[HI-BIT]

I agree, and one can also "waste good money" on $600 USB cables. The Cabledyne is sonically excellent and a bargain IMO.

 

[hmorneau]

  I actually have a bit of experience with this subject and because of that I want to quickly jump in here.  It is possible (ok, likely) that this same comment was already posted like 20 times, but I could only make it to someone copy/pasting an interview with some "expert" from Audioquest (yeah, the company that makes products like this) before giving up.
 
Of course digital signals are simply analog square waves, and they are subject to the same damage and distortion as any other analog signal.  No argument from me on that!  The difference is that for a digital signal the 'damage' and 'distortion' don't actually affect the end result unless there is an event of biblical proportions causing said damage.  Like let's say you were listening to music in a running microwave oven.  That would do it probably.  Is your USB cable resting on top of a kicking subwoofer?  If so the subwoofer is probably also affecting the sound, but the signal might be wonky too.  You would not believe how bad a square wave can look while still transferring one billion bits with zero errors.  Anyone who claims they can hear a difference between a Monoprice USB cable and a $200 one is either a) lying, b) delusional, or c) the changes are coming from some external factor having nothing directly to do with the cable.  Like the background noise changed while you were exchanging cables, or an analog connector got bumped while putting the headphones on.  Those are the only options, now go buy this and donate $195 to the charity of your choice.

If the quality of the cable were indeed making a difference on the digital cable all the internet would be in trouble. No body believe that when you download a high quality track from a server on the internet that the network cable quality make any difference in the sound, but something magical happens when the same data transfert between the computer and the dac. I don't know what is it, but suddenly for that last few inch the rules of how digital data travel change. 
 

 Originally Posted by x838nwy 


Detection and measurement are two different things. I can detect light in my room but i do not have the tools to measure its intensity or other properties, for example.

As for measurements, didn't 00940 posted something along those lines?

You may not have the tools, but it doesn't mean they don't exist. 
 
From wikipedia:
Light is measured with two main alternative sets of units: radiometry consists of measurements of light power at all wavelengths, while photometry measures light with wavelength weighted with respect to a standardised model of human brightness perception. Photometry is useful, for example, to quantify Illumination (lighting) intended for human use. 
 
Ho well, I give up. Buy all the cables you want, in fact I should start selling some. 

 

[x838nwy]

 
You may not have the tools, but it doesn't mean they don't exist. 
 
From wikipedia:
Light is measured with two main alternative sets of units: radiometry consists of measurements of light power at all wavelengths, while photometry measures light with wavelength weighted with respect to a standardised model of human brightness perception. Photometry is useful, for example, to quantify Illumination (lighting) intended for human use. 
 
Ho well, I give up. Buy all the cables you want, in fact I should start selling some. 

 
I think you misunderstood my post. I wrote of detection and measurement to explain that just because I lack to tools to measure something, it does not mean I cannot detect its presence. I'm quite aware that several attributes of light or more generally - radio magnetic waves - can be measured. I was simply saying that just because I do not have any of these tools of measurement to hand does not mean I cannot say with any certainty that my room is lit. Just because I cannot currently measure the intensity or wavelength of the visible light content falling on my retina does not invalidate my statement that this room is lit with, say, a green light.
 
Obviously if there are measurements of what I am seeing then my claims can be verified and science dictates that evidence overrules whatever my opinions or perceptions may be, but to demand that anyone* who claims to hear a difference that they produce a comprehensive set of measurements is a little silly.
 
* - anyone without commercial interest in sales of these cables.

 

[BirdManOfCT]

   
I think you misunderstood my post. I wrote of detection and measurement to explain that just because I lack to tools to measure something, it does not mean I cannot detect its presence. I'm quite aware that several attributes of light or more generally - radio magnetic waves - can be measured. I was simply saying that just because I do not have any of these tools of measurement to hand does not mean I cannot say with any certainty that my room is lit. Just because I cannot currently measure the intensity or wavelength of the visible light content falling on my retina does not invalidate my statement that this room is lit with, say, a green light.
 
Obviously if there are measurements of what I am seeing then my claims can be verified and science dictates that evidence overrules whatever my opinions or perceptions may be, but to demand that anyone* who claims to hear a difference that they produce a comprehensive set of measurements is a little silly.
 
* - anyone without commercial interest in sales of these cables.

That makes too much sense. Therefore, your post is disqualified.

 

[sANDEKERU]

You need an audiophile USB controller (you will also need to shield it using tinfoil lined with something that will insulate the pcb) that only runs your dac so that no other usb devices connected to your computer can interfere with your dac.

 

[hmorneau]

   
I think you misunderstood my post. I wrote of detection and measurement to explain that just because I lack to tools to measure something, it does not mean I cannot detect its presence. I'm quite aware that several attributes of light or more generally - radio magnetic waves - can be measured. I was simply saying that just because I do not have any of these tools of measurement to hand does not mean I cannot say with any certainty that my room is lit. Just because I cannot currently measure the intensity or wavelength of the visible light content falling on my retina does not invalidate my statement that this room is lit with, say, a green light.
 
Obviously if there are measurements of what I am seeing then my claims can be verified and science dictates that evidence overrules whatever my opinions or perceptions may be, but to demand that anyone* who claims to hear a difference that they produce a comprehensive set of measurements is a little silly.
 
* - anyone without commercial interest in sales of these cables.

I agree that I can't argue with that, read about the "Argument from ignorance".
 
"Arguments that appeal to ignorance rely merely on the fact that the veracity of the proposition is not disproven to arrive at a definite conclusion. These arguments fail to appreciate that the limits of one's understanding or certainty do not change what is true. They do not inform upon reality. "
 
For more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

 

[x838nwy]

  I agree that I can't argue with that, read about the "Argument from ignorance".
 
"Arguments that appeal to ignorance rely merely on the fact that the veracity of the proposition is not disproven to arrive at a definite conclusion. These arguments fail to appreciate that the limits of one's understanding or certainty do not change what is true. They do not inform upon reality. "
 
For more info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Argument_from_ignorance

 
Thank you for pointing that out and it is useful to watch out for such arguments in future discussions of this kind (and of cables in general). However, I don't think it applies in the case of which I wrote.
 
"I observe [X] when I do [Y]" is not an argument but a statement of observation. An argument from ignorance would be to say that "I observe [X] when I do [Y] because of [A]. I cannot prove that it is not [A], therefore it is."
 
As an example, before the days of Newton, a person can truthfully say that when he lets go of an unsupported object, it falls to the ground. This is a correct observation because the object does certainly fall to the ground. If the person were to state that said object falls to the ground at a constant velocity, this would be an incorrect observation as it disagrees with other precise and measured observations. It's still however not an argument. Now if the person were to claim that objects fall and he/she thinks it is because the earth is full of little holes and it just kindda sucks things down this is now an argument or rather this proposal is open for argument. It still, unfortunately, does not make it an appeal to ignorance as it still need to go further to say that "because it cannot be proven that the earth doesn't suck through little holes, therefore it must" to be come such an appeal/argument.
 
So saying cable [C] sounds better than cable [D] is not an argument from ignorance. What I was writing about was that if someone makes such a claim, it is not productive to ask him/her for measurements or "proof" or whatever because the tools to obtain the "proof" is normally not within reach of the person reporting the observation. To further go on to claim that if no "proof" can be given for the observation then the observation must be somehow false is equally silly and is entering the realm of being an appeal to ignorance.
 
Before we go further, I agree that a statement of observation does not and cannot make a very strong case for anything. But that is sadly a limitation a great number of us face - we do not have the tools or the expertise to offer explanations of what we observe so there is simply not enough material for a proper argument among typical** members of this forum. In fact, most of us do not even have the tools to verify our observations except for our ears and perceptions. And this is really there we hit a bit of am imps-ass. Some say they do, some say they do not but the majority cannot offer a great deal of explanation or verification of their observation.
 
This is were I think the more expert and learned members and the MOT's can really help - and thankfully they have offered information and measurements to support both views. It is clear that more evidence suggests that there is no difference between USB cables (as long as they are to spec. etc.) that will result in a different output from the DAC. But there are some quite prominent figures in the industry who do not make or sell cables who claim they do hear a difference. So yes, if one were to conclude based on currently available information, one would have to conclude that USB cables make no difference. But then again, a lot of very smart people once claimed "perfect sound forever"
 
Actually, come to think of it, "audiophile USB cables make no difference - there is no proof that they do, therefore they do not" is actually an argument from ignorance. Odd that.
 
** - members like myself who just use their (untrained) ears and may be an amount of reading on the subject.

 

[hmorneau]

 
Actually, come to think of it, "audiophile USB cables make no difference - there is no proof that they do, therefore they do not" is actually an argument from ignorance. Odd that.

"One must always remember that the burden of proof is on the person making a contentious claim."

 

[x838nwy]

  "One must always remember that the burden of proof is on the person making a contentious claim."

 
A feeling shared by many. But the contentiousness of a claim is subjective. Talk to a creationist about evolution and you'll find that they think the whole evolving from apes thing not just contentious but simply bat-$hit crazy. But to scientists, the idea of a creator putting fossils in the ground to test our faith is a stretch of the imagination to say the least. To someone one who hears (or believes they hear) the difference, a claim otherwise is contentious. To a person who hears none, a claim to the contrary is more contentious. 

 

[hmorneau]

   
A feeling shared by many. But the contentiousness of a claim is subjective. Talk to a creationist about evolution and you'll find that they think the whole evolving from apes thing not just contentious but simply bat-$hit crazy. But to scientists, the idea of a creator putting fossils in the ground to test our faith is a stretch of the imagination to say the least. To someone one who hears (or believes they hear) the difference, a claim otherwise is contentious. To a person who hears none, a claim to the contrary is more contentious. 

The science (backing the evolution theory) says that there is no loss of sound quality when it's digital. Those who hear the difference I let you guess which category they belong according to your explanation. 

 

[x838nwy]

  The science (backing the evolution theory) says that there is no loss of sound quality when it's digital. Those who hear the difference I let you guess which category they belong according to your explanation. 

 
Lolz. Admittedly when it comes to audiophile cables, I'm a bit of a Fox Mulder

 

[valtopps]

wow still people don't believe there a difference in sound with usb cables, wow! again.
I don't know the how or why but I can hear it. ive went with a belkin gold usb and it sounded good. I decided to try a pangea usb w/ 4% silver a few months ago and wasn't thinking I was going to here anything, wow I said to my self that's sound so good, better then the belkin.
a week ago I bought the pangea pure silver usb again wow! I heard more detail clearer highs.
 
the people saying theres no difference must not have high end equipment or never tried a good usb cable.

 

[domer]

  wow still people don't believe there a difference in sound with usb cables, wow! again.
I don't know the how or why but I can hear it. ive went with a belkin gold usb and it sounded good. I decided to try a pangea usb w/ 4% silver a few months ago and wasn't thinking I was going to here anything, wow I said to my self that's sound so good, better then the belkin.
a week ago I bought the pangea pure silver usb again wow! I heard more detail clearer highs.
 
the people saying theres no difference must not have high end equipment or never tried a good usb cable.

 
You, sir, fall under category 'B'.  See my earlier post for more details.

 

[Lorspeaker]

... bravo for the B club      bad for the wallet..

 

[valtopps]

lmao like I said before try before you open your mouth or buy some good equipment before testing.  im not going to argue over this, I spent a whole night testing all three cables and I can tell you what cable was plugged into my dac without looking. please don't respond to this post I don't care what you have to say.