Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Don't get why "Audiophile" USB Cable would improve sound quality
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Don't get why "Audiophile" USB Cable would improve sound quality - Page 6  

post #76 of 835


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Pell View Post

 

 

For those of you out there that do believe that the cable makes a difference... Wouldn't it be pretty easy to test the sonic difference by making a test audio file with different frequencies, and then setting up a mic by one of the drivers to record the audio played through each cable? Although it wouldnt be 100% scientific, I would assume that done a bunch of times, we should be able to see a difference of the waveforms of the recording.

 

And, for another test to check data loss.... If you were to compare the time it took to transfer a very large file several times from one drive to another using two different cables, if the cables really do make a difference, there should be consistency with the copy time of the expensive cable, and the cheap cable should have a large variance from one copy to the next. I think between those two tests, which can be done at home with a little preparation, we should have a good idea on whether or not they make a difference.

 

The biggest question for those that love the expensive cables, what would your response be if there was true scientific proof (beyond some minor home-based tests) that the cables truly did nothing, and the effect was psycho-somatic? And for the non-believers, what would your response be if there was true scientific proof of sonic changes?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by uelover View Post

What I want to say is that USB cables do make the different. How it achieves it and why is that the case, we are all waiting for that answer.

 


I would think that if there was a measurable (aka real) benefit, companies would eat it up and advertise the hell out of it. I went to the product pages of all the USB cables mentioned in this thread (and a few others), and not a single one mentioned anything about sonic differences, only that the cable is the best ever and will provide the best listening experience. I could not find a single objective statement on how the listening experience would change. Outside of the audio world, these kind of sales are typically called scams.

 


That's interesting..... 2 extra paragraphs appeared that weren't there when I quoted your post.....

 

Another way to approach this might be to investigate what uelover is reporting, rather than discounting it.  Certainly he is hearing something and has developed preferences for certain cables.  He says "more resolving" I'm still not sure exactly what he's hearing.

 

About making recordings.  Prog Rock Man posted about a tool called the Audio DiffMaker.  Is this what you're referring to?  You make a recording with one cable, change cables and make a second recording.  The program will null out everything that is the same and you are left with only the difference between the two cables.

 


Edited by upstateguy - 5/20/11 at 1:37am
post #77 of 835

I found the edit button :)

 

Also, anyone know why the top part of that text is in a white box?

post #78 of 835
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Pell View Post

I found the edit button :)

 

Also, anyone know why the top part of that text is in a white box?



Did you type it somewhere else then copy and paste it here?

post #79 of 835

see above, I added to the post also.

post #80 of 835

 

edit


Edited by drez - 5/20/11 at 3:10am
post #81 of 835
Quote:
Originally Posted by drez View Post

I think this thread should be named "why don't cable makers justify their USB products in terms of technical, empirical performance"

 

Seeing as USB is a digital technology which transmits digital data, I find it baffling that these products are marketed in the same way as analogue products - ie. by describing supposed change in sound characteristics the product brings.

 

This I think is part of the reason so many people label these products as snake oil - it is impossible to tell the good products from the bad without A) risking hundreds of dollars for an unproven product or B) relying on the fragmented and/or subjective opinions of other audiophiles

 

For other technologies I have taken the second option mentioned above as a given, as technical data cannot adequately describe certain aspects of performance.  But of digital interconnects I can't help but feel that this should not be the case.

 

The only reason I can see for manufacturers taking this approach is A)Deliberate intent to mystify and confuse consumers or B)That most of these products are designed with no real technical insight/research.

 

 


I think this thread should be named "Something is happening here but we don't know what it is."

 

The only reason I can see for manufacturers taking this approach is:  that there doesn't seem to be a way to measure what is being reported.

post #82 of 835

@USG: Got it. I will pm you the links when I come across them. Too bad that you are in NY if not I will invite you over for a listen and confused.gif together.

 

I am not sure if there is a loan program over there in the US where you can take several cables home and listen before deciding if they are worthy to have you purchased them. I took various cables back home to try myself before deciding if I should keep the better one over using monoprice cables.

 

Of course, skeptics can scorn and laugh off at what I am saying here.

 

But I want to make a point to those who are open minded to not close off the idea that digital cables will make a difference.

 

 

post #83 of 835

 

edit


Edited by drez - 5/20/11 at 3:10am
post #84 of 835


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by uelover View Post

@USG: Got it. I will pm you the links when I come across them. Too bad that you are in NY if not I will invite you over for a listen and confused.gif together.

 

I am not sure if there is a loan program over there in the US where you can take several cables home and listen before deciding if they are worthy to have you purchased them. I took various cables back home to try myself before deciding if I should keep the better one over using monoprice cables.

 

Of course, skeptics can scorn and laugh off at what I am saying here.

 

But I want to make a point to those who are open minded to not close off the idea that digital cables will make a difference.

 

 

 

Did you hear a difference with each cable you tried?
 

 

post #85 of 835
Quote:
Originally Posted by upstateguy View Post




I think this thread should be named "Something is happening here but we don't know what it is."

 

The only reason I can see for manufacturers taking this approach is:  that there doesn't seem to be a way to measure what is being reported.


 

If you can't measure it, then it isn't happening.  Computers can measure things down the the slightest detail.  Us humans cannot.  Basically, if someone does a scientific test with professional equipment and comes up with no difference, then the cable is making no difference.  It's as simple as that, you can't argue raw data.

 

Of course, you can argue with the methods chosen to obtain said data, and I think that's probably why DBT is banned on this forum - and such a test would be too.  It'd be better to do that in the "sound science" forum.

post #86 of 835
Quote:
Originally Posted by DaBomb77766 View Post


If you can't measure it, then it isn't happening.  Computers can measure things down the the slightest detail.  Us humans cannot.  Basically, if someone does a scientific test with professional equipment and comes up with no difference, then the cable is making no difference.  It's as simple as that, you can't argue raw data.

 

Of course, you can argue with the methods chosen to obtain said data, and I think that's probably why DBT is banned on this forum - and such a test would be too.  It'd be better to do that in the "sound science" forum.

 

You'd think so, but you can't deny that something is going on.
 

 

post #87 of 835
Quote:
Originally Posted by drez View Post

But there is - the aim of the digital cable as I understand it is to transmit the cleanest and most coherent digital signal possible.  This can be measured by the amount of jitter present.  Manufacturers don't publish this data.  I don't know why, but I can speculate as above.

 


It's debatable how audible that jitter is .

 

post #88 of 835

meh I give up no point putting my neck out to argue over this.


Edited by drez - 5/20/11 at 3:10am
post #89 of 835
Quote:
Originally Posted by drez View Post

Read above

 

To me there is no doubt that jitter is the prime candidate factor in performance of a digital cable (IMO etc etc.)...

 


I'm not convinced that cable induced jitter is a problem or even audible in the short runs we use in audio.

 

But here's something to think about.  Have you considered reflections?

 

post #90 of 835
Quote:
Originally Posted by upstateguy View Post



 

You'd think so, but you can't deny that something is going on.
 

 



Well, that something could just be placebo.  I'm not saying that there's necessarily anything wrong with that.  If it works for you, then I'm fine with it.  You claim to tell a difference, so I guess I'll believe you and maybe you really do find a difference.  It's just, I'm skeptical the cable itself is the thing making the difference, but until we have definitive proof either way, arguing isn't going to help anyone here.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Don't get why "Audiophile" USB Cable would improve sound quality