Blind test 16 times, audiophile USB Cable vs USB cable

[Sal1950]

PS Audio makes low quality products while being marketed as a science-based company. Paul McGowan is a charlatan who pretends to be "a good guy who tells you the truth" in his videos which are misleading.


Their amplifiers are bad.

"Though the Sprout didn't excel in any area of measured performance, it compensates for that with its affordable price and considerable flexibility. It really is a "one-stop shop" for putting together an inexpensive system.—John Atkinson
Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content...ed-amplifier-measurements#5X1pqCag6l2zWxrJ.99"

Excuses excuses.

 

[Panelhead]

Not a USB cable, but the Corning optical Thunderbolt cable used to connect computer to interface is easily distinguishable from an Apple copper Thunderbolt cable in my system. Length is way different, longer one sounds better.
Corning also makes optical USB cables and have seen people comment they sound different than normal USB cables. There is an electrical conductor in the optical USB cables where the TB is only optical fiber.
Think with TB it is the electrical isolation, but may be something else. The two high speed conversions in the optical cable should only potentially degrade the performance.
I really have limited experience with using USB to connect dac and computer. Used an Oyaide 30.00 cable when using USB, and the cable supplied with the dac seemed the same. It was a 100.00 two headed Light Harmonic cable.
Did experiment with cables when using FireWire cables. Some were different sounding, but they were ones not built to spec. A Lacie gimme cable did not have twisted pair construction and had dropouts. An Audioquest cable also acted up. Opened it up and the shielding coverage was poor. Opened up FW cables to snip power wire at computer end to eliminate any potential noise.
Pearstone FW cables seemed to be as good as Oyaide, Brainiac, and some expensive mil-spec. The Pearstone were 6 - 10.00 at BH Photo.
Saw a cable company promote an audiophile FW cable. They said it was a huge improvement when used to connect a computer to external spinning drive. Most likely added transparency to Excel spreadsheets and Word documents.

 

[Sal1950]

Not a USB cable, but the Corning optical Thunderbolt cable used to connect computer to interface is easily distinguishable from an Apple copper Thunderbolt cable in my system. Length is way different, longer one sounds better.

How were levels measured and matched?

 

[pkane]

Some DACs can respond differently to USB cable design. I've measured an increased noise floor and jitter with an older Emotiva DAC using two different USB cables (one audiophile, another generic). That's the only DAC where I've seen these two cables behave differently in a measurable way.

Both cables resulted in no differences when used with a modern, better-designed DAC. I can only assume that some shielding/grounding design within the generic USB cable caused a ground loop or another pathway for noise that gave Emotiva heartburn. Green is the audiophile cable, blue is generic $5 USB cable:

Shields were connected on both sides of both cables, but the audiophile cable had a very slightly lower shield resistance (about 0.2 Ohm difference). Audiophile cable was the shorter one. I didn't measure ground resistance, but that would also be interesting to confirm.

 

[Panelhead]

They were not measured. Used length of optical to move computer out of rack and across the room. I either damaged or received a defective cable initially. Cable would drop the connection and light would go out showing connection between interface and computer.
After returning and purchasing another left components in the same positions to make sure second cable had robust connectivity. Swapped many times over a week.
The optical cable showed more silences around notes.The copper cable had more “flow”. The individual notes were connected.
At first was not sure the gaps between notes was an improvement. Just different. After a few days the perspective from the optical cable was preferred.
Once the reliability of the new cable was shown and the SQ evaluated the computer was moved back across the room. No comparisons are possible now without rearranging the rack to put computer and music drives back into rack.
No SINAD or other test was performed.
I went Optical to allow moving computer out of the rack. The difference in Sonics was not expected. I think there are areas in digital playback that are not fully understood.
I see comments that streaming files are more pleasing than the files transferred by a cable. That might be the electrical isolation. Or could be artifact related from using a wireless transmission. Or there might not be a difference.

 

[SIY]

The optical cable showed more silences around notes.The copper cable had more “flow”. The individual notes were connected.

Lacking a level matched, controlled double blind test, this claim is highly dubious. When digital transmission isn't working right, this is NOT what the effect is on the sound.

 

[Panelhead]

I know you are an expert. Just commenting on what I hear.
I doubt the copper cable is not functioning properly. I THINK the difference is the removal of an electrical connection between the computer and dac.
The difference is real. The cause is not something I am can identify.
The TB connection is very robust. Audio does not stress it.

 

[SIY]

Maybe it's what you hear. Certainly it's what you believe you hear. Two different things. If you had said, oh, there was a buzz or hashy noise with one and not the other, or oh, one had dropouts and pops, that would be at least plausible. "Flow" and "connected notes" are not.

Re: the "expert" thing, I am merely experienced in the sorts of things that people use to fool themselves, myself absolutely included. If I thought I heard a difference like that, I'd run a DBT to figure out if I were fooling myself- which I routinely do, being human. I would hate to be immune to illusion since I love close-up magic.

 

[Roen]

I know you are an expert. Just commenting on what I hear.
I doubt the copper cable is not functioning properly. I THINK the difference is the removal of an electrical connection between the computer and dac.
The difference is real. The cause is not something I am can identify.
The TB connection is very robust. Audio does not stress it.

Basically, if you make a claim about audible differences in gear, this forum will call on you to provide concrete proof, besides the usual subjective opinions, because what sounds one way for you does not necessarily translate to other people.

 

[Panelhead]

Guess I need to purchase an AP Analyizer before stating what is heard in system. I believe in measurements. Just not sure where threshold is for “good enough”.

 

[SIY]

Run a level matched double blind test. Cheaper than an AP for sure!

 

[Panelhead]

The AP is the answer. The level matched double blind is not as easy to perform. I have to get an assistant and rearrange the system to perform double blind testing.
To just double blind the Apple TB cable with a Corning optical with require moving computer and disc drives back to rack, multiple power ups of interface and computer to prevent hot plugging these active data cables, play something and use my Sound Pressure meter to verify the acoustic output, then perform multiple blindtests to identify the better options.
I do not have a sap who is willing to swap the cables and listen to a short session repeatedly. An AP is way too easy, input some pulses and record the analog output to see if the residual noise floor and spreading of the pulses changes. Plus check for harmonics generated by the pulse.
I think I found the reason the CorningThunderbolt and USB 3 optical cables have proven to have such a high failure rate.
They spec both as hot swappable. No verification is that is the same as hot pluggable. My first Corning TB cable worked for less than eight hours. But I hot plugged it many times as it became more erratic in operation. The replacements have not been hotplugged. No issues.
The other is the temperature limit is listed as 55C. My first one was purchased and delivered in the summer. The temperature in transit and in the mailbox can easily exceed that. Plus the connectors heat up in operation. Added stick on sinks to both ends to reduce this.
The connections are powered by the devise they are plugged into. I hooked up a linear supply to the interface that shows current output to ma level.
With the Thunderbolt active the interface drew 1300 ma at 13.2 voltsdc.With the computer turned off the interface was pulling 1125 ma at the same 13.2 volts.
It appears the Thunderbolt optical receiver and converter to electrical pulses consumes 2 watts of power. With the size and lack of cooling I suspect this shortens the life of the circuitry. And it gets hot here in Houston.
Most reports are getting a year of life from a CABLE. Then they quit transmitting data. At a couple hundred a pop it is not acceptable.
ALSO, I have included repeatabable and verifiable numbers in this post.

 

[SIY]

The numbers may be fine, but they don't speak to the remarkable audibility claims.

If I were closer, I'd invite you over to run the measurements on the AP setup in my lab, but Phoenix might be a bit of a haul for you.

 

[Panelhead]

I cannot consider hearing a difference between a conventional data cable and a an optical cable with no electrical continuity as remarkable.
But about Phoenix, you never know. I was on the Olympia Peninsula twice last month and discussed visiting Amir’s lab. Never could work the details, he was in Texas when I was free, and last when he was available I was not.
I was hauling my family and not a pile of components. But I did post some measurements of the amp I finished end of last year on another thread.

 

[SIY]

See post 47 and 49. What you claimed was remarkable.

But the invite is open. I'm in the throes of moving at the moment, but my lab will be up and running again in 2-3 weeks.

 

[Panelhead]

Never expected to be able to hear a difference. Only purchased the optical to be able to move the computer to listening area and not speaker and equipment area.
The difference in sonic perspective was a nice bonus.
I doubt I will purchase an AP. Do not have time at home to listen as much as I want. Might try Channld’s Scope program.
Purchased a small scope about 15 years ago but it was only 12 bit or some other ridiculous low resolution value. Used it to test amps that struggled to get -100 dB noise floor. It would never see the noise level of what is used today.

 

[DaleCarter1021]

Nothing affects the "sound" of a cable, ESPECIALLY one carrying a digital signal, than $$$

 

[Panelhead]

There are standards that cables should be built to. If the specs are met the transmission is fine.
With all the low cost hardware available small manufacturers see cables as a profit source. They are late to the game, there are low cost, high performance USB cables at Amazon, Walmart, and included in the box with many peripherals.
Most of the ones used in my system came in the box with the external drive they are connected to.

 

[Surge]

Hahahahah. I have not laughed so hard at a thread in a long time. Some of you are delusional. YES, digital cables make a difference. But not as much on sh!tty gear. So that is likely your problem. And the apparent fact that you prefer to wallow in ignorance. Do yourselves a favor - listen to them. But if you can’t or don’t want to pay for better gear, then don’t. But stop spreading lies.

 

[Chrispy]

There's a reason it's called BS Audio....