The Great USB cable debate poll

You're absolutely right; sorry for the error.

 

Thanks for taking the time to drop me a PM earlier. I hadn't had time to reply to this in the last day or two but your message prompted me. I think my POV is that when it comes to buying this stuff, I could nip onto a nearby cable site, splash out £500 on a USB cable, and not worry too much. On the other hand, I could just do a bit of reading up and maybe put a stop to the buy-in around "spend more, upgrade, enjoy, fret, spend more, upgrade, enjoy..." merry-go-round which is what I did!

But thanks again, and yes, I tend to agree!

 

The only Mapleshade products I have is a massive equipment stand (weighs over 250 lbs by my crude calculations) and a turntable platform. I bought it for looks mostly, and my old stand sucked. One thing I can say is I can play records without the subsonic rumble from the sub. That problem is gone, gone, gone.

As far as cables go, even USB, I tend to buy some of the "better quality" ones simply because I hope to avoid some sort of failure. I don't know if it matters to my ears, and if so, probably not to any level that I would care about. If you think it matters to yours, then upgrade your cables.

 

A thought just occurred to me... If there are people out there who have tried the upgrade I've talked about and didn't hear a difference isn't possible they're the ones not choosing to hear what actually is a difference? I mean guys like me are getting called delusional a lot in this thread... Just sayin.. If it was drummed into my head that something can't be scientifically possible, and the change was subtle as I've said several times, I could understand someone not believing what their ears are hearing. Or shutting down because of the cost. Hard to be open minded about this. But some of you might want to give it a shot.

 

Keeping an open mind can in audio can be really difficult. I was pretty certain that I wouldn't be able to hear the difference between Redbook and higher sample rates until I set up a solid ABX environment and I absolutely did hear a difference.

Cable testing is more difficult because you really need time and a "helper" who can swap the cables (or not). Up the thread, I mentioned than I got more obvious audible results with a cleaner USB source and $20 USB cable than a $100 USB cable by itself. And I have "listened" to USB cables from Audioquest, Shunyata, Mapleshade, and I think a couple of others that I can't remember.

IMHO, there are less expensive ways to address the things that high-end USB cables claim to address. And as time goes on, the DACs will be engineered and constructed in ways that will make the need for those expensive, kludgey solutions obsolete. If the same results can be achieved for less money, why not?

 

The problem isn´t if we hear a difference or not. It doesn´t really matter so much. The question is really if there is a difference and if that difference is in any way significant.

 

I think I'll try the green marker trick on a few CDs again first...I actually have some green magic markers here, but not any "high-end" USB cables.

 

Well here's the problem: I have two non-generic USB cables supposedly designed with audio in mind, a Schiit Pyst and one of Audio Advisor's Pangea cables. There are no differences between these cables and generic cables. Does confirmation bias work both ways? Absolutely it does, 100%. But the problem is, I have a larger bias towards wanting my system to sound better then I do towards winning arguments about cables.

So then somebody might tell me well, those cables aren't especially expensive, perhaps you should try say, a $200 cable, not out of line to use on my $2500 DAC, right? But the problem here is that all attempts over 32 pages to qualify why a cable that cost more would actually be better has gotten us nowhere. So why bother? And to be fair, you can't use the "not good enough system" argument, as I think while your system no doubt sounds great, I don't think anybody would suggest its more resolving then mine.

It all comes down to one of the most basic principles of engineering over the past thousand years: To improve something, you must be able to measure it. USB cable manufacturers don't measure them. Ergo, what we're left with is basically magic, and I don't believe in magic, despite the fact that I learned in this thread I'd have a better sex life if I did (still laughing over that post, sorry).

So to recap a long post - 1. I honestly don't hear differences between USB cables I've tried. 2. Science -absolutely does- confirm that I shouldn't hear differences. I'm intentionally putting this as #2 and not #1, mind you. 3. Nobody can offer any tangible explanation why an expensive USB cable should sound better beyond claims it might be able to fix actual problems I'm not having.

 

Remember the internet motto: "Without a link, it didn't happen." Can you please supply a trustworthy link confirming USB cable manufacturers do not measure their cables.

 

How about you supply a link of somebody that does?

 

Good luck finding any USB cable manufacturers quoting actual measurements on their products aside from audiophile mumbo-jumbo like "better hash and grain", " improved imaging", "more detail", "delivering the richest sonic textures ever", etc.

 

They wouldn't necessarily...just kind of strange that there are no "real world" measurements to speak of...just claims of things like "improved imaging", and "double helix technology".

I'm well aware that my system isn't good enough to hear the sonic differences in USB cables.

I just really want to appreciate what "hash and grain" sounds like, and it comes out in the wrong way when I post my feelings because I get emotional.

 

Reads like you are also applying analog audio concepts to digital cables.

 

Light Harmonic advertises a USB cable that provides 10.083 Gbit/s bandwidth, which is roughly twice as fast as the USB 3.0 standard:

http://www.lightharmonic.com/lightspeed.html

I'm not certain what advantage this would provide as any 3.0 compliant devices connected to it would max out at 5.0 Gbit/s, right? Or an I missing something?

 

It does come packaged in a really nice box suitable for jewelry, and is priced at $1999 for a 3.8m cable.

It has to sound better than a regular USB cable in some way...maybe when you start to approach $2K for a single USB cable is when "hash and grain" starts to become an audible factor (depending on the playback system, obviously).

 

Interesting. And here I was under the impression the onus of proof fell to the one making the claim.

You made the claim. And it is hardly scientific for a claimant to want it both ways. If it is your goal to stand up for "science" as you perceive it, you need to have an attitude of rigor...else your science is a trifle weak. I do grow a bit tired of those who give science a bad name.

Now, it is time for your link...

 

I feel that this point is just not being understood lol

 

Fantastic so in 10 or so years you might get to experience the wonderfulness of that cable. But in the world we're living in where USB audio is a 2.0 standard its quite a waste of money

 

The box it comes in is really nice.

 

That's because it is wrong.

 

Nope totally right lol

 

Those are just about the sweetest amps on earth. I would never call that distortion. More like spiritual musical integrity