|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
68.6.165.139
Let me cut to the chase guys, the Synergistic Research USB cable is in a class of its own; it is simply remarkable. After hearing this cable on three different systems with three different USB DACs, replacement of the Kimber or Belkin USB cables with this cable improved the sound of every DAC used. The improvement was considerable.Like all Synergistic Telsa cables, the USB cable is treated with "Quantum Tunneling". I have included a link to see this process which I experienced first hand at the factory. There are no ferrite rings on this cable.
The first thing you notice when listening to the Synergistic is that the sound stage becomes huge. Listening to Jose Carreras with chorus in Ramirez's Misa Criolla, the massive acoustic space is easily heard with the chorus cleary delineated behind Carreras. On the Roy Orbision CD Black and White Night, the acoustic space of the room is beautifully portrayed with the audience and other performers easily heard in the room.
Other USB cables seem to compress the sound leading to a slight hardness. In Jane Monheit's new CD, Surrender, Jane's voice is a touch dry in this studio recording. The Synergistic removes the slight hardness I was hearing with the Kimber or Belkin.
One of the biggest changes you will hear with the Synergistic cable is that the high end opens up, and the closed in affect I was hearing with the other cables is eliminated. On Keith Jarrett At The Blue Note, the shimmer of the cymbals sound incredibly real compared to the the other cables. I had always thought the TDA 1543 NOS DAC in my Crimson was a bit soft at the high end. It was the cable, not the DAC.
Transients sound faster; the pace and rhythm is better portrayed with the Synergistc cable. The Bob James & Earl Klugh CD Cool reproduces what our friend Dr. David Shapiro refers to as "kick ass bass". I was amazed at what I heard!
The Synergistic removes a veil from the sound of the other cables.
I hope this little review gives you folks an idea of what a well engineered USB cable can do for our DACs. My Wavelength Crimson's sound has been transformed.
Is the Synergistic one meter USB cable worth $550? No, it is worth twice this amount.
Steve
Edits: 02/17/08 02/17/08Follow Ups:
You have the mind of a cookie, and the intellect of a roll-top desk.
nt
....for trying to keep us from using our own valued judgment, showing us that our lifetime of experience is irrelevant to our musical enjoyment, and especially, especially from spending our own well-earned money, long after we moved out our parents' house. Three cheers to our protectors.
Before I spend another dime, ever, I'm gonna contact them. Gosh, I didn't know decisions could be that easy.
If your valued judgment and lifetime of experience tells you to invest in snake oil, then I definitely think you should do it. :-)
For those not aware, USB is a digital communications format. This means it transmits in ones and zeros. The exact same data comes out of the cable as goes in - its not changed. If there is sufficient noise, the device simply doesn't function, and this would be a defective cable.
All the super duper magic treatings you give to a USB cable cannot change the fact that the exact same series of ones and zeros comes out the other end. The cheapest functioning cable, to $3000 super duper quantum tunneling cables (You don't know what quantum tunneling is, do you? They are sure hoping you don't.) all produce the exact same output.
Anyone who thinks they hear any difference is a lair, pure and simple.
More eduction for the gullible:
Quantum tunneling is the effect where photons and other QM-size particles can randomly jump to a new position. It can be in one place one moment, and another place the next. What this has to do with cables, no one has any idea, including the people selling "quantum tunneling enhanced" cables, which pretty much translates to "We're ripping you off because you are gullible enhanced".
nt
I'll be happy to try it. And blind test it. As I've done with many USB cables (generic, Belkin Pro, Monster Pro, Cryo Parts, etc.). I own all of those, by the way.And I'm not against expensive interconnects and speaker cables...I've auditioned my share, including some very expensive ones by Nordost, the AU24, Kimber, PS Audio, and various Cardas cables. My current setup has Cardas Golden Reference interconnect and speaker cables, by the way, so I am not against spending a few dollars on cables. I have some fancy power cables as well (Cardas, PS Audio, and Black Sand).
I can hear a very slight difference between analog cables, and that is why I've spent a considerable amount of money on them. I'm not as sure about power cables, but all the ones I have were acquired at a considerable discount (or free).
Digital cables, on the other hand, are another matter entirely. My experience shows that they either work or they don't work (causing both audible errors and the error light on a DAC to flash, for example). One can acquire a perfect USB cable for $50 or less. $550 is, to repeat myself, ridiculous. And claims about it sounding different are, based on my personal experience, comparable to claims about some magic rock sitting on top of your amplifier resulting in it sounding better.
To someone from the old school, I can understand that the idea of a cable improving sound is acceptable. But you have to understand how digital works to appreciate the idea that a cable that transmits digital data, aside from being 100% working or not, cannot change the sound. You have to understand that even an inexpensive USB cable must be 100% perfect in its data transmission or there would be no business of selling external hard drives (among many other USB devices). Yes, there are some considerations for very long cables...but nobody here is talking about using USB cables more than 2M long. The information is out there, but I can see where some people have done their cable tests (with analog stuff) and found that some sound better than others (despite many attempts by others to say otherwise) and so they are making the leap of concluding the same must be true for digital cables. But, as I've said, digital data transfer is an entirely different ballgame, my friend. USB itself would not exist if a simple cable were not able to work 100% (not 99.99999999%) of the time.
P.S. And, to the "experts" out there, please don't turn this into a "but audio is streamed, so it uses a mode different from hard drives which has errors" discussion. Yes, many (but not all) audio devices use the streaming format that is not error checked. But errors will not occur in this format unless there are extraordinary circumstances either (unusually long cables, extreme RFI conditions, lack of basic shielding, etc.), as is the case of non-streamed data. A good device should have some kind of error checking mode (i.e. send 500MB of data with specific test values and/or a checksum and verify that it can be transferred correctly)...if you are a hardware person making a USB device, perhaps you should support some kind of test mode for it to eliminate all the digital cable superstitions once and for all.
... right under our noses all this time... whoda thunk?
nt
People sometimes need to stop being know it all engineers and admit we really don't know everything and that sometimes something will make a difference (better/worse) and we really don't know why yet.
Throw your numbers around all you want... but if you haven't put your ear to it, you may just be blowing a lot of hot air. Sometimes a manufacturer cuts off his own feet when he tries to explain how he came up with what he did... he may have made something really special, but, because he's blown it on an explanation people don't listen. Sometimes the engineers are guessing at the explanations too.... doesn't mean it doesn't sound good/accurate.Acer Aspire 9500 laptop Pentium 1.73GHz w/ 2 gigs ram, Vista Premium 32 bit, WAV/CUE files on Hard Drives via firewire, XXHighEnd ver. 0.9U Player Q1 14, player priority nothing,thread priority real-time; Stello 100 USB-DAC nos
A USB cable is nothing more than a sheild (drain) and 4 insulated wires, 2 of which are a twisted pair and carry data. One end has a type "A" connector. The other end has a type "B" connector.
At $550 the manufacturer better explain why his cable is worth it. Does his cable reduce jitter? If so, by what percent? Why is his cable worth $550? What are the advantages?
How does the $550 USB cable interact with the USB port on a typical computer, which is massed produced and made as cheaply as possible? These are the questions that should be addressed by the manuacturer and by the "experts" that recommend the cable in this forum.
At $550 the manufacturer better explain why his cable is worth it. Does his cable reduce jitter? If so, by what percent?
Jitter?? What's that? EVERYONE knows that the dacs reclock everything! :)
You never disappoint Jim.
But if it gives a better, more accurate music presentation does it matter what the explanation is or if the manufacturer is completely off in why it does what it does?
Acer Aspire 9500 laptop Pentium 1.73GHz w/ 2 gigs ram, Vista Premium 32 bit, WAV/CUE files on Hard Drives via firewire, XXHighEnd ver. 0.9U Player Q1 14, player priority nothing,thread priority real-time; Stello 100 USB-DAC nos
No it doesn't matter Sev. Of course you are right here.
I was just making fun of Jim's inconsistencies. He argues that USB cables CAN'T make a difference and that Jitter doesn't exist because of reclocking at the dac....but now is wanting to have the manufacturer explain how their cable produces less jitter.....
doh
I botched where I put my post above... was suppose to go under Jim's post.
Acer Aspire 9500 laptop Pentium 1.73GHz w/ 2 gigs ram, Vista Premium 32 bit, WAV/CUE files on Hard Drives via firewire, XXHighEnd ver. 0.9U Player Q1 14, player priority nothing,thread priority real-time; Stello 100 USB-DAC nos
what a bunch of fools... more money than brains at work here
send me $1000... I'll send something that'll fix everything
...is that instead of calling a 'buyer beware', the "experts" here encourage the less informed to buy into this stuff. Expert advisors are suppose to look out after the interests of the non-experts. In the two DIY audio forums (outside the asylum) I frequent experts really do give honest advice calling out snake oil for what it is. It's just the opposite here though.
> ...is that instead of calling a 'buyer beware', the "experts" here
> encourage the less informed to buy into this stuff.
This is a site for audiophiles. That is, a site for the somewhat reality-challenged to discuss and develop "flat earth" beliefs about sound, sound perception and the performance of audio hardware along with a bit of support and encouragement from those in the industry.
> Expert advisors are suppose to look out after the interests of the
> non-experts.
Why? Experts are likely to look after the interests of non-expert friends, family and the communities in which they are active members (assuming their advice is wanted). For communities that have sets of values that are opposed to their own are experts going to take an interest?
The audiophile community holds a mishmash of conflicting "flat earth" beliefs and rejects/opposes established knowledge which even extends to simple things taught to school children like Ohms law and the information in a digital signal. There are no "expert" audiophiles if one associates "expert" with mankind's scientific knowledge about sound, sound perception and how audio equipment functions. This is not a problem for audiophiles who have chosen to reject established scientific knowledge in favour of magic and nor is it a problem for experts who take no active interest in the closed audiophile community.
> In the two DIY audio forums (outside the asylum) I frequent experts
> really do give honest advice calling out snake oil for what it is.
> It's just the opposite here though.
So the people putting in the effort to run those sites encourage a different set of values to those running this site. Isn't it good to have a choice? Or are audiophiles and audiophile beliefs a sufficient threat that the mainstream should become concerned?
If people are daft enough to pay absurd sums of money for magic cables then fair enough. I cannot see much wrong with a fool being parted from his money and the people pushing this stuff could be peddling far worse. Is this an unreasonable view?
Excellent post. I especially like the reference to "flat earth" as this is a term I've often used when describing the beliefs of those who see audio through the dogmatic objective lens. I do agree however that choice and a difference of opinion should be respected. The funny thing is, you are 180 degrees out of phase on this one. You hold the prevailing scientific consensus up on a static pedestal when in fact science is fluid and always shifting. Usually these shifts are slow and evolutionary but sometimes they are sudden and constitute a paradigm shift. If you doubt this, or if you do not understand what I am talking about, read a scientific journal from 25, 50, and 100 years past. You'll read some pretty amusing scientific "fact" much of which is wrong from the perspective of today. Do you assume we have reached a point where this dynamic no longer applies? Perhaps you have a unifying law of physics? For those who are not aware, the "laws" of physics as they apply to the universe fall apart when applied to sub atomic particles while the prevailing laws of Quantum mechanics fall apart when describing the universe. Yet despite the fact our fundamental understanding of the universe and it's building blocks are not only incomplete but also contradict one another, both inner and outer space co exist. Perhaps when a unifying law of physics is established our understanding of what actually happens in audio cables will be complete. Audio cables embody both the greater physical universe with their conductors, dielectrics and shielding that we can see, touch and feel, as well as Quantum mechanics as this pertains to the electrons and their EM fields that pass through our cables. It's no wonder strict, if somewhat sophomoric purveyors of the scientific method take such issue with what is obvious to everyone who listens. Don't feel bad, they also ridicule the physicists who are working to establish a unifying law of physics because their work, when complete, will rewrite their reality templates. Flat Earth thinking if you ask me.
The thing I have the hardest time understanding is why people who do not trust their own senses would choose a hobby that is all about subjective enjoyment? I mean if you can't hear the differences in cables or electronics, or if you don't trust your ears when making such comparisons, then what do such people gain from high end audio when mid-fi, with it's perfect measurements, fits their reality construct so nicely, and at a huge savings? Is it status? What do such people base their High End buying decisions on? Spread sheets, graphs, narrowly defined measurements?
Back to the OP's original topic. If he says a USB cable made a significant difference who are we to question what he heard until we first have a chance listen for our selves? Sure polite speculation or discussion is one thing, but the tone and content of many posts here go way beyond what I consider reasonable and polite discourse. At the end of the day high end audio should be about music and what it takes to recreate emotionally moving music at home. For those of us who look at audio in this way it pays to experiment and try new things. Many of us have found cables can and do significantly improve not only the sound of our systems, but also our enjoyment of music. We have also found that power cords have a significant impact on sound despite the fact the signal and current they deliver first traveled through miles of wire of different forms and in different voltages. We accept this because we hear the change they make in our systems. Why would we assume a USB cable should be any different? Is it because deep down inside we do not see the computer as the equal of our stand alone digital transports? Could it be that we don't really believe our computers are in the same league as our old CD players? I'd imagine that when people start to experiment with what goes in front of the DAC, not only will they discover what a USB cable can do, but also that different power supplies in our computers, RAM, isolation platforms, and so on all make a significant contribution. When this starts to become common knowledge PC based audio will finally be maturing and it's full potential will start to be realized. Think about it; what would a traditional state-of-the-art CD player sound like with the same garbage internal components found in our computers (power supplies, capacitors, resistors, connectors, and so on). Now imagine how much better your PC could sound if the same attention to detail was paid to it's internal components as is paid to high end CD players, transports and DAC's. I'd say Synergistic Research's USB cable is a good first step in this direction.
> > I mean if you can't hear the differences in cables or electronics < <
You're generalizing. Electronics can make an audible difference. Cables have less of an impact or no impact at all. Opinions, differ on this.
For most of us with limited resources it makes sense to put your money where it makes the most impact.
Well Jim since you have obviously not heard this cable your opinion is unsubstantiated and the tone of your previous posts places your "opinion," such as it is, in perspective.
You're calling me out because you don't like my opinion? I thought this was an open forum?
Weak
Excellent post. I especially like the reference to "flat earth" as this is a term I've often used when describing the beliefs of those who see audio through the dogmatic objective lens. I do agree however that choice and a difference of opinion should be respected. The funny thing is, you are 180 degrees out of phase on this one. You hold the prevailing scientific consensus up on a static pedestal when in fact science is fluid and always shifting. Usually these shifts are slow and evolutionary but sometimes they are sudden and constitute a paradigm shift. If you doubt this, or if you do not understand what I am talking about, read a scientific journal from 25, 50, and 100 years past. You'll read some pretty amusing scientific "fact" much of which is wrong from the perspective of today. Do you assume we have reached a point where this dynamic no longer applies? Perhaps you have a unifying law of physics? For those who are not aware, the "laws" of physics as they apply to the universe fall apart when applied to sub atomic particles while the prevailing laws of Quantum mechanics fall apart when describing the universe. Yet despite the fact our fundamental understanding of the universe and it's building blocks are not only incomplete but also contradict one another, both inner and outer space co exist. Perhaps when a unifying law of physics is established our understanding of what actually happens in audio cables will be complete. Audio cables embody both the greater physical universe with their conductors, dielectrics and shielding that we can see, touch and feel, as well as Quantum mechanics as this pertains to the electrons and their EM fields that pass through our cables. It's no wonder strict, if somewhat sophomoric purveyors of the scientific method take such issue with what is obvious to everyone who listens. Don't feel bad, they also ridicule the physicists who are working to establish a unifying law of physics because their work, when complete, will rewrite their reality templates. Flat Earth thinking if you ask me.
The thing I have the hardest time understanding is why people who do not trust their own senses would choose a hobby that is all about subjective enjoyment? I mean if you can't hear the differences in cables or electronics, or if you don't trust your ears when making such comparisons, then what do such people gain from high end audio when mid-fi, with it's perfect measurements, fits their reality construct so nicely, and at a huge savings? Is it status? What do such people base their High End buying decisions on? Spread sheets, graphs, narrowly defined measurements?
Back to the OP's original topic. If he says a USB cable made a significant difference who are we to question what he heard until we first have a chance listen for our selves? Sure polite speculation or discussion is one thing, but the tone and content of many posts here go way beyond what I consider reasonable and polite discourse. At the end of the day high end audio should be about music and what it takes to recreate emotionally moving music at home. For those of us who look at audio in this way it pays to experiment and try new things. Many of us have found cables can and do significantly improve not only the sound of our systems, but also our enjoyment of music. We have also found that power cords have a significant impact on sound despite the fact the signal and current they deliver first traveled through miles of wire of different forms and in different voltages. We accept this because we hear the change they make in our systems. Why would we assume a USB cable should be any different? Is it because deep down inside we do not see the computer as the equal of our stand alone digital transports? Could it be that we don't really believe our computers are in the same league as our old CD players? I'd imagine that when people start to experiment with what goes in front of the DAC, not only will they discover what a USB cable can do, but also that different power supplies in our computers, RAM, isolation platforms, and so on all make a significant contribution. When this starts to become common knowledge PC based audio will finally be maturing and it's full potential will start to be realized. Think about it; what would a traditional state-of-the-art CD player sound like with the same garbage internal components found in our computers (power supplies, capacitors, resistors, connectors, and so on). Now imagine how much better your PC could sound if the same attention to detail was paid to it's internal components as is paid to high end CD players, transports and DAC's. I'd say Synergistic Research's USB cable is a good first step in this direction.
That is not science or innovation or a great step in the right direction...that is exploitation of the naive.
....you're right!! The guys at Synergistic tied Steve down over a fire ant hill, and FORCED him to enjoy, then purchase the USB cable.
Oh, the horror of being so naive. THAT will teach Steve!
Of course, you already know better, don't 'ya.
Erm...I said exploit, not coerce. And I am certain that Steve (is that Mercman?) enjoys that cable of his own free will, and that it is anything but horrific to him. But I also certain that whoever charged him $550 is laughing all the way to the bank.
Does your observation on the merits of a USB cable and it's cost hold true for all cables in the Audio play back chain? Curious.
No, and I've got another post around here somewhere that details the many expensive ANALOG cables I own and use.
Scrith,
I understand you skepticism-in fact I share it. The thing is all high end cables when first introduced were met with similar disbelief. When Gold Endz and Foulton Gold interconnects came out in the 1970's most people threw rocks at them because it was a new idea and the reasons why interconnects could make a difference were not fully understood (this is still the case for some it seems). While all that was necessary for perfect sound from any loud speaker was a 16 gauge lamp cord (again this is still true for some). And what about power cords? How were they first received?
The point is PC Audio is new and some are making the same assumptions regarding what can and cannot be improved upon with PC Audio as was made for hi-fi in the 70's, 80's and 90's. But for anyone who has invested in cables because they can hear and appreciate the differences cables make don't assume a USB cable should be any different. I'd imagine it won't stop here. I am certain that different brands of RAM, internal power supplies, hard drives or static memory and so on, will all combine to elevate the state-of-the-art for computer Audio. A little skepticism is healthy but when it precludes you from trying new things with nothing to loose it becomes very unhealthy.
Excellent post. I would love to try the SR cable (there are 4 or 5 other SR cables in my system and I think they are quite good) but can't say I will.
Cheers
> > "flat earth" beliefs about sound, sound perception and the performance of audio hardware along with a bit of support and encouragement from those in the industry < < <
Are you saying that there may be industry shills here? "Experts" whose job it is to advocate snake oils? $550 cables, $10K DACs, Shakti Stones, etc..
Oh my gosh, I would have never believed it!...heh...heh
"Don't you jive me with that cosmic debris..." FZ
If I can add my 2 cents here.
It is true that different digital cables do sound different that is my perosnal experience with cabels such as Wydeye, form Apogee electronics, also RCA SPDIF cables Canare cabels with Canare 75 ohm connectors, illuminatti D-60, a cut of RG-59 terminated with some pretty good quality crimp on RCA connectors, other Kimber, MIT, Monster, some DIY (NIgel Pond Special), and a few others.
when heard and compared the same digital source (Pioneer Elite DVD player, Samsung Blu Ray BDP1200,CAL dedicated delta CD drive, Krell KAV300CD and also a PC based CD/DVD rom Drive.
They all invariably imparted their own sound soem better than others and by better I mean more clear, more coherent, beter bass, more extended, more delineated, better mids, more cristal clear top end etc.
Also the cbaels have their own sonic signature though less prominent than a good or bad analog cable interconnect as a refference, but still imparting its own sound.
Even to a DAC such as the Benchmark media still can tell small differneces in sound even though the DAC1 reclock and upconverts everything to 24 bits 192KHz. if you can't hear that simply your capability to hear things is impaired or simply your system lack enough resolution to hear the minute changes that might impart more musicality or plain old enjoyability of it.
So far my best DAC is the tube CAL ALpha with soem pair of TungsRam ECC83 tubes vintage 1960's.
I'm still to hear a 1543 DAC a good buddy of mine (Wheezer) had cooked up for me with Doede's special board (imported form Germany) and some upgraded components.
I don't think you spending $500 on a USB cable is what sanity calls for, but I do believe different cables sound different and soem of them in the right conext with the right components and in the right room can sound suberb!! thsi is clearley the case of Magnan cables (Analog and speakers too that uses brass??? of all materials to impart its own special signature to much success . . . people swear by mollecualr arrangement of the cristal by cryo treatment, there sui al kinds of stuff that really works, unfortunately this is an industry in which we laureate some of te self dilussional people that charge you for a "Teleportation tweak" that they perfrm their magic over the telephone and with their flobby dust everything sounds better, well gess what I am not surprised those people don't claim that you need the trick doen once a year becaus eof environmental causes it wears away the effect kinda thing . .. that's one end of the spectrum. On the other end you have the engineers that swear that if you can't scope it or measure it or quantify it, it just can't hear it . . .
I learned to know that sometimes we try to hard to measure or quantify with the wrong tools, that sometimes your ear is more sensitive than a meter or scope, and that most of the times we try to measure and understand beyond our capacity.
All I can tell you is that USB cables should be subject to the same set of variables that other digital cables are so hearing differences is a personal thing, maybe the $550 USb cable is betteer in some regard to the $1.25 USb I bought in cablestogo, however is how you feel about what you do that gives or takes away form your enjoyment of this hobby.
If you feel empowered by spending half of a thousand bucks, to hear things clearer or better then do it if it pleases you, makes you happy and will not take away form your family responsibilities financially.
Now, if you feel like an IDIOT because you had to starve your kids for 2 weeks to get the money to satisfy your audio latest and greates ambition , media crazed fed addiction, then by all means please don't!
Also be aware that the law of diminishing return apply here in spades.
that the differnece between a cable for $1.25 to a $550 cabel is not even a considerable factor as percentages, will you get a 20 % (or even less)cable for 440 times the price.
Now, that's what I call Insane . . .
The rest is up to you.
I am a cable believer I own interconnects form Kimber Kable (most of ém silver) then soem really super expensive cables from Australian manufacturer PSC, some from Shunyata, Monster, XLO, and a few others, they all very good ecpecially the Kimbers and the PSC's, but they all do have a particular synergy with a aprticular components in its own context, they do different things to different components.
The real secret is to find the components that synergize betwen them even though you connect them with not so $$$uperior cable$. and to me that is the secret of trial and error.
The higher up you go un the price latter, the less you have to figit around looking for synergy.
But as music and audio is concern there is such a thing as audio heaven for the common man, just takes some time and effort to matching the components, upgrade some resistors and capacitors in soem components pays VERY BIG dividends, room placements, a few tweaks, experiemnt with cables, audio points, mass loading source components (it works guys!!)
You can feel free to critizise my lines or agree or disagree with me, we still live in a free country. Thank God for that!
Hope this helps a little bit
God Bless!
Gonzalo
See the Wikipedia article.
v
Gang,
Look there are 2 cables inside a USB cable. There is the DATA differential pair that must be designed for traffic up to at least 12Mhz and the POWER cable which is VBUS 5V's and Ground.
I have like tons of cables now and some do sound different. But remember it will be device dependent.
All of the PCM27xx devices require VBUS to determine the computer is there. This means there is current running from the computer to the USB Device via the POWER side of the cable.
Other devices like the TAS1020 look for signal on the DATA portion of the cable only. Therefore the VBUS is not used and only the Ground connection on the POWER side is used.
On the DATA side termination on the Device side or endpoint will have an effect on transmissions. I usually get the 5M cables put them on a couple of computers with my USB analyzer on the DAC side and check for errors.
It's not suggested to use a 5M with streaming audio. These cables were meant for low speed devices. 2M and under for audio will make all the difference in the world.
With the POWER side being used it can bleed noise from the computer into the dac.
It would be nice if you could switch the VBUS signal on the computer side from VBUS to Ground if your device doesn't use it.
Anyways another thing about the POWER side of the cable is that noise from the computer can end up on the device. The cable should do all it can to make sure that doesn't happen.
It's best like all aspects of this hobby to try this stuff before you buy it.
Remember using these expensive cables on a hard drive is worthless they are in Block mode not Streaming and will not be effected by the use of costly cables.
Thanks
Gordon
J. Gordon Rankin
Are there any cables out there that run the power and ground cables externally (i.e. on a - preferably shielded - line, separate from the line that transfers the signal)?
I'd imagine that this would do wonders for the audio quality...
"Music is God's gift to man, the only art of Heaven given to earth, the only art of earth we take to Heaven."
-Walter Savage Landor
"Posted by TopPop (A) on February 18, 2008 at 19:09:05
Are there any cables out there that run the power and ground cables externally (i.e. on a - preferably shielded - line, separate from the line that transfers the signal)?
I'd imagine that this would do wonders for the audio quality..".
The Synergistic Research Tricon USB cable "looks" like what you describe. It has two rather stiff (for a usb cable) geometries running in parallel that terminate into the usb connectors. I have no idea however if this means the signal / power are separated or if they ride in each cable. This could however be part of the huge improvement these cables deliver over the Kimber and the Belkin Gold / Pro.
One question.
I seem to remember reading that all USB packets, including the synchronous ones, have a header before the payload. Also, even if the bandwidth is specifically reserved for them by the host, they are still multiplexed with other packets if other devices are attached (say a keyboard).
But even if the audio device is the only one on the bus, how does the presence of the headers and of the temporal gaps between consecutive packets affect the audio quality? Does the DAC stream the data in real time as it arrives? No buffering whatsoever (not even 100 bits)? This would require extraordinary precission from the host device since it would have to put the packets on the wire at exactly the right time. Am I missing something?
Adal,
All devices on the USB link are sent packets. Each device specifies what is called MaxPacketSize for each endpoint.
In audio using ISO packeting the amount of data sent is specified by the SOF packet. You can specify this from I think 1ms to 32ms. But in audio we do as most do and set this to the maximum which is 1ms.
For 16 bits you need 4 bytes per sample (stereo) and 24 bits you need 6 bytes.
If we are doing 44.1/16 at 1ms increments we need 176.4 bytes per SOF packet. Since this cannot be done all OS's send 176 bytes 9 times and then 180 bytes ounce for a total of 1764 bytes over 10ms.
If we run 24/96 then we need 6*96= 576 bytes per 1ms SOF.
The PCM27xx series controllers have fixed buffer sizes of 2x48*4=384.
With the TAS1020/TUSB3200 you can specify the buffer size to what ever you want and control the DMA actually everything. So you can make the buffer allot larger and assure the lack of pops and clicks if there are errors in the bus.
The USB controllers only look at what their USB_ID is. They disregard all other communication seen on the link. With many computers and hubs the device will only see what it is suppose too.
Thanks
Gordon
J. Gordon Rankin
You got it. There is very little buffering in the typical USB interface. Gordons has a bit more than typical because he does a hand-shake and presumably gets it in bursts.
The PLL is locked on all the bits on the USB wire or only on the payload information? If only on the payload, it is stopped in the interval between consecutive packets?
I believe he still uses isochronous, only with async endpoint to adjust source rate, so PLL still needed to lock on bus. Plenty of ways for jitter from the PLL clocks to get to the audio clock circuits, even when the sample clock is derived from a local oscillator. No huge surprise there. Still looks like a nice, simple design though.
One question.
I seem to remember reading that all USB packets, including the synchronous ones, have a header before the payload. Also, even if the bandwidth is specifically reserved for them by the host, they are still multiplexed with other packets if other devices are attached (say a keyboard).
But even if the audio device is the only one on the bus, how does the presence of the headers and of the temporal gaps between consecutive packets affect the audio quality? Does the DAC stream the data in real time as it arrives? No buffering whatsoever (not even 100 bits)? This would require extraordinary precission from the host device since it would have to put the packets on the wire at exactly the right time. Am I missing something?
Gordon - Why does the USB cable seem to make a difference with your Async USB protocol DAC's? This should isolate pretty well I would think.
"The path of the righteous man is beset on all sides by the iniquities...yada yada yada"
Thanks for reminding me why it will be a cold day in hell before I trust my audio to a USB device.
There are differences between spdif coax cables too... gl Everything makes a difference. I went into computer audio thinking I was out of the audio rat-race... it seems that computer audio is just as sensitive as any other part of the chain. The good news is my front end is better now than it ever has been for less money...The bad news is I have a feeling the "less money" part isn't going to last long as more and more irresistible tweaks are made and shown to have a difference in music presentation.Acer Aspire 9500 laptop Pentium 1.73GHz w/ 2 gigs ram, Vista Premium 32 bit, WAV/CUE files on Hard Drives via firewire, XXHighEnd ver. 0.9T-5 Player Q1 18, player priority nothing,thread priority real-time; Stello 100 USB-DAC nos
I've got a USB from an external drive to my laptop, and another USB from my laptop to my Empirical Turbo2 ... which would be better place to try the Synergistic cable?
From laptop to the Off-Ramp Turbo 2.
Well...heheh
If you're like me and use XXhighend as a player, then your wav files from your HDD get completely loaded in RAM before playing. Therefore, your link between computer and dac is most sensitive. Also, If you can, use firewire from HDD to computer and only have one USB running.
Acer Aspire 9500 laptop Pentium 1.73GHz w/ 2 gigs ram, Vista Premium 32 bit, WAV/CUE files on Hard Drives via firewire, XXHighEnd ver. 0.9T-5 Player Q1 18, player priority nothing,thread priority real-time; Stello 100 USB-DAC nos
My cheap anonymous USB cable is bit perfect when used to backup my harddisk (thankfully as I was recently forced to discover) and at data rates far higher than that needed for audio. Since the Synergistic Research USB cable sounds different to my cheap reliable cable will it corrupt my computer data if used for backups?
Backups are not "real-time" so the cables will have the same result, no data errors. Streaming audio is a different case, real-time.
I am not sure I understand how streaming audio differs from streaming data for USB devices. As I understand it, my USB sound card has a small buffer which is filled with audio samples passed across the USB cable and the size of the buffer is related to the size of the latency that is often quoted. This buffer would seem to need data at a rate of 1.4 Mbits per second (2 channels of 16 bit samples at 44.1kHz) across a USB 2 cable with a speed of 480 Mbits per second. There would not appear to be a problem keeping the buffer full enough or is there?
C'mon folks... having some semblance of an open mind can often lead to "real and solid" discoveries. Such is the case with the USB cable being discussed. I heard it demoed at CES during a comparo with another cable (utilizing an iRoc tethered to an iMac laptop). Half-way through a beautiful George Harrison acoustic cut I stepped into the hallway and called "bjeff" describing what I heard. He then told "Mercman" and the rest is history.
Everyone has an opinion, but that opinion would be a lot more valid if you had heard this cable before posting. It's that simple.
I do not carry/sell Synergistic cables... wish I could, but I don't.
Mercman wrote,
"Let me cut to the chase guys, the Synergistic Research USB cable is in a class of its own; it is simply remarkable. After hearing this cable on three different systems with three different USB DACs, replacement of the Kimber or Belkin USB cables with this cable improved the sound of every DAC used. The improvement was considerable."
Well, I too have heard the Synergitics USB cable in the same systems as Mercman, and without question IT IS in a class of it's own. I have compared it to the Kimber and the Belkin Gold and it's not a fair fight. I have been on the fence about computer/server based audio...the addtion of this cable sealed the fate of my CDP. It is up for sale. Unlike Mercman, I am not using a state of the art USB DAC. Still the effect, for me has been that profound that I can say good-bye to my CDP, with no regrets, and without a thought of looking back.
Clearly this cable is not cheap (as USB cables go), but it with my $1000 DAC has trumped my $8500 CDP.
BTW, we often cite those "comments from the other room". And yes, when the Synergistics USB went in it evoked the "what did you just do, that sounds way better" from my wife (in the next room), almost instantly.
To Ted and his crew at Synergistics, thanks.
Just curious, which $8500 CDP are you are referring to?
bjeff has a Audio Aero Capitole MK II special edition
The Capitole is an upsampler (resampler?) and the iRock is not. I understand why he would prefer the iRock. I also like the sound of NOS dacs.
Thanks for the reply.
QE
bjeff;
For context purposes which non "state of the art" "$1,000" DAC are you using
Using the iRoc. Very very impressive.
Thanks bjeff
This is a great thread! Now in terms of USB DAC performnce and overall value, it begs the questions - does the $1495 iroc WITH Synergistic cable outperform say the V2 (non ASYNC) Wavelength Cosecant (which I happen to use). At this point I'm trying to decide whether the ASYN upgrade on the Cosecant will be worthwhile in view of the iroc performance.
Mercman, maybe you can weigh-in on this since you have been through pretty much all of Gordon's DACS and now have the new ASYNC models for comparison. How would you think that the ASYNC Brick would compare to the non-ASYN Cosecant? How about the V2 Brick versus iroc?
Thanks in advance
dSpringham is correct on the new price of the iRoc. I purchased mine before the price increase.
As Mercman indicated hope to have some comparison information re: iRoc and Brick V2 (ASYNC) within a week.
dspringham,
Its been a long time since I heard a Cosecant. I think the review of the Brick v 2 will help you.
We are in the process of comparing the new Brick to the iRoc. The Brick needs some more break-in time. bJeff and I are working on this together. I will be writing a review on the new Brick once I have a handle on it. The iRoc will be discussed in this review.
Steve, is this the Synergistic Research Tricon USB cable you are referring to?
Where can one find this cable to purchase?
Gary
Gary,
It's the only USB cable they make. Contact a delaer or the company. It is not a product they have begun to truly market yet.
> > Is the Synergistic one meter USB cable worth $550? < < <
Hell, I'd pay 4 times that amount...heh......heh!
Jim,
I spoke to Ted at the Synergistic factory. If they were to build an active bias version of the cable, it would probably cost $1200.
I don't think the USB cable is really priority one for them at this time - even for $550. Remeber, this is not a mass produced item. Belkins are fine for what they deliever. But they are more interested in driving your printer than your high end audio system.
I guess there is something for everyone.
As a programmer, as a network specialist and as an I&C consultant, my work hinges on my understanding of the technology. I have my own opinion on USB and other aspects of technology.
If you are a happy listener then that is really the important thing.
As Joseph Campbell said, "Follow your bliss."
$550 is unbelievable, particularly for 1m.
Did you compare it to Belkin Pro or Belkin Gold?
Both Steve.
Syneristic may not even continue to make this thing. They aren't using prefab wire and the termination process has proved to be very difficult given the quality of available connectors.
If you guys remember, in earlier posts I was very skeptical about this product. I have pissed away more $ for less performance improvements in the past.
What we need is to convince Revelation labs to make a USB cable that is affordable. They make great I2S cables already.
Steve,
I have known Brad Vojtech for several years and purchased a number of his cables. Brad does make a USB cable, but you may want to think twice before ordering from him.
He has been banned from Audiogon because he was taking money and not delivering the cables. My good friend had a terrible time getting his cable after it was paid for from Brad.
At this time, consider Brad out of bussiness.
Steve,
Remeber that Synergistic has a dealer network. Also, Brad was charging around $350 for his 1.5 meter USB cable.
I've heard differences in usb cables. Makes me wonder how robust usb is for out to DAC purposes. I'll spend this kind of money on a cable only after I've decided on a new DAC, which I am unsure about at this time.
Some people really stand by using a Fireface out to spdif to any ol dac you want...I don't know yet.
Been doing lots of software changes (xxhe constantly changes) and some other changes in the system... but going for a new dac is always on my mind...but not yet. Synergistic puts out good cables though; I'm sure it has a great presentation.
Acer Aspire 9500 laptop Pentium 1.73GHz w/ 2 gigs ram, Vista Premium 32 bit, WAV/CUE files on Hard Drives via firewire, XXHighEnd ver. 0.9T-5 Player Q1 18, player priority nothing,thread priority real-time; Stello 100 USB-DAC nos
USB is as robust as any other real-time digital interface, such as S/PDIF as far as data integrity. The terminations are not as good, but the data integrity seems fine, even with a 16 footer.
Like all cables used in this mode however, they are subject to skin-effect (for real), dispersion and dielectric absorption due to insulators and losses due to resistance. The more you minimize these, the better the cable will sound. If the USB interface is totally buffered and reclocked (such as my Pace-Car or the Wavelength Asynch interfaces), these affects will not matter so such an expensive cable is not necessary. For conventional USB interfaces that use adaptive mode, it does matter.
Steve N.
> > > If the USB interface is totally buffered and reclocked (such as my Pace-Car or the Wavelength Asynch interfaces), these affects will not matter so such an expensive cable is not necessary < < <
Gee, that sounds familiar! THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT I'VE BEEN ARGUING ABOUT USB DACs (Since they rebuffer and reclock)!!! SO WHY DID EVERYONE CONTRADICT ME???
Actually all USB DACs buffer and re-clock the data. So I guess you're saying that expensive USB cables are a waste of money. If you can find a USB DAC that does not buffer and re-clock, please point it out?
All USB DAC's do NOT rebuffer and reclock the data the same way. Some have very shallow buffers, a few bits, and the "reclocking" is either a PLL or ASRC. Neither of these is immune to jitter.
The only USB DAC's that actually buffer and are immune to incoming jitter are: Spoiler with Pace-Car reclocker inside and Wavelength DAC's that support async USB protocol.
What DAC's are you referring to?
Steve N.
If you dismiss dual stage clock recovery PLLs out of hand as not being immune to jitter then there is no sense in re-hashing my original arguments. We'll just go around in circles again. I know John S insists that PLLs are not efficient as well. I don’t buy it but I'll just drop the entire discussion and invite everyone to purchase a $550 USB cable unless they happen to own your above recommended DACs.
Before leaving I will say this. Isn't it remarkable that Broadcast TV, Cable and Satellite can transmit a 1080i signal with synched 5.1 Dolby surround streamed at > 20mbps without error across tens of miles of nothingness but audiophiles have anxiety attacks with pushing less than 20kbps down 1 meter of cable? And reasonably priced dual stage clock recovery PLLs aren't good enough!
Posted by JimOfOakCreek (A) on February 17, 2008 at 20:13:39 "Isn't it remarkable that Broadcast TV, Cable and Satellite can transmit a 1080i signal with synched 5.1 Dolby surround streamed at > 20mbps without error across tens of miles of nothingness but audiophiles have anxiety attacks with pushing less than 20kbps down 1 meter of cable? And reasonably priced dual stage clock recovery PLLs aren't good enough!"
Yea and my Satellite audio / video broadcasts are 100% perfect 100% of the time-I just can't figure out why my english broadcasts look like Japanese lip synching. Digital perfect sound (and sight) forever? I sure am grad I didn't get rid of my old LP's.
I don't have that problem with TW Cable nor with over the air broadcasts (I find PBS always perfect). I don't have Satellite so I can't judge.
Steve,
I have a Wavelength Async Crimson and a Wavelength Async Brick ver 2 here. The Synergistic cable makes a big difference with these DACS.
Are you sure the brick is Async? I though that Gordon had only released async for Crimson and was planning Cosecant.
If this is true, then I dont have an explanation. In theory, if the implementation is done correctly, async should disregard ANY jitter from the USB interface.
Does Gordon use the power from the USB cable for anything in the DAC?
Steve N.
Yeah, I agree, if the interface is async, there should be no effect, unless the cable is one of those crummy stock cables.
Steve,
The version 2 Brick I have now is Async. I don't think Gordon uses the power from the USB cable for the DAC. Gordon will hopefully chime in on this tomorrow. I really have limited knowledge on the engineering end of all of this.
At least he was awhile back.
.
mercman (Steve),
audioengr states that USB cable quality should not make a difference with the new ASYNC format. Is your Crimson not udated with the ASYNC interface and if so, I wonder why there would be a noticable difference with the new cable.
Also, is a USB cable and I2S cable not the same thing - I think I'm confused.
USb is a cable from the computer to the audio converter, usually USB to S/PDIF or USB to I2S. I2S is the interface to the D/A chip. If you do USB to I2S, you avoid the conversions to S/PDIF and the clock recovery from S/PDIF.
The USB cable has one signal pair and a power pair. The S/PDIF cable has a single signal pair. The I2S cable has 3 or 4 signal pairs, usually one data pair SDATA, one L/RCLK or "SYNC" pair, one MCLK or master clock pair and one BCLK, or bit clock pair.
Rio Tubes laid it out for me in the link below about usb & I2S. I'm betting that even with ASYNC or pace car or whatever... the higher your dac/system is in resolution the more one hears digital effects in cables.
Steve
Thanks for addressing USB robustness... I remember I use to drive myself crazy listening to the differences in dig coax cables too (back in the ol cd transport to DAC days). I chose an Orchid cable back then that I liked. So, ya, nothing magical or more robust about coax either I guess.
Hope to talk with you within the year about possible configurations/needs using your stuff.
Acer Aspire 9500 laptop Pentium 1.73GHz w/ 2 gigs ram, Vista Premium 32 bit, WAV/CUE files on Hard Drives via firewire, XXHighEnd ver. 0.9T-5 Player Q1 18, player priority nothing,thread priority real-time; Stello 100 USB-DAC nos
Certainly both S/PDIF and USB cables can cause timing effects or jitter. This is why better cables in both cases can improve the sound with most interfaces.
Is the Synergistic one meter USB cable worth $550? No, it is worth twice this amount.
Twice???? LOL
Dynaudio Rules,I'm a little surprised at your response. Have you heard this cable?
You own AudioQuest stuff. Hey, you can get a great deal on interconnects and speaker cables at Target.
I remember when audiophiles thought wire was just wire. Do you recall the Fulton Golds? I think not.
Hey man, don't break my balls without even auditioning the goods.
Steve
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: