[Mython]

  What the hell is an audiophile usb cable? It's a digital transfer. That's just stupid talk.
 
Next thing you will tell me you use audiophile Ethernet cables so that the music coming from your NAS sounds better...

 
 
Please... no need to get irate

 
 
Personally, I'm not a big fan of 'audiophile' cables - I consider many of them to be a disgracefully-overpriced rip-off, with lots and lots of potential snake-oil, but... there is some legitimacy to designing a digital transfer cable more carefully than cheapo ones, in order to improve their rejection of stray RF noise, which can (potentially) alter the sound to some extent.

 

[hAbIrAbI]

As an IT guy that kind of talk just boils my blood because it means the person talking has no clue what is actually happening during the data transfer so they are making assumptions.
 
I mean if an audiophile usb cable actually had any benefit then that would also mean that IT in general was using cables that didn't ensure bit perfect transfers which is a crazy idea. I mean I sometimes transfer presentations to usb devices that are relevant for top management. All companies would have to buy the best cables to ensure data integrity. But they don't because it's not necessary.
 
The only context in which an audiophile usb cable might make sense is if it is used for analogue transfer. This is something I can imagine happening in the future since the smartphone companies want to abolish the 3.5mm jack. So they would use usb c cables for headphones at which point one can discuss if audiophile cables ensure a better transfer.

 

[Mython]

  As an IT guy that kind of talk just boils my blood because it means the person talking has no clue what is actually happening during the data transfer so they are making assumptions.
 
I mean if an audiophile usb cable actually had any benefit then that would also mean that IT in general was using cables that didn't ensure bit perfect transfers which is a crazy idea. I mean I sometimes transfer presentations to usb devices that are relevant for top management. All companies would have to buy the best cables to ensure data integrity. But they don't because it's not necessary.
 
The only context in which an audiophile usb cable might make sense is if it is used for analogue transfer. This is something I can imagine happening in the future since the smartphone companies want to abolish the 3.5mm jack. So they would use usb c cables for headphones at which point one can discuss if audiophile cables ensure a better transfer.

 
 
I understand where you are coming from, and I share a degree of your cynicism towards so-called 'audiophile' cables for digital transmission purposes. I get it - honestly, I assure you, I am definitely not an 'audiophile cable' fanboy.
 
But things are not always as clear-cut as they may outwardly appear. A digital interconnect cable may actually influence the performance of analogue electronics within a DAC / DAC-amp, even though the cable may be intended to function exclusively in the digital domain.
 
 
 
The following posts, by Rob Watts, are relevant:
 

 

I don't think anyone will ever answer that question satisfactorily if you know how the technical aspects of the devices work. The transport is passing a purely digital signal onto the Mojo, just what the original file is. Mojo does all the work. That being said, some people swear they hear a difference in sound depending on the transport. You decide what is most likely

The reasons why sources and digital interconnects sound different are well understood - see some of my posts. In a nutshell it is not jitter (all my DACs are source jitter intolerant) but down to RF noise and distorted currents from the source flowing into the DAC's ground plane. The RF noise inter-modulates with the analogue electronics, creating random noise as a by product, which creates noise floor modulation, and that makes it sound brighter or harder. The correlated or distorted currents very subtly add or subtract to small signals, thus changing the fundamental linearity, which in turn mucks up depth perception.
 
But I also agree in that lots of people hear changes that are not there - I for one have never heard any difference with optical cables (assuming all are bit perfect) with my DAC's, but lots of folks claim big differences. Placebo, or listening with your wallet, plays a part here. Then there are cases of people preferring more distortion... Listening tests must be done in a very controlled and careful fashion, particularly if you are trying to design and develop things.
 
Rob

 

 

   
 
Digital transmission is based on SPDIF standard which transmits data and clock information as an encoded signal usually using PCM, that information is decoded on the Mojo into data and clock signal so it's important that the encoded information be jittered free and not degraded over short distance.
 
The USB transmission on the other end is a device to device transmission mechanism using an encoding scheme and handshaking mechanism, it is usually stream based so more tolerant to poorer wire as frames are transmitted and decoded from the source to the target device. The target device will reconstruct the data and clock signal from the frame and then feed it to the DAC to be analog reconstructed and eventually band pass filtered to remove any residual high and low frequency signals out of the audio band.I still think you need to keep the USB cable short but it is more tolerant of longer lengths up to a limit.
 
To make a story short, the short USB cable is fine but an analog cable used as a digital one is just a bad idea. Again, that's just my opinion.

Just to clarify:
 
1. SPDIF decoding is all digital within the FPGA. The FPGA uses a digital phase lock loop (DPLL) and a tiny buffer. This re-clocks the data and eliminates the incoming jitter from the source. This system took 6 years to perfect, and means that the sound quality defects from source jitter is eliminated. How do I know that? Measurements - 2 uS of jitter has no affect whatsoever on measurements (and I can resolve noise floor at -180dB with my APX555) and sound quality tests against RAM buffer systems revealed no significant difference. You can (almost) use a piece of damp string and the source jitter will be eliminated.
 
2. USB is isochronous asynchronous. This means that the FPGA supplies the timing to the source, and incoming USB data is re clocked from the low jitter master clock. So again source jitter is eliminated.
 
So does this mean that any digital cable will do?
 
Sadly no. Mojo is a DAC, that means its an analogue component, and all analogue components are sensitive to RF noise and signal correlated in-band noise, so the RF character of the electrical cables can have an influence. What happens is random RF noise gets into the analogue electronics, creating intermodulation distortion with the wanted audio signal. The result of this is noise floor modulation. Now the brain is incredibly sensitive to noise floor modulation, and perceives this has a hardness to the sound - easily confused as better detail resolution as it sounds brighter. Reduce RF noise, and it will sound darker and smoother. The second source is distorted in band noise, and this mixes with the wanted signal (crosstalk source) and subtly alters the levels of small signals - this in turn degrades the perception of sound stage depth. This is another source of error for which the brain is astonishingly sensitive too. The distorted in band noise comes from the DAP, phone or PC internal electronics processing the digital data, with the maximum noise coming as the signal crosses through zero - all digital data going from all zeroes to all ones. Fortunately mobile electronics are power frugal and create less RF and signal correlated noise than PC's. Note that optical connection does not have any of these problems, and is my preferred connection. 
 
Does this mean that high end cables are better? Sadly not necessarily. What one needs is good RF characteristics, and some expensive cables are RF poor. Also note that if it sounds brighter its worse, as noise floor modulation is spicing up the sound (its the MSG of sound). So be careful when listening and if its brighter its superficially more impressive but in the long term musically worse. At the end of the day, its musicality only that counts, not how impressive it sounds.         
 
Rob

 
 
 
With all that said, some cheapo cables may actually be designed with superior RF rejection characteristics than some more expensive 'audiophile' digital interconnect cables. It's very much on a case-by-case basis, and there is undoubtedly a lot of snake-oil in the marketplace, but that does not necessarily mean one should automatically throw the baby out with the bathwater

 
 
 
Anyway, this topic is more-suited to the 'Sound Science' forum, as it regularly pops-up in various other threads and invariably leads to heated debate that derails the intended topic of each thread 

 
 
 
.

 

[Mython]

Back to the DX200, I'm looking forward to seeing how this DAP performs.
 
Although its extremely poor battery life and very poor usability drove me nuts, I really liked the sound quality of my DX100, so I'm genuinely optimistic that iBasso will bring something interesting to the marketplace, that will not be a 'me-too' product.

 

[Dephezz]

  What the hell is an audiophile usb cable? It's a digital transfer. That's just stupid talk.
 
Next thing you will tell me you use audiophile Ethernet cables so that the music coming from your NAS sounds better...

thats why i was afraid of starting this schiit... I suggest u either to keep sitting in confidence of your basic theoretical knowledge or to be open for new info. Just a couple of month ago i was more sceptical about this subject than you. But after some practice tests i just know now what i'm talking about and. You and i know, that in theory there are just 1 and 0 in the cable. You dont know thay low budget dacs dont have galvanic isolation, that cheap usb controller in pc has lots of noise in it and sound goes by asynchronous usb protocol, you dont know that usb cable actually can have an impact on SQ, because u havent ever tested it on practice.
As i said - grab 3-5 different low/high budget usb cables. Connect to your system, compare, make an informed decison to avoid placebo effects and AFTER that tell that you cant hear any difference in SQ.
Thank you.

 

[Lurker0]

  As i said - grab 3-5 different low/high budget usb cables. Connect to your system, compare, make an informed decison to avoid placebo effects and AFTER that tell that you cant hear any difference in SQ.

Grab a USB halvanic isolator, and forget about listening cables

 

[twister6]

 

  What the hell is an audiophile usb cable? It's a digital transfer. That's just stupid talk.
 
Next thing you will tell me you use audiophile Ethernet cables so that the music coming from your NAS sounds better...

thats why i was afraid of starting this schiit... I suggest u either to keep sitting in confidence of your basic theoretical knowledge or to be open for new info. Just a couple of month ago i was more sceptical about this subject than you. But after some practice tests i just know now what i'm talking about and. You and i know, that in theory there are just 1 and 0 in the cable. You dont know thay low budget dacs dont have galvanic isolation, that cheap usb controller in pc has lots of noise in it and sound goes by asynchronous usb protocol, you dont know that usb cable actually can have an impact on SQ, because u havent ever tested it on practice.
As i said - grab 3-5 different low/high budget usb cables. Connect to your system, compare, make an informed decison to avoid placebo effects and AFTER that tell that you cant hear any difference in SQ.
Thank you.

 
Exactly!  It's true, digital signal is just 0s and 1s, and there is a simple explanation, similar to quotes from Rob Watts, such as digital audio data transfer includes both the data and the timing info.  Degradation of a signal due to a lower quality cable will cause skew in the analog square edges of “digital” pulse (1s are just analog square pulses when you look on the scope) which results in a timing inaccuracy that will cause jitter and packet errors.  Chord devices are more advanced, as it was referred to by Rob as "jitter intolerant", probably due to some clever PLL filtering to clean up the signal edges.  Other devices are not as tolerable, thus a difference in a cable quality can be audible (subtle), especially using high res files and resolving headphones/earphones.
 
Another problem, in USB bus you are dealing with a pair of data wires and a pair of power wires (5V vbus and ground), and cheaply designed cable will have a poor isolation of power/ground and data resulting in a coupling of the noise from a power to a signal.
 
Of course, all this is a theory, so trust your ears.  I have done a number of comparisons using cheapo budget usb cables and a few quality AQ usb cables (in $25-$65  range).  As much as I'm a cable believer, my personal opinion about $1k usb cables is that its beyond diminishing returns.  But, I personally have no problem recommending something like AQ Forest for under $35 (quality connectors, great shielding and isolation, and overall solid build) because I hear the difference when using it instead of cheap thin usb cables you get bundled with different gadgets.

 

[gr8soundz]

   
Exactly!  It's true, digital signal is just 0s and 1s, and there is a simple explanation, similar to quotes from Rob Watts, such as digital audio data transfer includes both the data and the timing info.  Degradation of a signal due to a lower quality cable will cause skew in the analog square edges of “digital” pulse (1s are just analog square pulses when you look on the scope) which results in a timing inaccuracy that will cause jitter and packet errors.  Chord devices are more advanced, as it was referred to by Rob as "jitter intolerant", probably due to some clever PLL filtering to clean up the signal edges.  Other devices are not as tolerable, thus a difference in a cable quality can be audible (subtle), especially using high res files and resolving headphones/earphones.
 
Another problem, in USB bus you are dealing with a pair of data wires and a pair of power wires (5V vbus and ground), and cheaply designed cable will have a poor isolation of power/ground and data resulting in a coupling of the noise from a power to a signal.
 
Of course, all this is a theory, so trust your ears.  I have done a number of comparisons using cheapo budget usb cables and a few quality AQ usb cables (in $25-$65  range).  As much as I'm a cable believer, my personal opinion about $1k usb cables is that its beyond diminishing returns.  But, I personally have no problem recommending something like AQ Forest for under $35 (quality connectors, great shielding and isolation, and overall solid build) because I hear the difference when using it instead of cheap thin usb cables you get bundled with different gadgets.

 
Well said.
 
Anything digital (for audio) has to be converted to analog for hearing purposes at some point. I think it's a matter of choice whether the output can be as accurate as possible or if 'close enough' (approximations due to errors) is acceptable. But, for many reasons, the differences aren't always audible and (imo) higher price doesn't guarantee more accuracy.
 

 

[cjs001]

  What if i want to use it like a DAC with good usb cable? There are no audiophile usb c cables on the market yet. I have AQ Carbon with usb b to micro AQ adapter for my DX80. So i wonder, if DX200 will be MUCH better than DX80 in terms of SQ, i could buy it. If dx200 will have only usb-c i think i'll need usb-c to micro adapter to use it with usb b to micro adapter

Assuming that an audiophile USB cable will have a significant impact on the end result, you'll probably also want an "audiophile" usb C to micro usb adaptor. I for one don't see the point really as adding ****ty adapter between the signal path would probably do more harm than using a standard usb type c cable.

 

[Mython]

<"Cough">  DX200 thread  <"Cough"> 

 

 

[twister6]

  <"Cough">  DX200 thread  <"Cough"> 

 

 
Let me re-assure you, as soon as DX200 is released, we will start talking about "DX200"

 

[Onitsuka]

audiophile USB cable... an "audiophile" usb C to micro usb adaptor...

Does an audiophile USB cable sound better than normal $3 cable?

 

[Mambosenior]

Does an audiophile USB cable sound better than normal $3 cable?

Oh boy! Stir the pot, why don't cha!

Due to the "X" in the name, the DX200 will be sensational (those Xs on any electronic gear are attention-grabbing, ain't they!)

 

[gr8soundz]

Does an audiophile USB cable sound better than normal $3 cable?

 
Do the $35 Koss Porta Pros sound better than a $300 pair of Beats headphones?
 
Price isn't (or shouldn't be) the deciding factor. Won't know which sounds better til you personally try it. If what you have works and you're happy with it, what else matters?
 

 

[Dephezz]

  Grab a USB halvanic isolator, and forget about listening cables 

Normal galvanic isolator costs about 200-400$ and you know it . When i'll buy my first hi-end dac i'll certainly purchase one as only in this way it'll be worth it. But for now i have 50$ usb cable and happy with it along with my DX80 as dac. Will you work on dx200 firmware when it comes out?
 

  Back to the DX200, I'm looking forward to seeing how this DAP performs.
 
Although its extremely poor battery life and very poor usability drove me nuts, I really liked the sound quality of my DX100, so I'm genuinely optimistic that iBasso will bring something interesting to the marketplace, that will not be a 'me-too' product.

First of all, thanks for sharing info about USB protocol.
Secondly, I'm also looking forward to see how dx200 will demonstrate itself vs N6 and X7. I really want dx200 to destroy them and become a no-brainer dap under 1k$ 

 

 
Of course, all this is a theory, so trust your ears.  I have done a number of comparisons using cheapo budget usb cables and a few quality AQ usb cables (in $25-$65  range).  As much as I'm a cable believer, my personal opinion about $1k usb cables is that its beyond diminishing returns.  But, I personally have no problem recommending something like AQ Forest for under $35 (quality connectors, great shielding and isolation, and overall solid build) because I hear the difference when using it instead of cheap thin usb cables you get bundled with different gadgets.

Thats what i'm talking about! I've done same comparisons: cheap printer cable, inakustik premium, aq carbon, ww starlight 7, qed reference. QED was the best, but because it provides lots of details in high-mid and high range i didnt buy it (highs in EDM starts to sound harsh unfortunately). AQ carbon is very clean, transparent, high quality cable that i wanted. 50$ is a very nice price for it (used ofc).
 

  Assuming that an audiophile USB cable will have a significant impact on the end result, you'll probably also want an "audiophile" usb C to micro usb adaptor. I for one don't see the point really as adding ****ty adapter between the signal path would probably do more harm than using a standard usb type c cable.

The point is that any hard adapter is much better than OTG adapter with wire. Hard one provides very little quality loss. I have AQ B to micro adapter. I'll just buy good usb c to micro adapter like this one and call it a day I dont think that 2 normal hard adapters will make good usb cable sound like a cheapo. No way

 But they will definitely degrade cables potential a bit.
 

 
Let me re-assure you, as soon as DX200 is released, we will start talking about "DX200"

Yeah, im sorry for starting this mess around usb 

 

Does an audiophile USB cable sound better than normal $3 cable?

Not every one. I had inakustik premium cable. Its about 15$ and sound same as cheap printer one, despite it has golden connectors and two wire isolations.
WW Starlight is about 100-150$ and sounds less transparent than AQ Carbon. If you need to liven up mids and highs - qed reference is at your service.
The point is that you need to compare them in your system to make an informed decision. If u cant grab several cables - AQ Forest/Supra/Furutech GT2 are no brainers in entrance level. Mid priced: AQ Carbon/QED Reference/Chord SilverPlus/Neotech NEUB-1020/Zonotone 6N or 7N/iFi Gemini/DH Labs Mirage(simply the best in this group).
 
 

  Price isn't (or shouldn't be) the deciding factor. Won't know which sounds better til you personally try it. If what you have works and you're happy with it, what else matters?

Absolute truth. Just keep sanity and try everything by yourself.