

pj 
(P.S> sorry Cardas users)


----------



## bequietjk

Being that the Aucharm does not state 90 ohm characteristics, i wanted to go with the Wireworld Chroma 8 USB 2.0 because of its twisted conductors, simple design and low cost.  Cant wait to audition it.


----------



## roadcykler

Arniesb said:


> Aq dont know how to make usb cables... Just move on.




A long time, very experienced writer for Stereophile disagrees with you and uses an AQ Cinnamon. Just saying.


----------



## Arniesb

roadcykler said:


> A long time, very experienced writer for Stereophile disagrees with you and uses an AQ Cinnamon. Just saying.


They got paid and im not.
I just want to help people buy gear that is legit from my experience.


----------



## Redcarmoose

The Cinnamon cable has more of a lively spiced tone, warm with a hint of heat, reminding of late-nite fireplaces and coco. Where the Forest has more of a botanical tone, airy and peaceful...like the woods. Carbon on the other hand is strong and bullet-proof like a bulletproof vest. Of course the Diamond is royalty in response, super clear and sparkling.


----------



## Darkestred (Jan 18, 2020)

Nevermind.  Issue has been resolved.


----------



## amigastar (Feb 29, 2020)

Hey there people.

I have a question.

I've ordered the Audioquest Carbon from Amazon. I'm using an IFI Ipurifier2 in my setup. My question is, will the purifier nullifie the improvement that i get through the cable because it's connected to the DAC, i mean between the cable and the DAC? Or should i remove my IPurifier from my audio chain?

I hope someone can help me with this.

thx


----------



## PointyFox

amigastar said:


> Hey there people.
> 
> I have a question.
> 
> ...



No, because there won't be any difference between that cable and a $3 Belkin cable.


----------



## audiobomber

amigastar said:


> Hey there people.
> 
> I have a question.
> 
> ...


You'll need to listen for yourself. The iPurifier2 has worked for me in a few situations, in others it's been a disappointment. It depends on your particular system and whether you like what it does to the sound (i.e individual preference). The USB cable is only part of the equation.


----------



## amigastar

amigastar said:


> Hey there people.
> 
> I have a question.
> 
> ...





PointyFox said:


> No, because there won't be any difference between that cable and a $3 Belkin cable.


Thats what i'm gonna find out. But i'm with you on this, Cables are Snake Oil. But we'll see.


----------



## Redcarmoose

amigastar said:


> Hey there people.
> 
> I have a question.
> 
> ...




Not sure but make sure you order the smallest distance of cable for your needs. Even the expensive cable manufacturers that could make more money from longer cables say it’s a true concept.


----------



## Strat1117

amigastar said:


> Thats what i'm gonna find out. But i'm with you on this, Cables are Snake Oil. But we'll see.



Cables are not snake oil in that they do make an audible difference, but price is no guarantee of performance.  The belkin usb is a perfect example - As good as just about anything, yet costs only ~$10.


----------



## bmichels (Mar 1, 2020)

At different price point those 3 represent very good value. I have used all 3 with success.


----------



## PointyFox (Mar 1, 2020)

Then again, I've used a ton of different <$3 cables, all with success too.
Actually, the only cable I've ever NOT gotten to work was an $800 Wireworld coax cable that I got pretty cheaply just for the heck of it. Couldn't get it to work. My best guess was that the connectors had some gunk/oxidation on the inside of the parts that hold onto the coax jacks which was preventing a good connection.


----------



## Roasty

bmichels said:


> At different price point those 3 represent very good value. I have used all 3 with success.



Which did u like the most? I have the Curious Evolved cable on order..


----------



## bmichels

Roasty said:


> Which did u like the most? I have the Curious Evolved cable on order..


Curious is the best of the 3... and the most expensive.  
It provides amazing "presence": you feel the band is in the room with you...


----------



## Roasty

bmichels said:


> Curious is the best of the 3... and the most expensive.
> It provides amazing "presence": you feel the band is in the room with you...



OK I feel quite relieved now.. Thanks!


----------



## EuropeanEar

Redcarmoose said:


> Not sure but make sure you order the smallest distance of cable for your needs. Even the expensive cable manufacturers that could make more money from longer cables say it’s a true concept.



This is true to speaker cables and interconnects.  USB (S/PDIF, AES/EBU) cables are a completely different story.


----------



## amigastar

I sent the Audioquest Carbon back. Too much money but i've read about another cable which seems promising.
The Supra USB Cable
https://www.whathifi.com/supra/usb-20/review
I'm gonna try this next.
Maybe it's an improvement to my Audioquest Forest.


----------



## manueljenkin

amigastar said:


> I sent the Audioquest Carbon back. Too much money but i've read about another cable which seems promising.
> The Supra USB Cable
> https://www.whathifi.com/supra/usb-20/review
> I'm gonna try this next.
> Maybe it's an improvement to my Audioquest Forest.


Supra is quite detailed but a bit artificially shouty. If distance Is not a concern, please try the uptone uspcb. price is similar (I own both and like both, but uspcb is technically better).


----------



## Arniesb

manueljenkin said:


> Supra is quite detailed but a bit artificially shouty. If distance Is not a concern, please try the uptone uspcb. price is similar (I own both and like both, but uspcb is technically better).


If it is shouty then it is bad cable. Every usb cable that is better designed sound wider and deeper.


----------



## manueljenkin

Arniesb said:


> If it is shouty then it is bad cable. Every usb cable that is better designed sound wider and deeper.


I wouldn't rush up to that conclusion. It still is much better than any cheap cable I've tried, including my stock apogee groove cable, which is pretty decent on its own. You get what you pay for and it's not end of the world. Also, it seems to matter how usb ports are designed and certain cables may match well to certain things. I have personally not had that experience but there's word around that this is the case.

Soundstage is kinda a subjective thing, different people perceive it in different ways. Supra actually sounds wide, but imo artificially so and lacks a bit of that holographicness (the microcontrast, or in relatable terms, the 3d pop you get from a good camera lens). In any case, I find USPCB to be better on all fronts, except soundstage "width" where Supra felt artificial to me.


----------



## Arniesb

manueljenkin said:


> I wouldn't rush up to that conclusion. It still is much better than any cheap cable I've tried, including my stock apogee groove cable, which is pretty decent on its own. You get what you pay for and it's not end of the world. Also, it seems to matter how usb ports are designed and certain cables may match well to certain things. I have personally not had that experience but there's word around that this is the case.
> 
> Soundstage is kinda a subjective thing, different people perceive it in different ways. Supra actually sounds wide, but imo artificially so and lacks a bit of that holographicness (the microcontrast, or in relatable terms, the 3d pop you get from a good camera lens). In any case, I find USPCB to be better on all fronts, except soundstage "width" where Supra felt artificial to me.


Drop in noise floor result in bigger and deeper soundstage. Its a result of good design by suppresing noise of the power wire. Great power cables does that too.


----------



## Gazny

Anyone able to test the Chroma Cable by DJ Tech Tools(available on Amazon)? It is my best cable but I am looking at something from other companies with unique cable genomics.
I would love to hear a more experienced impression.


----------



## manueljenkin

Arniesb said:


> Drop in noise floor result in bigger and deeper soundstage. Its a result of good design by suppresing noise of the power wire. Great power cables does that too.



Thanks. I don't have experience in power cables. But I do know that for usb cables, transistors can be sensitive to timing issues, and even the software differences can be drastic. What I'm saying is, we can't generalize it to one particular trait, but on a general note I agree with your opinion.

Also, looks like you're used to trying different cables. Would you mind if I ask you advices for power cables?


----------



## amigastar

manueljenkin said:


> Supra is quite detailed but a bit artificially shouty. If distance Is not a concern, please try the uptone uspcb. price is similar (I own both and like both, but uspcb is technically better).


What is this uptone uspcb and what does it do?


----------



## Arniesb

manueljenkin said:


> Thanks. I don't have experience in power cables. But I do know that for usb cables, transistors can be sensitive to timing issues, and even the software differences can be drastic. What I'm saying is, we can't generalize it to one particular trait, but on a general note I agree with your opinion.
> 
> Also, looks like you're used to trying different cables. Would you mind if I ask you advices for power cables?


Connectors are most important when it comes to power cables so i would choose cable with quality wires and Furutech Connectors since Furutech connectors are the best.


----------



## manueljenkin

amigastar said:


> What is this uptone uspcb and what does it do?


It is a PCB board that does the job of what your usb cable is supposed to do, but cleaner. A cable will have lot of constraints in terms of characteristic impedance etc, which the pcb can mitigate a little easier.

Basically it's a cable without being a cable.


----------



## audiobomber (Mar 12, 2020)

I use an inexpensive Type A to Type B USB adapter in a secondary system. Like the USPCB, it acts as a wireless cable. The disadvantage is that it physically inverts the outlet port, so I have my Raspberry Pi flipped upside down. 

The interesting thing about the USPCB is that it allows you to disconnect the USB 5V pin. If your DAC doesn't need USB power, the sound will very likely improve by blocking the the 5V bus. I don't have room for the rigid USPCB in my main system, so I block the 5V pin of my Oyaide Class A cable, from the sms-200 to my Audiolab DAC, with electrical tape. Relieving  the DAC from having to ground the 5V supply made a significant improvement in the sound. 
https://community.octoprint.org/t/put-tape-on-the-5v-pin-why-and-how/13574


----------



## Mediahound

Here's my recent video review of the  Supra USB cable:


----------



## PointyFox

You got to wonder why electrical engineers don't obsess over cable quality for their high end measurement devices and think nothing of using a $5 cable to measure something millions of times smaller than what would be audible through headphones.


----------



## ThanatosVI

Redcarmoose said:


> Lol what? You have an AudioQuest Forest?
> 
> Lots and lots of us on Head-Fi use the Carbon? First I’ve heard of such slander! Lol I’m totally happy, not changing a thing.


Was this old comment supposed to mean Audioquest Forest is good or bad?

From the looks I feel tempted to use those between my components.


----------



## Sonic Defender

Mediahound said:


> Here's my recent video review of the  Supra USB cable:



So you have gone from as long as the signal travels through the cable without change it is good enough to now hearing differences in USB cables?


----------



## Mediahound

Sonic Defender said:


> So you have gone from as long as the signal travels through the cable without change it is good enough to now hearing differences in USB cables?



Huh?


----------



## Sonic Defender

Mediahound said:


> Huh?


You said this on the first page of the thread:
I would never consider a USB cable that expensive. If signal is getting through fine without without interference, that's all that matters to me.

That seems to be a pretty definitive statement of principle.


----------



## Mediahound

Sonic Defender said:


> You said this on the first page of the thread:
> I would never consider a USB cable that expensive. If signal is getting through fine without without interference, that's all that matters to me.
> 
> That seems to be a pretty definitive statement of principle.



Ah. Yep.


----------



## Sonic Defender (May 7, 2020)

Mediahound said:


> Ah. Yep.


That was all I was referring to. If I was understanding that correctly at first you were of the mind that a USB cable is a USB cable. It just seemed odd that you were now reviewing USB cables and it seems no longer feeling the way your thread started. People are allowed to change their minds, no harm no foul. Not to mention that cable you reviewed isn't that expensive. I guess I was just surprised that you felt a USB cable was review worthy.


----------



## Mediahound (May 7, 2020)

Sonic Defender said:


> That was all I was referring to. If I was understanding that correctly at first you were of the mind that a USB cable is a USB cable. It just seemed odd that you were now reviewing USB cables and it seems no longer feeling the way your thread started. People are allowed to change their minds, no harm no foul.



I have not changed my mind, that statement still holds true, just more refined now in terms of how well the signal gets through and without RF/EMI interference, impedance variance,  etc. = a more pure signal.

Doing the above well is all that matters and the sad truth is that some of the super-expensive 'audiophile' USB cables don't.


----------



## Sonic Defender

Mediahound said:


> I have not changed my mind, that statement still holds true, just more refined now in terms of how well the signal gets through and without RF/EMI interference, impedance variance,  etc.


Fair enough. I actually like your reviews and have read several, by the way.


----------



## SteveM324

I have the Curious USB and I like it for the large soundstage, pinpoint imaging, and natural tonality.  I compared it to the Nordost Heimdall.  For my preferences, the Curious USB was much better and it wasn’t difficult to hear the difference.


----------



## Redcarmoose (May 7, 2020)

ThanatosVI said:


> Was this old comment supposed to mean Audioquest Forest is good or bad?
> 
> From the looks I feel tempted to use those between my components.



In a very specific situation a group of us have all used the exact same configuration of the Sony TA-ZH1ES headphone amp being connected to the Sony Cradle holding a Walkman 1Z or 1A as a digital source. Note photograph. 

In that particular situation the AQCarbon seems to add a quality. If it’s from EMI shielding or silver used who knows? But in that regard it seems to work. There is obviously group confirmation bias so that needs to be taken into account. If the AQCarbon also makes a difference in simply hooking up a computer to a DAC; I don’t know?

It was just funny to have a member who actually owns an AQForrest USB end up coming on here and slamming the AQ cables? Maybe there is better? AudioQuest makes a Diamond cable too which is above the Carbon and I know of one member who loves his. There is also an on-line comparison where the reviewer thought he could hear a difference between the Diamond and Carbon in use. In our situation the shortest foot length is the way to go as they make 5 foot and longer too. But you want normally as short as you can get away with. This is typical thought and even companies will recommended using as short as needed even though they make more money selling longer cables.


Edit:
This may be the shortest one?
https://www.amazon.com/gp/aw/d/B0041EH0WW/ref=psdcmw_464394_t3_B00DQDBCPU


----------



## koven

SteveM324 said:


> I have the Curious USB and I like it for the large soundstage, pinpoint imaging, and natural tonality.  I compared it to the Nordost Heimdall.  For my preferences, the Curious USB was much better and it wasn’t difficult to hear the difference.



Curious is solid. Plan to try anything else? Sablon looks good.


----------



## SteveM324

koven said:


> Curious is solid. Plan to try anything else? Sablon looks good.


No, I’m very satisfied with my system’s sound.


----------



## PointyFox

Just once I decided to try a $900 cable for the fun of it and because someone offered it to me for $200 on eBay and I knew I could get my money back by reselling it. It's the only cable I've had that I couldn't get to work.


----------



## JohnIgel

I can hear difference on my headphone rig when switching from the AQ Cinnamon and the AQ Carbon. I don’t hear as much of a difference between the Carbon and the Curious cables, it’s very slight. I don’t know if I could distinguish between the two in blind testing.


----------



## manueljenkin

SteveM324 said:


> I have the Curious USB and I like it for the large soundstage, pinpoint imaging, and natural tonality.  I compared it to the Nordost Heimdall.  For my preferences, the Curious USB was much better and it wasn’t difficult to hear the difference.



Have you tried the uptone uspcb? I own one and wonder how different sounding the curious or jcat cables are.


----------



## 340519

I don't know. I have kimber kable's entry usb and a kimber select copper KSUSB-CU $1500 usb and I can't tell a difference. I mean the expensive one looks pretty with the wood ends and all.


----------



## cazone

I have the Aucharm between my laptop and RME for a few weeks now and I like it a lot.


----------



## shultzee

I switched from a Pangea to a AQ Carbon and could definitely hear a difference.  I like the carbon a lot.


----------



## Roasty

I started off with an AudioQuest Carbon. Bought the Curious Evolved USB cable and it was very very good. pinpoint imaging, clear highs. a little bit aggressive in the upper registry sometimes. I now have the Phasure Lush^2 USB cable and it is better than the Curious in that it sounds smoother and effortless, with punchy (maybe slightly thick) bass and just gorgeous mids. I have not yet tried any other jumper config on the Lush^2 cable other than the stock config it was delivered in. I just received the Mad Scientist Black Magic usb cable but have not had the chance to try it out yet.


----------



## PointyFox

You guys have some excellent imaginations.


----------



## Roasty

PointyFox said:


> You guys have some excellent imaginations.



Yes, that is probably the case! Oh well, the mind will believe what it wants to believe. As long as it brings some enjoyment out of the hobby, I figure it is worth that crazy cash we spend.


----------



## cazone

another very nice, not so expensive silver USB cable. Made in France by Atelier Acousitk
I compared it to the Aucharm an prefer this one.

c*


----------



## darmccombs

I need a Usb-C to Usb-B connection.  Which would provide better sound quality?

1) Audioquest Carbon Usb-C to Usb-B cable
or
2) A better Usb-A to Usb-C Cable connected to the Apple Usb-C to USB-A adapter

I ask because it looks like most the best Usb cables are Usb-A to Usb-B.


----------



## Roasty

darmccombs said:


> I need a Usb-C to Usb-B connection.  Which would provide better sound quality?
> 
> 1) Audioquest Carbon Usb-C to Usb-B cable
> or
> ...



May I suggest a custom cable from Pete at Triode Wire Labs. Email him and see what he can do for you. Great guy and awesome products. I have his Discrete USB and have no complaints. He has built custom stuff for me before and the build quality is impeccable.


----------



## darmccombs

Roasty said:


> May I suggest a custom cable from Pete at Triode Wire Labs. Email him and see what he can do for you. Great guy and awesome products. I have his Discrete USB and have no complaints. He has built custom stuff for me before and the build quality is impeccable.


Thank you for your suggestion.  I do not want to go the custom cable route however.


----------



## shultzee

darmccombs said:


> Thank you for your suggestion.  I do not want to go the custom cable route however.



I have had a bunch of USB Cables and I really like the carbon.  If you want to go a cheaper route for a nice sounding cable check out the Pangea SE.  Audio Advisor is one of the dealers.


----------



## darmccombs

shultzee said:


> I have had a bunch of USB Cables and I really like the carbon.  If you want to go a cheaper route for a nice sounding cable check out the Pangea SE.  Audio Advisor is one of the dealers.


Thanks for your suggestion.  I'm not looking for a cable suggestion though.

I'm trying to find out if buying a very good USB cable (standard USB-A to USB-B), then adding a USB-A to USC-C adapter cable, degrades the sound much (compared to just buying a lesser USB-C to USB-B cable.


----------



## 439598

darmccombs said:


> Thanks for your suggestion.  I'm not looking for a cable suggestion though.
> 
> I'm trying to find out if buying a very good USB cable (standard USB-A to USB-B), then adding a USB-A to USC-C adapter cable, degrades the sound much (compared to just buying a lesser USB-C to USB-B cable.


There is no rule, but length is big part of USB cable quality, the longer it is the more id lean towards the adapter route.
If length doesnt matter, I would look for some of those super short USB C cables, and buy a few different ones and see which sounds best, I would bet that would be better than the adapter.


----------



## Roasty

I just received a Final Touch Audio Callisto usb cable. For those who feel they've almost "completed" their system and looking to add that one last percent.. This cable may well be that finishing touch (as the company name implies... lol). 

I have the phasure lush2 and mad scientist black magic, triode wire labs discrete usb, (and previously curious evolved), and the fta callisto bests all of them. 

Out of the box, the callisto takes away all upper registry edginess and glare; I had this with the lush2 but I mistook it for detail and clarity; only now is it apparent that I was poorly mistaken. Pinpoint imaging for vocals, better instrument placement, which makes for a more believable and dimensional soundstage. 

In all fairness, the other cables I have are already very good but the callisto just takes it up another notch. If I could put a ruler and measure it, the actual differences in sound are probably really small, but the thing is they're noticeable. 

At the asking price, it is definitely in the diminishing returns category. But like I said... Finishing touches. 

I have just ordered another one.


----------



## S-O8

No one here use Vetere ?   I have a DiFi USB to my Chord TT2 and it is awesome ... beats the Audioquest Carbon for clarity and generally being cleaner.     I have both but the Vetere is the cleaner cable.  A lot dearer I grant you ... but there 'technically' shouldn't be a difference.


----------



## S-O8

No replies ... oh well ... I went with a Chord Signature Super Aray ... not sure it is for me though at this stage - so exact the higher range feels a bit sharp.   I am waiting for my Vetere to be returned after repair.

I tried an AQ Diamond.  Nice cable and USB B to C too .. not having to use an adapter for my Mac ... just not sure it beats the Chord and can't see it beating the Vetere at this stage ...


----------



## manueljenkin

On the budget end, I really love the uptone uspcb!.


----------



## Arniesb

Roasty said:


> I just received a Final Touch Audio Callisto usb cable. For those who feel they've almost "completed" their system and looking to add that one last percent.. This cable may well be that finishing touch (as the company name implies... lol).
> 
> I have the phasure lush2 and mad scientist black magic, triode wire labs discrete usb, (and previously curious evolved), and the fta callisto bests all of them.
> 
> ...


Untreated copper... I bet it just rolls of highs and everyone think that it solved usb problems... No usb cable will solve usb problems, only very good reclocker or high end sound card like the one from jcat with best possible power supply will cure usb.


----------



## jambaj0e

For me the single biggest different I've gotten from a cable is the Sablon 2020 Panatela Reserve USB Cable. If you follow the thread on it on What's Best Forum as well other reviews, you'll read nothing but raves and even though it costs $750 for the powered version required for my Chord Hugo TT2, it has absolute brought clarity, speed, tonality, and authority that I didn't even know I was missing from my system.

What's very noticeable is the texture in the music and instruments. I thought I was already having that in instruments like bass guitar or drums but they are now so much more clearer and well-defined. Notes are no longer mere notes, you can hear so much of the instrumentation behind them. Drums and percussion are so well-defined that no matter how busy layered everything else are in the track, you don't lose sense of them. Things just don't get muddled.

I think when you get to the point where you have a high-end system, a cable like this is like night and day. The power and data are on separate cable runs, as you can see below. And if you're in Los Angeles and want to have a listen, as well as test out your headphones (the higher end the better of course), feel free to DM me:

Sablon Audio





Custom PC --> Sablon 2020 Panatela Reserva Elite powered USB Cable --> Chord HUGO TT2 --> Sommer Epilogue XLR Cable --> Cayin HA-300 DHT 300b Tube Amp (Psvane ACME 300b + NOS Sylvania 6SN7W Metal Base tubes) --> Mavismodz custom 4-core OCC copper balanced cable with Furutech miniXLR & 4-pin XLR terminations --> Audeze LCD-3 Fazor headphone/ BJC Ten White Speaker Cable --> Tekton Lore Reference Speakers


----------



## Sonic Defender

Go look at Audio Science Review. Recently they tested a similar Audioquest powered offering and found out that it was actually worse than a very inexpensive run of the mill USB cable. They tested it for several parameters that influence the sound quality audibly and it just didn't make a difference beyond actually having more distortion due to the addition of a powered component.


----------



## Roasty

I like to read audio science review. I also like to roll cables and do think cables make a difference. I think it's ok to be on both sides of the camp, as long as I'm happy and get enjoyment out of the hobby. 

Anyways, @jambaj0e, I preferred the FTA offerings over the sablon 2020 USB and sablon ethernet cables, and now am liking the Phasure lush3 and et3 cables a lot. Probably to do with system and headphones and personal preference.


----------



## 439598 (Nov 1, 2020)

Sonic Defender said:


> Go look at Audio Science Review. Recently they tested a similar Audioquest powered offering and found out that it was actually worse than a very inexpensive run of the mill USB cable. They tested it for several parameters that influence the sound quality audibly and it just didn't make a difference beyond actually having more distortion due to the addition of a powered component.


Actually this just highlights ASR's manipulative way of presentating his results quite  well.
Look at the D50 jitter spectrum, "identical" as he puts it.
except it clearly isn't, and someone even points this out but no one cares :https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...jitterbug-usb-filter-review.10205/post-278691
When It does make things very slightly worse with schitt DAC he happily draws attention to that with big red text.
I have seen this happen many times on there but cant remember the exact examples.

He actually reviewed an 'audiophile' USB cable and it measured better than a basic good quality USB cable, better mains suppression: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...ents-of-wireworld-starlight-7-usb-cable.6599/

But it's ''inaudible'' so is deemed pointless... very weird that he loves to strongly recommend all these new expensive ultra low distortion DACs when the most basic topping d10 or d30 or whatever it's called will give performance that they deem is already well below audibility

P.S Im not saying the audioquest thing is good, it is a clearly a useless gimmick , they do a teardown in that review and its some basic passive filtering.
Any well made DAC will have this inside already and *at the DAC end where it is most effective*, and even if it didnt the measureable difference would likely be next to nothing unless there was a noise problem in the system.The USB interfaces in modern DACs have much more sophisticated ways of reducing jitter internally.


----------



## Ragnar-BY (Nov 1, 2020)

Sonic Defender said:


> Audio Science Review.


ASR owner is a reviewer, who listens to measurements, not music. In my opinion his reviews are intended primarily to get some hype, by playing with ego of Chi-Fi owners.


----------



## Sonic Defender

Ragnar-BY said:


> ASR owner is a reviewer, who listens to measurements, not music. In my opinion his reviews are intended primarily to get some hype, by playing with ego of Chi-Fi owners.


Not true at all, that is a gross oversimplification. He listens to plenty of music and does subjective listening impressions quite frequently. I am not saying everything is perfect and there are always going to be issues even with ASR trying to be very objective. I am always shocked at how frightened subjective only fans are to the scrutiny of objective measurements. I have a foot in both camps. I have really enjoyed the sound of some gear that hasn't measured that well, but I still think measurements are important.

And as for the Chinese companies taking over the audio world by storm, quite frankly they are just doing a really, really good job and you should be happy that you can now get a DAC for $300 that can measure and sound as good as $3000 boutique DAC. Why would anybody not celebrate the costs of high-performance audio gear coming down?


----------



## jambaj0e

Sonic Defender said:


> Go look at Audio Science Review. Recently they tested a similar Audioquest powered offering and found out that it was actually worse than a very inexpensive run of the mill USB cable. They tested it for several parameters that influence the sound quality audibly and it just didn't make a difference beyond actually having more distortion due to the addition of a powered component.



A similar AudioQuest USB cable? That's not the same as the Sablon 2020 USB cable. 

Also, measurements can only tell you so much and listening is the other component. I listen to a lot of audiophile podcast from Occasional podcast to Ps Audio Ohms Law to Darko Audio to Th Hifi Podcast with Duncan & Darren. Not one them only rely on just measurements. 

In fact they've spouted multiple examples where two things can measure the same and sound different, or something that measure well but sound horrible. 

I only take Audio Science Review as a grain of salt, not the end all be all. I'd rather listen to experts in the industry.


----------



## 439598 (Nov 1, 2020)

Sonic Defender said:


> Not true at all, that is a gross oversimplification. He listens to plenty of music and does subjective listening impressions quite frequently. I am not saying everything is perfect and there are always going to be issues even with ASR trying to be very objective. I am always shocked at how frightened subjective only fans are to the scrutiny of objective measurements. I have a foot in both camps. I have really enjoyed the sound of some gear that hasn't measured that well, but I still think measurements are important.
> 
> And as for the Chinese companies taking over the audio world by storm, quite frankly they are just doing a really, really good job and you should be happy that you can now get a DAC for $300 that can measure and sound as good as $3000 boutique DAC. Why would anybody not celebrate the costs of high-performance audio gear coming down?


You didnt understand his point... It is absolutely true, ASR listen to measurements. ASR are not against people subjectively preferring something that measures worse , but the only reason they will accept for liking worse measuring gear is due to subjectively pleasing audible distortion. They stand by that any audible difference in gear is measurable.... 

If you believe any audible difference is measurable, then you do not have a foot in both camps.


----------



## jambaj0e

Roasty said:


> I like to read audio science review. I also like to roll cables and do think cables make a difference. I think it's ok to be on both sides of the camp, as long as I'm happy and get enjoyment out of the hobby.
> 
> Anyways, @jambaj0e, I preferred the FTA offerings over the sablon 2020 USB and sablon ethernet cables, and now am liking the Phasure lush3 and et3 cables a lot. Probably to do with system and headphones and personal preference.



Right I have seen people between the FTA and Sablon camp, although most people who also compared the Sablon love it over the Lush3. I never tried the Lush3, but I am definitely very happy with the Sablon 2020. It's good to know there are several very well options out there for us that doesn't cost over $1000


----------



## Ragnar-BY

Sonic Defender said:


> you can now get a DAC for $300 that can measure and sound as good as $3000 boutique DAC


Unfortunately, it’s not true. I’ve had cheap DACs, I have quite expensive DAC now and I’ve listened  to very expensive ($10K+) DACs. $300 DAC does not sound as good as mine, mine does not sound as good as $10K DAC. Not even close in both cases.

If you look at good Chineese products, like Denafrips, Auralic and others, you’ll see that their TOTL gear is as expensive as European or American. Because advanced RnD and QC is expensive everywhere, even in China.

By the way, I have technical education. Although I do not deny the value of subjective sensations, I always lean towards the position of objectivism. But there is an important thing to remember. Scientific approach never meant denying everything incomprehensible. Science is all about finding explanations for things. ASR with their strong prejudice have nothing in common with real science.


----------



## jambaj0e

Ragnar-BY said:


> Unfortunately, it’s not true. I’ve had cheap DACs, I have quite expensive DAC now and I’ve listened  to very expensive ($10K+) DACs. $300 DAC does not sound as good as mine, mine does not sound as good as $10K DAC. Not even close in both cases.
> 
> If you look at good Chineese products, like Denafrips, Auralic and others, you’ll see that their TOTL gear is as expensive as European or American. Because advanced RnD and QC is expensive everywhere, even in China.
> 
> By the way, I have technical education. Although I do not deny the value of subjective sensations, I always lean towards the position of objectivism. But there is an important thing to remember. Scientific approach never meant denying everything incomprehensible. Science is all about finding explanations for things. ASR with their strong prejudice have nothing in common with real science.



I own both the Chord Hugo TT2 at home and the Chord Mojo for travel/work, and man, as much as I can enjoy the Chord Mojo, I'm always feeling that I can't wait to go home to listen on my home system. It's such a big difference between a $500 DAC and a $5500 DAC


----------



## audiobomber (Nov 1, 2020)

Sonic Defender said:


> And as for the Chinese companies taking over the audio world by storm, quite frankly they are just doing a really, really good job and you should be happy that you can now get a DAC for $300 that can measure and sound as good as $3000 boutique DAC.


 Have you tried this yourself? I had a $300 Topping D50S home for trial, and I own a $3000 exaSound e32 Mark II, with Teddy Pardo LPS. Even with the P50 LPS added to the Topping, there is a world of difference in SQ. ASR's simplistic static measurements are worthless. Music is dynamic and complex.

They rate the Modi 3 above the Yggdrasil. LMAO!


----------



## audiobomber (Jan 16, 2022)

Since this is a thread about cables, here's my ranking of the ones I own:
1. Curious Cable
2. Oyaide neo d+ Class A
3. Ghent Audio Teflon Silver Plated Y-cable
4. Vanguard Dual Head USB cable.

I had the Oyaide neo d+ Class S for a couple of weeks, sent it back. The Class A sounded more organic, the Class S was too bright.


----------



## Sonic Defender (Nov 1, 2020)

audiobomber said:


> Have you tried this yourself? I had a $300 Topping D50S home for trial, and I own a $3000 exaSound e32 Mark II, with Teddy Pardo LPS. Even with the P50 LPS added to the Topping, there is a world of difference in SQ. ASR's simplistic static measurements are worthless. Music is dynamic and complex.
> 
> They rate the Modi 3 above the Yggdrasil. LMAO!


I respect your opinion, and I am glad that you enjoy your exaSound. I would however ask if you have conducted level matched, multiple trial blind listening tests to determine if you can hear a difference between DACs. If you can that would be a pretty amazing feat. Sighted listening tests are biased and I am not shocked that your more expensive DAC sounds better, and possibly it does, but the only evidence that matters is a well conducted blind listening test. There have been such tests conducted by experienced people who had an open mind and were more interested in evidence as opposed to just defending their expenditures and when it was all said and done I have never heard of anybody who can distinguish between two audibly transparent DACs. I had the NAD M51 at the same time as a Mojo and a little iFi iOne and at the time I just kept the iOne as I couldn't hear any difference.

Anyway, rather a waste of time to discuss such things as in the end people should enjoy their hobby however they see fit. I will say here and now that I can't hear the difference with decent DACs. And yes this is a cable thread so I will show myself out and apologize for going off topic.


----------



## audiobomber (Nov 2, 2020)

Sonic Defender said:


> I respect your opinion, and I am glad that you enjoy your exaSound. I would however ask if you have conducted level matched, multiple trial blind listening tests to determine if you can hear a difference between DACs. If you can that would be a pretty amazing feat. Sighted listening tests are biased and I am not shocked that your more expensive DAC sounds better, and possibly it does, but the only evidence that matters is a well conducted blind listening test. There have been such tests conducted by experienced people who had an open mind and were more interested in evidence as opposed to just defending their expenditures and when it was all said and done I have never heard of anybody who can distinguish between two audibly transparent DACs. I had the NAD M51 at the same time as a Mojo and a little iFi iOne and at the time I just kept the iOne as I couldn't hear any difference.
> 
> Anyway, rather a waste of time to discuss such things as in the end people should enjoy their hobby however they see fit. I will say here and now that I can't hear the difference with decent DACs. And yes this is a cable thread so I will show myself out and apologize for going off topic.


The method I use for comparing audio components is to listen for an extended period, in my system, with my music. That is reality. A-B testing is flawed and leads to mistakes, because it is an artificial construct. A double-blind ABX test is representative only, it is not reality, and has been shown ineffective for audio testing repeatedly in the decades I've followed audio.

I own an iOne, it is a nice little DAC. I've tried to replace the bulky Audiolab 8200CD on my desktop with the tiny iOne, but I can't because the iOne lacks bass slam and the treble is slightly grainy.

The D50S failed due to poor PRaT, which is a cardinal offence. I have no use for anything that makes music sound boring.


----------



## Sonic Defender

audiobomber said:


> The method I use for comparing audio components is to listen for an extended period, in my system, with my music. That is reality. A-B testing is flawed and leads to mistakes, because it is an artificial construct. A double-blind ABX test is representative only, it is not reality, and has been shown ineffective for audio testing repeatedly in the decades I've followed audio.
> 
> I own an iOne, it is a nice little DAC. I've tried to replace the bulky Audiolab 8200CD on my desktop with the tiny iOne, but I can't because the iOne lacks bass slam and the treble is slightly grainy.
> 
> The D50S failed due to poor PRaT, which is a cardinal offence. I have no use for anything that makes music sound boring.


While I disagree with pretty much everything you just wrote, not in an aggressive dismissive way, I still accept that you have the right to your opinions. I also owned the Audiolab 8200CD. Small world.


----------



## manueljenkin (Nov 12, 2020)

HOW ASR THINKS AN AMP WITH 0.5% THD SOUNDS LIKE




HOW IT REALLY SOUNDS




Also, this thread was created by people who hear/perceive differences with usb cables, measurable or not, to help themselves aware of the choices! I don't think they need persuading otherwise, and it distracts from the purpose of this thread.

Science is limited by the present level of knowledge/understanding. It can anytime be overridden by a more rigorous analysis/methodology.


----------



## Mediahound

Just as an update, I'm still quite happy with the Supra USB cable as I've posted previously. 

Although generic USB cables usually work fine and so-called audiophile ones are usually no different, the main thing I like about the Supra USB is they publish adherence to the USB audio specific spec. of 90 Ohms impedance. Not having an impedance mismatch for USB audio can be an improvement and you don’t have to guess.


----------



## branislav

USB DISRUPTOR


----------



## EJSorona

Hello. What I have available here are Audioquest Pearl USB A-B cables. I'm also interested in Oyaide cables (USB, but probably also XLR to XLR cables), but I have to get them via an importer (more expensive, it takes from 45 to 90 days to arrive). Are the AQ Pearl good enough or should I bite the bullet and go for the Oyaide cable*? 

*It would be the Neo D+.


----------



## pagauge0

Love my Curious Cable for the Hugo/ Mojo with the Sennheiser HD 660s.


----------



## funkur

EJSorona said:


> Hello. What I have available here are Audioquest Pearl USB A-B cables. I'm also interested in Oyaide cables (USB, but probably also XLR to XLR cables), but I have to get them via an importer (more expensive, it takes from 45 to 90 days to arrive). Are the AQ Pearl good enough or should I bite the bullet and go for the Oyaide cable*?
> 
> *It would be the Neo D+.



The Oyaide Class D+ is a nice cable (a steal at $60 USD) and should easily outperform the AQ based on the copper quality alone.  If you can, try ordering from Amazon US and use a package forwarder like MyUS.  You should get them within 1-2 weeks and save some money.

Though my current favorite under $100 USD is the RiCable Magnus which just replaced my Oyaide Class D+.  DHL shipping (their only option) from Italy is a little pricey though.


----------



## EJSorona (Mar 26, 2021)

funkur said:


> The Oyaide Class D+ is a nice cable (a steal at $60 USD) and should easily outperform the AQ based on the copper quality alone.  If you can, try ordering from Amazon US and use a package forwarder like MyUS.  You should get them within 1-2 weeks and save some money.
> 
> Though my current favorite under $100 USD is the RiCable Magnus which just replaced my Oyaide Class D+.  DHL shipping (their only option) from Italy is a little pricey though.


Cool. Actually searching it further at a local online marketplace, I found for sale the Oyaide D+ Class B (green cable), one is brand new 1 meter long, and the other is a second hand, 75cm cable, for a bit over 1/3 of the price of the 1 meter brand new one.
I also found the Oyaide XLR to XLR pair, also green cables and plugs. I plan to purchase a balanced DAC for my Stax SRM-353X, so I need the 3 pin XLR cables.
I know that the Class A Oyaide cable exists (black with some orange bands at the plugs), that is a little more expensive.
At home I found a generic USB cable, hi-speed, no ferrite filters, and I would dare say that it sounds a tiny bit better, definitely a little less muffled than the ferrite filtered one I was using up until now.
In any case, if the Oyaide green cables are definitely a big improvement over the generic printer cables, then I definitely go for them.
EDIT: Besides, I don't have a credit card right now, so I can't use services like MyUS or other importing services that only handle the shipment and not the purchase. 
I used to do that in the past, it was definitely less expensive and I could even purchase second-hand goods. Maybe one day, right not this is the price I pay for doing zero paperwork.


----------



## funkur

EJSorona said:


> Cool. Actually searching it further at a local online marketplace, I found for sale the Oyaide D+ Class B (green cable), one is brand new 1 meter long, and the other is a second hand, 75cm cable, for a bit over 1/3 of the price of the 1 meter brand new one.
> I also found the Oyaide XLR to XLR pair, also green cables and plugs. I plan to purchase a balanced DAC for my Stax SRM-353X, so I need the 3 pin XLR cables.
> I know that the Class A Oyaide cable exists (black with some orange bands at the plugs), that is a little more expensive.
> At home I found a generic USB cable, hi-speed, no ferrite filters, and I would dare say that it sounds a tiny bit better, definitely a little less muffled than the ferrite filtered one I was using up until now.
> In any case, if the Oyaide green cables are definitely a big improvement over the generic printer cables, then I definitely go for them.


Oops, let me clarify, I had the D+ Class A (OCC Copper), not the Class B (OFC Copper)


----------



## EJSorona

funkur said:


> Oops, let me clarify, I had the D+ Class A (OCC Copper), not the Class B (OFC Copper)


Still, are the class B good enough? Again, I don't want to pay much and wait weeks for some bloody cables. 
The Oyaide green cable (the new one) here is about the same price as the AQ Pearl one.


----------



## funkur

EJSorona said:


> Still, are the class B good enough? Again, I don't want to pay much and wait weeks for some bloody cables.
> The Oyaide green cable (the new one) here is about the same price as the AQ Pearl one.


Not having heard either, I couldn't tell you.  

I did have Pearl HDMI cable recently to demo for I2S use and didn't think it was anything special.


----------



## EJSorona

funkur said:


> Not having heard either, I couldn't tell you.
> 
> I did have Pearl HDMI cable recently to demo for I2S use and didn't think it was anything special.


Then I'll rule the AQ cables out. I'd love to get the Class A cable someday.


----------



## stevedlu (Mar 27, 2021)

The Furutech GT2 cables are my favorite. Ive owned much more expensive USB cables that have performed much worse. The problem with high end USB cables is that a lot of them stray away from USB 2.0 specifications and use lower gauge (thicker) wires. A lot of USB modules on DACs depend on the cable to be within spec to perform optimally. A bad USB cable will have distorted/noisy high frequency audio.


----------



## EJSorona (Mar 27, 2021)

stevedlu said:


> The Furutech GT2 cables are my favorite. Ive owned much more expensive USB cables that have performed much worse. The problem with high end USB cables is that a lot of them stray away from USB 2.0 specifications and use lower gauge (thicker) wires. A lot of USB modules on DACs depend on the cable to be within spec to perform optimally. A bad USB cable will have distorted/noisy high frequency audio.


Ergo, what it works for your setup might not work for mine.
Schiit has the PYST line of RCA, XLR and USB cables. I have a pair of 6" RCA patch cables and they work fine, but I never compared them with other RCA cables.
I used them for my Modi/Magni 2 Uber stack (thou I preferred to spread them because the Magni tended to not stand still). Does anyone here have any experience with the PYST USB cable? They are  20-24 dollars a piece.


----------



## simon740

Hello,

Im looking for a good usb-c to usb-B cable. Which one? 

regards,
Simon


----------



## keithc

Roasty said:


> I like to read audio science review. I also like to roll cables and do think cables make a difference. I think it's ok to be on both sides of the camp, as long as I'm happy and get enjoyment out of the hobby.
> 
> Anyways, @jambaj0e, I preferred the FTA offerings over the sablon 2020 USB and sablon ethernet cables, and now am liking the Phasure lush3 and et3 cables a lot. Probably to do with system and headphones and personal preference.



See this:


This is a well-thought out experiment to show quantitative differences between USB cable transmission in audio. Compared to all the other subjective reviews of Cable A sounds better than Cable B, which naysayers can claim is all ownership pride and placebo effect, well, here it is.

Obviously even though there's a measurable difference, in the end you have to decide which one sounds better in your system. But for anyone who says it's a null effect, well, they're wrong.


----------



## Tsunzo

I just ordered a supra usb A-B cable. Let's see if I can hear any difference.


----------



## markishwong

anyone compared their USB cables against the Ifi Mercury 3.0?
Im trying to find an upgrade from this cable.


----------



## vonspanky (Jun 6, 2021)

There seems to be a limited choice for USB 3.0 A to B cables. The iFI Mercury is one but not many options below £200?


----------



## Mediahound

vonspanky said:


> There seems to be a limited choice for USB 3.0 A to B cables. The iFI Mercury is one but not many options below £200?


USB audio spec is 2.0 so a 3.0 cable does nothing for that.


----------



## Tanalasta

Quite happy with the Audiowuest cinnamon. USB C to USB B isn’t easy to find.


----------



## vonspanky

Mediahound said:


> USB audio spec is 2.0 so a 3.0 cable does nothing for that.



Hi, yes but the zen can has the USB 3.0 type B port so quality cables are hard to find.


----------



## amigastar (Jun 19, 2021)

Normally i don't believe in Different Cable Sounds, *BUT *I've ordered the Audioquest USB Carbon last year from amazon which i didn't keep.
But i listened to it and i'm pretty sure the sound was different than my cheaper USB Cable, it had a blacker background sounded slightly more analog.
Now i'm on the fence of buying the Audioquest USB Carbon again and keep it this time. But like i said i don't believe in cable sound.


----------



## amigastar

OK,
so i've ordered an Audioquest USB Carbon, can i still use my IFiPurifier2 in my chain or is it better to feed the DAC with the Carbon alone?


----------



## audiobomber (Jun 28, 2021)

A cable does not do what the iPurifier2 does, i.e. re-clocking and cleaning the power. Better DAC's handle those functions, to the point where an iPurifier will be useless or even harmful to the sound. If your DAC benefits from the iPurifier2 now, I expect you will want to keep it your system.


----------



## EuropeanEar

amigastar said:


> Normally i don't believe in Different Cable Sounds, *BUT *I've ordered the Audioquest USB Carbon last year from amazon which i didn't keep.
> But i listened to it and i'm pretty sure the sound was different than my cheaper USB Cable, it had a blacker background sounded slightly more analog.
> Now i'm on the fence of buying the Audioquest USB Carbon again and keep it this time. But like i said i don't believe in cable sound.


Let me summarize what you just said.  You listened to the Audioquest Carbon USB cable. You are pretty sure that the sound was different than your cheaper cable but you still don't believe in cable sound.  No offense, but this means that beliefs overwrite first hand experience in your world.


----------



## amigastar (Jun 27, 2021)

EuropeanEar said:


> Let me summarize what you just said.  You listened to the Audioquest Carbon USB cable. You are pretty sure that the sound was different than your cheaper cable but you still don't believe in cable sound.  No offense, but this means that beliefs overwrite first hand experience in your world.


No offense taken 
Yes, i've listened to the Carbon USB cable but even if i heard a difference that doesn't mean automatically its true, i could be a hearing phenomenon where i just believe and imagine it's better.


----------



## manueljenkin

Mediahound said:


> USB audio spec is 2.0 so a 3.0 cable does nothing for that.


Depends on the driver used. No one is stopping anyone from writing a custom driver that uses usb3.0 speed or features (necessary or not is another question). Don't know of their dacs but their signal regenerators apparently work at usb 3.0 speed.


----------



## audiobomber (Jun 28, 2021)

manueljenkin said:


> Depends on the driver used. No one is stopping anyone from writing a custom driver that uses usb3.0 speed or features (necessary or not is another question). Don't know of their dacs but their signal regenerators apparently work at usb 3.0 speed.


iFi Audio DAC's also have USB 3.0 ports. I read once on their website a claim that 3.0 processing results in better noise control, but I couldn't find this statement again when I looked for it recently. I have an iOne, which I've used with several 2.0 and 3.0 cables. My Oyaide neo d+ Class A USB 2.0 cable sounds better than basic StarTech and Belkin USB 3.0 cables, fed from a USB 3.0 port on my laptop.

USB cables affect tonality, and soundstage. Some are warm sounding, some cool, some rather sibilant. Finding a USB cable with complementary sound is the most important thing, IME. Just because a cable costs more or has a big reputation doesn't mean it will sound better in your system. I'm using a generic 2.0 cable with the iOne right now that sounds really good, smoothed out the top end and a nice soundstage. My Oyaide is out on loan right now, will have to try it on the iOne vs. the freebie generic once I have it back.


----------



## The Jester

Plenty of choices … I’ve had good results with Oyaide USB cables, both the D+ Class S and the cheaper D+ class A with a slight preference for the cheaper D+ class A, good quality and reasonably priced as they’re usually aimed at and sold through Pro audio stores …


----------



## amigastar (Jun 29, 2021)

I think i'm gonna return the Carbon Cable, i see no difference to my Forest Cable, so yeah. Maybe there is a difference maybe not, can't tell honestly.


----------



## bagwell359

Have no experience with all the offerings.  But I have a .7 meter Oyide Neo B to C.  I didn't expect much and I still need to conduct more testing.  However, the mids seem smaller, but much cleaner/more focused.  Highs are less glaring and smoother.  Bass seems clearer.  Will have to as I said carry on with AB blind testing.


----------



## Mediahound

My review of the new Supra Excalibur USB:


----------



## Whitigir

Anything best for the money is DIY


----------



## Sonic Defender

Or whatever isn't defective and comes from the shelves at a Best Buy or The Source. As another perspective. I used a USB cable that was included with a printer for a $3000 DAC. Sounded absolutely perfect. Again, just as another perspective.


----------



## Redcarmoose

There are many roads to Rome.


----------



## manueljenkin

Whitigir said:


> Anything best for the money is DIY


Not sure if you can diy a wire from copper without good manufacturing facility!


----------



## Whitigir

manueljenkin said:


> Not sure if you can diy a wire from copper without good manufacturing facility!


LOL!!! Thanks for the good laugh, but that still doesn’t change what I said earlier


----------



## greenblured

Whitigir said:


> LOL!!! Thanks for the good laugh, but that still doesn’t change what I said earlier


Did a swap from the standar Supra to a Neo Oyaide d+ usb class s. 3 meter is arond a hundred bucks..
This cables are promotet againtst the pro marked. DJ's,studios and the like. Very sturdy. Power awg18/signal awg22, double shielding, solid connectors, platinum+rhodion plated bronce alloy terminals.
Calmer more analog sounding than the supra. less sibilance, not as 'glassy'. Fy first impresions where that music sounded dark and muffled. Held out and swept in the old Supra after 14 days. Soundet sharp,glassy and fatiguing. So very satisfied with the Neo( made in china designed by Oyaide) The real deal is out of my budget.


----------



## The Jester (Sep 2, 2021)

Picked up both the D+ class S and the slightly cheaper class A in past couple of years, interestingly, slightly preferred the class A as being slightly more neutral or “organic” sounding … but that‘s just my feelings … they make a pure silver version for the “hifi market” too at over twice the cost…  well made robust cables though …


----------



## greenblured

The Jester said:


> Picked up both the D+ class S and the slightly cheaper class A in past couple of years, interestingly, slightly preferred the class A as being slightly more neutral or “organic” sounding … but that‘s just my feelings … they make a pure silver version for the “hifi market” too at over twice the cost…  well made robust cables though …


Did you use the same lenght for A and S?


----------



## The Jester (Sep 2, 2021)

I did, though both only 1 metre, found them very robust and use the Class S for my mobile setup .. Laptop/DAC/ powered Sub and satellites mainly cause it’s much easier to see in lower light conditions, less chance of leaving it behind ….
All that being said they are pretty good cables for the money…


----------



## audiobomber (Sep 2, 2021)

The Jester said:


> Picked up both the D+ class S and the slightly cheaper class A in past couple of years, interestingly, slightly preferred the class A as being slightly more neutral or “organic” sounding … but that‘s just my feelings … they make a pure silver version for the “hifi market” too at over twice the cost…  well made robust cables though …


I also tried the silver Class S vs. the copper Class A and preferred the copper version. The Class S was too bright in my system so I returned it and kept the Class A.

I noticed that Oyaide no longer manufacture the original Neo d+ Class A cable, as the pure copper is no longer being manufactured. I believe there is a replacement, called Oyaide Elec D + USB Class A Rev2, but I'm not sure how it compares.


----------



## antastik (Sep 6, 2021)

audiobomber said:


> I kept the Oyaide Neo d+ Class A USB 2.0 cable and returned the more expensive Class S cable. Both are very detailed, but I preferred the Class A for its warmer, more organic sound vs. the bright Class S sound. This review describes what I hear in the Class A cable. http://www.theabsolutesound.com/articles/oyaide-neo-d-class-a-usb-20-cable/


Based on your findings, I gave the class A a try and it is indeed good. I wish I could try class S, but it is hard to find. Have you come across other notable usb cables of reasonable price? Thank you


----------



## audiobomber (Sep 6, 2021)

antastik said:


> Based on your findings, I gave the class A a try and it is indeed good. I wish I could try class S, but it is hard to find. Have you come across other notable usb cables of reasonable price? Thank you


The Ghent Audio Y-cable is not quite as good as the Oyaide Class A when judged as a pure USB cable, but for DAC's that benefit from upgraded external USB power, it can make a significant difference. Pretty much a necessity with my Rasberry Pi 3B+ due to its dirty USB bus. Also great with my Dell Inspiron laptop.
https://ghentaudio.com/part/u21.html


----------



## 548184 (Sep 8, 2021)

Howdy, I wasn't planning on posting on this thread until my battery-powered supercapacitors to power my USB optical cable was ready.

But Monoprice has a sale going on right now, so here we go....

For USB, you may want to consider a Monoprice USB optical if it fits your needs:



> That's right, Geoff. SlimRun optical + "any USB cable" I have tried sounds better than that USB cable alone with the Extreme.



https://www.whatsbestforum.com/thre...-crème-de-la-crème.27433/page-151#post-631947

This statement may indicate it has similar decoupling effects to Toslink optical. You can even use mains + USB charger or mains + power conditioner + USB charger. USB battery pack when critical listening.

USB optical + low latency realtime === pretty nice.

I run exclusively battery-powered low latency realtime NUCs and supermicro motherboards.  I also run low latency realtime on my Raspberry Pis.  I call them baby Taiko Extremes since the low latency realtime Taiko Extreme @ $35,000 is out of my range, these will have to do for now.

https://taikoaudio.com/taiko-2020/sgm-extreme-music-server/





https://www.monoprice.com/product?p_id=16377



> This inexpensive Monoprice SlimRun USB 3.0 extender is the functional equivalent of MSB's Pro USB adapter for a non-MSB DAC and comes in lengths of up to 164 feet and for the 65 foot length that I am using, I paid only $200 USD. Unlike a lot of other optical USB solutions, it is backward compatible with USB 2.0 and provides a pure optical data connection from server to DAC. While 5V VBUS and power to the receiving module is generally provided by the server's USB port, it can be fully bypassed with a 5V battery (or in my case, an LPS-1.2) resulting in complete galvanic isolation. To ensure that this is the case, I have shut off the 5V VBUS coming from the JCAT Femto USB card by pulling its jumper. Unlike the Corning optical USB cable (which I own and sounds horrible), this fiber USB extender when coupled with Sablon's latest USB cable sounds REALLY good and, to my ears, is superior to the Intona USB 3.0 isolator (which I find flattens the sound stage). There is a very obvious drop in noise floor resulting in greater clarity and definition with no perceptible downside that I can hear. The further benefit of this complete galvanic isolation is that I no longer hear any benefits from grounding the Extreme. This solution has proven so effective that I use it for both listening rooms but just as importantly, I am now fully leveraging the Extreme in both listening rooms without the use of a sound degrading endpoint.
> 
> Finally, I was curious to know how the Extreme would sound as a Roon endpoint while using my AMD 12-core server as the Roon server. Would the Extreme benefit from offloading some of the work to another high-power device? The presentation was full and dynamic but I found that the AMD server actually slowed down the Extreme and I say this quite literally. In this configuration, the Extreme sounds slower and it is a definite step backward. Thus far, the Extreme sounds best standalone.



https://www.whatsbestforum.com/thre...treme-the-crème-de-la-crème.27433/post-631854

Since Chord DACs requires the VBUS, there was no issue with the SlimRun. If you use Thunderbolt (USBC) optical, there's no VBUS communication so that needs to be ruled out.

Unfortunately, the DAC-side of the USB optical gets warm when powered, so I added heatsinks wrapped by non-conductive Kapton tape:



You may need to adjust so your USB ports doesn't stress. A single heatsink is fine.

So if you have >= DAVE, Monoprice Slimrun USB optical + Sablon

If you have <= TT2, Monoprice Slimrun USB optical + Uptone USPCB

I'll try to post photos of how I power the USB optical cable in a month.  I don't like any USB cooper wires on the DATA side in my chain, only optical + PCB.  USB cooper wires also add coloration by imparting their own signature.  I only like perfectly neutral signatures like glass toslink and now USB optical + PCB.  Also, since I run exclusively low latency, I don't know how much cooper wires will slow down or impede the sound.  I enjoy the quick, tight, layered pro audio audiophile bass that only realtime audio can provide.  Cooper wires will only slow things down.

The sale may only last a few more days.  You can also try to search coupon codes for free delivery.  It works, but you have to click through some links.


----------



## antastik

UWOTM888 said:


> Howdy, I wasn't planning on posting on this thread until my battery-powered supercapacitors to power my USB optical cable was ready.
> 
> But Monoprice has a sale going on right now, so here we go....
> 
> ...


Impressive


----------



## 548184 (Sep 9, 2021)

I'm just a messenger standing on the shoulder of Giants.  I just add in my own flavor and power everything by battery and ultracapacitors.  I'm not eccentric enough yet to revamp the power supply of my home with a few dedicated 30A power lines (1 for digitial, 1 for analog), so batteries are good alternative as I can scale to hundreds or thousands of batteries if needed.  It's objectively a better solution too.

Romaz, whom discovered the Monoprice Slimrun USB optical solution, and Ray-Dude are the OG innovators (Giants) with a Million Dollar Audio Budget.  If you search Chord DAVE threads, you will find their innovative solutions from long ago.

Many of these innovators have moved on to other Audiophile sites.

On Ray-Dudes system below, you can see how the Monoprice SlimRun USB plays a role in both their Chord DAVE and Chord Hugo TT2.  These guys have been through hundreds of USB cables and can have pretty much any USB cable they want.  You can see how they architect their USB solution below.  It's a K.I.S.S. methodology by just powering their USB optical with a battery.  If the Monoprice SlimRun USB optical is good enough for their Million Dollar Audio gear, it's good enough for my purposes.

It's pretty much a given people are aware that RFI/EMI is a fungus in Audio systems today.  By avoiding Cooper wire, you avoid attracting noise and brightness in your system.  Batteries + optical can pretty much eliminate 99%+ of these noises and provide a nice, soothing super low noise floor which levels up the other positive SQ attributes.

I'll get back when my battery project to power this cable is complete...

NOTE:  Separating a clean side USB is a thing.  They use dedicated PCI-E USB cards to separate from the internals of the PC.  So none of them connect directly to the USB motherboard, they connect to a PCI-E USB card which essentially decouples from the PC internals.






^^^
Nice clean and neutral.  No coloring or artificial preservatives.  Batteries placed at specific weak points to offset potential RFI threats.  Technically, the Monoprice SlimRun USB optical is a USB optical extender.  "USB cable" is maybe not in play anymore.  Technically, the Uptone USPCB is not a USB cable either.  So technically, "Monoprice SlimRun USB optical + Uptone USPCB" is not a "USB Cable"?

I found some interesting snippets:



I'll be using about 500 Farads for the USB optical cable.  TT2 has about 60 Farads.





Why buy an expensive DAC if a traditional USB cable dominates or plays a major role in the signature?  It should have no role.





Traditional Cooper Wire USB cable pulled out the chain is a good thing.


----------



## manueljenkin (Sep 9, 2021)

UWOTM888 said:


> I'm just a messenger standing on the shoulder of Giants.  I just add in my own flavor and power everything by battery and ultracapacitors.  I'm not eccentric enough yet to revamp the power supply of my home with a few dedicated 30A power lines (1 for digitial, 1 for analog), so batteries are good alternative as I can scale to hundreds or thousands of batteries if needed.  It's objectively a better solution too.
> 
> Romaz, whom discovered the Monoprice Slimrun USB optical solution, and Ray-Dude are the OG innovators (Giants) with a Million Dollar Audio Budget.  If you search Chord DAVE threads, you will find their innovative solutions from long ago.
> 
> ...


Don't know about other cables, but I can confirm that the uptone uspcb sounds amazing (have one for my DAC) and for the price it is a steal. However, it blocks you from the features of having a wire connection, especially if you preferred a longer cable run or different positioning of the dac from your system.


----------



## 548184 (Sep 11, 2021)

manueljenkin said:


> However, it blocks you from the features of having a wire connection, especially if you preferred a longer cable run or different positioning of the dac from your system.



I know it's a paradigm shift in thinking, so it's an adjustment to understand.

What is happening is you are combining two solutions together:

A USB optical extender with a female USB A port +++ the male A port of the USPCB.





^^^ USB-A Male goes to source.  USB-A Female goes to USPCB.  USPCB Male (microB or B) goes to DAC.

Combined together you get the benefits of Toslink optical (No RFI, Super Speed Throughput, netural sound sig, etc.) and flexible length.  From 33 feet (10 meters) minimum to 164 feet max.



It's my fault as I wasn't prepared to post on a USB cable thread.  I just wanted to make a timely post since the Monoprice USB optical was on sale.  I'll try to take better photos in a month.



Sale over:





This solution should satisfy both the objectivist and the subjectivist.

I like that your passionate about the USPCB, this just adds to that solution with a pliable optical cable that can be installed on any system.

When combined together, it's a lethal combination.

This solution is for those whom think about how each part interacts with one another to provide no noise and no coloration, it's not for those whom are susceptible to Marketing and want a certain Brand.  It's about finding the optimal solution with no bias.  If you want a certain Brand of USB cable for bragging rights or to put in your signature, this isn't that sexy solution.  I'm just proposing an out of box alternative.

The USPCB by itself is an inflexible device.  This solution is not that.  I agree, the USPCB in isolation is a PITA.  Combined with an optical extender, it's easy as pie.  Adjustments just need to be made to not stress the DAC's USB port.

Just think of it as if Uptone offered an optical extension cable to the USPCB how life would be much easier.

Another snippet:

https://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=161789.0






It's just another USB option if you want to listen to your expensive DAC it all it's glory with super low noise floor and no coloring.  If you want your USB cable to play a role in your DAC's signature and bottle-necking your DAC, there are plenty of traditional USB cable solutions.  If your DAC is not transparent and resolute enough in the first place, it may not even be worth the effort to switch out your traditional USB cable.


----------



## genefruit (Sep 12, 2021)

UWOTM888 said:


> I know it's a paradigm shift in thinking, so it's an adjustment to understand.
> 
> What is happening is you are combining two solutions together:
> 
> ...


If you look at the Amazon listings for these and check out the used/returns, you can get a very good deal.  I picked up the 32.8ft one which arrived today for $22.15 and there is a 49ft one for $21.40 right now.  I figure for this amount and 30 days to return to Amazon, I can give it a trial.


----------



## 548184 (Sep 12, 2021)

genefruit said:


> If you look at the Amazon listings for these and check out the used/returns, you can get a very good deal.  I picked up the 32.8ft one which arrived today for $22.15 and there is a 49ft one for $21.40 right now.  I figure for this amount and 30 days to return to to Amazon, I can give it a trial.



Nice.  I'll check back in a month.  Taking a break from the site.

USB over Fiber Extenders is also a thing, but they get complicated and expensive.  Also I don't know how to mesh with USPCB.  It's easier for devices like USB hard drives and USB WiFi to isolate from the PC internals (no noise, USB bus can get noisy), but since the USPCB is so inflexible it's almost impossible to integrate without additional cabling.


----------



## Metron

Do (decent) USB adapters used on DAC-computer connection cables affect sound fidelity in any way?


----------



## Ufanco

Tried a lot of different usb c to c otg cables. My favorite is the custom ones from XINHS.


----------



## bagwell359

greenblured said:


> Did a swap from the standar Supra to a Neo Oyaide d+ usb class s. 3 meter is arond a hundred bucks..
> This cables are promotet againtst the pro marked. DJ's,studios and the like. Very sturdy. Power awg18/signal awg22, double shielding, solid connectors, platinum+rhodion plated bronce alloy terminals.
> Calmer more analog sounding than the supra. less sibilance, not as 'glassy'. Fy first impresions where that music sounded dark and muffled. Held out and swept in the old Supra after 14 days. Soundet sharp,glassy and fatiguing. So very satisfied with the Neo( made in china designed by Oyaide) The real deal is out of my budget.


well some cables in various apps seem to be better (RCA intercconnects, spkr cable for difficult loads).  Others are just the same (balanced interconnects).  So with some trepidation I bought the same Neo (B to C).  I blind A/B'd it for some hours.  Neo .7M long & 1M for generic - both wrapped in brown paper, and both changed by my wife.  I cut the tests short.  The Neo was more relaxed and the treble was not as angular, softer and more analog, but with more real detail.  Not a huge difference but a smaller and and still welcome one.  I'm chasing bigger game cost wise, will live with these for some time forward.


----------



## 548184 (Oct 11, 2021)

Here's some photos of the USPCB + SlimRun optical combo w/ a gaming DAC.  The last photo is to show how one can power with a USB battery bank Type-A female so you can decouple from the Mains.  I plan to power with battery-powered Super Capacitors for Music so will post if I get that going...  I just use a Mains battery charger when gaming, so it's flexible how you want to power depending on your tolerance.  Reports are that a LPS maxs out the SQ, but I avoid Mains at all costs when active Music listening is involved.


----------



## DEANO2

I wonder who in all those supposedly brilliant recording engineers squashed the living daylights via loudness in recordings ? Perhaps because they used souless generic data loving USB cables they couldn't tell the loss of dynamics , tempo and emotion in the music.


----------



## Whitigir

DEANO2 said:


> I wonder who in all those supposedly brilliant recording engineers squashed the living daylights via loudness in recordings ? Perhaps because they used souless generic data loving USB cables they couldn't tell the loss of dynamics , tempo and emotion in the music.


Lol! You are funny!

I think the loudness war ideas comes from the time where the major of the music were being pirated digitally, and with limited storage capacity, so they were shared via MP3 and so on.  If you listen to any of those low-res format, with very low quality DAC from a cheap laptop, and a cheap earbuds, then you will hear the sounds being recessed in a weird way.  So, those engineers thought that in order to hear more details, which results in better music, they would equalize all the dynamic and it loudness to be equal across the spectrum.  It does result in a better way to listen to music back then.  

However, if you compare the 2 different sources as mentioned above via high-end DAC/Amp, you will hear the loudness war to be flat and weird, where as the other MP3 still offer depth and cues of imaging.

Just different majority of the Consumer market for different products.  I just hope that the recording industry deal away with this loudness war as soon as possible, since everyone can enjoy high-end DAC/amp system nowadays, even the usb cables is higher end, which doesn’t need the loudness to be tampered with


----------



## Ronengeller

why not just connect the dac with optical to the source? also if connected to a Mac mini usb straight to the dac wouldn’t the uspcb just pass along all the noise?


----------



## The Jester

DEANO2 said:


> I wonder who in all those supposedly brilliant recording engineers squashed the living daylights via loudness in recordings ? Perhaps because they used souless generic data loving USB cables they couldn't tell the loss of dynamics , tempo and emotion in the music.


Louder song attracts more interest than a softer one, using every last Db of dynamic range is one thing, using compression to jam everything up as loud as possible degrades the sound quality as well as reducing any perceived difference between songs, having vocalists corrected with auto tune doesn’t help either …


----------



## Strat1117

The Jester said:


> Louder song attracts more interest than a softer one, using every last Db of dynamic range is one thing, using compression to jam everything up as loud as possible degrades the sound quality as well as reducing any perceived difference between songs, having vocalists corrected with auto tune doesn’t help either …


Agreed. Just remember, these are the same ‘engineers’ who claim things like wires all sound the same and only measurements count. I always laugh when someone plays the engineer card, as if it makes their opinion law.  Given the manifestly poor quality of so many commercial recordings - all professionally engineered - I think the opposite is more likely. 😬


----------



## PointyFox (Dec 30, 2021)

Strat1117 said:


> Agreed. Just remember, these are the same ‘engineers’ who claim things like wires all sound the same and only measurements count. I always laugh when someone plays the engineer card, as if it makes their opinion law.  Given the manifestly poor quality of so many commercial recordings - all professionally engineered - I think the opposite is more likely. 😬


What card do you have that trumps the engineer card?


----------



## Strat1117

PointyFox said:


> What card do you have that trumps the engineer card?


Common sense, among others. Try reading my post again. Then you can read my signature. A professional engineer is responsible for every bad recording out there, and there are PLENTY - how is it a credential for anything?

_Res ipsa loquitur. _


----------



## PointyFox (Dec 30, 2021)

Strat1117 said:


> Common sense, among others. Try reading my post again. Then you can read my signature. A professional engineer is responsible for every bad recording out there, and there are PLENTY - how is it a credential for anything?
> 
> _Res ipsa loquitur. _



Oh, I took "engineer" to mean like...actual engineer. Not someone who mixes songs.
Though to be fair, common sense, well, scientific common sense, could be used against your argument as well.


----------



## The Jester

Can’t always blame the individual, recording, mastering, mixing, final production is all done by professionals, ie it’s their job they get paid for, but they don’t make the decisions about how the studio customer wants something to sound, or how much they want to spend on studio time, if the studio itself has no “minimum standard”  then there’s two options, do as requested or quit on principle of upholding personal “professional” standards, if you’re single with no ties then maybe, if you have dependants and bills to pay ?


----------



## Strat1117 (Dec 31, 2021)

PointyFox said:


> Oh, I took "engineer" to mean like...actual engineer. Not someone who mixes songs.
> Though to be fair, common sense, well, scientific common sense, could be used against your argument as well.


I meant the whole category of hobbyists who prefer to look at graphs over listening with their ears. These ‘scientists’ recorded the terrible sounding albums and designed the headphones you hate (along with the ones you like).  My point is that the evidence (that is, the multiplicity of divergent opinions regarding the relative merits of virtually any headphone) demonstrates beyond cavil that an engineering degree is simply and unequivocally NOT a credential for being capable of infallibly distinguishing good sound from bad. In MY OPINION, measurements do not mean much in choosing a satisfactory piece of audio gear (I don’t think they even reliably correlate to what we hear, but that’s a different discussion), any more than measurements could help you choose which flavor of ice cream is ‘better’.  All you can do is (hopefully) find what makes you happy, mostly through trial and error, perhaps with a little guidance from reviewers with whom you have a track record of agreement, and stick with that. Don’t be persuaded by self-appointed experts who use ‘science’ to tell you what you should and shouldn’t enjoy. The audio hobby is not a math problem with only one correct answer. If it was, it wouldn’t be much of a hobby at all. That’s all I’m trying to say.  I did not mean any personal offense, and I do not profess that all engineers are automatically wrong. Only that they are not automatically right.


----------



## Redcarmoose

Strat1117 said:


> I meant the whole category of hobbyists who prefer to look at graphs over listening with their ears. These ‘scientists’ recorded the terrible sounding albums and designed the headphones you hate (along with the ones you like).  My point is that the evidence (that is, the multiplicity of divergent opinions regarding the relative merits of virtually any headphone) demonstrates beyond cavil that an engineering degree is simply and unequivocally NOT a credential for being capable of infallibly distinguishing good sound from bad. In MY OPINION, measurements do not mean much in choosing a satisfactory piece of audio gear (I don’t think they even reliably correlate to what we hear, but that’s a different discussion), any more than measurements could help you choose which flavor of ice cream is ‘better’.  All you can do is (hopefully) find what makes you happy, mostly through trial and error, perhaps with a little guidance from reviewers with whom you have a track record of agreement, and stick with that. Don’t be persuaded by self-appointed experts who use ‘science’ to tell you what you should and shouldn’t enjoy. The audio hobby is not a math problem with only one correct answer. If it was, it wouldn’t be much of a hobby at all. That’s all I’m trying to say.  I did not mean any personal offense, and I do not profess that all engineers are automatically wrong. Only that they are not automatically right.


I love this post!


----------



## Joe Bloggs (Jan 2, 2022)

Strat1117 said:


> I meant the whole category of hobbyists who prefer to look at graphs over listening with their ears. These ‘scientists’ recorded the terrible sounding albums and designed the headphones you hate (along with the ones you like).  My point is that the evidence (that is, the multiplicity of divergent opinions regarding the relative merits of virtually any headphone) demonstrates beyond cavil that an engineering degree is simply and unequivocally NOT a credential for being capable of infallibly distinguishing good sound from bad. In MY OPINION, measurements do not mean much in choosing a satisfactory piece of audio gear (I don’t think they even reliably correlate to what we hear, but that’s a different discussion), any more than measurements could help you choose which flavor of ice cream is ‘better’.  All you can do is (hopefully) find what makes you happy, mostly through trial and error, perhaps with a little guidance from reviewers with whom you have a track record of agreement, and stick with that. Don’t be persuaded by self-appointed experts who use ‘science’ to tell you what you should and shouldn’t enjoy. The audio hobby is not a math problem with only one correct answer. If it was, it wouldn’t be much of a hobby at all. That’s all I’m trying to say.  I did not mean any personal offense, and I do not profess that all engineers are automatically wrong. Only that they are not automatically right.


To equate one engineer or another having made a bad product every now and then with being able to throw out the laws of physics / facts of computational data transfer at will is just laughable.  And as pointed out, we're talking about electronics engineers not music sound engineers anyway.  Those probably can't play or record music worth a damn, but yes, their word on how your equipment works IS at least part gospel, coz they made the damn things.

>the multiplicity of divergent opinions regarding the relative merits of virtually any headphone / equipment

If users having opinions is proof of anything, why don't you simply say that cables must sound different because users have opinions on them?


----------



## Strat1117 (Jan 2, 2022)

Joe Bloggs said:


> To equate one engineer or another having made a bad product every now and then with being able to throw out the laws of physics / facts of computational data transfer at will is just laughable.  And as pointed out, we're talking about electronics engineers not music sound engineers anyway.  Those probably can't play or record music worth a damn, but yes, their word on how your equipment works IS at least part gospel, coz they made the damn things.
> 
> >the multiplicity of divergent opinions regarding the relative merits of virtually any headphone / equipment
> 
> If users having opinions is proof of anything, why don't you simply say that cables must sound different because users have opinions on them?



Nah, just funnin’ ya’. Engineerz know everything! The rest of us dopes should just buy whatever they say measures the best, coz they alwayz agree with each other and, you know, science. 

🙄


----------



## PointyFox

Strat1117 said:


> Nah, just funnin’ ya’. Engineerz know everything! The rest of us dopes should just buy whatever they say measures the best, coz they alwayz agree with each other and, you know, science.
> 
> 🙄



When subjected to a blind test the dopes don't even agree with themselves!


----------



## Joe Bloggs (Jan 2, 2022)

Strat1117 said:


> Nah, just funnin’ ya’. Engineerz know everything! The rest of us dopes should just buy whatever they say measures the best, coz they alwayz agree with each other and, you know, science.
> 
> 🙄


Actually equipment these days can measure atrociously (relatively speaking) and still sound _every bit as fine_ as equipment with exemplary measurements, because the bar has been raised so far above audible thresholds.  Not that that is reason for lauding such equipment ABOVE good measuring ones, though...

I guess my position can be summed up as "it's your money, at least you aren't getting anything (audibly) worse..."

Now, since no one would ever believe that _everything sounds the same_ (and a whole industry would collapse if they did*), everyone quibbles endlessly over what sounds the best, and one day it is the good measuring stuff and the next day it's the bad measuring stuff.  That it can be so interchangeable and up to individual opinion is further proof that _they don't actually sound any different_.  Better even than DBT, which is so difficult to set up properly and so easy to falsify ("I did a double blind test and could pick this red cable over that black one every time! (No I didn't, I was looking at the cables every time.  But just you try to prove it 1000 miles away from my location!  Ha!)").

*Being a MOT, I should be quaking in my boots for spouting such world-ending heresy, but I'm not, because I'm confident that not a single person would take me seriously anyway, least of all you 

^The above excludes headphones and loudspeakers of course, every single pair of those measures (and sounds) completely differently...


----------



## Ronengeller

Has anyone try to solder the male lightning and female usb parts of the apple camera adapter to bypass the cable? Or maybe cutting each end and solder a nice cable in between the two connections?


----------



## ericx85

Got the Wireworld Platinum starlight 8 cable today. I'm about 80% sure it sounds a little different than the Audioquest Carbon I have, but I think it has more to do with the fact that the Wireworld is a 3ft USB B to USB C connection and the Carbon being 6ft USB B to USB A. Both are in the back of my PC and I think its just that the type C port is better quality than the A ports


----------



## Redcarmoose

ericx85 said:


> Got the Wireworld Platinum starlight 8 cable today. I'm about 80% sure it sounds a little different than the Audioquest Carbon I have, but I think it has more to do with the fact that the Wireworld is a 3ft USB B to USB C connection and the Carbon being 6ft USB B to USB A. Both are in the back of my PC and I think its just that the type C port is better quality than the A ports










Yes. I made the mistake of ordering the 1.5m instead of the .75m too. I could not return it.


----------



## gregorio

Strat1117 said:


> Just remember, these are the same ‘engineers’ who claim things like wires all sound the same and only measurements count.


You don’t seem to realise a simple basic fact, that digital audio is itself only a measurement. Therefore, of course only measurements count, when you’re listening to digital audio what is it that you’re listening to that isn’t digital audio?


Strat1117 said:


> I always laugh when someone plays the engineer card, as if it makes their opinion law. Given the manifestly poor quality of so many commercial recordings - all professionally engineered - I think the opposite is more likely.


That would be true ONLY if the “manifestly poor” recordings were made by engineers and all the good/sublime recordings weren’t. Obviously that isn’t the case and your conclusion is obviously false.

And, what makes an engineer’s opinion law (or the opposite) is the reliable evidence/science which supports (or contradicts) their opinion. 


Strat1117 said:


> Don’t be persuaded by self-appointed experts who use ‘science’ to tell you what you should and shouldn’t enjoy.


What self-appointed experts use science to tell you what to enjoy?


Strat1117 said:


> The audio hobby is not a math problem with only one correct answer.


That’s exactly what it is if you’re listening to digital audio, didn’t you know that? Although it’s not really a “problem” anymore, it was solved long ago. 

G


----------



## swva

I picked up a Belkin Hi-Speed Gold Series cable recently after reading it was great for use with audio.


----------



## teknorob23

gregorio said:


> You don’t seem to realise a simple basic fact, that digital audio is itself only a measurement. Therefore, of course only measurements count, when you’re listening to digital audio what is it that you’re listening to that isn’t digital audio?
> 
> That would be true ONLY if the “manifestly poor” recordings were made by engineers and all the good/sublime recordings weren’t. Obviously that isn’t the case and your conclusion is obviously false.
> 
> ...



Albert Einstein said it best:  “Not everything that can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted.”


----------



## PointyFox

The Emperor said it best: “the most marvelous cloth...invisible to anyone who was unfit for his office or unforgivably stupid”.


----------



## gregorio (Jan 22, 2022)

teknorob23 said:


> Albert Einstein said it best:  “Not everything that can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted.”



True but NOT applicable to recording/reproducing audio, because if it can’t be counted then it can’t be recorded or obviously be reproduced!

Digital audio is just numbers, numbers representing the results of a measurement, that’s it, there’s nothing else. Anything that can’t be measured or represented by these numbers can’t be recorded (or reproduced).

G


----------



## kumar402

Have been happy camper with Supra USB cable. It’s best bang for buck cable


----------



## Joe Bloggs

teknorob23 said:


> Albert Einstein said it best:  “Not everything that can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted.”


https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/05/26/everything-counts-einstein/

Einstein didn't say that, a sociologist did.  Typical sociologist saying...

Einstein got us to count that which was previously uncountable and your daily GPS navigation today depends on it.


----------



## Moose246

https://www.matrix-digi.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=67

This one's not too shabby.


----------



## simon740 (Mar 12, 2022)

Today I order this one:




For connection between LG V40 and Ares II :-D


----------



## SquareOFortune (Mar 21, 2022)

This thread was a fun read! 

I do wish more of our community was able to reach the difficult state of being neither credulous nor hubristic; there are endless snake-oil salesmen and charlatans selling confirmation bias, sunk-cost fallacies, and emotional investment, but there are also areas of study that aren't yet perfectly quantified with the scientific data and measurement tools we've devised thus far.

The Problem:
Regarding this particular topic (digital information sent over metallic low-voltage wiring) for instance, we know that the raw zeros and ones from the source to the destination DAC are bit-perfect even with cheap, poorly made USB cables. However, EMI and other signal noise artifacts can be—and have been—objectively measured with USB and other digital transport technologies, and differences can be seen with the naked eye in graphs, and—depending on how poor the gear/power source is or how much the amp's volume gets cranked up to negate lowered pre-amp EQ and/or power-hungry monitors—even heard for some listeners to at least some degree in blind tests.



> How could there _possibly _be a difference in the analog output stage due to the digital source hardware's transport cable?


That's the primary argument from those who say "digital is literally binary, so either the complete data arrives or it does not; there is no old-school analog 'fuzziness' about the digital process like there is with fully analog systems (e.g. vinyl)."


Unfortunately, that fails to consider and understand how USB actually works end-to-end. Yes, the 0s and 1s *are *literally identical on the transmission and receiving ends. That is absolutely correct. But the crux of the matter is to instead ask _how_ those binary data states are represented on metal wiring in the first place?

Analog voltage swings to create near-square waves.

Yes, the raw information itself is digital, of course, but *the transport method for that digital data is analog*, which means it's therefore bound by—and affectable by—the laws of physics (specifically electromagnetism). It's almost like two ships communicating with Morse code. You'd be correct to state that the message either arrives fully in tact as intended, or it does not (like seeing a black screen on one's TV due to HDMI interference or desync), but the actual, physical _method_ for sending that Morse code is still subject to whatever medium it inhabits—be it foggy ocean air, a clear sunny day, a dim or bright spotlight, etc. There are more variables at play than whether the startpoint and endpoint are binary; the transport method and medium between the two does matter IF that binary data is to be converted to an analog format. If all you’re doing is sending and receiving digital information (documents, photographs, etc.), the media type doesn’t matter so long as the data arrives in tact and passes error-correction. Since audio does not enter an amp and monitor as that perfect digital data, the transport media could still matter.

Anything involving analog voltage stepping on metal wiring is subject to the laws of physics—specifically EMI—and USB in particular can even cause issues within its own cable since its 5V power on pinout 1 is physically sharing close (sometimes unshielded, in the case of most cheap cables) proximity with the two data pinouts (which is why you see some people opt to physically separate the power and data segments of USB when attempting to achieve minimal artifacting).

The Solution
In the end, that means the only perfect way to avoid the possibility of analog artifacting with any digital transport is to utilize technology that cannot possibly be interacted with by the physics of electromagnetism/EMI or RFI, such as fiber optics transceivers over silicate glass (which is why that's at the core of global internet structure). I really hope we get consumer-grade fiber optical transport options in the coming years akin to what's been common in the network engineering world for decades, because TosLink obviously doesn't take complete advantage of what the highest-end DACs are capable of these days. Then these discussions can be relics of the past and we can all go back to arguing about important stuff like the Harman target and HRTF. 

Until then, you're ALL correct:

*1) Don't buy diamond-encrusted USB cables or support scammers selling silly unsubstantiated nonsense,* but also...

*2) Don't assume you know everything humanity is capable of discovering about the nuances of electromagnetism and its undeniable and measurable affect on shoddy consumer analog transport media which uses voltage swings to represent on/off states, and how that affects subsequent analog amplitude stages if not accounted for.*




> TL;DR:
> There is value in humility, and the quest to know the right answer should lead us to utilizing the scientific method and double-blind experiments to determine which transport methods yield the best measurable, objective results, and whether that aligns with the average listener's preferred subjective audio experience.




Tangential aside: 
This reminds of how there seemed to be a sizeable market for used power conditioners when I was looking into them, which turned out to oftentimes be due to the fact that smoothing the power and making it more consistent "cleans" up the noise floor for some people with less-than-ideal power sourcing in their listening environments, but because they increase output impedance, they also remove some of the dynamics, body, liveliness, or "heft" from some genres. The solution for this ended up being to use a full power "regenerator" instead of a conditioner, which provides clean power AND lowered output impedance (a la PS Audio's PowerPlant series). But none of that was really explored or measured for decades; people would buy conditioners, notice the improved clarity alongside the diminished dynamics, and that's about where it ended for a long while. It started as subjective feelings by experienced listeners who couldn't quite put their finger on why music sounded less enjoyable on some conditioners vs the "dirty" wall outlet. It was subjective until it wasn't. It _was_ eventually studied, measured properly, experimented with, and solved by pioneering engineers who were open-minded enough to ask questions and not dismiss subjective data, which can be an important starting-point for gathering objective results. Lots of things are bound to our imperfect senses and confirmation biases, but not everything. We always have plenty to learn, so don't assume that because you can't personally perceive a difference between two product categories that none exists.

So continue to be skeptical, _always_, and be ever mindful of dishonest schemes to separate you from your money, but don't be conceited or assume you know all there is to know either. There's a balance between the two. Instead, be curious and follow the research where it takes us.

_[One example of objectively-measurable differences in USB cables and adapters at a low noise floor beyond the capabilities of human hearing, but still undeniably present nonetheless and potentially audible if high-gain + low pre-amp settings are required:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/do-usb-audio-cables-make-a-difference.1887/]_


----------



## gregorio

SquareOFortune said:


> I do wish more of our community was able to reach the difficult state of being neither credulous nor hubristic; there are endless snake-oil salesmen and charlatans selling confirmation bias, sunk-cost fallacies, and emotional investment, *but there are also areas of study that aren't yet perfectly quantified with the scientific data and measurement tools we've devised thus far.*


I've bolded this supposed "other side of the argument" and that's the problem! It's an incorrectly supposed argument rather than a rational argument because:
1. Yes, nothing can be perfectly quantified with scientific measurements but we don't need to perfectly quantify it in order to make assertions about audibility, we just need the measurement tools to exceed the level of audibility and they do, typically by a factor of a thousand to a million or more times!
2. Yes, there are areas of study that can't yet be quantified with scientific data/measuring tools but we're NOT talking about those areas. We're talking about the areas of digital data transport and analogue audio signals, which can and have been quantified (well beyond audibility) for many decades.


SquareOFortune said:


> [1] However, EMI and other signal noise artifacts can be—and have been—objectively measured with USB and other digital transport technologies, and differences can be seen with the naked eye in graphs, [2] and—depending on how poor the gear/power source is or how much the amp's volume gets cranked up to negate lowered pre-amp EQ and/or power-hungry monitors—even heard for some listeners to at least some degree in blind tests.


1. Yes, they can be seen with the naked eye in graphs but ONLY if: A. We measure the result with measurement tools that can measure 1,000 times or more below audibility *and* B. We scale/magnify the results so the differences can be seen with the naked eye!
2. I'm not sure what you're saying here. If we take some noise/artefact at say -130dB and amplify sufficiently so that it is audible, say by 70dB or more, then sure it could be detected in blind tests but then obviously we're hearing an artefact at -60dB not at it's actual level of -130dB and of course we can't actually listen to a recording like that because it would blow our ear drums.


SquareOFortune said:


> SquareOFortune said:
> 
> 
> > How could there _possibly _be a difference in the analog output stage due to the digital source hardware's transport cable? .
> ...


No, that's NOT the primary argument or indeed any level of the argument. The actual arguments is: There will always be some level of measurable difference in every analogue output stage (given measurement tools >1,000x more sensitive than the human ear). Given a particularly badly designed DAC, a difference due to the USB cable can be measured but even in such an extreme case, this difference is ~1,000 times below audibility.


SquareOFortune said:


> Yes, the 0s and 1s *are *literally identical on the transmission and receiving ends. That is absolutely correct. But the crux of the matter is to instead ask _how_ those binary data states are represented on metal wiring in the first place?


Why is that "the crux of the matter"? It's not due to the following because:


SquareOFortune said:


> Yes, the raw information itself is digital, of course, but *the transport method for that digital data is analog*, which means it's therefore bound by—and affectable by—the laws of physics (specifically electromagnetism).


No, the transport method for that digital data is NOT analog. An Analog signal is a continuous signal, a digital signal represents data as a set of discrete values, not a continuous signal. While it's not an analog signal, it is an electrical signal and therefore it is "_affectable by--the laws of physics_" - However, it's subject to ALL the relevant laws/rules of physics, NOT "_specifically electromagnetism_". Some of which you have clearly failed to consider (see below).


SquareOFortune said:


> It's almost like two ships communicating with Morse code. You'd be correct to state that the message either arrives fully in tact as intended, or it does not (like seeing a black screen on one's TV due to HDMI interference or desync), but the actual, physical _method_ for sending that Morse code is still subject to whatever medium it inhabits—be it foggy ocean air, a clear sunny day, a dim or bright spotlight, etc.


That's a good analogy and maybe more appropriate than you realise but it demonstrates the opposite of what you appear to be claiming. Let's say I want to send the message "Good Morning" to another ship: The radio operator transmits this as a series of dots and dashes (Morse Code), the receiving operator interprets these dots and dashes back into "Good Morning", writes that message on a piece of paper and hands it to the recipient. What happens if it's foggy, sunny or there's some other interference? The dots and dashes are maybe a little more distorted but the receiving operator still interprets "Good Morning" and writes it down for the recipient. This "Good Morning" message is completely unaffected, the written words are not more foggy, brighter or distorted in any way at all, they're exactly the same as without that interference. The only time interference has any effect whatsoever on the received written message is when the interference is so great that the receiving radio operator cannot differentiate the dots and dashes and interpret "Good Morning". This is pretty much exactly how digital signalling works, the amount of interference does not affect the data at all, unless it's so great that a zero can no longer be differentiated from a one.


SquareOFortune said:


> [1] ... the transport method and medium between the two does matter IF that binary data is to be converted to an analog format. If all you’re doing is sending and receiving digital information (documents, photographs, etc.), the media type doesn’t matter so long as the data arrives in tact and passes error-correction.


1. As in the above analogy, it doesn't matter, that was the whole point of digital in the first place. 
2. But you're not just "_sending and receiving digital information (documents, photographs, etc.)_", you're also reading those documents and looking at those photographs aren't you? That also requires a conversion to analogue, by a printer or video display. 


SquareOFortune said:


> Anything involving analog voltage stepping on metal wiring is subject to the laws of physics—specifically EMI—and USB in particular can even cause issues within its own cable since its 5V power on pinout 1 is physically sharing close (sometimes unshielded, in the case of most cheap cables) proximity with the two data pinouts (which is why you see some people opt to physically separate the power and data segments of USB when attempting to achieve minimal artifacting).
> 
> The Solution


Yes you said that above but again it's NOT an analogue voltage and also again, it's not specifically EMI, there are other laws/rules of physics and signalling to which it's also subject. For example the Nyquist/Shannon sampling theorem and differential signalling to name just two. We do not need to eliminate interference in order to perfectly transport the data, we just need to make sure it is not so high that the data is not corrupted and we ensure that with another law/rule of physics/signalling, Common Mode Rejection (CMR). "The Solution" would therefore be to implement CMR in the USB protocol, which it does and always has (using differential signalling)!


SquareOFortune said:


> [One example of objectively-measurable differences in USB cables and adapters at a low noise floor beyond the capabilities of human hearing, but still undeniably present nonetheless and potentially audible if high-gain + low pre-amp settings are required:
> https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...s/do-usb-audio-cables-make-a-difference.1887/]


1. Of course, it's always possible for some boutique manufacturer to screw-up a DAC design and induce some artefact that even extremely cheap DACs manage to completely avoid but even in the extreme example you've provided the differences are not just beyond the capabilities of human hearing, they're even beyond the capabilities of amps + speakers/HPs to reproduce! Because:
2. No they're not potentially audible or even vaguely close to audible! The objectively measured difference in your example was at around -130dBFS, now what peak level do you normally listen to music at, 80dBSPL maybe 90dBSPL? Your HP/Speakers obviously cannot produce sound 130dB lower (-50dBSPL or -40dBSPL), that's way below their noise floor and even if they could, 0dBSPL is roughly the lowest limit of human hearing anyway. Doing it the other way around and amplifying those differences by enough so that they can be heard gives us this: Average sitting room noise floor is about 40dBSPL, so let's say we amplify those differences so they're also 40dBSPL and maybe just about audible. Our peak level is of course still 130dB higher, which would be 170dBSPL, your speakers/HP cannot produce anywhere near that level and if they could, it would instantly blow your ear drums out, probably put you in a coma and possibly kill you. It can't be audible or even "potentially audible" if you have no ear drums or are dead! 


SquareOFortune said:


> [1] But none of that was really explored or measured for decades; ... [2] It started as subjective feelings by experienced listeners who couldn't quite put their finger on why music sounded less enjoyable on some conditioners vs the "dirty" wall outlet.


1. Of course it was. They were measured and explored by commercial recording studios years/decades before there even were any audiophiles!
2. No it didn't, it started at least in the early 60's and probably much earlier. The actual designers of (studio) audio equipment were manufacturing their own power conditioners/supplies for their specific equipment from at least that time and they did that with measurements. I remember a huge conditioner/supply for an old Neve desk from the late 60's which took 2 people to move and had to be left switched on 24/7. Manufacturers still do it of course, modern digital equipment uses tiny amounts of power compared to large old analogue mixing desks and the AC mains power has to be converted and conditioned for it to even work in the first place.


SquareOFortune said:


> [1] So continue to be skeptical, _always_, and be ever mindful of dishonest schemes to separate you from your money, but don't be conceited or assume you know all there is to know either.    [2] There's a balance between the two. [3] Instead, be curious and follow the research where it takes us.


1. I don't assume I know all there is to know but then we're not talking about "all there is to know", just about digital and analogue audio. I do know more than a fair bit about digital/analogue audio but I don't need to know everything, just the basic facts of how/why it works would be enough. 
2. There is no balance between the two. In the extreme cases where there are differences, they're so tiny they can't even be reproduced by speakers/HPs, so there's no differences in the sound to hear. We have to look elsewhere for the answer.
3. That's the problem! For many, "research" just seems to mean reading various articles and videos made by manufacturers selling their products, plus reviewers and other audiophiles depending on that marketing as their only source of information. We wouldn't have this problem if people followed the actual research, the proven/demonstrated facts.

G


----------



## SquareOFortune (Mar 21, 2022)

gregorio said:


> G


I appreciate your detailed and well-considered response, and will be giving it the full time it deserves when I’m off work. I’m always happy to learn and hear about others’ experiences, perspectives, and research.

Until then, here’s a teaser I’ll be interested to hear your thoughts on:


There are some specific solid state and full tube-stage amplifiers which have almost the same measurements (some of Schiit’s older models are a good example that founder Jason Stoddard referred to in an interview when discussing this very quandary below), yet they sound incredibly distinct. Is this because we’re not measuring the right variables, or our measuring tools are not advanced enough to quantify why they sound different? Do they actually sound the same since the measurements are nearly the same and everyone’s just crazy? Curious about your thoughts here.


There are audible differences between some cheap-to-midrange USB cables with some DACs which don’t account for EMI isolation (usually cheap ones). Is anyone who hears a difference crazy? Are they getting really lucky during blind tests when attempting to guess when cables have changed? Or are some poorly-shielded source outputs and unshielded/unfiltered DAC inputs potentially more susceptible to EMI/RFI when processing analog stage conversion, and thus benefit from all the help they can get?
From what I’ve been able to tell, anyone with a good high end DAC is not likely to notice much (or any) difference between a free printer USB cable or a Supra. But DACs built with poor filtering and shielding (like sub-$99 products from 4+ years ago), can sound different.



My $6 ferrite choke TrippLite USB cable works great with my old AKM 4490 DAC module, but the noise floor is still pretty bad due to coil whine from my video card whenever my screen refresh rate goes above 120Hz, so if I disable all audio and turn up the volume, I hear extremely loud hums and jittering pulses that change relative to what variable frame rate I see on my FPS counter (GSync, so the monitor isn’t at a static rate). 
It’s not just a subjective guess about sound quality, and it’s not confirmation bias; it’s an issue that’s well within audible range and is loud as all getout. But I don’t notice it in day-to-day use when enjoying music, playing games, or watching movies. 
Maybe I need a better shielded USB PCIe card. Maybe a USB cable with the 5V rail removed/separated might help. I don’t know yet since it’s not bothersome enough to fix at my typical listening volumes (though it is very audible if I get really into a song and turn it up), but I’ll definitely note down which variables I test if I try multiple solutions. 
The point is that it’s not digital noise from a supposedly perfect digital transport cable. It’s clearly-audible analog interference coming from poorly-shielded hardware in my source machine (PC), and if the USB cable were impervious to EMI/RFI and only ever transported perfect 0s and 1s and nothing else, the noises I’m hearing would be impossible. I’d be happy to record the noise for you if interested.


I look forward to reading the rest of your post later today! 🤓


----------



## SquareOFortune

Thanks again for the reply, and for going into so much depth. As promised, here are some selected thoughts:



gregorio said:


> we just need the measurement tools to exceed the level of audibility and they do


This is accurate at face-value, but we haven’t necessarily perfected all of our methodologies for accomplishing that goal given that some products technically measure nearly identically yet sound undeniably different. My favorite example was discussed during an interview with Jason Stoddard (which I referred to in my previous comment) where he was unable to answer why some tube amps could hardly be distinguished from some solid-state amps with every measurement under the sun, and still subjectively sound vastly and obviously distinct from each other. I'll repost the questions here for easier multi-quote replying: 

Is this because we’re not measuring the right variables, or our measuring tools are not advanced enough to quantify why they sound different? 
Do they actually sound the same since the measurements are nearly the same and everyone’s just crazy? 
Curious about your thoughts on that.

Our simian brains have accomplished a lot, but we’re not infallible, and don’t yet have the right objective tools to completely explain every single one of our subjective experiences, including our auditory senses. I trust that we will at some point in the not-too-distant future, but we’re not at the end of discovering all there is to know quite yet, so a little curiosity and continued experimentation is the way forward, not dogmatic assumptions of the absolute omniscience of our current tools.



gregorio said:


> the transport method for that digital data is NOT analog





gregorio said:


> it's NOT an analogue voltage


These are paradoxical statements. Electricity is not digital. 

Electricity is an element of the natural world which we’re controlling to represent artificial digital exchanges and processing. 

That’s why signals transmitted over copper wires (or any other metal) are referred to as “near-square waves”; they’re very closely-approximating perfect square waves—and they do it well enough to be interpreted as what we need it to—but that doesn’t mean the electrical signaling can’t possibly be influenced by its surroundings if not properly filtered on both the sending and receiving ends, shielded inbetween, and accounted for during processing, nor does that mean that such interference won't find its way to subsequent analog stages, regardless of whether or not that impacts the actual data integrity. They're separate variables, and what makes one ideal doesn't necessarily improve the other, and when they're intermingled so intricately as they are with digital media conversion to analog audio, both need to be bolstered by appropriate means (error-correction in the case of digital, and shielding/filtering in the case of analog).

Are Chord, Schiit, and numerous other manufacturers lying about why they're spending money and effort to include galvanic isolators on the circuit boards of their DACs? I suppose that’s certainly possible, but it seems a bit conspiratorial to jump to that assumption.

Are enterprise network engineering corporations like TrippLite lying about why they add ferrite cores to their USB cables? Perhaps, but that also seems odd given how inexpensive the end products are ($6 for the one I use, as mentioned in my previous comment), so it seems like there’s not much snake-oil markup to be gained by putting in the effort and money to design such products simply for show or marketing fluff.

Or are all these engineering groups implementing buffers and filters and shielding due to the fact that electricity is what's passing through USB, and electricity—again—is inherently not digital or artificial. It is a natural product being expertly manipulated to in its voltage and amplitude in such a way that it can be interpreted by computational enclaves as 1 or 0, but it's not perfect; with today's technology, we can only achieve digital signaling which is impervious and immune to RFI/EMI using photons (light) and quantum states (which we haven't fully reined to our control quite yet). That means that information passed between computational devices is usually quite accurate, but must still contend with the surrounding natural world in which it resides.

Luckily, it can be checked by error correction features to be sure the data arrives as it departed, so computationally, that’s almost always good enough for a processing unit to go about its job. The very existence of error correction technology—such as ECC-RAM or the transport layer of the OSI model—in and of themselves are sort of a monument of refutation for the claim that "digital is digital and can't be improved further or interfered with," as none of these technologies would be necessary had humans invented anything like always-perfect, immutable digital transport and processing.

If, taking a step further, that digital data then needs to interface with analog outputs, then all the digital perfection in the world—if it existed—still would not account for the need to also consider analog interference. That will never change until we grapple with and bend quantum state computing to our will.



gregorio said:


> We do not need to eliminate interference in order to perfectly transport the data


Since I addressed this above, I won’t go into much detail, but it seems as though you’re stopping halfway with that thought. Yes, you’re correct: the ways in which we’re able to manipulate and control analog electrical signaling to approximate digital on/off states just needs to be good enough to match on both ends of a message.

The next part of that true statement should add the qualifier that “acceptably accurate—or even bit-perfect digital data—does not inherently lead to flawless analog conversions of that perfect digital information. Analog signaling has its own distinct needs for acceptable levels of distortion.”


----------



## gregorio (Mar 22, 2022)

SquareOFortune said:


> I’m always happy to learn and hear about others’ experiences, perspectives, and research.


That's refreshing to hear because most aren't, they're only happy to hear about perspectives that broadly match their own and "research" based on marketing. So those of us who post the actual facts are typically flamed and/or encouraged to go elsewhere.


SquareOFortune said:


> [1] There are some specific solid state and full tube-stage amplifiers which have almost the same measurements (some of Schiit’s older models are a good example that founder Jason Stoddard referred to in an interview when discussing this very quandary below), yet they sound incredibly distinct. [2] Is this because we’re not measuring the right variables, or our measuring tools are not advanced enough to quantify why they sound different?


1. This raises several issues, the most important of which is to always bare in mind is that nearly all audiophile manufacturers have faced a quandary for many years and in some cases for as much as 4 decades or so: If measurements really do quantify audio, why would anyone spend the significant (and in some cases the huge) premium on audiophile equipment in favour of a cheaper unit which measures (nearly) the same? There have been many "solutions" to this quandary over the years but they all mainly boil down to falsely discrediting measurements; "we can't measure everything", "our hearing is more accurate than any measurement" and countless variations on these and similar themes. In most cases there is some fact (sometimes even a very simple fact) and logic that easily falsifies such marketing but the audiophile industry has learned to omit/dodge/obfuscate these facts because literally, their survival depends on it. With that in mind, on to your question:

Tubes are strange devices compared to modern digital and solid state technology. With digital for example, it's effectively perfect (well beyond the bounds of audibility) all the way from it's noise floor up until it reaches it's absolute maximum at which point it fails catastrophically, this is a linear response. Tubes are not like this, they are non-linear. So for example at one level of amplification a tube amplifier maybe audibly perfect and measure virtually the same as an audibly perfect SS amp but at a higher amplification it will start to add significant amounts of distortion in an unpredictable/non-linear way, even harmonics, odd harmonics and inter-modulation distortion for instance. Electric guitarists have taken advantage of this fact since the 1960's, deliberately over-driving tube amplifiers into producing massive amounts of these various distortions, even to the point of defining "their sound" by it, Jimi Hendrix probably being the most famous early example. Of course, we can measure ALL this distortion, even tiny amounts of it and the "simple fact" that proves this is the example of digitally (modelled) guitar amps/cabs, which couldn't exist if we were not able to very accurately measure ALL this non-linear behaviour. Of course, manufacturers cannot publish all this information in relatively short, simple marketing literature specs, they tend to only publish the spec of optimal performance, the point at which distortion is minimal, and therefore the published specs can appear very similar to another (SS) amp with minimal distortion. This highlights a common marketing tactic which many audiophiles "fall for" (which is why it's still common of course); confusing measurements with published specs.

2. The answer is therefore: We absolutely can measure the right variables and our measuring tools are way more than advanced enough to quantify the difference (and have been for many years/decades). Whether a manufacturer chooses to publish all or even the right variables in their specs is another question though!

I have no idea why Jason Stoddard couldn't answer as I just have, I would be more than surprised if he didn't know it as it's hardly some new discovery, so I can only assume he didn't want to for some reason.


SquareOFortune said:


> Do they actually sound the same since the measurements are nearly the same and everyone’s just crazy? Curious about your thoughts here.


If the amps are being operated at the exact point at which the measurements are nearly the same then there's no other option, assuming that by "nearly the same" you mean differences that are below audibility. However, the "everyone's crazy" thing is backwards. A common and sometimes vital ingredient in audiophile marketing is to mischaracterise perception/perceptual errors. It is not crazy to experience perceptual errors, it's normal, everyone experiences perceptual errors almost constantly and we probably wouldn't have survived as a species if we didn't. So it's crazy to believe that audiophiles are somehow not subject to it. Can audiophiles not perceive the stereo effect, are they dead, does the world disappear every second or two? Obviously not.


SquareOFortune said:


> [1] There are audible differences between some cheap-to-midrange USB cables with some DACs which don’t account for EMI isolation (usually cheap ones).[2]  Is anyone who hears a difference crazy? [3] Are they getting really lucky during blind tests when attempting to guess when cables have changed? [4] Or are some poorly-shielded source outputs and unshielded/unfiltered DAC inputs potentially more susceptible to EMI/RFI when processing analog stage conversion, and thus benefit from all the help they can get?


1. Again, quite a bit of that is backwards unfortunately. Using your example of video screens; yes, they do typically produce very significant interference. As I mentioned before, there's a simple fact that negates the audiophile logic/marketing, in this case: What about the hundreds of millions of TVs and computer monitors that have very cheap audio DACs and amps inside them, only a few CMs away from that source of heavy interference? Are these very cheap DACs and Amps somehow not subject to the laws of physics or do they achieve decent isolation very cheaply?
2. As above about the "crazy" description.
3. What blind tests? Sure I've seen a lot of faulty blind tests with such a result but I'm aware of no controlled blind tests that do. If you wish to continue this part of discussion we'll have to do it elsewhere because in this subforum even discussing this most reliable form of testing is banned, which by itself should tell you something!
4. We now seem to be talking about the performance of the source and/or DAC, not of the cable.


SquareOFortune said:


> From what I’ve been able to tell, anyone with a good high end DAC is not likely to notice much (or any) difference between a free printer USB cable or a Supra. But DACs built with poor filtering and shielding (like sub-$99 products from 4+ years ago), can sound different.


From the evidence, very cheap DACs manage to isolate their analogue sections from interference, from say the source or video screens, pro-audio ones do too (even the cheap ones). The only ones that appear to have problems are some DAPs (perhaps unsurprisingly) and some audiophile DACs. It should be noted that USB (or any) cables only reduce interference affecting the cable itself, not interference in the signal that occurred before the signal entered the cable.


SquareOFortune said:


> Our simian brains have accomplished a lot, but we’re not infallible, and don’t yet have the right objective tools to completely explain every single one of our subjective experiences, including our auditory senses.


Ah yes, another old time audiophile marketing classic. Sure, we don't have measurements or even a complete explanation of how the human brain creates subjective experiences but a USB cable doesn't have a human brain (or subjective experiences), we're not trying to measure the performance of the human brain, we're trying to measure the performance of a cable.


SquareOFortune said:


> These are paradoxical statements. Electricity is not digital.


I didn't say it was digital, I said it wasn't analogue. An analogue (audio) signal is a continuously varying voltage that is analogous to the sound pressure waves, which is why it's called analogue. A digital signal is also (typically) an electrical signal but it's not a continuously varying voltage, is not analogous to sound pressure waves and therefore is not an analogue signal. This is the whole point of digital in the first place, interference that would change (audibly) an analogue signal has no effect on a digital signal.


SquareOFortune said:


> [1] That’s why signals transmitted over copper wires (or any other metal) are referred to as “near-square waves”; they’re very closely-approximating perfect square waves—and they do it well enough to be interpreted as what we need it to—but that doesn’t mean the electrical signaling can’t possibly be influenced by its surroundings if not properly filtered on both the sending and receiving ends, [2] shielded inbetween, and [3] accounted for during processing, [4] nor does that mean that such interference won't find its way to subsequent analog stages, regardless of whether or not that impacts the actual data integrity.


1. Again, here your talking about source and DAC, not the cable.
2. Here you are talking about the cable and even cheap ones do isolate from interference with differential signalling. Again though, that's interference that would affect the signal in the cable, not interference that occurs before the cable (EG. The source).
3. Interference has no effect during processing, unless it's great enough to change the data.
4. It's obviously the responsibilty of the DAC to isolate it's analogue side from noise/interference in it's power supply or wherever. A cable is obviously just responsible for the signal that's in the cable, not for what happens to the signal before or after it leaves the cable.


SquareOFortune said:


> They're separate variables, and what makes one ideal doesn't necessarily improve the other, and when they're intermingled so intricately as they are with digital media conversion to analog audio,


They're not intermingled so intricately, that's the whole point of digital audio in the first place. If they become intermingled in the DAC that's a serious design flaw in the DAC.


SquareOFortune said:


> Are Chord, Schiit, and numerous other manufacturers lying about why they're spending money and effort to include galvanic isolators on the circuit boards of their DACs?


Work it out for yourself. How much money and effort are TV and video display manufacturers spending on their audio DACs (costing just a few bucks) right next to a really serious source of interference? The example you yourself posted demonstrated how a Schiit DAC did show a (very tiny) difference but a much cheaper DAC didn't. Again, it's a very old audiophile marketing tactic; "big-up" some potential problem that isn't a problem or has been solved cheaply years ago and explain the money/effort/skill it takes to solve that (non) problem to justify "audiophile" prices, (jitter is another classic example of this tactic but there are several). It's not a conspiracy, the audiophile manufacturers didn't all attend secret meetings and agree on this lie. It's just basic audiophile marketing and the manufacturers just jump on the bandwagon when it's profitable to do so.


SquareOFortune said:


> The very existence of error correction technology—such as ECC-RAM or the transport layer of the OSI model—in and of themselves are sort of a monument of refutation for the claim that "digital is digital and can't be improved further or interfered with," as none of these technologies would be necessary had humans invented anything like always-perfect, immutable digital transport and processing.


Just so I'm clear, you're effectively claiming that digital is proven to be imperfect because digital makes it perfect? The whole basis of digital communications is that the error can be controlled to any arbitrary level, this is how it differs from analogue communications where the error cannot be controlled to any arbitrary level, there is always the cumulative effect of (at least) Johnson noise. The only question with digital is how low do we want the error to be? Think of an iPhone for example, it's capable of around 600 billion (64 bit) instructions a second, if the transportation or processing of just one of those trillions of bits were in error, an iPhone would probably crash once every second. Again, a simple demonstrated fact.


SquareOFortune said:


> If, taking a step further, that digital data then needs to interface with analog outputs, then all the digital perfection in the world—if it existed—still would not account for the need to also consider analog interference.


Yes and that is in fact the case. For over a decade now it's been standard practice to mix/produce and master music recordings in 64bit (float) but of course we can't output that, we can't even output 24bits. The most any DAC can output is around 20bits because much beyond that is the error limit of analogue. That doesn't affect music reproduction of course, because they almost never use more than about 10 bits. When it comes to external noise/interference ANY competent DAC should be able adequately deal with that.


SquareOFortune said:


> The point is that it’s not digital noise from a supposedly perfect digital transport cable. It’s clearly-audible analog interference coming from poorly-shielded hardware in my source machine (PC), and if the USB cable were impervious to EMI/RFI and only ever transported perfect 0s and 1s and nothing else, the noises I’m hearing would be impossible. I’d be happy to record the noise for you if interested.


As above, no USB or any other sort of cable is impervious to signal interference before the the signal enters the cable. The signal will always have some level of interference after it exists the cable, just as fog or sunlight will cause interference on what the radio operator receives (in the previous analogy) but that interference is removed by the conversion process, which only considers zeros and ones. It's certainly possible to incompetently design a DAC so the interference bleeds over into the analogue section but again, if extremely cheap DACs can manage the task competently, why should (some) more expensive audiophile DACs not be able to?


SquareOFortune said:


> Maybe I need a better shielded USB PCIe card. Maybe a USB cable with the 5V rail removed/separated might help. I don’t know yet since it’s not bothersome enough to fix at my typical listening volumes (though it is very audible if I get really into a song and turn it up), but I’ll definitely note down which variables I test if I try multiple solutions.


It's always been the case that home computers are rich sources of interference and nearly all of them output quite a serious amount of noise from their USB ports. And, it's very likely that an external USB DAC will get it's signal from a home computer. These two facts are hardly some secret known to only a few. So why do we find audiophile DACs that are apparently not designed to be connected to a home computer or perhaps more accurately, are incompetently designed to be connected to a home computer? Either of your two solutions my work but personally, I'd be looking at getting a competently designed DAC, they can be very cheap!

G


----------



## SquareOFortune

gregorio said:


> G


I appreciate your detailed responses to each of my examples and questions, and have enjoyed the discourse.

Based on what we’ve discussed thus far, I believe that there seems to be quite a bit that we’re actually aligned on, though we may simply be talking past each other since we perceive the same baseline and agreed-upon facts differently, and therefore express or explain their nuances and interactions differently.

I was able to tell that some of my intended points didn’t quite land with the interpretation I had intended, and that may be the case due to our likely different professional backgrounds and our past/current hobbyist interests.

For instance, when I’m designing, inspecting, and testing low-voltage solutions at my current job, I know that the digital source and digital receiver do *not* actually hold all the cards for the end-result output, and that cabling matters just as much—and if installed incorrectly, much more—to successful functionality.

I almost wish I could have you visit one of our site projects so I could demonstrate this to you live and in-person and gauge your reaction:

If I’m transmitting data from a 10Gbps ethernet source router or switch (so a fully digital transaction end-to-end) to a client interface card or switch port through CAT6a and I place live high-voltage insulated copper wiring (the same as what’s used in all modern residential and enterprise buildings) parallel to that CAT6a within about 7” or less, you can watch the Tx/Rx packet drops and retries spike before your very eyes.

When the high-voltage is moved further than 12” away, the packet loss and retry rates immediately go back to normal.

Nothing to do with the quality or capability of the source host; nothing to do with the quality or capability of the receiving client. This happens on $92 PCIe NICs and $10,000 enterprise appliances all the same, because it’s not dependent on—or resolvable by—the host or client gear.

It’s simply and solely the physical cable itself being affected by nearby interference (EMI, in this case), and directly leading to measurable data loss.

In the same example test above, if the CAT6a is wound to run at about 45° to 135° of the nearby high-voltage wire, the packet drops and retry rates are normal. Straighten the CAT6a within 7” or so of the high-voltage for longer than about a 6” span, and the packet losses jump back up.

This is why you’ll see low-voltage data wire (or, more rarely, the high-voltage instead) wound side-to-side in many modern professionally-fitted rough-stage building sites (and even some pricier new-build houses, which we do regularly).

This interaction is typical for 10Gbps networks utilizing ethernet (specifically CAT6a (copper twisted pairs) at 500Mhz when in multi-gig mode, and especially if it’s traditional unshielded/UTP, but we avoid proximity-parallel HV/LV for STP as well to ensure 100% transport reliability for the life of the installation).

Thus, part of our official building inspection requirements regardless of the ethernet category used are that no low-voltage copper data lines can be parallel to high-voltage wire within 12” for longer than a 6” span.

The source and receiver are not the end-all/be-all, even in 100% digital applications. The wiring type, build, quality, shielding, length, resistance, AWG, and even the physical shape of the route it takes can all potentially be variables for whether communications arrive reliably in a timely manner with minimal latency (due to error-correction) and fully intact, if at all, should there be an amateur installer who assumed that only the source host and the receiving client mattered.

This is why we also occasionally employ room-to-room fiber optic data drops for some clients, since there is no possible risk of RFI or EMI, and the only “shielding” necessary depends on how rough the installers or client will be with the wire. In the case of network fiber optics, all of your earlier statements about how the host and client are all that matter are actually true, so long as the fiber isn’t bent beyond its manufacturer’s specifications, doesn’t develop micro-fractures from tension stress/pressure, and is a length within the transceivers’ capabilities (so come to think of it, even with fiber optics, the wire’s build and installation environment do still matter, just in vastly different regards 😅).

Even though we may fundamentally disagree on the matter of modern transport technology quality and reliability, and obviously have different experiences under our individual belts that shaped those views, I thoroughly enjoyed reading your insights and appreciate that we were able to have a fruitful and civil fireside chat these last few days. 🤓


----------



## gregorio (Mar 24, 2022)

SquareOFortune said:


> I almost wish I could have you visit one of our site projects so I could demonstrate this to you live and in-person and gauge your reaction:


I don’t doubt what you stated in your last post and I’m not surprised by it. Likewise, it would be interesting to see your reaction if you visited my place of work, although I’ve had several audiophiles visit the various studios I’ve owned over the last 30 years, so I’d have a fair idea what to expect.


SquareOFortune said:


> Even though we may fundamentally disagree on the matter of modern transport technology quality and reliability…


It’s not that we disagree on that matter, more that we disagree on it’s relevance. Sure, there’s a lot of modern technology employed in the recording industry, even some cutting edge technology, such as machine learning for example but fundamentally it’s old technology and even more so as far as audio reproduction is concerned.

For example, standard uncompressed stereo 44/16 is just 1.4Mbps, that would barely even register on your modern 10Gbps networks. Just last week I was recording (a favour for a friend) a choir on location. I only had a small office as a control room, there were 3 desktop computers with screens, 2 laptops, 3 banks of mic pre-amps, various other audio equipment, external backup drives, power cables all over the place, extensions hanging off extensions, a total mess (but I had to work with what I was given). Snaking it’s way through this mess, a 4m crappy old USB 2 cable transferring from a 10 year old, relatively very cheap ADC in real time, 24 simultaneous channels of 24/96. 10 hours of recording time, not a single drop out, no detectable errors, distortion or noise on analysis, let alone audible distortion/noise. This was way more demanding and worse conditions than a consumer environment and USB2 is 22 year old consumer technology, hardly “modern transport technology”.

Again, audiophile marketing would like us to believe that digital audio is a new technology and they’re at the cutting edge of it, that’s just nonsense. Digital audio was first deployed in 1951 (by AT&T), 6 years BEFORE the first stereo vinyl was released to the public! In the late 1960’s the BBC was using digital audio to transfer audio from it’s main broadcasting center to it’s regional radio transmitters. By the time CD was released to the public in 1984, digital audio was already over 30 years old and some of the early CD players were already beyond audibly perfect. By the end of the 1990’s, audibly perfect ADCs and DACs could be made for peanuts. In the recording industry we had to start doing 8 or 10 times “loop backs” in order to reliably hear the artefacts.

More than 20 years later and of course the audiophile industry has to keep discovering (or making up) supposed problems, that their latest equipment fixes, to get you closer to audio perfection …. that was actually already achieved with high quality reproduction equipment 40 years ago!

G


----------



## F208Frank

Audioquest carbon seems to be a pretty affordable USB cable running about $220 or so for .75M.


----------



## manueljenkin (Mar 26, 2022)

SquareOFortune said:


> This thread was a fun read!
> 
> I do wish more of our community was able to reach the difficult state of being neither credulous nor hubristic; there are endless snake-oil salesmen and charlatans selling confirmation bias, sunk-cost fallacies, and emotional investment, but there are also areas of study that aren't yet perfectly quantified with the scientific data and measurement tools we've devised thus far.
> 
> ...


Just a quick note: optical signals are far less deterministic than electrical signals (of course they are both electromagnetic in foundation but optical signals have extremely probabilistic nature in their generation etc) and needs substantial digital backend to function properly. This whole back end can get noisy (both switching noise + ground plane noise due to digital logics and also phase noise just because the data is kinda running more probabilistic. There’s a lot of math involved). I don’t quite believe optical to be a real fix to this problem.

Also optical cables have pretty strong requirements in terms of fabrication and quite often their tolerance to bending etc.


----------



## teknorob23

manueljenkin said:


> Just a quick note: optical signals are far less deterministic than electrical signals (of course they are both electromagnetic in foundation but optical signals have extremely probabilistic nature in their generation etc) and needs substantial digital backend to function properly. This whole back end can get noisy (both switching noise + ground plane noise due to digital logics and also phase noise just because the data is kinda running more probabilistic. There’s a lot of math involved). I don’t quite believe optical to be a real fix to this problem.



i agree...the so far insurmountable issue preventing optical from being and optimal solution for carrying data is that you cant turn light pulses into audio, at some point the light signal has to be converted back into an electronic signal whether its in the network feed or between the streamer and dac. The conversion process is an inherently noisy one, so you're better off dealing with this issue before it gets into your streamer or DAC, where you have no opportunity to intervene.


----------



## manueljenkin (Mar 26, 2022)

SquareOFortune said:


> If I’m transmitting data from a 10Gbps ethernet source router or switch (so a fully digital transaction end-to-end) to a client interface card or switch port through CAT6a and I place live high-voltage insulated copper wiring (the same as what’s used in all modern residential and enterprise buildings) parallel to that CAT6a within about 7” or less, you can watch the Tx/Rx packet drops and retries spike before your very eyes.


I hope you also observed the power consumption profiles as it tries to recover data from a sub optimal link. The electronics has to work harder in general (the whole architecture of how it goes about this is super complex and I wish to learn more about it someday) and it’s power consumption starts to get more erratic, and there’s very good chance this can influence the analog side as power supply noise (filtering this can be non trivial).


----------



## manueljenkin

F208Frank said:


> Audioquest carbon seems to be a pretty affordable USB cable running about $220 or so for .75M.


Uncomfortably looks at my sub 200$ DAC thinking about a cable more expensive than the dac. 😅


----------



## padawan25

teknorob23 said:


> Albert Einstein said it best:  “Not everything that can be counted counts and not everything that counts can be counted.”


Unfortunately it was sociologist William Bruce Cameron who coined the phrase originally


----------



## teknorob23

padawan25 said:


> Unfortunately it was sociologist William Bruce Cameron who coined the phrase originally



Mr Cameron made a very good point


----------



## padawan25

teknorob23 said:


> Mr Cameron made a very good point


Lol….he sure did


----------



## chesebert

Mediahound said:


> What's the best USB audio cable for the money?
> 
> I've been using a generic 3 Meter one for a while and don't really believe USB cables make much if any difference in audio quality, however, I'm getting some drop outs and do need to go that distance.
> 
> ...


As short as possible. The optimal cable is just hard-wired input and output plug without wires


----------



## NoTimeFor

Spura Excalibur is a very good usb cable,  I think. In my case, compare to a generic usb cable, the result is very dramatic. Bought the Spura to use with Holo May (once it arrives) but I couldn't wait so I hooked up the cable with Simaudio Moon 390 and Macbook Pro. Feeding upsampled pcm using hqplayer, the sound is dense and super smooth. Excellent imaging and separation- I think it's no worse than Mind Network connection which how I use the device normally. Definitely recommend this cable for people who are looking for a nice USB cable but don't want to break the bank account.


----------



## nwavesailor

Going from the basic Supra (1 meter) to the Excaliber (2 meter) tonight. I don't expect much more than the already good USB Supra.


----------



## audiobomber (Apr 3, 2022)

Deleted. Wrong thread.


----------



## deekod

Ronengeller said:


> Has anyone try to solder the male lightning and female usb parts of the apple camera adapter to bypass the cable? Or maybe cutting each end and solder a nice cable in between the two connections?


Fiio LT LT1 cable working great with my iPhone 12 to MJ2👍


----------



## Ronengeller

deekod said:


> Fiio LT LT1 cable working great with my iPhone 12 to MJ2👍


Thanks! Did you have a chance to compare to Apple cck for sound 
quality?


----------



## dougms3

padawan25 said:


> Unfortunately it was sociologist William Bruce Cameron who coined the phrase originally


I think you're missing the point of the quote, doesn't really matter who "coined" it, if Einstein is willing to repeat it.


----------



## deekod

Ronengeller said:


> Thanks! Did you have a chance to compare to Apple cck for sound
> quality?


Yeh maybe more clarity using the fiio, not much in it tbh


----------



## The1Signature (May 23, 2022)

JohnIgel said:


> If you have good enough equipment you can hear difference between USB cables.  I was running the AudioQuest Cinnamon and heard a definite improvement when I upgraded to the AudioQuest Carbon, more detailed and dynamic.


which length do you have?




Redcarmoose said:


> Yes. I made the mistake of ordering the 1.5m instead of the .75m too. I could not return it.


although i know the 75cm version is enough for me, i was thinking to buy the 150cm version - just in case when setup changes in the future.

however, after reading this forum and people buying sames cables with different sizes etc., i will buy the 75cm version now.


----------



## Ridonculous (Jul 4, 2022)

I'm new to the audiophile world and I currently have the following:
FiiO K5 Pro
HD560S
HD6XX

I used a regular printer cable from Amazon but I got interference / static. So, I decided to buy the Chroma Cables listed below and the interference went away. While doing my research on cables, I noticed that there are much, much more expensive cables to be had. One reasonably priced alternative to Chroma Cables was the Oyaide NEO d+ Class B. A seller on Amazon currently has a sale on the Oyaide cables and I wanted to know if there would be any difference if I got those cables instead. Does it even matter for someone like me with beginner equipment or would the cables only be of consequence for more premium setups?

$50 Oyaide NEO d+ Class B USB Type C to Type B Cable - 2 Meter (6.5 ft)
$45 Oyaide Neo d+ Series Class B USB Cable 2M

vs.

$17 Chroma Cables: Audio Optimized USB-A to USB-B Cable
$17 Chroma Cables: Audio Optimized USB-C to USB-B Cable with 56K Resistor


----------



## dougms3 (Jul 4, 2022)

Ridonculous said:


> I'm new to the audiophile world and I currently have the following:
> FiiO K5 Pro
> HD560S
> HD6XX
> ...


For price to performance value, you could try this.

https://www.aliexpress.com/item/325...st.0.0.21ef1802cyk1Qm&gatewayAdapt=4itemAdapt

I took apart one of these cables made from the knockoff odin wire. 

Not too sure but it looks like 24-28 awg, the core is solid silver or more likely sterling silver.  Each conductor has a PET or PTFE sleeve then spiraled aluminum/silver plated copper/sterling silver shield, then a PET or PTFE sleeve on top of that, maybe 8 conductors total.  I took a lighter to the wire and tried to burn the sleeve but it won't burn or melt so I'm assuming its not PVC.

It outperformed all the usb cables I've tested on my system, most expensive was $250.


----------



## Sonic Defender

In what ways did it outperform the other USB cables? You are most likely just referring to sighted listening tests where the more expensive and attractive the cable you look at, the better it sounds. What audible problems are there with a generic USB cable?


----------



## Sonic Defender

Ridonculous said:


> I'm new to the audiophile world and I currently have the following:
> FiiO K5 Pro
> HD560S
> HD6XX
> ...


This is a contentious issue with many, many experienced users telling you that cables make no difference at all unless the cable is poorly manufactured (I fall into that camp). You will also find many experienced users who swear that cables matter and they will spend ridiculous sums of money on them. You will have to determine what you think of course. I have used a generic Brother printer cable on a DAC that was worth almost $3000. I didn't care and it sounded wonderful.


----------



## dougms3

Sonic Defender said:


> In what ways did it outperform the other USB cables? You are most likely just referring to sighted listening tests where the more expensive and attractive the cable you look at, the better it sounds. What audible problems are there with a generic USB cable?


Sounds better, less noise and all the things associated with noise reduction.  IE more bass, cleaner, tighter bass, better dynamics, increased stage and depth, more microdetail, etc.  Listening tests and also as you can see I disassembled it to look inside to see what its made of.  Sure, looks pretty too I guess but I could care less about how a cable looks.

If you didn't notice the post I was answering, he stated this "I used a regular printer cable from Amazon but I got interference / static.".  Perhaps you think he's imagining this?  You can see the odin knockoff cable has heavy shielding and very good dielectric materials, that alone will help with the problem he's having.

Hey aren't you the guy that said you prefer bluetooth sound quality because it sounds better than a wired headphone?


----------



## headfry

dougms3 said:


> Sounds better, less noise and all the things associated with noise reduction.  IE more bass, cleaner, tighter bass, better dynamics, increased stage and depth, more microdetail, etc.  Listening tests and also as you can see I disassembled it to look inside to see what its made of.  Sure, looks pretty too I guess but I could care less about how a cable looks.
> 
> If you didn't notice the post I was answering, he stated this "I used a regular printer cable from Amazon but I got interference / static.".  Perhaps you think he's imagining this?  You can see the odin knockoff cable has heavy shielding and very good dielectric materials, that alone will help with the problem he's having.
> 
> Hey aren't you the guy that said you prefer bluetooth sound quality because it sounds better than a wired headphone?


Anyone who listens to a properly done USB cable on revealing equipment may be surprised to hear the benefits. Me, I went
from a stock USB to a Curious Hugo Link (bought used for CA $125) on my Mojo (now Mojo 2) and the difference was night and day.

Supra Excalibur is an excellent reasonably priced cable that is widely recommended.


----------



## Sonic Defender

dougms3 said:


> Sounds better, less noise and all the things associated with noise reduction.  IE more bass, cleaner, tighter bass, better dynamics, increased stage and depth, more microdetail, etc.  Listening tests and also as you can see I disassembled it to look inside to see what its made of.  Sure, looks pretty too I guess but I could care less about how a cable looks.
> 
> If you didn't notice the post I was answering, he stated this "I used a regular printer cable from Amazon but I got interference / static.".  Perhaps you think he's imagining this?  You can see the odin knockoff cable has heavy shielding and very good dielectric materials, that alone will help with the problem he's having.
> 
> Hey aren't you the guy that said you prefer bluetooth sound quality because it sounds better than a wired headphone?


Nope, saying Bluetooth sounds better than wired would be ignorant. I think it sounds just as good when implemented properly, but better than wired? Not me. You can find a well shielded cable I'm quite sure that costs under $30.


----------



## manueljenkin

Ridonculous said:


> I'm new to the audiophile world and I currently have the following:
> FiiO K5 Pro
> HD560S
> HD6XX
> ...


If you are fine with the spacing restrictions, uptone uspcb is awesome! It’s not really a cable but rather a pcb connecting from pc to dac.

If you’re going expensive it would be preferable to find one with tweakable connectors and properties like phasure lush 3 or ifi Gemini. The overall pairing is often synergy related and having tweakable parameters can help pair them better.


----------



## Mediahound (Jul 18, 2022)

I recently found another good budget audio USB cable that has similar conductors as higher-end USB audio cables (ie. silver plated copper conductors). It's from the Monoprice Monolith line:

https://amzn.to/3AZS1vS

I will say however that in terms of looks, it sorta reminds me of something out of the 1990's but to me that's minor since it's just gonna sit behind your gear anyways:


----------



## Ridonculous

manueljenkin said:


> If you are fine with the spacing restrictions, uptone uspcb is awesome! It’s not really a cable but rather a pcb connecting from pc to dac.
> 
> If you’re going expensive it would be preferable to find one with tweakable connectors and properties like phasure lush 3 or ifi Gemini. The overall pairing is often synergy related and having tweakable parameters can help pair them better.


When I joined this site last month, someone welcomed me with "say goodbye to your wallet" and I see what he meant. 

I ended up buying the Chroma Cables USB cables and they worked fine. The static that I previously got was gone.


----------



## manueljenkin (Jul 25, 2022)

Ridonculous said:


> When I joined this site last month, someone welcomed me with "say goodbye to your wallet" and I see what he meant.
> 
> I ended up buying the Chroma Cables USB cables and they worked fine. The static that I previously got was gone.


Glad you found a budget option that worked well for you! I bought two usb cables that together costed close to half the price of my dac (dac is a budget one 😅).


----------



## Mediahound

Mediahound said:


> I recently found another good budget audio USB cable that has similar conductors as higher-end USB audio cables (ie. silver plated copper conductors). It's from the Monoprice Monolith line:
> 
> https://amzn.to/3AZS1vS
> 
> I will say however that in terms of looks, it sorta reminds me of something out of the 1990's but to me that's minor since it's just gonna sit behind your gear anyways:



My video review of this cable is up:


----------



## Sampajanna

Shunyata FTW. I have an Omega. It is wonderful. Final Touch is also a great USB cable maker.


----------



## Brandfuchs

Wireworld Ultraviolet (1m for 30 quids on eBay) might be a good budget option


----------



## Temple

nwavesailor said:


> Going from the basic Supra (1 meter) to the Excaliber (2 meter) tonight. I don't expect much more than the already good USB Supra.


Did you hear much of a difference between the two? Thinking about picking up the standard Supra.


----------



## Temple

dougms3 said:


> For price to performance value, you could try this.
> 
> https://www.aliexpress.com/item/325...st.0.0.21ef1802cyk1Qm&gatewayAdapt=4itemAdapt
> 
> ...


What other cables did you compare this one to?


----------



## dougms3

Temple said:


> What other cables did you compare this one to?


Shunyata venom usb, xlo electric ultraplus usb and a few others.


----------



## nwavesailor

I did the same Supra change but for me it was a length issue with the 1 meter being a little short.
 I hear nothing different but I don't have young or golden ears and frankly I have not done A / B tests either.


----------



## Temple

Can someone recommend a USB cable comparable to the Supra Excalibur for around $100? Seems there prices went up.


----------



## Temple (Oct 1, 2022)

After reading most of this thread I have it narrowed down to:

-RiCables Magnus
-Supra Excalibur 

Any input on these two would be great.
​


----------



## Sampajanna

Final Touch Audio also makes great USB cables


----------



## Temple

funkur said:


> The Oyaide Class D+ is a nice cable (a steal at $60 USD) and should easily outperform the AQ based on the copper quality alone.  If you can, try ordering from Amazon US and use a package forwarder like MyUS.  You should get them within 1-2 weeks and save some money.
> 
> Though my current favorite under $100 USD is the RiCable Magnus which just replaced my Oyaide Class D+.  DHL shipping (their only option) from Italy is a little pricey though.


You still happy with your Magnus cable?


----------



## LowBeat91

Is there a warmish usb a to b cable coming from the Audioquest Carbon which is a bit crisp but "colder" sounding than the regular


----------



## gimmeheadroom

I'm using all Wireworld Chroma or UV. They're good cables at fair prices.

Disclaimer: I don't believe cables have sound and I don't buy boutique cables. I like well-made cables of good materials and I make my own AES/EBU and RCA cables.


----------



## LowBeat91

Did someone know an alternative to the Audioquest Carbon? It sounds a bit harsh and dry on my Abyss Diana V2. Maybe because its silver. Looking maybe for a cooper baswd alternative


----------



## kingoftown1

@LowBeat91 some brands to look at:
Inakustik
Triode Wire Labs
Curious Cables
Tubulus
Sablon
Final Touch Audio
Neotech
Oyaide
Pink Faun
Jcat
Audience


----------



## dougms3

LowBeat91 said:


> Did someone know an alternative to the Audioquest Carbon? It sounds a bit harsh and dry on my Abyss Diana V2. Maybe because its silver. Looking maybe for a cooper baswd alternative


I bought this to test it out and was going to return it if it wasn't good but ended up keeping it because it sounds so good.

Currently on sale for $79 - 30% off coupon.  Excellent value to performance ratio and no risk 

https://www.amazon.com/Monosaudio-F...nter/dp/B09KRL5KTW?ref_=ast_sto_dp&th=1&psc=1


----------



## 432EVO

I have enjoyed AQ Diamond....seems to add a bit of focus and clarity w/the 2 dacs I've connected it to my streamer.


----------



## ScrapIron

Wow, good thread on USB cables.

I went with the Schiit Signal Wire USB for $20 to see what it gets me over a generic printer cable. I may be inclined to try something a little more 'risque' (to my wallet) such as the Supra Excaliber or a WireWorld UV. Would love to try a Curious or Black Magic, but darn these budgets. 

Appreciate all the input/feedback/discussion....


----------



## Ragnar-BY

ScrapIron said:


> I went with the Schiit Signal Wire USB for $20 to see what it gets me over a generic printer cable. I may be inclined to try something a little more 'risque' (to my wallet)


Try Furutech Formula 2. My experiments with USB cables also started with Schiit’s cable. Furutech was a good upgrade. I’ve tried more expensive cables (like AudioQuest Diamond) later, it was better than Furutech, but the difference was much smaller.


----------



## lator

I have tested quite many:

Atlas Element SC
AudioQuest Carbon
AudioQuest Diamond
Curious original
Curious Evolved
Final Touch Audio Sinope
Intona Premium
Intona Ultimate
JCAT Signature
Oyaide NEO d+ Class S
Sablon 2020
Sablon Evo
Supra 2.0

If I had to choose just one recommendation it would be *Intona Premium*. It offers 85% compared with the best and has exceptional tonal balance. Investing more would improve bass extension and soundstage depth.


----------



## dougms3

I'm going to recommend this again.

For the price, I dont think anything is better.

https://www.aliexpress.us/item/3256...tewayAdapt=glo2usa4itemAdapt&_randl_shipto=US

Someone mentioned that it outperformed their audio sensibility signature silver usb.


----------

