[DefectiveAudioComponent]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quaddy /img/forum/go_quote.gif @defective, i hope you are joking, as impedance has nothing to do with the physical angle of a cable per say.

Well, obviously I am joking, because there is no way that bending the usb cable can affect the sound. But in fact, that's the reflection-theory that (I guess that he) refers to, to avoid sharper turns than 45 degrees for usb signals on printed circuits boards. It's also entirely unclear how a different cable design could affect this non-problem. But of course, fixing a non-problem is very easy since one doesn't have to do anything at all.

 

[audioengr]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MacedonianHero /img/forum/go_quote.gif My brother is a Professional Engineer (Electrical) and is a design consultant for several well known electronic OEMs (over 10 years of experience) and based on his recommendation, there is NO difference as a USB cable (like an HDMI cable) carries a digital signal. There would be a difference for analog cables like RCA cables. So go with the cheapest you can find that won't fall apart. Cheers.

If we are expounding credentials, then fine, here are mine:
About Empirical Audio : Empirical Audio

25 years doing digital design and engineering design management in the computer industry. Designed the first massively scalable parallel supercomputer. Design-team lead on the Pentium II. 22 Patents issued. Worked for Intel for 16 years. Unisys, then Sperry Univac for 3.

Look, I know what I'm talking about here, so dont insult me. I dont have time to debate this. I'm sharing my knowledge, take it or leave it, I dont care.

Similar issues occur with digital coax cables. Here is a white paper I wrote for Positive-feedback with the analysis:

spdif

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

 

[DefectiveAudioComponent]

Quote:

Originally Posted by audioengr /img/forum/go_quote.gif Look, I know what I'm talking about here, so dont insult me. I dont have time to debate this. I'm sharing my knowledge, take it or leave it, I dont care. Empirical Audio

Postive feedback is not a scientific journal, if we are speaking about knowledge sharing rather than opinion sharing (no need for scientific evidence for opinions).... do share your credible sources if you like. You have shared nothing yet. With your vast knowledge, some hard evidence to back up your unusual and hard-to-believe claims should be easy to find.

EDIT: Since you are su busy, Steve, I'll help you out a bit. Start with explaining and showing the problem that you are trying to fix. Something in the lines of... "It is well known that X is a problem (insert any sources that agree with that here). You can easily hear that X is a problem if you do Y" (insert procedure for hearing the problem yourself). X is (explain X here)."

 

[gregorio]

Quote:

Originally Posted by audioengr /img/forum/go_quote.gif Look, I know what I'm talking about here, so dont insult me. I dont have time to debate this. I'm sharing my knowledge, take it or leave it, I dont care. Similar issues occur with digital coax cables. Here is a white paper I wrote for Positive-feedback with the analysis: spdif Steve N. Empirical Audio

Sorry you haven't got the time to debate it, or provide answers to any of the questions posed. As I said in my earlier post, I didn't expect you to answer them anyway!

Thanks for that link Steve. Here is a link to a thread which exposes your link as a complete bunch of self serving BS:

PSW Recording Forums: Dan Lavry => Why longer is generally better for an S/PDIF Digital Cable

G

 

[Quaddy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorio /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sorry you haven't got the time to debate it, or provide answers to any of the questions posed. As I said in my earlier post, I didn't expect you to answer them anyway! Thanks for that link Steve. Here is a link to a thread which exposes your link as a complete bunch of self serving BS: PSW Recording Forums: Dan Lavry => Why longer is generally better for an S/PDIF Digital Cable G

how does that thread so definitively expose it as BS? i read it and cant see, sure there are varying opinions, but there are no conclusions drawn, its one persons word against another, its childish, like his link is better than your link.

some people believe wikipedia to be 100% factual because it can be linked to

also, worryingly, you seem to hold dan lavry on some kind of pedestal if its his word you are treating as gospel.

far better to say that there is no definite answer and give them both benefit of the doubt, unless you are in a position to clearly conclude absolute factual judgement?

 

[DefectiveAudioComponent]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quaddy /img/forum/go_quote.gif far better to say that there is no definite answer and give them both benefit of the doubt, unless you are in a position to clearly conclude absolute factual judgement?

No. It's Steve who says he has a solution to some kind of problem. It is up to him to show that the problem exists, and how we can easily verify that. Then, he has to show that his solution has some chance of fixing the problem. But first, the problem. There is so far no reason to believe that his gear is any better than any cheap cable from the store.

And by the way, he could easily share this information with us, if there is indeed a problem and a solution. Because, for his engineering effort (if in fact there is one) he needs to have a setup where the problem can be heard, and another (with his fix) where it can't be heard. He just needs to tell us what the systems consist of, and what to listen for.

(That's just the first step, though, but it would be a start)

 

[audioengr]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gregorio /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sorry you haven't got the time to debate it, or provide answers to any of the questions posed. As I said in my earlier post, I didn't expect you to answer them anyway! Thanks for that link Steve. Here is a link to a thread which exposes your link as a complete bunch of self serving BS: PSW Recording Forums: Dan Lavry => Why longer is generally better for an S/PDIF Digital Cable G

I have met Dan Lavry, so I can understand this response. I do not believe he even read the white-paper carefully. There are a lot of designers with huge egos in this industry.

The article says nothing at all about my products. In fact, many cable manufacturers have stopped offering 0.5m and 1.0m digital cables just because of this article. If you contact the editor of UHF (Ultra-Hi-Fidelity) in Canada, you will find that he read this article many years ago and being suspicious of it, he designed and carried-out a double-blind test with a number of digital cables (without my knowledge). The results of this AB/X verified my anaysis and conclusions. He visited my suite at CES one year and gave me a copy of the article, which was printed in his magazine, giving me full credit. You can contact Gerard, the editor of UHF here:
Ultra High Fidelity Magazine

So, I think this exposes Dan Lavry. It was a cheap shot IMO. The emperors clothes are off.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio

 

[tyrion]

This thread is closed for now. There is way too much in the way of personal attacks and I need to see if it can be cleaned up.

 

[Playstation]

The usb dac I'm looking at Has it's own power supply. Was wondering if 10ft is too long for a usb audio cable. Will be plugging it into a PS4.