Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › USB cable and Sound Quality
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

USB cable and Sound Quality - Page 2  

post #16 of 783
Verify'
post #17 of 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by purrin View Post

Because any dielectric will polarize the electrons. Essentially the cable becomes a capacitor.

 

The EMI theory however is more sound. I actually got a subtle, but notable improvement by wrapping my USB cable with aluminum foil.

 

700


That's awesome. Mine has aluminum wrapped in copper wrapped in a condom. They are all supposed to suppress things from penetrating into the signal.

 

Mine is a bit thicker than yours though. It should be....cost me nearly $6,900.00!

post #18 of 783

Are you going to release an aluminum foil wrapped paradox to keep aliens from degrading the audio signals? 

post #19 of 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

Are you going to release an aluminum foil wrapped paradox to keep aliens from degrading the audio signals? 


No.

 

I'm importing unobtanium from Pandora. Should be getting vetted by the JEDI council in short time.

post #20 of 783
I want a JEDI Cable too!


Edited by Draygonn - 7/24/12 at 7:19pm
post #21 of 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by LFF View Post

 

I'm importing unobtanium from Pandora. Should be getting vetted by the JEDI council in short time.

 

That sounds stupendous.  I'm hoping to get my aluminum T50rp mods RexAeterna Certified ® sometime in the next couple weeks. 

post #22 of 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Griploc View Post

Interesting. I emailed the company's tech support to elaborate with supporting data and graphs to berify their claims. I will post the answer back as soon as i recieve it

 

Right, get more pseudoscience from the company selling the product.  I hope the graphs are in color, that makes them more impressive and will help convince everyone...  rolleyes.gif

post #23 of 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Griploc View Post

The other main benefit has to do with the materials used, which also allow the signal to travel more efficiently and with less interference. 

 

It's still ones and zeros. As I stated above, you have REALLY screw up the signal to make it not read as ones and zeros. Interference up until that point, is irrelevant since it does not change the data the D/A conversion uses. The only other factor that *might* come into play is jitter. Which: 1) has not been demonstrated to be audible. 2) USB standards already have a certain amount of compensation for. 3) Is dealt with by many (if not most) D/A systems - especially async and anything that reclocks. and 4) you have to work really hard to generate an appreciable amount of in a short cable. 

 

 

 

Quote:
We use a very thin copper conductor and good-sounding dielectric. Both the design and materials have benefits for sonics and audio conversion.

 

 

No. These are not audio cables. There are no sonics. It is data. Ones and zeros. Unless the cable changes the order of the ones and zeros (and does so smartly - which ones and zeros are better bass? which ones are clearer treble?) then there is no way for the cable to affect the sound except to degrade it so far as to make it unreadable. 

 

There *might* be an argument to be made if your device is powered off the USB bus, for the power component to affect the amplifier circuit. But not the D/A - and one would still need to provide actual evidence that this is the case. 


Edited by liamstrain - 7/23/12 at 8:41pm
post #24 of 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Griploc View Post

Could you support data regarding good dielectric not sounding good

 

Read this article: http://www.audioholics.com/education/cables/dielectric-absorption-in-cables-debunked

 

Furthermore, like so many have said in so many different ways, USB does not pass analog audio signal, it passes binary packets of data. Also, consider that USB 3.0 max nominal speed is 5 Gbps. Audio packets should be effortless and with negligible bit error rates if using standard recommended stock cable.

post #25 of 783
Here is the reply back fro pierre, the founder of mapleshade audio:

Using current methods of measuring cables--that is, methods that are entirely limited to  how well they pass sine wave based test signals--assuming you had measuring instruments of cutting edge resolution, you would certainly be able to show measurable differences between cables of varying geometries and materials. And those differences would be guaranteed to be completely unrelated to which cables sounded better and which ones sounded worse. 

Why? Very simply because 1) no combination of sine waves (which are extremely simple, smooth and repetitive in shape) can begin to approximate the extraordinarily complex, sharp edged and non-repetitive waveform patterns of real musical instruments; and b) because of their inherently non-linear response, how wires/speakers/amplifiers/CD players/etc. respond to repetitive sine wave patterns is entirely different than how they respond to non-repetitive music waveforms. 

In fact, it is possible to demonstrate that the more you tailor the design of wires or electronics to pass sine waves accurately, the worse the wires or electronics sound with real music. Classic current examples of this are the MIT speaker cables, which are, of all cables on the market, the ones that are the most slavishly tailored to yield the best possible sine wave accuracy. The result of MIT's meticulous sine wave optimization is that our $120 Golden Helix speaker cable consistently beats their $10,000 Oracle cables in head-to-head listening tests.

Until audio engineering develops measurement techniques based on a library of real music waveforms (a very difficult task indeed), disciplined listening panel tests conducted by people who hear live, unamplified music at least once a week will remain a vastly more  accurate and scientifically reliable measurement tool than any currently known electronic instruments. And wires or speakers or electronics developed by meticulous experimentation using such listening tests will continue to sound strikingly and obviously better than those developed only according to sine wave theory and measurements.

Where does this leave you with respect to evaluating the Clearlink USB cable? Very simple: you can purchase it, borrow a much more expensive USB cable from a dealer or friend and listen to both, using identical one minute passages from well-recorded test files that you are really familiar with. Your ears will tell you whether there's a difference. And our money back guarantee means this experiment will cost you nothing but postage. Speaking of the importance of empirical evidence from listening tests: to date, we have sold multiple hundreds of our Clearlinks with that same money back guarantee; not one has been returned because it sounded inferior or only equal to the expensive wire our audiophile customers were already using.

If you're interested in more detailed information on any aspect of the above, please feel free to call me at our tech advice line, 410 867-7543.
post #26 of 783
I am well aware the digital data is transferred in packets. I took a course in audio engineering and music production which explained this thouroghly a few years back. I only wish to recreate analogue information in the digital realm to a very close emulation. I have to admit though his pitch to sell his product is smeared and stepped away from the graphs and charts info which had me doubting his info.

Vibration control is something i am a firm believer about which is his area of expertise(pierre) and have heard it for myself which is a night and day transformation.

I will listen to another highly respectble companys usb cable within the next few weeks and honestly give my feedback on the basis of true and false
post #27 of 783

Let me summarize his message:  "There are mysteries in audio that can't be measured.  Trust me, our cables are better."

 

Where in his information did he make the distinction between analog and digital information?  No where.  His discussion of complex music waveforms is complete bunk.  Combining sinewaves of different amplitudes and frequencies does not present a problem for a cable, and it has ZERO to do with a digital signal.

 

Unless your listening is done as part of a double-blind test, it means nothing - except that you will feel better about your desire to spend this money.   

 

It is the same old subjective vs objective argument:  Golden ears claim to hear things that can't be measured.  Either you believe that or you don't.

post #28 of 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Griploc View Post

I will listen to another highly respectble companys usb cable within the next few weeks and honestly give my feedback on the basis of true and false

 

Be sure to have them blindly switched out by someone other than you periodically. That will help remove some bias in your listening (usually unconscious). 

 

Better if you can do a true abx or dbt, but that can be hard to manage on your own. 

 

As for Pierre's comments - he managed to avoid providing evidence, neglected that this was digital vs. audio (and his audio information was poor anyway), or even solid electrical theory in his response. There are some things in audio cables that can affect the sound (RLC), and his lacking even the mention of those elements convinces me that it is safe to say that he has no idea what he's talking about. 


Edited by liamstrain - 7/24/12 at 7:03am
post #29 of 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by Griploc View Post

Why? Very simply because 1) no combination of sine waves (which are extremely simple, smooth and repetitive in shape) can begin to approximate the extraordinarily complex, sharp edged and non-repetitive waveform patterns of real musical instruments;

 

Just plain nonsense and clearly written by someone who does not understand even the basics of Digital Audio re how sampling and reconstruction happens, this pervasive "sine waves are easier than music" is just out and out wrong and yet keeps getting trotted out again and again and again !

 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Griploc

 

In fact, it is possible to demonstrate that the more you tailor the design of wires or electronics to pass sine waves accurately, the worse the wires or electronics sound with real music. Classic current examples of this are the MIT speaker cables, which are, of all cables on the market, the ones that are the most slavishly tailored to yield the best possible sine wave accuracy. The result of MIT's meticulous sine wave optimization is that our $120 Golden Helix speaker cable consistently beats their $10,000 Oracle cables in head-to-head listening tests.

 

A comparison with MIT is very telling as they are a company that routinely bungs RC netwoks on their cables and peddles made up and irrelevant parameters (articulation, energy storage)  - not a good point of comparsion if you want to be taken seriously !

 

Notwithstanding that , how about some blind listenintg tests to back this up ?

 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Griploc
 
Until audio engineering develops measurement techniques based on a library of real music waveforms (a very difficult task indeed), .

 

It is utterly trivial to send a real music signal down a cable and measure what comes out of it, I've done this with a $30 sound card !


Edited by nick_charles - 7/24/12 at 8:01am
post #30 of 783
Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post

 

Be sure to have them blindly switched out by someone other than you periodically. That will help remove some bias in your listening (usually unconscious). 

 

Better if you can do a true abx or dbt, but that can be hard to manage on your own. 

 

Or take the analog output and digitally record that for both cables and compare - this will show any differences very easily

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 › USB cable and Sound Quality