 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
70.152.116.33
In Reply to: Re: low end digital cables sufficient? posted by badbear on October 4, 2005 at 09:14:25:
[ It's easy to imagine the expensive cable having some mysterious improvement on the sound, but it's simply euphonics. ]Unfortunately, no, it's not just 'euphonics'. Different digital cables have different bandwidth, different levels of shielding, different susceptibility to ground loops, diferent levels of dielectric signal involvement, all of which can affect the jitter level AT THE DAC.
See:
http://www.geocities.com/jonrisch/jitter.htm
for starters, noting the large number of references and citations, many of which lead to other references and citations.[Good converters incorporating a phase locked loop (PLL) will cancel any jitter on the spot.]
Just not correct, not technically, or in practice.
Many DACs and CDPs actually use the digital signal itself as a timing reference, and no PLL, no crystal, nothing known to man can totally eliminate jitter from a digital audio data stream. The best designed PLL can only reduce jitter, and then, only within a certain bandwidth. It is techincally impossible to reject ALL jitter 'frequencies', because then, the PLL couldn't work, and there is no way to make a brick-wall filtered PLL that works in the real world.
See the various citations I referenced in the above web page.
Now, you do use the Benchmark DAC, which BTW, makes some pretty amazing and over the top claims about "jitter immunity", and yes, it is much better than average in terms of jitter susceptibility.
But many audiophiles have heard cables sound different with the Benchmark, and found that it does NOT have "total jitter immunity".
See:
http://www.AudioAsylum.com/audio/digital/messages/55974.html
where I discuss some particulars about the DAC1 unit.[ Save your money for better converters, and enjoy the music. ]
That is good advice, AS LONG AS he has a digital cable that is not going to become a limiting factor in the music reproduction. Nor does that take a $1000+ cable, I hacve been consistent in recommending a very cost effective way to get to about the 95-98% quality point with a digital cable, see:
DIY Digital Cables:
http://www.AudioAsylum.com/audio/cables/messages/66862.html
and for comments on how the three sound:
http://www.AudioAsylum.com/audio/cables/messages/46405.htmlA $9.95 Wal-Mart cable just ain't gonna do it. Nor is a $39.99 RS digital or video cable.
Many music lovers and audiophiles have quite a bit of experience with having to deal with digital cables and DACs, and many have found that even though they may be subtle, the devil is in the details.
In your case Bill, I am sure thzat you are familiar with the subtleties of dither algorithms, ann how they can all sound rather unlike one another. SBM, UV22, PowR, etc. All sound different. All of these live below -90 dB, and according to all the hard-headed objective thoeory in the world, should be completley inaudible. But they aren't, and most studio recording folks would get violent if you forcerd them to use their least favorite version.
One more thing for the record: you are publically on record as being pro-DBT. I just think that this information would be invaluable for some of the folks reading this post, as it explains a great many things in a nutshell.
Jon Risch
Follow Ups:
Im sorry Jon, but what does my stance on DBT have to do with anything? I recall getting slammed for using that term before, which was surprising. I use this technique often to decide, for example. which dither might be best for a particular mix. Knowing the dither choice in advance can't help but skew the results, because humans can't help influencing themselves. I also use a Digital Domain VSP digital audio control center which my good friend and former employer (hope I don't get slammed for name dropping) Bob Katz designed with an 'anti-jitter' circuit. It reduces the jitter to the point that it's effects are inaudible. Does it totally remove jitter? Technically, no, but if I can't hear it, then to me it's gone, for my purposes.
Sometimes this technical hairsplitting just clouds the issues. Does the music sound better? Is the jitter a factor anymore?
It's not fair to associate DBT with choices made in the studio. Choices made in the studio are valid subjective decisions based on production values, not device qualification.If jitter is reduced, do you need a DBT to prove it? If dither warms the presentation, do you also need DBT to prove it? No, you accept it because you hear the benefits. Try listening to a cable that offers benefits before slamming high performance options.
I slammed nothing, Duster, just questioned.
Perhaps slam is a hard word, but (you are correct) "cable guy's" POV gets slammed often in this forum. I'm sorry if your intent is honest and not as a write-off naysayer. I hope to hear from you in this forum a test of HQ cables as used in the studio.
Speaking of mastering studios, digital cables, and blind testing...(see link below)
-snip-
Blind Testing
Q.) Has Cardas ever engaged in any blind testing of its cables?
A.) Sure in the early days many, but now days there is so much product in the field and so much agreement on the character of various cables that setting up a double blind would seem silly to most high-end fanatics. However, the recording industry is very cautious and guarded about changes because the stakes are quite high, so a few years ago there was a double blind test done by what is I suppose the top mastering facility in the world, Grundman Mastering. The type of test is one often used in the industry to sort things out. The reason for the test was not to determine whether or not cables sounded different, that was already a given, the tests were to determine which cable sounded best and why.
In this test new mastering facilities were being built in the US and in Japan and cables were requested from all the leading suppliers from Belden to Transparent. Various cuts were mastered to CD changing only the cables. The CD's were sent to a panel of engineers and others and the results tabulated. None of the listeners knew what the difference was between the cuts. The results were easily quantifiable. I think it took a year to complete all the comparisons, in the end, two of the many cables compared proved profoundly superior to the rest. Grundman is now wired with Cardas Neutral Reference. - George
-snip-
Grundman Mastering is *the* big dog mastering facility in LA. Bernie is *not* hoodwinked by "cable myths" (BTW, the studio's monitoring system sounds killer, as I've heard it as a client).
See the following link's, "Blind Testing", section:
- http://www.cardas.com/content.php?area=faqs&content_id=23&pagestring=System+Set+Up (Open in New Window)
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
