If I ever travel again to the US, it will mostly to visit PS Audio! I am listening to Paul to learn about life using audiophile topics as an excuse. Amazing stories, Paul. Thank you, sir!
I love Paul's videos because I click on a USB cable video and leave with a deeper understanding of the value of life and the philosophical implications of it. Thank you Paul and happy birthday.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Any company charging hundreds of dollars per meter of cable should be able to provide data for their claims. Surely they ran tests to arrive at their final design. For example, what is the digital error rate at X signal strength with Y strength of ambient radio interference? If ANYONE had any data to that effect, they would produce it and the debate would end. So the actual debate is: Should companies be free to charge 10-100x for products with shaky claims without being criticized? If there is real data, I'm happy to stand corrected.
USB cables following the standard can be relied on to transfer data correctly in terms of bit content and timing. Yes a PC can yield common mode noise to the DAC via the USB cable but the cable itself can do nothing about it unless you add a common mode choke or one of those ferrite clamps that goes around the cable. But this method can actually risk degrading the data transfer reliability as the EOP (End Of Packet) signal is not differential. Still some people have success with such approach in reducing the noise. Also, always remember that any cable should be kept as short as possible as it can pick up common mode noise e.g. even 50/60Hz can be picked up by the cable. This phenomenon also has nothing to do with the cable quality itself.
One thing that might be worth trying is an optical USB link, normally these things are used to greatly extend USB around something like a factory. (for telemetry, instrumentation etc.) but they could be a solution to keep computer (particularly ground) noise out of your audio setup. This way you get the isolation of toslink, but retain the ability to use async USB audio.
USB cables can transfer noise that is on your ground into your equipment, and maybe even pick up electrical RF noise on the shield, but as far as transferring the actual "ones and zeros", the cable either does it or it doesn't. So, unless you have a ground loop, or other source of RF noise getting into your ground, and from there, into the analog stages that lead to your amplifier, then no, a USB cable, by definition, cannot affect the quality of your sound. If a USB cable is causing ones and zeros to get dropped, you'll have audio artifacts, dropouts, etc, but if the ones and zeros are all getting through, then no, one cable cannot sound better than another. That only happens in analog cables.
Agreed. Usb delivers digital signal information only. The general 'quality' of a USB connection has no bearing on the analog signal, that is created by the DAC. Sure there could be noise getting from the source, to the DAC through the USB cable and affecting the DAC output (unlikely), but that is not the fault of the USB cable. You cannot expect a cable to 'rid itself' if unwanted noise delivered to it through the input. RCAs can pick up noise from the air, and in that case shielding will help. But even in that case, relocating the cable is better than getting a different cable.
"a USB cable, by definition, cannot affect the quality of your sound. If a USB cable is causing ones and zeros to get dropped, you'll have audio artifacts, dropouts, etc, but if the ones and zeros are all getting through, then no, one cable cannot sound better than another. That only happens in analog cables." That would be true if USB audio transfer worked the same way as data transfer. It doesn't. USB audio is Isochronous. "Isochronous transfer mode uses error-checking but includes no re-transmission in case of Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC) errors. Electrical noise on USB signals causes CRC errors and thus data loss, as does poor signal integrity. In mild cases, this leads to audio signal distortions. In the worst cases, clicks and dropouts. It means that a USB audio device can work correctly only if USB signal quality is excellent and no CRC errors occur." The differences between clean USB audio and dirty USB audio can be measured. However, those making the measurements claim that they are inaudible. The big differences come from cable length; the shorter the better. But we already knew that...
Not really. It directly contradicts your claim that "a USB cable, by definition, cannot affect the quality of your sound". The issue now is whether that degradation of quality is audible or not. I would test it given that I possess several USB cables, but there is a number of issues: 1. The easily accessible front USB ports on my HTPC don't play nice with my DAC. 2. None of my USB cables are certified as being compliant with the USB spec. 3. Even if I fail to detect an audible difference, that doesn't exclude the possibility that someone else might be capable of doing so. 4. I have in the past managed to hear "unmeasurable" and therefore "inaudible" differences. Transient Intermodulation Distortion for example. See: Otala and Leinonen 1976: pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b3c0/a892a982ebde91f83f228905dac30186f827.pdf
Even the cheapest poorly made USB cable will provide 'bit-perfect' asynchronous transfer without an issue upto 200Mbps. A basic cable made to USB spec will of course transfer upto 480Mbps 'bit-perfect'. There is plenty of evidence for this being the case and cable cost doesn't change this. This is why a 99p cable built to USB spec, which most are, can transfer the same amount of data, in the same time from A to B just as well as a £999 cable. Also any spec USB cable, even the ones poorly made, usually have no problems coping with the relatively low Mbps required to stream simply audio. USB 2.0 at 480Mbps is more than any audio stream will ever need at any bit rate. e.g. A 24/192 stereo audio file will only require ~13Mbps to stream it bit-perfect on any USB cable or less than 3% of a USB cables capacity.
There was an optical cable connection called ST in the early days of digital audio that was supposed to be hands-down the best there was. It used glass optical rather than the toslink plastic, and it had such a wide bandwidth that it could transmit over a dozen channels. I don’t know why it failed to catch on; often the best choice isn’t the one that makes it in the marketplace.
It doesn't high end, audio is a lie perpetuated by Paul and MANY like him for one simple reason, to rob you blind. ua-cam.com/video/qXuBsdmEOAs/v-deo.html
The good news is that USB's digital nature does make it much more resistant, but not completely immune to EM noise. In real life, don't digital signals are not perfect square waves, but instead closer to capacitive charging a d discharge curves. What that means in practice is that as long as the interference is not bad enough to distort the actual voltage signal to mistake a zero to be a one and vice-versa and/or mess up timing. Contrast this to a purely analogue signal carrying cable where unless one resorts to measures such as balanced differential signaling to cancel out noise, every distortion gets passed straight into your sound. For reference, sensitive scientific equipment such as oscilloscopes must resort to measures such as shielded coaxial cables to minimize signal distortion and enable observation of GHz frequency signals.
Although I can't afford the great equipment your company makes I do enjoy your videos as I usually learn something from them regardless of the "snake oil" claims.
Paul, surely if there is an audible difference to you, there should be a measurable difference in some way with some tool to showcase the difference along the path that you are hearing, correct?
The result is exactly what i though it will be. The USB standard established by the computer world carry a lot more critical 0 and 1 than a CD content.
We may need EEG or MRI to measure human perceivable differences in sound... From there learn how to measure what the brain is perceiving in a way that isn't so expensive 😂😏 Personally I think we haven't figured out how to measure everything about sound yet... we would need a lot of Open Source collaboration to find out what in audio we can hear and perceive but can't measure. If you hear a difference, than there must be one. Why instead of using old standards to measure stuff, why are we trying to innovate and find new ways to measure sound and all the magical (😋 only magical because its not discovered yet) things it does. I think that we are the end-all-be-all and have all the information humans will ever know is asinine. I really think listening to music during brain scans using different equipment and seeing what the brain actually does during these perceived differences in sound will get us looking in the right direction. Until we do that we're going to be looking in the dark for solutions. I mean seriously instead of building something and seeing if it sounds good, why not backwards engineer it from the brain? There are many aspects to sound, I believe even some psychological... Otherwise chemical's wouldn't change the perception of audio... But they do. How could we manupulate the sound to trick the brain into letting more data past the filters between your ears😉 like the chemicals that humans ingest sometimes... That lead to an increase of perceived sound quality. I think too many people have their heads too far stuck in a math book to hear things right in front of their ears😏 Then there is the quantom computing thats up and coming... Imagine having one of those buggers where you don't only have one and zero, but 1, 0, 1 and 0, 1 or 0... Ect. Which is getting closer to a crossover of digital and analog (in my perception of the tec.) Furthermore, with the dynamic output of a quantom processer, I believe it will be able to beter utilise tubes in a true crossover computer.(idk what else to call something like that) but I believe a digital signal could be output to a tube, then manupulated in a way that would affect the quantom entanglement outcome of the signal. Feed that into the quantom processer, then back to tubes for audio output. ...on a side note... I find it fun to match equipment that has no place being with eachother for fun unexpected outcomes. Even if quantom computing doesn't merge with tubes as I suspect it eventually will in a true digilog... The amount of data able to be stored and process drees us from the endless format arguing, just make a maximum capable format, unrelated to just whats "needed"... It would be a fun experiment to see what happens.
I just turned 71, so I'll always be your senior, Paul. Thanks for the effort -- but I'm still pretty much in the "snake oil" camp. when it comes to USB (or other strictly digital) interconnects: if they're not outright defective, the differences between various USB cables used between a PeeCee and a DAC are minuscule with regard to what a mere human ear can actually detect. Of course, if you've already invested in a high-end DAC, it makes no sense to skimp on a cable -- just don't spend a three-digit price on one, because that also makes no sense!
From a cheap cable running from my Mac to the DAC I have I believe there was a major improvement with the Blue Dragon USB cable. The cable was also shorter than my other USB-A cables as well.
I think he's talking about the electrical noise because of the copper connections in the USB cable, not so much the quality of the digital signal itself. The digital signal will arrive fine it just arrives with I interference from a power supply of the connected devices.
@@Joshcom88 -- USB doesn't care about "interference from a power supply of the connected devices." As long as the "ones and zeros" that comprise a digital signal are distinguishable from each other by "the connected devices" any extraneous "interference" is irrelevant -- and if such "interference" is so severe as to significantly affect the flow of digital data, a supposedly better cable isn't going to remedy that.
Hi Paul, can you recommend some good ,,sounding,, usb c to usb c and usb c to micro usb short cables for dongle usb amp/DACs? Like there are some really good usb cables from supra or curious cables but none of those are usb c or micro, only from audioquest ... Do you have some experience with good short usb Cs and micros? Thanks
How about a using a 25 cent DVD composite rca cable that tests out at 75 ohm as a digital coax into a dac? I did it once, and for the first two minutes only heard about 30 percent of the recorded music. Once it was streaming fully, it sounded ok but was missing 20 percent of the sound.
I've noticed that some quality USB products, e.g. decent webcams, have cables with ferrite beads, smaller versions of those found on old-fashioned VGA video cables -- I suspect adding these to a typical (but not cheap/flimsy) PeeCee-to-DAC USB cable would be beneficial.
The ferrite is there to suppress unwanted EMI/RFI emissions that's it. If you dont believe me you can remove it your self the cord will work exactly how it did before it was removed.
I'm not sure I hear a difference in sound quality in DAC's, but then again I have no experience with really high end DAC's, the best I had was Musical Fidelity M1DAC and Asus Essence One Muses Edition. STILL, with a cheapo USB cable I hear buzzing and noise when I move the mouse and when HDD is doing something, or when I have a game turned I can hear a certain type of silent buzzing. With a better quality USB cable (Supra USB 2.0) there's zero buzzing and noise, it's always perfectly silent.
It sounds like someone has recently attended the Landmark Forum (discussion about personal stories)... :) thanks for the recommendation about Curious Cables
I have run in to so many bad USB cable in my life time, I could filled a trashcan with all of them. Even ones that meet specs but brake in a year. I could see a difference just transferring files. And even see a difference doing firmware upgrades, some would just randomly fail if a bad cable was in the mix.
Hi Paul. Happy Birthday! Hi-Fi definitely needs you! I honestly can afford most of your products, but have few( just power cables). I have always been a high value kind of guy so I have a hard time dissing out the dough. I do believe your company makes so of the best high end products though. You gotta pay to play :). I am definitely interested in your new speakers line. Hopefully it's semi affordable ;) when it comes out. Keep up the great work Paul!
Expensive digital USB cables make a zero audible difference if you're using any half decent modern solid-state dac. This has been proven many times before. You don't need to spend hundreds of dollars for a cable. Any decent cable from $10-$50 will do.
Hi Paul, you often recommend Audioquest cables but they seem to come in many colour coded quality levels. I am aware that depending on the level of connected equipment, the differences in cable quality may or may not be audable. While I don't want to buy cables that impede the audio quality, I also don't want to waste money on top end cables that are so far above the performance level of my existing components that they offer no improvement over the lower priced cable levels. In other words, it's a question of matching HiFi performance level without wasting money. My existing speakers are Polk Audo 10B (tweeters replaced (silk dome), considering getting the crossovers recapped by a well respected professional here in Australia. I can't detect a problem but the detected tweeter issue was slight yet has made a huge difference to my audio pleasure, so maybee well worth doing. Amplifier is a Yamaha A 700 which has been recapped. There are a number of analogue sources connected directly to the amp. There are a few Digital sources connected to a DAC Essence HDACC TV is connected to DAC via optical, (PVR to TV via HDMI) BDP to DAC via HDMI passthrough. Hard drive to BDP via USB (I intend to replace this with a NAS via LAN) Despite the age of the speakers and amp, the audio performance is exceptional IMO and the best system I have ever put together. I know there are much higher end options available that I could afford but it's in a smallish open lounge dining area and there is no space in my house for a dedicated listening room. This system gives me a lot of pleasure and given the size and nature of available space, it doesn't seem appropriate to upgrade from this level. The RCAs I am using are fairly thick but they were relatively inexpensive. However the digital cables are all very very cheap and from what you are suggesting here this may be a mistake. Ken
Don't feel bad, Paul, I will be 70 next March, God willing, and I get mental lapses more and more frequently .. it's just that we have SO MUCH hardrive knowledge cluttering the ole cranium that sometimes it's hard to retrieve info at a moments notice !! LOL :D
simply: on async DACs there is no difference (except possible ground loop), but can be big difference on cheap DACs which sync clock to 1Khz of USB clock!
Paul P. A thanks. I'm always championing the room with many bookcases treatment, as it often was in the 50s through 70s HiFi listening room. I feel bookcases make great room treatments. Of course it depends on the speakers. Another nice treatment, Persian carpet on hardwood floors. I'm just saying we already have the answers.
Which begs the question why optical isn't the best connection method? Bypassing all that unwanted noise. Last i heard there is no audio quality limitation, the manufacturer can choose what data rates etc to run over it. I'm still yet to hear a convincing argument on why not to use optical...
Optical is a better alternative. Even Rob Watts, designer of the Chord Electronics DACs (also FPGA based like PS Audio's) has stated the optical cable is preferable to USB.
Optical can provide galvanic isolation from the source and in case of using a PC that can be a good thing of course. But as optical audio is one-way data with a sample clock that isn’t precise you will need a good quality ASRC (asynchronous sample rate converter) and data buffering to enable a constant (almost) jitter free clock into the DAC.
I believe I read somewhere that Optical will not produce 7.1 surround and that HDMI sound was the better option. Definitely not in noise filtering but in audio bandwidth applications.
probably one of the best episodes, thank you so much. and yes I do agree. noname usb cable sounds quite a bit harsh and edgy compared to an AQ forest, which again has no chance against an AQ coffee. On my transparent equipment, heard with my ears. I suggest trying it out.
Howdy. I wonder if feeding the USB signal through a USB hub to the DAC would deliver any noise reduction ? I understand a hub contains electronics that boost and shape the digital signal. Also, a hub uses a separate power supply which I think should help blocking the noise. Regards.
I'm using an uptone audio USPCB to link my streaming device and dac. I just wodner will replace the uspcv with curious cable give a small boost in sounds?
He cant do it. Actually there is not a single passed AB test done. And will not be. There is this "the amazing meeting" where you can get a million dollars if you can pass (do anything unnatural event) it and no one has done it, why? COS IT CANT BE DONE hehe...
Well, if you want to avoid noise getting from the PC to the DAC, why not isolate it? That is, have a separate box that converts from USB to an optical signal (the box, being digital, would not be affected by noise and the output signal should have FEC), then send the optical signal to the DAC. Now you have is completely isolated in addition to possibly (depending on how the converter works) being able to have a cable that is longer than 5m.
What about an optical USB cable? Like the one from Linus Tech Tips. He had a 100 ft optical USB 3.Optical cable. How (if any) would this affect sound quality? If Toslink spdif isolates the two devices connected, then an USB 3.Optical cable should do the same for a connected DAC, correct?
First of all Happy Birhtday and thank you for all the Videos. I just googled for hours and opinions on that topic and saw the video title. Thank you so much for explaining that usb cables do make a difference. And I don't think problems with remembering things is connected to the age I'm in my 30's and I forget and can not remember things all the time :D
standard EE isn’t high end audio. High end audio is to ameliorate playback systems beyond pure function towards the very best possible (for a certain budget bracket), which doesn’t make a difference to 98% of people. Unless of course they get a chance to actually listen to it.
I was all ready to cry snake oil, but your point actually makes a lot of sense. I hadn't thought of a USB cable acting as an antenna that could introduce RF interference into the analog portion of the amplifier, and it makes sense that a poorly shielded cable could pick up and carry carry this kind of radiation inadvertently.
Your initial instinct was correct. Any half decent modern solid-state dac will have zero audible changes in sound from using an audio quest cable. This has been measured and proven.
LOL, I love the funny guy at the end... Here's hoping that u had a good 70th B.D.... And please come to Toronto and demo your P.S. Audio products for us...
Curious Cable USB is 500USD... This is snake oil. In the digital audio world the signal is binary with redundant silent bits made for recovery and concealment of a potential digital error. Your cable is good if there's no burst or dropouts that can't be corrected. So to keep it simple, buy well grounded and insulated and short USB cable and that's it.
I bought four Audioquest USB cables and after weeks of listen, I returned all but the most expensive one. They all sound different. The more expensive sound better. I wanted to save money by going with the cheapest cable but the difference in sound quality is too big to ignore.
Please explain how a USB cable can transfer my files without error, bit-for-bit, between two storage devices, yet magically exhibits loss when you use it between a computer and a DAC? Boggles the mind. Snake oil, mythology and old wives' tales.
Actually, file transfer has error correction while USB audio doesn't. So just in theory you can experience bit flipping. It just doesn't happen nowadays because the outputs have become so good.
Bought a very nice expensive usb cable, sounded fine but got signal dropouts all the time, bought a cheap Blue Jeans usb cable and everything has been working fine, no dropouts and no difference in sound quality.
Cheap would be 2.99usd from Wal-Mart. Blue Jeans operates on catching folks like you thinking snake oil terms about expensive cables and.... as knee jerk reaction looking to suppose cheap cables ... sorry 40usd for cables is not cheap , cheap is 5usd .
I don't get it... why would you give the snake award to a tweak/item that you think works? Shouldn't that be for things that people spend money on that have no benefit (that are, you know, like snake oil?)
So I wonder what are the reasons that some USB cables any good than ather: a. Some USB cables provide filter / noise reduction from the source computer, so the noise from the computer can't affect the DAC while the others just passing the data as they are ? b. Some USB cable generate noise ? a or b , or a+b
Seeing that Asynchronous USB has *ZERO ERROR CORRECTION* present, unlike the normal data USB protocol, it's not a stretch at all to understand that cables matter. If ethernet didn't have EC, cables would matter there for very short lengths as well.
I've actually used lots of different USB cables with my external sound card, including the cheapest 5 metre extension cable I could find, connected to a further 2 metres of cable. The result, absolutely no difference in sound whatsoever. 5 metres is the maximum recommended length, so 7 metres was really pushing it. But it worked absolutely fine. Hey Paul, please can you change that cable on your modem for me so that your videos sound better! Absolutely ridiculous, I can't believe this is even being debated lol.
Digital interconnects can't make a difference pretty much by definition. True cheap crap is cheap crap and may cause drop outs or just won't last. so you want something decent. However if you're going to spend hundreds of dollars on cables anyway, I have some really nice sounding cables I can sell you. They're vintage and well broken-in.
Surface Pro tablets and alike do NOT put out any real noise. So just use them for your streamer source and your good to go with a quality cable. FYI USB cable will have different sound so get a couple and test. We ended up with Audioquest Pearl for more detail all around vs SKW.
Thanks Paul. Some great points. Key point is that listening is where the rubber meets the road. Love the seniors moments by the way. At 58 I've also started to notice some minor delay in file retrieval times.
This is true while i charged my car battery the charger made an iterference on my china usb extention, when i swapped it out with a "real" usb 2.0 spec extention the interference was gone, and I have cut through my share of cables and for most of the time they are unshielded inside 😡 have even gotten aluminium cables that was copper coated inside the usb cables, and when you mix different types of metals of course they will sound different from cable to cable
There are too many hilarious comments for me to not add my two cents. How many people commented on this video basing their opinion on "Binary is just ones and zeros!" without ever considering what our complicated electronics accomplish with slight changes in voltage. I'm not a true audiophile. I probably can't be. My hearing likely doesn't qualify as professional grade, and my budget certainly does not. I buy very good quality equipment that I think sounds pretty darn good and stop there. I'll never spend $100+ on a USB cable because it doesn't fit into how I experience music. However, I do appreciate the monumental difference between a data transfer that allows time for error checking and one that does not. Every commenter who brought up the idea of comparing two digital versions of an audio file as a means to suggest that miles upon miles of questionable cabling along the way negates the need for high quality cabling to a DAC must have been unaware of how many times along the way that data was verified to be accurate before being passed to the next destination. In my opinion, the need for instantaneous playback without time for error checking in the audio data stream is really the cause for concern with cable quality because a variety of distortions of the signal can lead to a misinterpretation of the source material. Is your system of such a high quality as to reproduce these minute errors? Are your ears so well calibrated as to perceive these small differences? Maybe so, maybe not. But when errors lead to a slight distortion of the source material, and adding complexity to the circuitry for the purposes of measuring variations and correcting them takes precious milliseconds, sometimes it's just better to listen, make a design change, listen again, and subjectively judge what's better. In regard to digital transmission, a bit is not a 1 or a 0 until a threshold is established as to the voltage that makes it so. Binary isn't exactly black and white when it's subjected to being determined by a variance in voltage at fast switching speeds. Fully integrated systems do a great job, but without error checking along the way, the internet would be "noisy" and "jittery".
Well, I didn't know for sure if USB cables make a difference or not but I do know that computers infect every electronic device around them with noise. I know this from working with them in PA because I can see the RF interference registering -20dB on every channel of the dual band radio mic receiver. So in setting up the PC I wanted to isolate it from the sound system as much as possible within the existing very tight budget. So, on the basis of the 80/20 rule I bought a Zip-Lite USB cable as it at least has 2 ferrite beads and used it to connect a Radial USB Pro to run into the analogue PA via ground lifted, 95% shielded XLR cables. Radial gear has a good rep (Durability for sonic performance) in Pro audio & includes it's own inbuilt filters as well. This USB Zip-Lite cable is pretty darn cheap and at least has some filtering of it's own. On my home HiFi system using an Essence HDACC, it compares more than favorably against a much more expensive boutique USB cable (the only one I had available for comparison). So I think the Zip-Lite is an absolute winner for the price (about $6 from memory). So that's my story for what it's worth.
As long as your cable meets the impedance of your source and load maximum power will be transferred. There are many techniques to deal with noise. Given they are practiced so religiously cables alone won't make a difference other than perhaps shielding them in noisy environments. They won't alone reduce noise passed into them from the source. If anything they'll add noise due to mutual induction or thermal agitation. The general rule to lower noise is to lower the temperature bandwidth, and resistance. One might think using silver in a USB cable would fix this but it's practically useless given the math. I say this because of Johnson Noise. The noise voltage (when Boltzmann's constant is multiplied by temperature, bandwidth, and resistance) created due to thermal agitation for copper is .0038 ohms per million ohms per degree Celsius. Silver is .003 ohms per million ohms per degree Celsius. The resistances and temps would have to be orders of magnitude higher for any of this to matter in the slightest! Over the temperature ranges that electronic equipment operates these differences are minute. That said Bandwidth (Frequency) is also a component. So of course lowering the bandwidth also lowers the noise.
well, something which was not snake oil FPGA DACS are best but isolator makes huge difference long cable make difference but then cable is still snake oil......done blind, double blind testing....Sir. used audioquest cable and standard cable(same lenght) and both sounded same
Audio science review did a great video on it. An basically the shorter the lenght the better (but there is very little difference between a 12m cable and a direct 10cm plug) and over all there is no difference. But some expensive gimmick cable might even make it worse.
This seems like one of the easiest things to blind test, simply because cables are so easily swapped and can be hidden. A week or a month of daily or more swaps set up by someone else and a diary of what you think you are hearing should do it. At least then, the only one that a person could disagree with would be themselves.
The only way is to try it. I have a high end dac, American amps and speakers. The dac has been connected from a streaming device, not computer, using a cheap screened usb cable. It has been in place for years. The Project Stream Box Ultra was a significant move upwards from a laptop using Foobar. That difference was very noticeable. All my music files are on USB sticks. Even high bit rate Mp3s sound spectacular. The sound is fantastic even with the screened cheap USB cable. So those cheap cables do work well. For years I have believed it cannot get better with a better USB cable, and still think it can't. However, I'm going to give it a go with a C line USB from Chord Company. It's only 50 pounds so if that cannot better a cheap screened USB cable, nothing to worry about. Some may say 50 pounds USB is too little for a 9k pounds plus dac. I don't think it's worth spending large amount on a USB cable when a cheap screened one contributes to such a fantastic sound. It's the components that make the sound good in the first place. Too much hype about high res files too. If the equipment is good, even high bit rate Mp3s will sound superb as demonstrated by my setup. Almost all system demonstration are done using a basic music type track. Vocals and just a few instruments, jazz music etc etc. Any system can do that . There is a reason why dealers use those tracks. Even on UA-cam, high end systems are recorded playing such tracks.
I hear comments from people that say there is no difference, but they do not say what components they are using. The other thing not mentioned is how well the USB cable is shielded. Surely that must be of near equal importance and even nay sayers may accept that. Remembering that cables are all analog and the bandwidth required is pretty high, especially when dealling with the higher bit rates. The better the cable, the better defined the on and off which must make the job easier for any DAC. My experience has been that they have not made so much difference, but enough to make it worth using something just a bit better than the stock USB cables. Of course, if I were just using a cheap USB dac I would not bother, but for my hi-res system it is a different story. Regarding passing ground interference from a PC to a Hi-End DAC, I have wondered if it would be better to go from USB to Optical and then to a DAC to give total electrical isolation. I know that there can be compromises with optical, but PC's are just so full of noise that I wonder if it could be worth trying.
I'm going to agree with Paul on this one. But is a $300 USB cable right for you? Only you can answer that question. I have found that for most people the Amazon Basics USB cables are more then adequate. They are mechanically good and electrically sound. They are moderately priced but 3x -> 5x the cost of the cheapes. Once you get past a couple meters in USB cable length then things get complex. If your extending the length of something like a Logitech Webcam with a 6 meter USB cable you paid $10 for your going to have problems.
Paul, I have a question. Do you meditate? We all create our own reality...period. I hear the "I"m a victim of circumstance" thing all the time from people...bullshit. You are where you are in life because of the choices you have made in life, end of story. Choose a different story and live it! Quit whining, lol. This cable discussion reminds me of the old "tube amps are no different than solid state amps" thing. BULLSHIT. They sound different like or not as you may, they may have the same slope on an oscilloscope but they SOUND different no question about it. Fantastic video! I applaud your total disregard for the nah sayers! thank you for that. I live in western Oklahoma and am planning a trip to Colorado hopefully soon, I would LOVE to come visit and see Music Room One while I'm there. Keep up the good work!!
USB audio transfer is isochronous which means it has a CRC check but no retry mechanism so how bad does a cable need to be to fail a CRC check? The packets just get dropped if the CRC fails so you would hear it for sure. 🐍
@Dmitriy Getman Anything digital is good unless you have a lot of EMI in which case you either go optical or use shielded copper. Anyone who tells you that you can hear difference in tone by changing cables carrying digital signals, is full of shit. You either transfer the bytes or you dont. If you don't you either get no audio at all or very nasty audio artifacting such as pops and crackles but you never lose tone.
Happy Birthday 🎊 to you Paul, wishing you 70 more. We need you out here.
his birthday is in may lol! He's a taurus
I am not clicking like - let's keep it at 70 likes for 70'th anniversary :)
"That's the story I tell myself." At least we agree on something.
That's a perplexing comment. :)
Thanks for the award Paul, I humbly accept - it was an honor just being considered! :)
Thanks for the question! I've sent in my own and hope to get it answered too.
If I ever travel again to the US, it will mostly to visit PS Audio! I am listening to Paul to learn about life using audiophile topics as an excuse. Amazing stories, Paul. Thank you, sir!
I love Paul's videos because I click on a USB cable video and leave with a deeper understanding of the value of life and the philosophical implications of it. Thank you Paul and happy birthday.
Yes the philosophical implications of not spending over $100 on a USB cable. Very valuable information, indeed.
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Any company charging hundreds of dollars per meter of cable should be able to provide data for their claims. Surely they ran tests to arrive at their final design. For example, what is the digital error rate at X signal strength with Y strength of ambient radio interference? If ANYONE had any data to that effect, they would produce it and the debate would end. So the actual debate is: Should companies be free to charge 10-100x for products with shaky claims without being criticized? If there is real data, I'm happy to stand corrected.
Did you watch Paul's video?
70?!? Wow man looking good, I wouldn't give you more than 61-62.
USB cables following the standard can be relied on to transfer data correctly in terms of bit content and timing. Yes a PC can yield common mode noise to the DAC via the USB cable but the cable itself can do nothing about it unless you add a common mode choke or one of those ferrite clamps that goes around the cable. But this method can actually risk degrading the data transfer reliability as the EOP (End Of Packet) signal is not differential. Still some people have success with such approach in reducing the noise. Also, always remember that any cable should be kept as short as possible as it can pick up common mode noise e.g. even 50/60Hz can be picked up by the cable. This phenomenon also has nothing to do with the cable quality itself.
Cluck, cluck, cluck..
Ronald Thompson Yeah, some 🐓 don’t like 🐍 oil
@@ThinkingBetter Only my measurements are the correct measurements and no measurements will ever exist that are not already known by me.
we have done blind testing and double blind testing and there was no difference
@@dhruvmeena96don't tell the audiofools...they will cry....
Video starts at 4:30
thank you very much lol
lol 👍
One thing that might be worth trying is an optical USB link, normally these things are used to greatly extend USB around something like a factory. (for telemetry, instrumentation etc.) but they could be a solution to keep computer (particularly ground) noise out of your audio setup.
This way you get the isolation of toslink, but retain the ability to use async USB audio.
USB cables can transfer noise that is on your ground into your equipment, and maybe even pick up electrical RF noise on the shield, but as far as transferring the actual "ones and zeros", the cable either does it or it doesn't. So, unless you have a ground loop, or other source of RF noise getting into your ground, and from there, into the analog stages that lead to your amplifier, then no, a USB cable, by definition, cannot affect the quality of your sound. If a USB cable is causing ones and zeros to get dropped, you'll have audio artifacts, dropouts, etc, but if the ones and zeros are all getting through, then no, one cable cannot sound better than another. That only happens in analog cables.
Agreed.
Usb delivers digital signal information only. The general 'quality' of a USB connection has no bearing on the analog signal, that is created by the DAC. Sure there could be noise getting from the source, to the DAC through the USB cable and affecting the DAC output (unlikely), but that is not the fault of the USB cable. You cannot expect a cable to 'rid itself' if unwanted noise delivered to it through the input.
RCAs can pick up noise from the air, and in that case shielding will help. But even in that case, relocating the cable is better than getting a different cable.
"a USB cable, by definition, cannot affect the quality of your sound. If a USB cable is causing ones and zeros to get dropped, you'll have audio artifacts, dropouts, etc, but if the ones and zeros are all getting through, then no, one cable cannot sound better than another. That only happens in analog cables."
That would be true if USB audio transfer worked the same way as data transfer. It doesn't. USB audio is Isochronous.
"Isochronous transfer mode uses error-checking but includes no re-transmission in case of Cyclic Redundancy Check (CRC) errors. Electrical noise on USB signals causes CRC errors and thus data loss, as does poor signal integrity. In mild cases, this leads to audio signal distortions. In the worst cases, clicks and dropouts. It means that a USB audio device can work correctly only if USB signal quality is excellent and no CRC errors occur."
The differences between clean USB audio and dirty USB audio can be measured. However, those making the measurements claim that they are inaudible. The big differences come from cable length; the shorter the better. But we already knew that...
Exactly...
Not really. It directly contradicts your claim that "a USB cable, by definition, cannot affect the quality of your sound". The issue now is whether that degradation of quality is audible or not. I would test it given that I possess several USB cables, but there is a number of issues:
1. The easily accessible front USB ports on my HTPC don't play nice with my DAC.
2. None of my USB cables are certified as being compliant with the USB spec.
3. Even if I fail to detect an audible difference, that doesn't exclude the possibility that someone else might be capable of doing so.
4. I have in the past managed to hear "unmeasurable" and therefore "inaudible" differences. Transient Intermodulation Distortion for example. See: Otala and Leinonen 1976:
pdfs.semanticscholar.org/b3c0/a892a982ebde91f83f228905dac30186f827.pdf
Even the cheapest poorly made USB cable will provide 'bit-perfect' asynchronous transfer without an issue upto 200Mbps. A basic cable made to USB spec will of course transfer upto 480Mbps 'bit-perfect'. There is plenty of evidence for this being the case and cable cost doesn't change this. This is why a 99p cable built to USB spec, which most are, can transfer the same amount of data, in the same time from A to B just as well as a £999 cable.
Also any spec USB cable, even the ones poorly made, usually have no problems coping with the relatively low Mbps required to stream simply audio. USB 2.0 at 480Mbps is more than any audio stream will ever need at any bit rate. e.g. A 24/192 stereo audio file will only require ~13Mbps to stream it bit-perfect on any USB cable or less than 3% of a USB cables capacity.
So much help and information! another great video man.
There was an optical cable connection called ST in the early days of digital audio that was supposed to be hands-down the best there was. It used glass optical rather than the toslink plastic, and it had such a wide bandwidth that it could transmit over a dozen channels. I don’t know why it failed to catch on; often the best choice isn’t the one that makes it in the marketplace.
The glass is why
how ? . what going on ? is it jitter related or are there a lot of error corrections, audio does not need a lot of speed, why does it matter ?
It doesn't high end, audio is a lie perpetuated by Paul and MANY like him for one simple reason, to rob you blind. ua-cam.com/video/qXuBsdmEOAs/v-deo.html
Most companies that sell usb cables have a 30 day return policy. You can try a few out without soliciting opinions
Well said.
The good news is that USB's digital nature does make it much more resistant, but not completely immune to EM noise.
In real life, don't digital signals are not perfect square waves, but instead closer to capacitive charging a d discharge curves. What that means in practice is that as long as the interference is not bad enough to distort the actual voltage signal to mistake a zero to be a one and vice-versa and/or mess up timing.
Contrast this to a purely analogue signal carrying cable where unless one resorts to measures such as balanced differential signaling to cancel out noise, every distortion gets passed straight into your sound. For reference, sensitive scientific equipment such as oscilloscopes must resort to measures such as shielded coaxial cables to minimize signal distortion and enable observation of GHz frequency signals.
Although I can't afford the great equipment your company makes I do enjoy your videos as I usually learn something from them regardless of the "snake oil" claims.
Get a $400 cable, a good quality $25 cable and do a blind test. Easy.
I thought that's a real snake on your desk for a second. Paul you should work on those hollywood movies. :)
Paul, surely if there is an audible difference to you, there should be a measurable difference in some way with some tool to showcase the difference along the path that you are hearing, correct?
Only if you assume every aspect of the human listening experience is measurable, which it's not.
Marc Dostie Some time ago, I've found something that might catch your eye: bit.ly/2NyadBX
The result is exactly what i though it will be. The USB standard established by the computer world carry a lot more critical 0 and 1 than a CD content.
We may need EEG or MRI to measure human perceivable differences in sound... From there learn how to measure what the brain is perceiving in a way that isn't so expensive 😂😏
Personally I think we haven't figured out how to measure everything about sound yet... we would need a lot of Open Source collaboration to find out what in audio we can hear and perceive but can't measure.
If you hear a difference, than there must be one.
Why instead of using old standards to measure stuff, why are we trying to innovate and find new ways to measure sound and all the magical (😋 only magical because its not discovered yet) things it does.
I think that we are the end-all-be-all and have all the information humans will ever know is asinine.
I really think listening to music during brain scans using different equipment and seeing what the brain actually does during these perceived differences in sound will get us looking in the right direction.
Until we do that we're going to be looking in the dark for solutions.
I mean seriously instead of building something and seeing if it sounds good, why not backwards engineer it from the brain?
There are many aspects to sound, I believe even some psychological... Otherwise chemical's wouldn't change the perception of audio... But they do.
How could we manupulate the sound to trick the brain into letting more data past the filters between your ears😉 like the chemicals that humans ingest sometimes... That lead to an increase of perceived sound quality.
I think too many people have their heads too far stuck in a math book to hear things right in front of their ears😏
Then there is the quantom computing thats up and coming... Imagine having one of those buggers where you don't only have one and zero, but 1, 0, 1 and 0, 1 or 0... Ect.
Which is getting closer to a crossover of digital and analog (in my perception of the tec.)
Furthermore, with the dynamic output of a quantom processer, I believe it will be able to beter utilise tubes in a true crossover computer.(idk what else to call something like that) but I believe a digital signal could be output to a tube, then manupulated in a way that would affect the quantom entanglement outcome of the signal. Feed that into the quantom processer, then back to tubes for audio output.
...on a side note... I find it fun to match equipment that has no place being with eachother for fun unexpected outcomes.
Even if quantom computing doesn't merge with tubes as I suspect it eventually will in a true digilog... The amount of data able to be stored and process drees us from the endless format arguing, just make a maximum capable format, unrelated to just whats "needed"... It would be a fun experiment to see what happens.
I just turned 71, so I'll always be your senior, Paul. Thanks for the effort -- but I'm still pretty much in the "snake oil" camp. when it comes to USB (or other strictly digital) interconnects: if they're not outright defective, the differences between various USB cables used between a PeeCee and a DAC are minuscule with regard to what a mere human ear can actually detect. Of course, if you've already invested in a high-end DAC, it makes no sense to skimp on a cable -- just don't spend a three-digit price on one, because that also makes no sense!
thanks bruce. i feel this way about many of the topics of audio products.
From a cheap cable running from my Mac to the DAC I have I believe there was a major improvement with the Blue Dragon USB cable. The cable was also shorter than my other USB-A cables as well.
I think he's talking about the electrical noise because of the copper connections in the USB cable, not so much the quality of the digital signal itself. The digital signal will arrive fine it just arrives with I interference from a power supply of the connected devices.
👍
@@Joshcom88 -- USB doesn't care about "interference from a power supply of the connected devices." As long as the "ones and zeros" that comprise a digital signal are distinguishable from each other by "the connected devices" any extraneous "interference" is irrelevant -- and if such "interference" is so severe as to significantly affect the flow of digital data, a supposedly better cable isn't going to remedy that.
Hi Paul, can you recommend some good ,,sounding,, usb c to usb c and usb c to micro usb short cables for dongle usb amp/DACs? Like there are some really good usb cables from supra or curious cables but none of those are usb c or micro, only from audioquest ... Do you have some experience with good short usb Cs and micros? Thanks
Happy 70th Bday Paul! All the best in the years to come!
How about a using a 25 cent DVD composite rca cable that tests out at 75 ohm as a digital coax into a dac? I did it once, and for the first two minutes only heard about 30 percent of the recorded music. Once it was streaming fully, it sounded ok but was missing 20 percent of the sound.
Young nerd from UK, London. Loving the videos; wealth of knowledge.
Hello Paul, I thoroughly enjoy your candour and demeanor. I like the example you set.
I've noticed that some quality USB products, e.g. decent webcams, have cables with ferrite beads, smaller versions of those found on old-fashioned VGA video cables -- I suspect adding these to a typical (but not cheap/flimsy) PeeCee-to-DAC USB cable would be beneficial.
The ferrite is there to suppress unwanted EMI/RFI emissions that's it. If you dont believe me you can remove it your self the cord will work exactly how it did before it was removed.
I’m with you Paul. Turning 66 soon here. I forget everything brother. Your not alone. Cheers!
I'm not sure I hear a difference in sound quality in DAC's, but then again I have no experience with really high end DAC's, the best I had was Musical Fidelity M1DAC and Asus Essence One Muses Edition. STILL, with a cheapo USB cable I hear buzzing and noise when I move the mouse and when HDD is doing something, or when I have a game turned I can hear a certain type of silent buzzing. With a better quality USB cable (Supra USB 2.0) there's zero buzzing and noise, it's always perfectly silent.
It sounds like someone has recently attended the Landmark Forum (discussion about personal stories)... :) thanks for the recommendation about Curious Cables
Happy birthday to you❤️ . How i can set my gain without damaging my speakers ,if i have a big power amp .
I have run in to so many bad USB cable in my life time, I could filled a trashcan with all of them. Even ones that meet specs but brake in a year. I could see a difference just transferring files. And even see a difference doing firmware upgrades, some would just randomly fail if a bad cable was in the mix.
The simple answer is NO.
Hey, Happy Birthday Paul. Here is to many, many years of wonderful music.
so if I download a file I get less data , please explain
Happy birthday Paul, you're looking great!
Hi Paul. Happy Birthday! Hi-Fi definitely needs you! I honestly can afford most of your products, but have few( just power cables). I have always been a high value kind of guy so I have a hard time dissing out the dough. I do believe your company makes so of the best high end products though. You gotta pay to play :). I am definitely interested in your new speakers line. Hopefully it's semi affordable ;) when it comes out. Keep up the great work Paul!
Expensive digital USB cables make a zero audible difference if you're using any half decent modern solid-state dac. This has been proven many times before. You don't need to spend hundreds of dollars for a cable. Any decent cable from $10-$50 will do.
Hi Paul, you often recommend Audioquest cables but they seem to come in many colour coded quality levels. I am aware that depending on the level of connected equipment, the differences in cable quality may or may not be audable. While I don't want to buy cables that impede the audio quality, I also don't want to waste money on top end cables that are so far above the performance level of my existing components that they offer no improvement over the lower priced cable levels. In other words, it's a question of matching HiFi performance level without wasting money.
My existing speakers are Polk Audo 10B (tweeters replaced (silk dome), considering getting the crossovers recapped by a well respected professional here in Australia. I can't detect a problem but the detected tweeter issue was slight yet has made a huge difference to my audio pleasure, so maybee well worth doing.
Amplifier is a Yamaha A 700 which has been recapped.
There are a number of analogue sources connected directly to the amp.
There are a few Digital sources connected to a DAC Essence HDACC
TV is connected to DAC via optical, (PVR to TV via HDMI)
BDP to DAC via HDMI passthrough.
Hard drive to BDP via USB (I intend to replace this with a NAS via LAN)
Despite the age of the speakers and amp, the audio performance is exceptional IMO and the best system I have ever put together. I know there are much higher end options available that I could afford but it's in a smallish open lounge dining area and there is no space in my house for a dedicated listening room. This system gives me a lot of pleasure and given the size and nature of available space, it doesn't seem appropriate to upgrade from this level.
The RCAs I am using are fairly thick but they were relatively inexpensive. However the digital cables are all very very cheap and from what you are suggesting here this may be a mistake.
Ken
I connect my pc to my soundsystem via a shielded Soundblaster Z Soundcard through optic cable. So no emi.
Don't feel bad, Paul, I will be 70 next March, God willing, and I get mental lapses more and more frequently .. it's just that we have SO MUCH hardrive knowledge cluttering the ole cranium that sometimes it's hard to retrieve info at a moments notice !! LOL :D
simply: on async DACs there is no difference (except possible ground loop), but can be big difference on cheap DACs which sync clock to 1Khz of USB clock!
Yup, on USB audio 2.0. They must have some old $hit DAC that cant do it. He's so wrong.
happy birthday Paul, have a nice glass of wine , thanks.
Hey Paul, I think you were referring to Curious Cables Australian company.
Wonderful and informative video. Thanks again!
Paul, does carpeted floors sweetens the high end for a horns?
yes
Yes. So can a sofa.
A bookcase certainy does.
But I'm not sure everybody knows what that is....
Paul P. A thanks. I'm always championing the room with many bookcases treatment, as it often was in the 50s through 70s HiFi listening room. I feel bookcases make great room treatments. Of course it depends on the speakers. Another nice treatment, Persian carpet on hardwood floors. I'm just saying we already have the answers.
Which begs the question why optical isn't the best connection method? Bypassing all that unwanted noise. Last i heard there is no audio quality limitation, the manufacturer can choose what data rates etc to run over it. I'm still yet to hear a convincing argument on why not to use optical...
Optical is a better alternative. Even Rob Watts, designer of the Chord Electronics DACs (also FPGA based like PS Audio's) has stated the optical cable is preferable to USB.
Optical can provide galvanic isolation from the source and in case of using a PC that can be a good thing of course. But as optical audio is one-way data with a sample clock that isn’t precise you will need a good quality ASRC (asynchronous sample rate converter) and data buffering to enable a constant (almost) jitter free clock into the DAC.
I believe I read somewhere that Optical will not produce 7.1 surround and that HDMI sound was the better option.
Definitely not in noise filtering but in audio bandwidth applications.
Punkn Punt
I use optical for my 2 channel set up. My theater is a different story.
Regular TOSLINK optical doesn't have the bandwidth for HD/Surround audio USB does.
probably one of the best episodes, thank you so much. and yes I do agree. noname usb cable sounds quite a bit harsh and edgy compared to an AQ forest, which again has no chance against an AQ coffee. On my transparent equipment, heard with my ears. I suggest trying it out.
Howdy.
I wonder if feeding the USB signal through a USB hub to the DAC would deliver any noise reduction ?
I understand a hub contains electronics that boost and shape the digital signal. Also, a hub uses a separate power supply which I think should help blocking the noise.
Regards.
I'm using an uptone audio USPCB to link my streaming device and dac. I just wodner will replace the uspcv with curious cable give a small boost in sounds?
Absolutely lovely! THANK YOU!
Hello from Egypt ,love your videos . thank you very much , HAPPYBIRTHDAY :D
hey paul ... why not just do an A-B test in front of us. try out three different cables with all settings the same and we will hear for ourselves ?
He cant do it. Actually there is not a single passed AB test done. And will not be. There is this "the amazing meeting" where you can get a million dollars if you can pass (do anything unnatural event) it and no one has done it, why? COS IT CANT BE DONE hehe...
Analysis plus or Audioquest carbon both do the job...... Many happy returns Paul.
Well, if you want to avoid noise getting from the PC to the DAC, why not isolate it? That is, have a separate box that converts from USB to an optical signal (the box, being digital, would not be affected by noise and the output signal should have FEC), then send the optical signal to the DAC. Now you have is completely isolated in addition to possibly (depending on how the converter works) being able to have a cable that is longer than 5m.
Curious Cable is the name Paul. I have it here ... it's funny they use a different conductor just for the ground and that's make a difference.
Totally great answer!
What about an optical USB cable? Like the one from Linus Tech Tips. He had a 100 ft optical USB 3.Optical cable. How (if any) would this affect sound quality? If Toslink spdif isolates the two devices connected, then an USB 3.Optical cable should do the same for a connected DAC, correct?
I bet optical cable performs worse because light-to-electricity conversion is very noisy.
Paul, you are a great person, do not let certain people stain you, in my opinion my Analysis plus usb make a difference against the $2 usb cable.
First of all Happy Birhtday and thank you for all the Videos. I just googled for hours and opinions on that topic and saw the video title. Thank you so much for explaining that usb cables do make a difference. And I don't think problems with remembering things is connected to the age I'm in my 30's and I forget and can not remember things all the time :D
GOD BLESS YOU, HAPPY BIRTHDAY, KEEP MOVING ON
If there are sonic degradation through lower quality USB cable, the digital signal that is.... then can you quantify the errors?
No, they aren't data errors, they are elctromagnetic.
i aptx bluetooth to an arcam dac which upscales to 24 bit...got no probs with cables.
oh man
i can suffer through a lot of videos for the great engineering that sometimes pops up
but this is getting ridiculous
standard EE isn’t high end audio. High end audio is to ameliorate playback systems beyond pure function towards the very best possible (for a certain budget bracket), which doesn’t make a difference to 98% of people. Unless of course they get a chance to actually listen to it.
I was all ready to cry snake oil, but your point actually makes a lot of sense. I hadn't thought of a USB cable acting as an antenna that could introduce RF interference into the analog portion of the amplifier, and it makes sense that a poorly shielded cable could pick up and carry carry this kind of radiation inadvertently.
Your initial instinct was correct. Any half decent modern solid-state dac will have zero audible changes in sound from using an audio quest cable. This has been measured and proven.
LOL, I love the funny guy at the end... Here's hoping that u had a good 70th B.D.... And please come to Toronto and demo your P.S. Audio products for us...
Curious Cable USB is 500USD... This is snake oil. In the digital audio world the signal is binary with redundant silent bits made for recovery and concealment of a potential digital error. Your cable is good if there's no burst or dropouts that can't be corrected. So to keep it simple, buy well grounded and insulated and short USB cable and that's it.
I bought four Audioquest USB cables and after weeks of listen, I returned all but the most expensive one. They all sound different. The more expensive sound better. I wanted to save money by going with the cheapest cable but the difference in sound quality is too big to ignore.
@@allansh828 It's just your brain playing tricks on you.
Please explain how a USB cable can transfer my files without error, bit-for-bit, between two storage devices, yet magically exhibits loss when you use it between a computer and a DAC?
Boggles the mind. Snake oil, mythology and old wives' tales.
Actually, file transfer has error correction while USB audio doesn't. So just in theory you can experience bit flipping. It just doesn't happen nowadays because the outputs have become so good.
Well said Paul.
Happy birthday Paul .. and many more! .. love your videos ...keep it up ..
Bought a very nice expensive usb cable, sounded fine but got signal dropouts all the time, bought a cheap Blue Jeans usb cable and everything has been working fine, no dropouts and no difference in sound quality.
Cheap would be 2.99usd from Wal-Mart. Blue Jeans operates on catching folks like you thinking snake oil terms about expensive cables and.... as knee jerk reaction looking to suppose cheap cables ... sorry 40usd for cables is not cheap , cheap is 5usd .
I don't get it... why would you give the snake award to a tweak/item that you think works? Shouldn't that be for things that people spend money on that have no benefit (that are, you know, like snake oil?)
terrywho22 the award goes to the touchiest subjects.
OK, I thought that would be something like a chicken award.
Nice special effects !
So I wonder what are the reasons that some USB cables any good than ather:
a. Some USB cables provide filter / noise reduction from the source computer, so the noise from the computer can't affect the DAC while the others just passing the data as they are ?
b. Some USB cable generate noise ?
a or b , or a+b
Seeing that Asynchronous USB has *ZERO ERROR CORRECTION* present, unlike the normal data USB protocol, it's not a stretch at all to understand that cables matter.
If ethernet didn't have EC, cables would matter there for very short lengths as well.
But AUSB protocol probably doesn't run on 480Mbps like USB 2.0.
@@thePavuk And yet it does.
I've actually used lots of different USB cables with my external sound card, including the cheapest 5 metre extension cable I could find, connected to a further 2 metres of cable. The result, absolutely no difference in sound whatsoever. 5 metres is the maximum recommended length, so 7 metres was really pushing it. But it worked absolutely fine. Hey Paul, please can you change that cable on your modem for me so that your videos sound better! Absolutely ridiculous, I can't believe this is even being debated lol.
what “sound card” are you using? Does it even accept bit-perfect input?
@@allansh828 hahahaha
When I heard 'Only you' ... I thought 'can prevent forest fires' should go next.
If you ask a guy that sells a $220 USB cable if they'll make an audible difference over sub-$10 options the answer you get shouldn't surprise you.
Digital interconnects can't make a difference pretty much by definition. True cheap crap is cheap crap and may cause drop outs or just won't last. so you want something decent. However if you're going to spend hundreds of dollars on cables anyway, I have some really nice sounding cables I can sell you. They're vintage and well broken-in.
Tara Labs?
Surface Pro tablets and alike do NOT put out any real noise. So just use them for your streamer source and your good to go with a quality cable. FYI USB cable will have different sound so get a couple and test. We ended up with Audioquest Pearl for more detail all around vs SKW.
Thanks Paul. Some great points. Key point is that listening is where the rubber meets the road. Love the seniors moments by the way. At 58 I've also started to notice some minor delay in file retrieval times.
Happy Birthday!
Ok snakeoil man…. So how do you design a USB cable the “right way”? It’s a standard, not sure what this even means.
This is true while i charged my car battery the charger made an iterference on my china usb extention, when i swapped it out with a "real" usb 2.0 spec extention the interference was gone, and I have cut through my share of cables and for most of the time they are unshielded inside 😡 have even gotten aluminium cables that was copper coated inside the usb cables, and when you mix different types of metals of course they will sound different from cable to cable
If you get any half decent cable for like $10 it will perform exactly the same as a $1000 cable.
Wax on, wax off Paul. Happy birthday 🎁. And for me it’s Yes USB cables make a difference 🖖
There are too many hilarious comments for me to not add my two cents. How many people commented on this video basing their opinion on "Binary is just ones and zeros!" without ever considering what our complicated electronics accomplish with slight changes in voltage. I'm not a true audiophile. I probably can't be. My hearing likely doesn't qualify as professional grade, and my budget certainly does not. I buy very good quality equipment that I think sounds pretty darn good and stop there. I'll never spend $100+ on a USB cable because it doesn't fit into how I experience music. However, I do appreciate the monumental difference between a data transfer that allows time for error checking and one that does not. Every commenter who brought up the idea of comparing two digital versions of an audio file as a means to suggest that miles upon miles of questionable cabling along the way negates the need for high quality cabling to a DAC must have been unaware of how many times along the way that data was verified to be accurate before being passed to the next destination. In my opinion, the need for instantaneous playback without time for error checking in the audio data stream is really the cause for concern with cable quality because a variety of distortions of the signal can lead to a misinterpretation of the source material. Is your system of such a high quality as to reproduce these minute errors? Are your ears so well calibrated as to perceive these small differences? Maybe so, maybe not. But when errors lead to a slight distortion of the source material, and adding complexity to the circuitry for the purposes of measuring variations and correcting them takes precious milliseconds, sometimes it's just better to listen, make a design change, listen again, and subjectively judge what's better. In regard to digital transmission, a bit is not a 1 or a 0 until a threshold is established as to the voltage that makes it so. Binary isn't exactly black and white when it's subjected to being determined by a variance in voltage at fast switching speeds. Fully integrated systems do a great job, but without error checking along the way, the internet would be "noisy" and "jittery".
Well, I didn't know for sure if USB cables make a difference or not but I do know that computers infect every electronic device around them with noise. I know this from working with them in PA because I can see the RF interference registering -20dB on every channel of the dual band radio mic receiver. So in setting up the PC I wanted to isolate it from the sound system as much as possible within the existing very tight budget. So, on the basis of the 80/20 rule I bought a Zip-Lite USB cable as it at least has 2 ferrite beads and used it to connect a Radial USB Pro to run into the analogue PA via ground lifted, 95% shielded XLR cables. Radial gear has a good rep (Durability for sonic performance) in Pro audio & includes it's own inbuilt filters as well. This USB Zip-Lite cable is pretty darn cheap and at least has some filtering of it's own. On my home HiFi system using an Essence HDACC, it compares more than favorably against a much more expensive boutique USB cable (the only one I had available for comparison). So I think the Zip-Lite is an absolute winner for the price (about $6 from memory). So that's my story for what it's worth.
Happy birthday. You definitely look younger than 70.
As long as your cable meets the impedance of your source and load maximum power will be transferred.
There are many techniques to deal with noise. Given they are practiced so religiously cables alone won't make a difference other than perhaps shielding them in noisy environments.
They won't alone reduce noise passed into them from the source.
If anything they'll add noise due to mutual induction or thermal agitation.
The general rule to lower noise is to lower the temperature bandwidth, and resistance.
One might think using silver in a USB cable would fix this but it's practically useless given the math.
I say this because of Johnson Noise. The noise voltage (when Boltzmann's constant is multiplied by temperature, bandwidth, and resistance) created due to thermal agitation for copper is .0038 ohms per million ohms per degree Celsius. Silver is .003 ohms per million ohms per degree Celsius.
The resistances and temps would have to be orders of magnitude higher for any of this to matter in the slightest!
Over the temperature ranges that electronic equipment operates these differences are minute. That said Bandwidth (Frequency) is also a component. So of course lowering the bandwidth also lowers the noise.
well, something which was not snake oil
FPGA DACS are best
but isolator makes huge difference
long cable make difference
but then cable is still snake oil......done blind, double blind testing....Sir.
used audioquest cable and standard cable(same lenght) and both sounded same
Audio science review did a great video on it. An basically the shorter the lenght the better (but there is very little difference between a 12m cable and a direct 10cm plug) and over all there is no difference. But some expensive gimmick cable might even make it worse.
This seems like one of the easiest things to blind test, simply because cables are so easily swapped and can be hidden. A week or a month of daily or more swaps set up by someone else and a diary of what you think you are hearing should do it. At least then, the only one that a person could disagree with would be themselves.
Audio Science Review has a Video on this topic on his channel. It can't hurt do hear the opposite opinion to compare.
glorey on your spot....paul..
The only way is to try it. I have a high end dac, American amps and speakers. The dac has been connected from a streaming device, not computer, using a cheap screened usb cable. It has been in place for years. The Project Stream Box Ultra was a significant move upwards from a laptop using Foobar. That difference was very noticeable. All my music files are on USB sticks. Even high bit rate Mp3s sound spectacular. The sound is fantastic even with the screened cheap USB cable. So those cheap cables do work well. For years I have believed it cannot get better with a better USB cable, and still think it can't. However, I'm going to give it a go with a C line USB from Chord Company. It's only 50 pounds so if that cannot better a cheap screened USB cable, nothing to worry about. Some may say 50 pounds USB is too little for a 9k pounds plus dac. I don't think it's worth spending large amount on a USB cable when a cheap screened one contributes to such a fantastic sound. It's the components that make the sound good in the first place. Too much hype about high res files too. If the equipment is good, even high bit rate Mp3s will sound superb as demonstrated by my setup. Almost all system demonstration are done using a basic music type track. Vocals and just a few instruments, jazz music etc etc. Any system can do that . There is a reason why dealers use those tracks. Even on UA-cam, high end systems are recorded playing such tracks.
I hear comments from people that say there is no difference, but they do not say what components they are using.
The other thing not mentioned is how well the USB cable is shielded. Surely that must be of near equal importance and even nay sayers may accept that.
Remembering that cables are all analog and the bandwidth required is pretty high, especially when dealling with the higher bit rates.
The better the cable, the better defined the on and off which must make the job easier for any DAC.
My experience has been that they have not made so much difference, but enough to make it worth using something just a bit better than the stock USB cables. Of course, if I were just using a cheap USB dac I would not bother, but for my hi-res system it is a different story.
Regarding passing ground interference from a PC to a Hi-End DAC, I have wondered if it would be better to go from USB to Optical and then to a DAC to give total electrical isolation. I know that there can be compromises with optical, but PC's are just so full of noise that I wonder if it could be worth trying.
I'm going to agree with Paul on this one. But is a $300 USB cable right for you? Only you can answer that question. I have found that for most people the Amazon Basics USB cables are more then adequate. They are mechanically good and electrically sound. They are moderately priced but 3x -> 5x the cost of the cheapes. Once you get past a couple meters in USB cable length then things get complex. If your extending the length of something like a Logitech Webcam with a 6 meter USB cable you paid $10 for your going to have problems.
You should read this. There will be a test Monday morning: sdphca.ucsd.edu/Lab_Equip_Manuals/usb_20.pdf
Paul, I have a question. Do you meditate? We all create our own reality...period. I hear the "I"m a victim of circumstance" thing all the time from people...bullshit. You are where you are in life because of the choices you have made in life, end of story. Choose a different story and live it! Quit whining, lol. This cable discussion reminds me of the old "tube amps are no different than solid state amps" thing. BULLSHIT. They sound different like or not as you may, they may have the same slope on an oscilloscope but they SOUND different no question about it. Fantastic video! I applaud your total disregard for the nah sayers! thank you for that. I live in western Oklahoma and am planning a trip to Colorado hopefully soon, I would LOVE to come visit and see Music Room One while I'm there. Keep up the good work!!
USB audio transfer is isochronous which means it has a CRC check but no retry mechanism so how bad does a cable need to be to fail a CRC check? The packets just get dropped if the CRC fails so you would hear it for sure. 🐍
Next up, do optical cables make a differce and will snake oil make your DAC sound better?
@Dmitriy Getman Anything digital is good unless you have a lot of EMI in which case you either go optical or use shielded copper. Anyone who tells you that you can hear difference in tone by changing cables carrying digital signals, is full of shit. You either transfer the bytes or you dont. If you don't you either get no audio at all or very nasty audio artifacting such as pops and crackles but you never lose tone.