Audioquest Jitterbug - "Removes Parasitic Resonance"

I am very curious just how one digital cable can sound (be an "significant" improvement) over another digital USB, HDMI, COAX, Optical or whatever kind of digital cable with the same specs and having quality in the build process to insure a quality end product.

If you have a poorly made or defective HDMI cable hooked up to a TV, you will experience dropped pixels that can be seen on the screen as digital information that is not being properly being transferred from the source to the screen.

Either the digital information "is" or "is not" being properly transferred by the cable, which is purely a passive device. Either the cable transmits the information or it does not. What it does not do is change or alter the information being transmitted by the signal.

So, I am asking out of curiosity, how can one digital cable be a significant improvement over another digital cable, with the same specs and quality build, such as the cables offered by Blue Jeans Cables, where you are paying for quality wire and quality construction, no smoke and mirrors?

What specifically, is the significant improvement?

In the digital realm "jitter" seems to be the main issue or non-issue, depending on what side of the fence one is on. Anyway you choose to look at it, a digital cable has absolutely nothing to do with "jitter", one way or another.

So, specifically, how is one improved over another?

 

I think you'll find not everyone agrees that is a given. It depends on how the components being connected are clocked. If the cable is only carrying data with no clock information (because the two components are driven by a common clock) then you are correct, it is not a problem. If, however, I make a real time copy of a source file and just connect one SPDIF output to a SPDIF input, the resulting output file sounds different because jitter is added. On the other hand, if I make a real time copy of a source file, connect one SPDIF output to a SPDIF input and use a common master clock for both components, then it sounds precisely the same because it is - no jitter is added that wasn't already there to begin with.

 

I would agree. My comment was simply that the cable does not itself introduce jitter, it does not add or subtract anything, properly made, it simply transmits the signal being sent through it. Two digital cables from different manufactures, with the same technical specifications, will preform identically and will therefore "sound" the same.

 

Yes. Exactly IMO. Have yet to see the Dunn J-Test look any different with digital SPDIF cables as regards to jitter. The spectrum and sidebands appear to be a function of the transmission and receiving devices rather than the cable itself... Of course, we're assuming decent cables with no data corruption of reasonable length.

Have yet to see any evidence otherwise from the cable manufacturers of course.

 

Are you sure? The more expensive one won't have a wider sound stage, crystal clear highs, warm, enveloping bass and the cheap-0 Monorpice cable will be cold, alienating, distant, irritated and hollow?

 

But, many of us would like a solid, scientific reason of how and why it would work.

 

Are we talking about audio cables, or a failing marriage?

 

$50 is a lot of money to some people. I know that if you don't have $50 to throw away, you may have other things to worry about in life, like food, shelter, bills...just sayin'...

 

I'll tell you what, my dentist is also a rock star! Back in May I had an infection caused by a loose tooth, I didn't realize that I had. My dentist told me that for the next 10-years I was going to have one issue after another. I went with his recommendations and had all of my upper teeth pulled. I don't care for the standard "novocaine" products because they contain epinephrine, so I use a short acting anesthetic, I also don't take prescription painkillers.

From past experiences with other dentists, simple extraction, etc..., I was expecting to be home, several hours later, and have the anesthetic wear off and was dreading what pain I would be in. I had stopped off at the pharmacy to pick up my antibiotics and prescription strength Motrin, then home, just waiting for unspeakable pain and nothing. Since my anesthetic was short acting, it had already worn off by the time I was at the drugstore and I did not realize it, when I went home, I was just waiting for the anesthesia to wear off, figuring I would be checking into the ER that night, for some real painkillers, the anesthesia had already worn off and I didn't know it.

I ended up taking the Motrin for a few days before I figured that I really did not need it and I stopped taking it.

I'm thankful that there are at least a few rock stars around!

 

Actually, I am sure, digital is digital. For the newbie's digital communication was invented back in the 1800's, back before analogue was possible, as it had not been invented yet. Think, Samuel Morse, the telegraph. Morse code, the alphabet of dots and dashes, 100% signal on a analogue telegraph line.

Today's digital signal is virtually not that much different, just faster, instead of bits, we have mega bits per-second.

You are listening to way to much rhetoric and are a bit lacking in a fundamental electronics background. In digital, there is either a signal or there isn't. For example, a glass optic cable would probably pass through a greater amount of information than the same cable made with plastic fibers. A glass fiber may be able to pass along more "digital" information than one made of plastic. This might mean, that the plastic cable can deliver redbook (CD) quality information where the actual glass fiber will be able to deliver HD audio at much higher bit rates.

So, yes, in this example, the "more expensive" cable wins, not because it is more expensive, but because it has a better technical specification that can pass information along.

Think of data transmission lines, it comparable to a super highway for cars, the cars travel at a set maximum speed, but if you have more lanes, more cars can pass a point at a certain time interval.

I am not a particular fan of Monoprice cables which I view, from a quality perspective as a few rungs up the ladder from Rat Shack cables. I do not consider them high end cables from a quality perspective, but I have owned and used them in days past when I just needed to keep some extra cables around just in case I wanted to hook something or other up and I needed a cable. I do not consider them bad construction, but rather a good value for considering their price point.

My point here is that newbie's today are subjected to a plethora of information. Unfortunately, a lot of it is purely B.S. and I simply refuse to cave in to it.

A cheap Monoprice digital cable, properly made, will sound no different than a digital $1k cable with the same specs.

Note: I am staying out of the analogue arena, where there are plenty of purely subjective opinions.

Digital is digital, unless you do something to deliberately subvert the sound or the cable is improperly made, as long as you are not expecting more than the cable is designed for, a Monoprice cable will sound the same as a stupid expensive cable with the same technical specifications.

It is not going to sound more cold, alienating, distant, irritated and hollow, than the uber expensive cable.

 

Great post. And I couldn't have been more sarcastic in mine. Just mocking the attachment of human emotion adjectives to the 'sound' of digital cables.

 

If I was under pressure to find food and shelter and trying to hunt down deer or whatever to get me through the winter, I wouldn't be posting on the internet complaining about audio devices, but would be looking for a scope for my rifle to increase my chances of survival. Just saying.

 

I am equal parts impressed by and terrified of you right now.

 

Science says a digital cable either works....or it does not. Anything else is nonesense.

 

I understand your point of view, but that is not my experience.

John K.

 

Don't bother....

 

Geez, I know it's $50 but they have a 30 day money back guarantee if not satisfied. Won't hurt you to give it a try and then pass judgement. Far better than drawing up some graphs and numbers of something that can't be measured, then to top it off you never even listened to it.
As for myself, I am more than content with the results of the Regen. Alex is giving the same guarantee over at Uptone Audio, in fact there is such a big back log, that if you are not satisfied with the Regen, you could probably turn around and sell it for more than you paid. But hey, don't try it, you may just like it, then what are you going to have to troll over? A coming out party for your new audio nirvana that can't be measured?

 

That is a good question. With today's marketing, we are exposed to many products that appear to be well constructed. The key word here is "appear". A few weeks back, I bought my assistant a refurbished iPhone directly from Apple, within three days, the small end of the Lightning connector, just fell apart. I ordered two more to have an extra on hand and not from Apple.

There is an old saying about what you can not "shine", today, this no longer holds true...

 

That isn't what I quite meant in my original post. What I meant was that if I do a real time transfer via SPDIF and the clocking of the input and output is not controlled by a master, then the output will sound different and that using different cables results in different sounding outputs. That being the case, in my experience, digital cables do sound different unless the clocking of all components in the chain is from a master clock, in which case they have no "sound" at all because input equals output. But in those cases where it isn't, generally the better the quality of the cable, the closer it sounds to the original source file.

I've experimented with quite a few loan cables - both RCA and optical and in the end I found that a Wireworld Silver Reference SPDIF got closer to any other. I cannot necessarily say that it is the actual cable itself that makes the difference - it could be the connectors, the way it is soldered, they way it interfaces with the connectors on the input or output, etc. Or it might be the cable itself as well. All I can report is that the only way to avoid digital cables from effecting the sound negatively is to use a master clock common to all the digital components - something that most of us can't do unless we either have pro gear or very high end stuff (like dCS).

But even budget -oriented audio hobbyists can confirm the above findings. Just connect one of those ubiquitous TASCAMS or whatever to the digital output of a computer soundcard, set everything to ASIO so that it is 100% "bitperfect" then make a recording corresponding to the correct sample rate and bit depth. Then null out the source file and recording in an audio editing program (i.e Sound Forge) and you'll find they won't be the same and they will sound different (if you have the listening skills and good enough equipment).

And then repeat the above experiment using a $5 computer cable and a $600 audiophile cable. You'll find the output files do not match each other. You end up with three different files, none of which is the same as any of the others. Now if bits are bits, why is that so unless the cable is adding jitter? Because when you null them out to the source file, you see a tell-tale jitter trail sitting on the noise floor of the output files.

Now try the same experiment using pro gear with a common master clock. You'll find if you null out the source and output there will be nothing - they are exactly the same.

All this is what Bob Katz meant when he said a well made digital cable won't have a sound. He was talking from a pro-audio point of view and in that respect he is completely correct. But from a consumer audio point of view, it is a different story - because as I say most of us do not possess a digital chain that can all run off an expensive master clock (just the Esoteric Rubidium one costs as much as a decent car).

 

Do the critics of digital cables think all USB-spdif converters sound the same?

Since there is a claim that all properly made USB cables and all digital cables sound the same, by extension I would guess that you would assume that the quality of USB-spdif converter would make no difference as well.

 

I hope you post the results of that experiment Gary. It would be downright embarrassing for the forum if you actually have no intention of doing any tests and are just trolling the thread.

 

In the context of this thread, which is intentionally anti-audiophile, any attempt at audiophile thinking is indeed trolling.