[korzena]

Quote:

There should not be a difference. There is no theory that supports that there could be. But I would be curious to see a well run ABX on these cables as well. 

 
ABX is not an ideal solution, too. It has been discussed so many times in so many threads that it does not even make sense to start the discussion again. If anyone is interested just search the forum.
 
 

 

[liamstrain]

Quote:

 
ABX is not an ideal solution, too. It has been discussed so many times in so many threads that it does not even make sense to start the discussion again. If anyone is interested just search the forum.
 
 

There is a current thread in the Sound Science forum, but to date, there have been few compelling arguments against them. If you have additional comments to share in that discussion, it would be appreciated.

 

[korzena]

Quote:

There is a current thread in the Sound Science forum, but to date, there have been few compelling arguments against them. If you have additional comments to share in that discussion, it would be appreciated.

 
Thanks for the info. However I am not going to get into discussion regarding this topic as it is not so exciting to me anymore
 
 

 

[LizardKing1]

 
Quote:

But I still don't exclude possibility that in some systems some USB cables can make difference. Well, I don't really know this as I haven't heard this myself, but I prefer to keep my opinion in the 'gray zone' than completely exclude this possibility only because scientific measurements don't support it.
 
Science proved false many times, too. Every few/several years scientists make new discoveries and change their opinions, too. This is why in this hobby, and especially in this hobby, which is about pleasure and experience for me, I put subjective opinions and my personal impressions before science.

I can't reply to everyone who quoted me, but here I need to clear something up.
 
There's a gigantic difference between a discovery and an invention. When you say "science has been wrong before" you're talking about discoveries. They are a thing of nature that we study. For example, I can analyze a certain chemical compound and through my results "this is molechule X". And later, though better means and new procedures, another scientist takes an identical sample and determines "the previous observations are incorrect, this is in fact molechule Y". This has happened lots of times along science, a good example is the belief that atoms were spheres with little electrons stuck to them, we now know that model is wrong. All of these things already existed and we simply investigated them, drawing better conclusions each time.
 
However, with USB it's an invention. It's man-made. I don't think it's quite possible for us to invent something like a data transmission protocol and use it without understanding how it works. I don't know if you ever compiled a program in a computer, but it only works if absolutely everything is perfectly correct, so it's not something that you can type by accident and get any results. What I mean is, these things don't come from throwing science at a wall and see what sticks, they only work because we understand them completely. We know it's impossible for a USB cable to actually change the sound in terms of things like frequency response (or soundstage!) because the way it was intentionally designed does not support that kind of change. It's like saying a car might turn into a transformer, that can't happen by accident, only if you added the machinery for that process.
 
I'm not at all trying to patronize any of you, and I'm sorry if I sound arrogant. I'm not an engineer or a programmer. It's your money to spend of course. Along my time here ended up reading reviews of things like "warm" USB cables and it made sense. But I'm glad someone educated me back then, and I don't think it would be fair of me to let a new member waste his budget on things that can't make a difference.

 

[korzena]

Quote:

However, with USB it's an invention. It's man-made. I don't think it's quite possible for us to invent something like a data transmission protocol and use it without understanding how it works. I don't know if you ever compiled a program in a computer, but it only works if absolutely everything is perfectly correct, so it's not something that you can type by accident and get any results. What I mean is, these things don't come from throwing science at a wall and see what sticks, they only work because we understand them completely. We know it's impossible for a USB cable to actually change the sound in terms of things like frequency response (or soundstage!) because the way it was intentionally designed does not support that kind of change. It's like saying a car might turn into a transformer, that can't happen by accident, only if you added the machinery for that process.
 

 
We've mentioned coaxial digital cables before. There was a time when people claimed that digital cables can't make any difference in sound. As far as I know today we have consensus that different digital cables can differ in sound. The cables were man-made invention.

 

[liamstrain]

Quote:

 
We've mentioned coaxial digital cables before. There was a time when people claimed that digital cables can't make any difference in sound. As far as I know today we have consensus that different digital cables can differ in sound. The cables were man-made invention.

Consensus among who, exactly? I have yet to see any objective data (measurement or DBT/ABX) to indicate that any properly made (not malfunctioning) coaxial cable (or any other cable of roughly equivalent resistance) can affect sound. 

 

[korzena]

Quote:

Consensus among who, exactly? I have yet to see any objective data (measurement or DBT/ABX) to indicate that any properly made (not malfunctioning) coaxial cable can affect sound. 

I have three different digital cables. The manufacturers of each of them claim they are made up to the specs (75 Ohm, etc). One of them is Blue Jeans Cable, another one is a silver cable (DIY by my friend who makes headphone amplifiers and cables), third one is the latest cable from Black Cat - Silverstar 75.
I can hear that Blue Jeans sounds more grainy and has more 'weight' than silver DIY which sounds smoothest and is more spacious than Black Cat cable which has one specific characteristics for me which is has a very tight bass.
 
Please use the scientific methods and measurements to convince me I don't hear these differences and it's probably only my imagination
 

 

[liamstrain]

The burden of proof, unfortunately, is the other way around - please prove to me what you are hearing is not the result of your own biases - even if unconcious (whose affect on sighted listening is well documented). Show me that you can identify them (or at least identify differences between them) in a volume matched ABX.  
 
For my own part, I have also tried digital cables by different manufacturers (USB and Coaxial), and have not been able to detect any difference between them - as a result I returned the expensive ones and kept the $3 monoprice cables. Preferring to invest the extra money into things that actually have been shown to affect the sound quality. 
 
But alas - this is a debate free forum. We should probably break off and part as friends. Sorry for taking this down the rabbit hole.  

 

[skamp]

this is a debate free forum

Now that's a subversive way of saying it

 

[LizardKing1]

Well should I really make a big post about what binary is composed of to have you just repeat that "science has been wrong before"? True, I don't have any experience with coaxial cables, and I'm trying to read up a bit on it. In the case of USB or HDMI I'm 100% sure you can't change the sound in the ways here described. Hell, not even an analog cable can change the soundstage. I suggest reading a bit on how the USB data transfer protocol works. It's not magic, it's fully understood. And there is definitely no consensus that digital cables change sound, I don't know where you read that but it's simply not true.
 
I don't think a double-blind test really matters. I mean if I take a piece of rope and a decent cable and ask you to ABX them both, do the results show anything new? Of course it's a great way to show people that they can't tell apart a few-thousand-dollar Locus Design USB cable from a Monoprice one.

 

[korzena]

Quote:

The burden of proof, unfortunately, is the other way around - please prove to me what you are hearing is not the result of your own biases - even if unconcious (whose affect on sighted listening is well documented). Show me that you can identify them (or at least identify differences between them) in a volume matched ABX.  
 
For my own part, I have also tried digital cables by different manufacturers (USB and Coaxial), and have not been able to detect any difference between them - as a result I returned the expensive ones and kept the $3 monoprice cables. Preferring to invest the extra money into things that actually have been shown to affect the sound quality. 
 
But alas - this is a debate free forum. We should probably break off and part as friends. Sorry for taking this down the rabbit hole.  

Agree that we should not enter this debate.
Well, maybe some day I will try some kind of ABX tests, just out of curiosity. For the time being I prefer to believe in my self-deception and enjoy myself. Sometimes ignorance can be quite blissful
Thanks for the discussion!
 

 

[Currawong]

Masochist that I am, I'm going to post.
 
Get binary out of your head. You're a layer too high in the system. 
 
USB cables have 4 wires. Two wires carry power and two carry data. You can effectively say that the data transmission is an analogue transmission of a square wave of a certain frequency.
 
For a USB cable to have an effect on an audio USB device compared to another cable, it would require that the USB audio device be susceptible to either noise in the power component or imperfections (jitter and reflections) in the data and that USB cable to significantly reduce the noise in the former or cause significantly less distortion during transmission in the latter.
 
However, if you're using a USB-powered audio device, you'd be better off getting a USB hub with a better power supply (eg: the lab-grade Vaunix) or possibly building a small DIY power supply and using that with a  powered hub. My subjective experience has been that better USB power improved how my system sounded with an Audiophilleo 1. I might see if the person who measured the AP1 could do so again when using a separate power supply, as it would be interesting, as it would if they measured with some "audiophile" USB cables.
 
Oyaide has pictures on their web site showing what they claim to be better transmission of the data. Whether or not this would matter again must depend on whether the device used would be affected by it sufficiently enough to cause changes in the analogue output. In that case, if it was for a DAC that has both USB and coax S/PDIF inputs, I'd still be more inclined to spend the money on a good USB to S/PDIF converter if the USB implementation in the DAC was poor. My impressions have been that it makes more difference. Well-designed electronics are always going to best well-designed wire in what they can achieve IMO.

 

[LizardKing1]

But that would account only for enough interference to actually distort the square wave beyond recognition by the decoder, right? In a normal USB interface there's still error recognition that would require for the data to be re-sent, so even in the described situation a bit-perfect transmission is possible. Of course if there was enough interference to distort it in the first time, chance are it might happen in the second, and so on ad-infinitum until finally you get pops or mute parts of a song. This may look like a statement, but it's actually a question =)

 

[Currawong]

As I understand it, USB audio is streamed and doesn't have error correction.

 

[sonq]

Quote:

Hell, not even an analog cable can change the soundstage.

Have you actually tried out a few cables or is this all theoretical?