[vandaven]

Quote:

Exactly.  The performance of digital cables doesn't seem to be as much about the quality of the materials themselves as much as manufacturing thresholds and such.  But USB is built to a spec, and to be called "USB" it needs to be up to that spec.  I wouldn't be surprised if some "audiophile" USB cables actually weren't up to USB spec...

+1
 
 

 

[uelover]

Quote:

Back to the topic...
 
After so many sparring sessions, can someone enlighten me as to the physical differences between "Audiophile" USB cables and normal ones? Personally I've only seen difference in cable material, plating on the USB plugs etc. There's no chip or circuitry built in to improve on the data transmission is there? If there are, maybe it helps cut down on errors along the short digital path taken... other wise, i really don't see how using more expensive materials would improve on digital data...?

Come over my place I let you hear =)

 

[justanut]

I'm afraid you'll cry when you hear my $5 usb IC
 
Quote:

Come over my place I let you hear =)

 

 

[uelover]

Quote:

I'm afraid you'll cry when you hear my $5 usb IC
 

Haha don't worry I won't. I have a $1 USB IC too XD

 

[dvw]

Since measurement is not possible, I wonder how do these guys do QA.
Do you hire some one to listen to a cable for a week (short listening time is a NO, NO,) and decide if the cable is good or not?
And how do you qualify for the job? DBT??? Oh no, that's not allowed.

 

[vandaven]

Quote:

Since measurement is not possible, I wonder how do these guys do QA.
Do you hire some one to listen to a cable for a week (short listening time is a NO, NO,) and decide if the cable is good or not?
And how do you qualify for the job? DBT??? Oh no, that's not allowed.

Measurement is possible. It just doesn't make a difference. 
 

 

[justanut]

I suspect that there is something that the "audiophile" USB cables are doing right and the cheap ones aren't, but its not in the material. And definitely there are also cheap ones that do it right.
 
Its funny how we're always arguing about how materials affect the normal speaker/headphone/IC cables, which still has some chance of actually being true (since different metals do conduct EM waves differently), and yet here we are again with the same arguments, but about something that can't be true, (all things being equal, difference being the metal used).
 
In the end I guess its your money. Why we're arguing so hard here is cos those of us who know there's no difference really want our brothers here to save some hard earned cash... 

 

[Currawong]

Quote:

I suspect that there is something that the "audiophile" USB cables are doing right and the cheap ones aren't, but its not in the material. And definitely there are also cheap ones that do it right.
 
Its funny how we're always arguing about how materials affect the normal speaker/headphone/IC cables, which still has some chance of actually being true (since different metals do conduct EM waves differently), and yet here we are again with the same arguments, but about something that can't be true, (all things being equal, difference being the metal used).
 
In the end I guess its your money. Why we're arguing so hard here is cos those of us who know there's no difference really want our brothers here to save some hard earned cash... 

You have to be careful what you think you know. Not too far over a century and a half ago, doctors thought it was unnecessary to wash their hands between seeing patients and ran one out of the profession for suggesting otherwise.  Not saying you're necessarily wrong, but I do see a lot of incompleteness and factual distortion posted on the forums.  I don't doubt that at some points I've been guilty of this too.
 

 

[LizardKing1]

Can we hear from the Locus 3500$ USB IC again please? It was getting interesting

 
I am very noobish in the field of digital cables, but tell me this: even if there is a difference, is it noticeable enough to pay 300$ for it? Yes, yes, I know, it's your money, but if you think it's a good purchase, you'll have no problems in answering.
 
PS: I loved that post about how, in a digital cable, errors aren't represented as little frequency roll-offs or small blurschanges in the shades of a certain color, but more as in complete distortion of the original information. It made a lot of sense and maybe a lot of the posters should read it.

 

[justanut]

True true~ Still... telling me using gold or silver transmits better quality 1s and 0s is kinda >..<
 
Quote:

You have to be careful what you think you know. Not too far over a century and a half ago, doctors thought it was unnecessary to wash their hands between seeing patients and ran one out of the profession for suggesting otherwise.  Not saying you're necessarily wrong, but I do see a lot of incompleteness and factual distortion posted on the forums.  I don't doubt that at some points I've been guilty of this too.
 

 

 

[dvw]

The chips; op amp, DAC etc are connected to leads by gold wire. With the gold price at $1500/oz, lots of chip now uses copper for connection. So new amps and DAC produced in 2010 and 2011are a mix of gold and copper wired chips. I wonder if anyone can tell the difference or even know they are now listening to copper instead of gold.

 

[Hennyo]

Gold is 24% less conductive than copper.... Only used in electronics because there's no rusting or tarnish.. It is effective at preserving contact integrity, and the gold plating is ludocrisly cheap. Your fears should not be any threat to electronics manufacturers for a couple more thousands of dollars/once. Gold plating is that cheap to use.
Have you ever seen an electronic employ gold wiring?

 
You/I probably never will.

 

[LizardKing1]

Then shouldn't gold-plated copper be the best idea ever?

 

[Hennyo]

The gold content that goes into a full blown motherboard is around 1.00 - 2.50 cents. Connectors and all. Tomshardware and other sites have acid-washed/melted down boards just to test it.

 

[justanut]

You guys are confusing analog wave xfer with digital data xfer I think... anyway...