[vhsownsbeta]

I like my cables medium-rare.

Mine, bleu (jeans).

 

[GearMe]

How do you cook a cable? This is a genuine question.

Well...apparently there are devices to do this; had no idea!
http://www.audioexcellenceaz.com/products/audiodharma-cable-cooker-cable-conditioner/

"Stereophile Recommended Component for 3 Years Running"

The good news is they're "Designed & manufactured in the U.S.A…built to last". They run anywhere from $999 to $1699 -- a pittance to pay to eek out that last nuance.

Of course, the other option would be to buy HD800/TH900/T1/Ether, etc. and wait for your cable to 'burn in' while listening to music (albeit in a slightly downgraded mode).

 

[lukeap69]

Well...apparently there are devices to do this; had no idea!
http://www.audioexcellenceaz.com/products/audiodharma-cable-cooker-cable-conditioner/

"Stereophile Recommended Component for 3 Years Running"

The good news is they're "Designed & manufactured in the U.S.A…built to last". They run anywhere from $999 to $1699 -- a pittance to pay to eek out that last nuance.

Of course, the other option would be to buy HD800/TH900/T1/Ether, etc. and wait for your cable to 'burn in' while listening to music (albeit in a slightly downgraded mode).

I think the last option is the easiest and cheapest for me as I own an HD800 SD already...

Thanks for the reply.

 

[KoshNaranek]

I am sorry to take so long to get back to this as the discussion seems to have moved beyond this but some points to consider:
 
Apparently, there is something in computer science called a Real Time Operating System. These systems make the clock the most important determiner of what the CPU is doing.
 
Computational threads can wholly occupy the CPU until they either terminate or reach a point where they can relinquish control of the system to other threads. RTOSs force the threads to relinquish control, whether they want to or not, based on time management of the Operating system. RTOSs have to be designed at the outset to have this functionality.
 
Some Examples:
QNX: originally designed as a Control OS for Power and Chemical plants.(Doing things on time on old, slow systems was important) Now purchased by Blackberry and is being put forward as an automotive control OS
 
Unix: AT&T Unix was designed to manage a phone system.(had to manage connections and billing according to time) This was later forked to Berkley System Design Unix(BSD) and continues to have this functionality. Mac OS is built upon this foundation, but I have no idea what Mac does in userspace(above the kernel)
 
Linux: designed as a Unix-like clone. It is not Unix and does not have RTOS capability. There is a hacked kernel that is distributed with Ubuntu Studio and Audiophile Linux. This is referred to as the low-latency kernel. My understanding is that even this kernel is not a true RTOS.
 
Windows: No RTOS capability at all and its ability to manage thread interrupts and load balance is inferior to Linux. Versions of Windows later than XP also have additional code to make its performance for audio even worse: https://www.cs.auckland.ac.nz/~pgut001/pubs/vista_cost.html
 
Most of what I have stated above come from an old issue of Byte magazine(pre 1999) I no longer have the issue and do not feel the need to track it down. Please feel free to correct and educate me on anything I may have misunderstood while in my fugue state.
 
Thank You
 
P.S. If the God of this Thread(baldr) requests it, I will look up the references!!

 

[castleofargh]

my eternal problem with all the usb magic boxes is a very basic idea: if something can consistently improve a DAC, why is it not inside the DAC already?

just that should trigger a little skepticism.
 I have 2 hypothetical answers:
1/ the guy who made the DAC doesn't know enough about the usb or whatever streaming protocol and requirements to use a design that isn't only good for laboratory conditions. or decided to cut corners to increase his margin.
 
the obvious reaction should be to get another DAC instead of trying to patch a poor design. right?
 
 
2/ the stuff you add that "improves" the sound, may only do so subjectively.  or may improve it only because they attenuate a specific problem you have at your house on your system. like anything added to a system it can't possibly be all good an no drawbacks. so what is the impact when you don't initially have that specific and significant problem? nobody seems too concerned with that. I find it strange.
double amping booooohhh badddd! too long a cable, booh badd!!!! but stacking stuff on the digital path, some marketing dude succeeded in making it look like a progress. just plug the magic box and sound will improve. brilliant stunt!
 
 I see this as drug vs disease. the fact that you can treat a specific disease with a drug doesn't mean that everybody should go and randomly take some without even knowing if they're sick. all those magic boxes look to me like such drugs, and people getting them randomly like they're pokemons, really doesn't feel right.
 
 
I understand that it can help for a few troubles(if we have them), and I obviously understand the curiosity surrounding those almost cheap devices with great hope of totally unclear "improvements". but when something seems too good to be true, it often just is.
 
 
cable cooker... give me a break-in.

 

[johnjen]

As I see it these "usb magic boxes" we are exploring, are revealing were changes in design can take us, for better and for worse.
And most of our experiments are trial and error attempts to push the envelope and discover what happens when the the limits of what is 'known' are exceeded.
 
To dismiss these efforts out of hand is, in my opinion, missing the point and just promotes the status quo of 'good enough' thinking.
And while for some 'good enough' is just dandy, others will want/need/must push the limits of what is possible, firstly to know what IS possible, then to know how much of an improvement IS possible, so to come to understand more of the 'big picture', while not getting bogged down by the minutia.
 
As for the attitude that these efforts are unworthy of spending our time investigating them, well, I'm reminded of a quote from long ago.
“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation.”  Rev. William H. Poole  1879
 
And another that seems to apply here too is…
"Awareness leads to recognition, recognition leads to desire, desire leads to manifestation, manifestation leads to observation of what was generated - and the cycle of evolution begins a new."   Author unknown
 
And lastly these variations upon a common theme…
"Never doubt that a small, group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
Margret Mead
 
and
 
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." 
"Truth never triumphs — its opponents just die out."
"Science advances one funeral at a time."  Max Planck
 
Lastly,
It is not hard to find Truth. What is hard is not to run away from it once you have found it.
- Prometheus
 
JJ

 

[RCBinTN]

Hi All,
FWIW, I find my cleanest music is served up by my mobile rig:  AK120ii - Oppo HA-2 - SE846.
The music is more resolving than my home rig - that is MacPro - JRiver - optical - Gumby - Bryston BHA-1.
I'm currently thinking about a dedicated music-only server as Mike has detailed many times, or else a Linux-based system like the Bryston BDP-2.
 
Enjoy your music!
RCBinTN

 

[Baldr]

  my eternal problem with all the usb magic boxes is a very basic idea: if something can consistently improve a DAC, why is it not inside the DAC already?

just that should trigger a little skepticism.
 I have 2 hypothetical answers:
1/ the guy who made the DAC doesn't know enough about the usb or whatever streaming protocol and requirements to use a design that isn't only good for laboratory conditions. or decided to cut corners to increase his margin.
 
the obvious reaction should be to get another DAC instead of trying to patch a poor design. right?
 
 
2/ the stuff you add that "improves" the sound, may only do so subjectively.  <snip>
 

 
I do indeed have a factual based answer to #1 above, at least as applied to me:  I have 7x the experience (35ish vs. 5ish years) design experience with DACs as opposed to USB interfaces.  Therefore, I am at a lesser point on the USB learning curve.  Since all of our DACs from Bimby up are upgradable, earlier adopters of our gear have been able to take advantage of USB upgrades as I have progressed along the learning curve.  This enables our clients to avoid the much shorter haircut of a newer entire DAC, as opposed to a much less expensive upgrade board.  It also enables a degree of freedom for both our customers and ourselves.
 
With respect to #2 above, I cannot comment, as there are too many system related factors dictating too many varietal scenarios upon which to comment.
 
On why such USB products exist, I have an observation to share.  It seems there are a variety of differing performance level USB input DACs designed over the last several years.  Combine this with the fact that both Mac and Windoze OS "upgrades?" seem to tolerate less and less current draw from their USB clients a they "progress" toward being compatible with smaller, harder to read and less current capability devices.  A vital function of our own Wyrd magic USB box is to provide much more current to the USB based DAC.

 

[johnjen]

   
I do indeed have a factual based answer to #1 above, at least as applied to me:  I have 7x the experience (35ish vs. 5ish years) design experience with DACs as opposed to USB interfaces.  Therefore, I am at a lesser point on the USB learning curve.  Since all of our DACs from Bimby up are upgradable, earlier adopters of our gear have been able to take advantage of USB upgrades as I have progressed along the learning curve.  This enables our clients to avoid the much shorter haircut of a newer entire DAC, as opposed to a much less expensive upgrade board.  It also enables a degree of freedom for both our customers and ourselves.
 
With respect to #2 above, I cannot comment, as there are too many system related factors dictating too many varietal scenarios upon which to comment.
 
On why such USB products exist, I have an observation to share.  It seems there are a variety of differing performance level USB input DACs designed over the last several years.  Combine this with the fact that both Mac and Windoze OS "upgrades?" seem to tolerate less and less current draw from their USB clients a they "progress" toward being compatible with smaller, harder to read and less current capability devices.  A vital function of our own Wyrd magic USB box is to provide much more current to the USB based DAC.

Ahhhh…
"I have an observation to share.  It seems there are a variety of differing performance level USB input DACs designed over the last several years."
 
The subtle art of understatment is alive and well!
 
And straight from Baldr no less… 
hahahahahahahahahahaha
 
JJ

 
ps. the twinkle in the eyes are the key to a more complete understanding…

 

[madwolfa]

 
A vital function of our own Wyrd magic USB box is to provide much more current to the USB based DAC.

 
But why would one need more than single Wyrd in a chain?

 

[kstuart]

It's worth noting that Personal Computers are not designed for real-time applications, such as video and audio.
 
Until recently, you told a PC to do something and some time later it did it.
 
So, many PC components perform poorly when people have decided to do real-time uses, like audio.  Specifically, USB (and other) output devices and power supplies have been shown to be the parts least well optimized for real-time.
 
So, why not put Wyrd-like USB devices inside DACs?   Because some of the advantages of these devices acrue to it not being electrically inside the PC and also not being electrically inside the DAC.

 

[madwolfa]

Nobody needs real-time for simple audio playback.

 

[johnjen]

   
But why would one need more than single Wyrd in a chain?

I realize I'm not Baldr, but my answer is based upon your use of the "need".
 
You don't "need" even a first Wyrd, let alone any of the other available paraphernalia.
 
Many are perfectly happy using the supplied cables that come with the gear we use.
 
Whereas some want to find out if there is 'Better'.
 
JJ

 

[Baldr]

   
But why would one need more than single Wyrd in a chain?

I have neither claim to any beneficial testimony of Wyrds in series nor any recollection of making it.  One Wyrd will solve any OS current limiting up to a several hundred ma or so.  This should be more than adequate to power any bus powered USB device at all except an XMOS device actually made to run off bus power.  Although I exaggerate slightly, such a level of current would perhaps be suitable for light grade welding.  I cannot explain the ubiquity of the XMOS USB audio decoder, any more than I can of the "Beats" Headphones.  Perhaps I am coarse.

 

[castleofargh]

  As I see it these "usb magic boxes" we are exploring, are revealing were changes in design can take us, for better and for worse.
And most of our experiments are trial and error attempts to push the envelope and discover what happens when the the limits of what is 'known' are exceeded.
 
To dismiss these efforts out of hand is, in my opinion, missing the point and just promotes the status quo of 'good enough' thinking.
And while for some 'good enough' is just dandy, others will want/need/must push the limits of what is possible, firstly to know what IS possible, then to know how much of an improvement IS possible, so to come to understand more of the 'big picture', while not getting bogged down by the minutia.
 
As for the attitude that these efforts are unworthy of spending our time investigating them, well, I'm reminded of a quote from long ago.
“There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments, and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance—that principle is contempt prior to investigation.”  Rev. William H. Poole  1879
 
And another that seems to apply here to is…
"Awareness leads to recognition, recognition leads to desire, desire leads to manifestation, manifestation leads to observation of what was generated - and the cycle of evolution begins a new."   Author unknown
 
And lastly these variations upon a common theme…
"Never doubt that a small, group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."
Margret Mead
 
and
 
"A new scientific truth does not triumph by convincing its opponents and making them see the light, but rather because its opponents eventually die, and a new generation grows up that is familiar with it." 
"Truth never triumphs — its opponents just die out."
"Science advances one funeral at a time."  Max Planck
 
Lastly,
It is not hard to find Truth. What is hard is not to run away from it once you have found it.
- Prometheus
 
JJ

mate this made me laugh so hard. there is so much irony for this to fall on me. 
I have never spent so much time and dedication on something that wasn't my job or a mean to get laid. so curiosity or motivation for audio, I'm just fine.  in fact, less would improve my life and wallet those days. I buy stuff for the sol purpose of measuring audio gears(not at the pro level, I have very limited capacities), doing all the stuff I can think of. usually I try to answer 1 question, and like in a game, when I unlock the question, I end up with a new level and 15new questions. arrrrrghhhhhhh!! my room looks like I'm that handy guy who's always fixing stuff, when I never owned a proper screwdriver before. now I have multimeters, bread board, plenty of cables and components, switches, mics, thermometer, db meter... this is madness and it's 100% for audio curiosity.  yesterday I was in PM with my math dealer RRod(20years I was clean, and now I'm smoking math again, thanks audiobama!) I came in asking for impulse response settings, to use for convolution. and today he got me some mad sine sweeps ready for consumption, the real deal, those stuff get you super high.
 
so I don't believe lack of curiosity or motivation is the reason why I don't care much for usb boxes. or cryo cable, or rice cooker, or DSD or aliens or gluten free nutella.  I don't go looking just because I can it's just not me, and I tend to only do me.  else,  like I said before, where do I draw the line? should I try all the Synergistic Research homeopathic devices?  is it still science if I put different vegetables on my DAC and check if the sound feels more natural? if you don't draw a rational line somewhere, soon enough you're with a tinfoil hat getting surgery to have both outer ears perfectly symmetrical for better soundstage. because why not?
if I had an audible or measurably high background noise on my DAC, I suspect a wyrd could do some good. that feels reasonable enough. but most likely I wouldn't own that DAC in the first place, I would have sent it back the first day I got it and noticed some noise.  it's problem, then solution. in that order only for me.  and if I have a problem and never know about it(which is very likely after all), then I'm the happiest man in the world with that problem. ^_^ I'm fine with that idea I suppose.