[jambaj0e]

I see one uncorrelated screen shot claiming to see errors. No average failure rate, no analysis. If I missed those, please point out where they are in the article.

But did you actually read the article in its entirety?

 

[bfreedma]

But did you actually read the article in its entirety?

I did. It’s a sales/marketing document, not an accurate technical analysis, Lots of hand waving about “problems” but no correlation of these problems to audibility.

Once again, please point out the average packet failure rate you claim is in the article. Or any analysis of bulk data Indicating there is an actual issue here that needs resolving. Let alone evidence that a cable would be technically capable of resolving those issues.

 

[reginalb]

He did show it, in the article. Did you not read it?

I read it, unfortunately, I also understand how USB works. As I said to you, your description of what errors sound like is wrong. I read that, in its entirety, before replying. The article fails (conveniently) to tell you what an error would sound like. There would be a very audible artifact, or a complete drop in audio. It doesn't change the characteristic of the audio, rather it would affect if you hear the audio at all. As others have already covered, the frequency of error is extremely low with an in-spec cable. You will know if your cable isn't in-spec, though. If your audio plays without dropouts, it's in-spec. (Or at least close enough for audio, which requires very little bandwidth).

 

[jambaj0e]

Gordon Rankin and Darko are selling you something and neither are reliable to provide objective information.

The error rate over a 2m USB cable is extremely low under typical conditions and is simple to test. I have run a continuous USB cable test at 24-bit/192kHz stereo audio for over 24 hours from a laptop to an RME ADI-2 DAC without a single error reported. If there is a meaningful error rate being observed, the cable and/or the connections are problematic. This would not be normal. The error rate is irrelevant for digital audio, but that won't generate any sales for devices that claim to resolve this non-issue. An engineer with savvy marketing skills can gin up some fervor in an attempt to spike sales. I would not rely on Darko or Rankin to show me the light.

There is a USB specification that should be followed.

https://www.intel.com/content/www/u...-bus/universal-serial-bus-specifications.html

And you really don't think that Gordon, who professionally been an engineer at this for decades haven't done your test and any other tests for error packets? And this error, by the way, is jitter. Is that what you were measuring?

You really don't think he hasn't listened to hundreds if not thousands of USB cables in his career (He also developed the USB audio certification for Apple)? And yet, he and other engineers like him (Paul McGowan) had said there are differences in USB cables and they're audible.

I'm sorry, for all of you guys who summarily dismiss his experience, go ahead. I'd trust his words and experience, as well as the differences I've personally heard on the Chord Dave +LCD-4Z and my Hugo TT2 + Cayin HA-300 + LCD-3.

If you haven't heard a difference, it may just be the cables you've tried (or not tried) or how resolving your system is. On the two I've heard, as well as my friend's Innuos Zen to Innuos Phoenix to M-Scaler to TT2 to LCD-4, I've heard the differences.

This is going round and round to nowhere, so I'm done, we're clearly in an impasse.

 

[megabigeye]

Ok, so did you read what Gordon Rankins wrote about isochronous USB audio transfer and how it is not error free? He's the engineer who created asynchronous USB (jitter clock in the DAC instead of the source) as well as created the Audioquest DragonFly. It's not "simple data transmission" because USB audio streaming is Isochronous (non error-correctin), not Bulk or Interrupt USB protocols (error-correcting).

Here's my problem with all of you naysayers: you say your thing without actually reading what he wrote in its entirety, nor do you even attempt to refute the technical things he said. Go ahead, you seem smart, read what he said starting halfway through this Darko Audio. I'd like to see you counter what he actually wrote:

https://darko.audio/2016/05/gordon-rankin-on-why-usb-audio-quality-varies/

I've read this article twice now. I also noted that the only times he mentioned audibility was in reference to music app faulting, not USB transmission.

I don't know that I'd go so far as to say that he intentionally left that part out, though. For all I know it's because he's an engineer and so he's more interested in overkill and redundancy than he is in audibility.

I also noted that the only time he mentioned USB cables being inadequate, he actually said it was the audiophile cables that didn't work with UAC2.

I think the reason others in this thread (myself included) aren't trusting Rankin's words is precisely because he's such an accomplished engineer. He's got a clear bias toward favoring the things he's worked on. Can you imagine working for decades at something only to realize that it didn't matter? Yeesh. That would suck.

Also, for what it's worth, I believe that not all USB cables are created equal. I once used an "audiophile" NuForce cable that picked up interference from a Bluetooth keyboard, which resulted in a very loud digital hash (?) sound. A cable with ferrite beads fixed the problem.

 

[reginalb]

And you really don't think that Gordon, who professionally been an engineer at this for decades haven't done your test and any other tests for error packets? And this error, by the way, is jitter. Is that what you were measuring?

You really don't think he hasn't listened to hundreds if not thousands of USB cables in his career (He also developed the USB audio certification for Apple)? And yet, he and other engineers like him (Paul McGowan) had said there are differences in USB cables and they're audible.

I'm sorry, for all of you guys who summarily dismiss his experience, go ahead. I'd trust his words and experience, as well as the differences I've personally heard on the Chord Dave +LCD-4Z and my Hugo TT2 + Cayin HA-300 + LCD-3.

If you haven't heard a difference, it may just be the cables you've tried (or not tried) or how resolving your system is. On the two I've heard, as well as my friend's Innuos Zen to Innuos Phoenix to M-Scaler to TT2 to LCD-4, I've heard the differences.

This is going round and round to nowhere, so I'm done, we're clearly in an impasse.

And I am sure it all has nothing at all to do with the fact that he sells insanely overpriced audio gear, spouting the same nonsense:

Brick N2, after RMAF 2019 there was a lot of talk about this product. At the USB connector is a USB isolator which then goes to the Microchip processor with 20x the buffering of the TAS1020. The processor enumerates at 24/96 (44.1, 48, 88.2, 96KHz sample rates supported) with low jitter dual oscillators and full reclocking before it reaches the NOS DAC chip with resistor IV. The DAC output is then directly coupled to the 12AU7A reactor follower output buffering the NOS DAC and cap coupled to the RCA outputs. Two versions available, Copper reactor $2K and Silver reactor (4x larger) $7500, upgrades available for any previous version of the Brick for $500. New Callisto USB DAC which is a super set of the N2 available soon with silver reactors and wood trim, VT135 output tubes. $10,000 (silver only sorry!).

Source: https://www.wavelengthaudio.com/Store/

So anyway, believe what you will, but please don't go around duping others. I find people like Gordon to be absolute scum. He's a snake-oil salesman of the worst kind. Go somewhere he is sometime and ask him to quantify what those packets lost equate to.

Just as I've asked Jason Stoddard to actually quantify what difference I would hear if I were to buy a "multibit" DAC from him. I didn't accuse him of anything, I didn't ask any crazy questions, just "What is the difference that I'll be able to hear between a standard Modi, and [the one that's 2.5x the price.]" I phrased it politely, with no mention of the price differential. He couldn't do it.

 

[jambaj0e]

I've read this article twice now. I also noted that the only times he mentioned audibility was in reference to music app faulting, not USB transmission.

I don't know that I'd go so far as to say that he intentionally left that part out, though. For all I know it's because he's an engineer and so he's more interested in overkill and redundancy than he is in audibility.

I think the reason others in this thread (myself included) aren't trusting Rankin's words is precisely because he's such an accomplished engineer. He's got a clear bias toward favoring the things he's worked on. Can you imagine working for decades at something only to realize that it didn't matter? Yeesh. That would suck.

But why do you think it doesn't matter, have you put in the amount of work that he has accomplished? Don't forget, he has also created many things, including the Dragonfly USB Dac. Like I said, just as you guys don't trust forum reader's words, I'd rather trust engineers with his resume, as well as Paul McGowan, and others whose job has been to test audio equipment every single day like Darren (designer at PS Audio) and Duncan (Testing tech at The Music Room). All who also said USB cables can make a difference.

https://www.thehifipodcast.net/about

 

[reginalb]

But why do you think it doesn't matter, have you put in the amount of work that he has accomplished? Don't forget, he has also created many things, including the Dragonfly USB Dac. Like I said, just as you guys don't trust forum reader's words, I'd rather trust engineers with his resume, as well as Paul McGowan, and others whose job has been to test audio equipment every single day like Darren (designer at PS Audio) and Duncan (Testing tech at The Music Room). All who also said USB cables can make a difference.

https://www.thehifipodcast.net/about

No, we know, you trust the guy selling you overpriced gear over the people that have an understanding of the underlying principles with no skin in the game.

 

[megabigeye]

But why do you think it doesn't matter, have you put in the amount of work that he has accomplished? Don't forget, he has also created many things, including the Dragonfly USB Dac. Like I said, just as you guys don't trust forum reader's words, I'd rather trust engineers with his resume, as well as Paul McGowan, and others whose job has been to test audio equipment every single day like Darren (designer at PS Audio) and Duncan (Testing tech at The Music Room). All who also said USB cables can make a difference.

https://www.thehifipodcast.net/about

Sorry, I don't quite understand— why do I think what doesn't matter? Audiophile USB cables? To be honest, I don't know enough to unequivocally come down on one side or the other, though I remain highly skeptical for the reasons outlined by others here.
My intention with that post was to point out that he almost completely left audibility out of that article, and that when he did mention it, it had nothing to do with cables, other than that some audiophile cables were inadequate for UAC2. Which is the opposite of saying that more expensive cables are better.

In fiction we'd say that Rankin is an unreliable narrator— he's too biased to give us a reliable tale. What do you do for work? (you don't actually have to tell me) Imagine that somebody came along and started claiming and proving that what you're doing is bunk. What would you do? I imagine you'd defend your job (and yourself!) tooth and nail! I worked for a decade at a bookstore. Mostly customers were very nice and polite, but every now and then somebody would come in, I'd help them for five, or ten, or twenty minutes, and then at the end they'd say, "thanks for your help, I can get it cheaper on Amazon." I didn't even like that job and it was still incredibly insulting. My dad worked for decades writing policy. Since he's retired a lot of his work has been undone, which, for him, is profoundly discouraging. And so he works a decade after his retirement to fix and defend his legacy. Mr. Rankin works as an engineer. Naturally when the question comes up about whether or not his work is meaningful, he's going to point out all the ways that he finds it meaningful. He is deeply, deeply biased toward defending the work that he does, has done, and will (hopefully) continue to do.
Does that help you understand why we don't trust Mr. Rankin's authority on this?

And, yes, I know that he designed the DragonFlies. I used to use and enjoy the DragonFly Red, until it broke.

Also, to the regulars in the Sound Science forum: I really wish you'd watch your language a little more closely. I know you're not directly being uncivil, but phrases like "rip off," "overpriced," "hand waving" all carry negative connotations with them. It's easy to infer from those words an animosity toward other posters, whether you're intending it or not. It doesn't help your arguments, but makes people go on the defensive. It's what the kids call micro-aggressions.

 

[megabigeye]

well, hmmmm
I share a small part of that school of thought with him too.
World Is full of people who believe too much in their ownreasoning and lab measurements.
I am a firm "believer" that as yet we can not measure everything fully, and the proof of the pudding is not in the recipe or the temperature of the oven!
at the same time, I am a firm believer that cables can be made badly, but there is no magic for making proper cables.

This is where you and I differ: for me, pudding is something that is cooked on the stovetop, not in the oven.

 

[reginalb]

...Also, to the regulars in the Sound Science forum: I really wish you'd watch your language a little more closely. I know you're not directly being uncivil, but phrases like "rip off," "overpriced," "hand waving" all carry negative connotations with them...It's what the kids call micro-aggressions.

I consider charging what Gordon does for a DAC to be a macro-aggression. Perhaps direct your offense to the snake oil salesmen, not the people pointing out that it's snake-oil. After several posts on a topic about someone who I think is amoral, I'll call them as such.

 

[reginalb]

On another forum, I believe that I am fed up with all the people saying 'this cable does it, that cable goes together only with that gear', etc.
I believe we are clear on the point that audio cables, whether interconnects, headphone cables or power cables, DO NOT change anything (unless, of course, very poor shielding or extremely high resistance). The whole thing is that a lot of people over 'there' are quite convinced that they, indeed, do.

I think I'll quote the banned OP after this conversation and bloviate for a moment. Anyone in the current USB discussion, note I'm going to be tying this conversation back to the OP, and not actually directly addressing the current topic of conversation. You've been warned.

This loop is instructive: There are those who will never be convinced. But I wanted to try to dispel discouragement, if I might. I once believed that I could get "better audio" from the right device. I bought my first "HiFi" DAP in 2011, a HiFiman HM-601 based on the information I obtained on this forum (not the Sound Science section, of course, but Head-Fi more generally). I truly believed my ears. I have always had an interest in science, and am a software engineer by trade, so I eventually found my way to the Sound Science section and was at first appalled by all the folks saying that I had wasted my money. So I read, at first attempting to reinforce my preconceived notions, and find assurance that I hadn't wasted money, and there was plenty of that to be found (away from this section of the forum).

But I ventured back, understanding that I hadn't really approached these questions in an honest way, and I started doing a lot more digging around "high resolution" audio. I eventually did my own blind testing and confirmed that everything I owned sounded like everything else I owned. I tried really hard to find audible differences, and even wrote a review that probably contributed to people disliking the Sony ZX1 (as I revealed that without the DSP on the device, it was indistinguishable from my Clip+).

There are those that will never be convinced, but you aren't talking to them when you hash this stuff out on an internet forum. You're talking to the lurkers. I could afford the small amount of money that I spent on a silly little DAP, but when I read about people on here putting savings towards their 14th DAP I just cringe. But while some folks have to be right, there are also those that want to get it right (thanks for that Colin Cowherd). I think these conversations are worth having for those lurkers just trying to get it right, and not waste their money.

I mostly lurk myself here, people like @gregorio have a deeper understanding of the analog side of audio than I will ever have, and I more or less leave those conversations up to people like him. I'll jump in on things like USB, as that's a bit closer to my own wheelhouse. the question is, of course, do you trust people that don't have skin in the game? Or do you trust the person who is trying to convince you that this $10,000 DAC has some magic pixie dust that can overcome the occasional error in USB data transmission?

 

[Whazzzup]

well i must destroy all my cables.......lolz hahahahahaha lolololololo

 

[megabigeye]

I consider charging what Gordon does for a DAC to be a macro-aggression. Perhaps direct your offense to the snake oil salesmen, not the people pointing out that it's snake-oil. After several posts on a topic about someone who I think is amoral, I'll call them as such.

Fair enough. But by calling him amoral you're implying that people that believe him are either also amoral (by knowingly believing him) or dupes (by unknowingly believing him). Also, you don't know that he's amoral. As I tried to explain above (maybe unsuccessfully), for all we know he's just a guy that's trying to get his job done as best he can. Or maybe he's amoral. We don't know!

Also, I wasn't taking offense. I honestly think that being as civil and understanding as possible is the best way to teach somebody something. Or, in keeping with the thread, to convince them.

 

[reginalb]

Fair enough. But by calling him amoral you're implying that people that believe him are either also amoral (by knowingly believing him) or dupes (by unknowingly believing him). Also, you don't know that he's amoral. As I tried to explain above (maybe unsuccessfully), for all we know he's just a guy that's trying to get his job done as best he can. Or maybe he's amoral. We don't know!

Also, I wasn't taking offense. I honestly think that being as civil and understanding as possible is the best way to teach somebody something. Or, in keeping with the thread, to convince them.

I was once duped by head-fi, we're all human. We'd be better off if we could all admit that it happens.

And you're absolutely right, I don't know he's amoral. But I definitely think he is. I think many people that sell to audiophiles know exactly what they're doing. You're right that I shouldn't assume what's in his heart, he just seems too well accomplished to not know exactly what he's doing.