[noahbickart]

Quote:

I absolutely agree. I just upgraded my printer USB cable to a printerphile USB cable. Now the colors are much more vivid and the pictures seem much more alive. My next upgrade will be the power supply cable.

A skeptic once tried to prove with a light meter that the colors were the precisely the same and that my head was playing tricks on me (lol), but I suspect that because his test contradicted my subjective experience, there must be something wrong with his test. 
 
After all, I feel that there is a difference. It is worth about $500 to me, and I won't let anyone tell me otherwise.

 

[Greenleaf7]

Quote:

A skeptic once tried to prove with a light meter that the colors were the precisely the same and that my head was playing tricks on me (lol), but I suspect that because his test contradicted my subjective experience, there must be something wrong with his test. 
 
After all, I feel that there is a difference. It is worth about $500 to me, and I won't let anyone tell me otherwise.

I never trust the equipment, I believe that they're often inaccurate and so i choose to hold my ears in much higher regard. I mean, why bother upgrading your headphones when a simple cable upgrade will offer a much improved sound quality? 
 
This is the next upgrade i'm planning on getting for my printer
http://www.shunyata.com/Content/products-ZitronAna.html
 
It claims to dramatically improves peak-current transfer and minimizes distortion between component power supplies and their power source. Although it looks akin to my garden hose, I'm convinced that the improvements will get rid of any nasty artifacts that might appear  my when using the stock power cord. I expect nothing short of a drastic improvement in print quality.

 

[noahbickart]

That's a low-fi printer rig.
 
You won't understand anything on a printed page until you run your printer off of battery power.
 
I also place my printer on maple blocks to spiritually isolate the printer from unwanted resonances
 
http://mapleshadestore.com/feedback_mapleshadeplatforms.php 

 

[xnor]

Quote:

After all, I feel that there is a difference. It is worth about $500 to me, and I won't let anyone tell me otherwise.

To such persons you can say that reality doesn't care how they feel.
 
For example, our eye has blind spots. Just because the white dot disappears for you doesn't mean it disappears from the static image -- in reality it's still there.

 

[drez]

You should see their usb cable (mapleshade). Very clearly out of spec, funny thing is some tried using two of them with a usb powered hub but the signal was so bad the connection wouldn't work. Someone mentioned it earlier but I do wonder how many audiophile cables have actual undergone usb certification.

Personally I am not a consistent objectivist, I believe that digital cable performance matters, just that their performance is purely a technical matter. I believe the DAC doesnt care what the cable is made of, as long as it measures well and does it's job of transferring a square wave with minimal rounding.

I have identified a trend with clearly out of spec cables. The sound quality descriptions tend to point to "relaxed" or "warm" sound qualities. Less suspect cables eg from Audioquest and Wireworld tend to be described as "faster" sounding. Strange thing is lots of audiophiles seem to prefer the warmer sound so will rank cables which are clearly bad digital cables, very highly. So many audiophiles are paying thousands for cables that likely perform badly...

I should also mention that I cant guarantee (let alone prove) that Wireworld and Audiqoest perform any better that a to-spec USB cable, just their designs are more sensible than some others I have seen. These examples were given purely for the sake of my argument.

These subjective anectdotes are hardly reliable "data" or "evidence", just trends I have observed. If anyone is interested in trying out or researching USB cables, I hope my observations might be useful.

 

[robertsong]

Quote:

I have a usb keyboard. I used to connect it to my computer with a stock usb cable. On a whim I decided to use this cable instead: 
http://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=AQMUSBDIA%20.75
 
It costs a mere $548 dollars, which, given that I have about $2000 in my computer, seems like a good deal.
 
Wow! The difference in my typing is amazing!
My nouns and adjectives agree with more precision!
My verbs stand out with greater action, and my nouns are free from hash and jitter.
The words I write have better flow and pace.
 
Anyone who can't tell the difference must not have golden ears. A better usb cable makes anyone a better writer.
 
 
 

 
Hi. Here is where your analogy fails. You don't understand the difference b/t data packets and an audio stream. Here's  Wireworld's explanation:
 
 
There is a fundamental difference between the transfer of computer data and

digital audio signals. Computers are able to transfer digital data without loss, because the data moves in the robust form of blocks, which do not depend on specific timing between the sending and receiving devices. However, digital audio signals are continuous streams of data, which are quite fragile, since the digital processor must remain perfectly locked onto the timing of the signal to avoid data losses.
The Limitations of digital audio processors and cables create timing errors known as jitter, which remove portions of the audio signal and replace them with noise and distortion. Cables tend to round off the square waveforms of the signal, making them less clear to the processor, thus increasing jitter. This rounding effect varies greatly among cables and a truly superior digital audio cable can make great improvements in sound quality.
WireWorld digital audio cables utilize unique designs specifically developed to minimize jitter by providing sharper, cleaner leading edges on the digital waveform. At each price level, they provide the lowest jitter available, producing distinct improvements in clarity, image focus, smoothness and dynamic range.
WireWorld USB cables feature a unique flat design that allows it to function over significantly longer runs than conventional USB cables and provides improved sound quality in media server, PC audio, and other digital music applications.

Our unique flat cable design not only improves performance, but it allows you to connect digital music devices over longer distances – for instance, a laptop PC across the room from the home theater system.
 All models exceed the USB2.0 High Speed specifications.
USB cables product sheet: CLICK HERE
 
 
And here is a Double Blind Test that refutes the "all usb cables sound the same" nonsense.
 
http://www.crystalcable.com/CMS/ckfinder/userfiles/files/Hi-Fi+%20februari%202012%20Crystal%20Cable%20USB.pdf
 
 
And here is some information on a more recent double blind test. This one may be the first to include jitter measurements.
 
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/664972/hifi-news-usb-cable-shootout
 
 
Noticing a trend here? It must all be part of a grand conspiracy for audiophile companies to scam people into forking over some extra cash. Riiiiiiight.

 

[robertsong]

Quote:

These subjective anectdotes are hardly reliable "data" or "evidence", just trends I have observed. If anyone is interested in trying out or researching USB cables, I hope my observations might be useful.

 
 
If subjective opinions mean nothing to you, and you can't trust your own ears, then how exactly do you choose a piece of audio equipment??
 
What are these "objective" measurements you go by?  Do you just throw a dart at whatever looks good to you?
 
Are DBT's useless to you as well?

 

[mikeaj]

Quote:

And here is a Double Blind Test that refutes the "all usb cables sound the same" nonsense.
 
http://www.crystalcable.com/CMS/ckfinder/userfiles/files/Hi-Fi+%20februari%202012%20Crystal%20Cable%20USB.pdf

 
I don't mean to nitpick when there are bigger issues at play, but there is a very important correction to make: that is single blind, not double blind.
 
But more importantly, there is no mention of statistical analysis or even rudimentary experimental design. How consistent is "remarkably consistent"? Same for the other link—apparently no serious discussion of listening results.
 
 
 
Also... you do realize that even for audio there's a buffer involved on the USB receiver's side, and that the USB signaling itself is not driving the DAC?

 

[noahbickart]

Digital audio signals are computer data. 1010111010101010101010 = 1010111010101010101010.
 
Digital audio isn't any more "fragile" than any other digital information. 
 
Wireworld sells USB cables making them far from unbiased.
 
USB and other Digital Cables either meet the spec that equipment using that Spec requires or they don't.
 
You may feel better about your listening experience using a $500 digital cable- but it doesn't sound different.
Quote:

 
Hi. Here is where your analogy fails. You don't understand the difference b/t data packets and an audio stream. Here's  Wireworld's explanation:
 
 
There is a fundamental difference between the transfer of computer data and

digital audio signals. Computers are able to transfer digital data without loss, because the data moves in the robust form of blocks, which do not depend on specific timing between the sending and receiving devices. However, digital audio signals are continuous streams of data, which are quite fragile, since the digital processor must remain perfectly locked onto the timing of the signal to avoid data losses.
The Limitations of digital audio processors and cables create timing errors known as jitter, which remove portions of the audio signal and replace them with noise and distortion. Cables tend to round off the square waveforms of the signal, making them less clear to the processor, thus increasing jitter. This rounding effect varies greatly among cables and a truly superior digital audio cable can make great improvements in sound quality.
WireWorld digital audio cables utilize unique designs specifically developed to minimize jitter by providing sharper, cleaner leading edges on the digital waveform. At each price level, they provide the lowest jitter available, producing distinct improvements in clarity, image focus, smoothness and dynamic range.
WireWorld USB cables feature a unique flat design that allows it to function over significantly longer runs than conventional USB cables and provides improved sound quality in media server, PC audio, and other digital music applications.

Our unique flat cable design not only improves performance, but it allows you to connect digital music devices over longer distances – for instance, a laptop PC across the room from the home theater system.
 All models exceed the USB2.0 High Speed specifications.
USB cables product sheet: CLICK HERE
 
 
And here is a Double Blind Test that refutes the "all usb cables sound the same" nonsense.
 
http://www.crystalcable.com/CMS/ckfinder/userfiles/files/Hi-Fi+%20februari%202012%20Crystal%20Cable%20USB.pdf
 
 
And here is some information on a more recent double blind test. This one may be the first to include jitter measurements.
 
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/664972/hifi-news-usb-cable-shootout
 
 
Noticing a trend here? It must all be part of a grand conspiracy for audiophile companies to scam people into forking over some extra cash. Riiiiiiight.

 

[robertsong]

Quote:

Digital audio signals are computer data. 1010111010101010101010 = 1010111010101010101010.
 
Digital audio isn't any more "fragile" than any other digital information. 
 

 
 
Nope, the difference is how the data is sent and how it is received and interpreted by the device. Blocks of data vs. a continuous stream. Audio receivers and data receivers do not work the same way. You are going to have to ask legitimate audio engineer for a more concise explanation. Unfortunatley no one posting on the "sound science" forum has those qualifications.  I can understand why not.
 
Btw, doesn't the Schiit engineer post on head-fi? If you really need a better explanation, maybe try PM'ing him.

 

[robertsong]

Quote:

You may feel better about your listening experience using a $500 digital cable- but it doesn't sound different.

 
 
There are subtle differences between audio components/cables, and there are some not so subtle differences. Just to be clear I heard differences between the Lacie Flat and Belkin gold cables as well. I'll leave it at that.

 

[WALL-E]

Well said drez!  I came to the same conclusion, experimenting with USB cables and finally I built my own basing on the Ethernet cable design, since the specification is well documented. http://www.head-fi.org/t/665635/know-how-diy-cable-related-tutorials
 
Some audio cable company making their "audio grade USB cables" have made claims that may apply to analog signal cables but not for digital data transfer it does not even meet normal commercial standards, unfortunately this is the normal situation with 'audiophile' cables.

 

[mikeaj]

Quote:

Nope, the difference is how the data is sent and how it is received and interpreted by the device. Blocks of data vs. a continuous stream. Audio receivers and data receivers do not work the same way. You are going to have to ask legitimate audio engineer for a more concise explanation. Unfortunatley no one posting on the "sound science" forum has those qualifications.  I can understand why not.
 
Btw, doesn't the Schiit engineer post on head-fi? If you really need a better explanation, maybe try PM'ing him.

 
Some audio devices don't use isochronous transfer mode, but all of the transfer modes are still packetized. It's not a continuous stream in that sense. Certainly not a stream in the sense of the timing being important in the way you describe, as there is a buffer and the DAC is not being driven by this "stream". Pretty much, the physical layer should be the same no matter which mode.
 
Sure, data transfers are bulk transfer mode, which have guarantee of delivery via retransmissions. But base bit error rate of signaling in USB is supposed to be 10^-12 to be standards compliant.

 

[robertsong]

Quote:

Some audio cable company making their "audio grade USB cables" have made claims that may apply to analog signal cables but not for digital data transfer it does not even meet normal commercial standards, unfortunately this is the normal situation with 'audiophile' cables.

 
 
On the contrary, I think the vast majority of them claim they do. I know absolutely nothing about this Mapleshade cable and could really care less about it. Out of curiosity how does one go about proving that?

 

[bigshot]

Btw, doesn't the (redacted) engineer post on head-fi? If you really need a better explanation, maybe try PM'ing him.

Been there, done that... You aren't going to find many sales reps posting in this forum. They prefer to participate in areas where the folks they are talking to don't really understand what they're talking about and just trust them to be correct. They don't do well in forums like this.

By the way, that sales literature you posted totally avoided the concept of buffering. Sound isn't streamed across cables. It's transferred in chunks and reassembled in a buffer before playing. That avoids momentary streaming errors.