USB Cable Shootout

thsmith

I pretty sure Solid was joking. The DAC 2 does go through a pretty ugly burn in though. I figure it has 325 hours on it at this point.

thsmith

zingo wrote: »

Here is my bottom line on the cable debate; if you enjoy listening to cables, knock yourself out. If you don't, that's fine but don't poo-poo someone who does. Whether the cable chaser is right or wrong, that is how they enjoy spending their time and money, and that's great for them. Please don't be so bitter or negative that you can't allow someone else to do something that they enjoy, even if you don't enjoy it or understand it.

+1 Jake !

Lietuvis91

oh c'mon, gimpod's post has GREAT entertainment value, especially if you read through tonyb's follow up (haha!).

It's funny that just recently I and someone else posted about our same exact experiences comparing two different sets of speaker wires. If there really was no difference, how is it that I and an unrelated party, magically "imagined" the same exact differences in sound characteristics when comparing the two wire sets?! Clearly.... we must both be nuts, and are, or should be, on the same drugs. :rolleyes:

Just ignore the haters... that'll speak the loudest

heiney9

zingo wrote: »

A DAC does have an analog output stage, so wouldn't that have to burn in?

I would think all the analog components in the output stage would need to burn in. I have experienced burn in in so many audio devices/cables that I have no doubt burn in occurs in a DAC.

H9

gimpod

tonyb wrote: »

Wow, thanks for that insight Gimpod, I best run over to staples for a box of those high end paperclips then. Should I get the ones with the silver coating, or the gold ones ? Gold is suppose to be better and the ones with the shiney smooth coating must transfer signal better than the ones with the rougher nickel coating.

tonyb, Actually I prefer the rusty ones you know the ones your dad bought 15 - 20 years ago and have been buried in the back of his tool shed ever since and you do realize the older and rustier they are the better they sound.


















Sorry guys I can't help myself, I'm sick and need help!

Face

I don't believe there have been any harmful posts in this thread, just some good info and some kidding around, no need to get upset anyone.

thsmith

I will be adding the Wireworld starlight to the shootout.

I have always struggled to provide reviews on equipment or tweaks.

Are there any guidelines or questionaires I could use to help make this shootout more meaningful?

gimpod

heiney9 wrote: »

I would think all the analog components in the output stage would need to burn in. I have experienced burn in in so many audio devices/cables that I have no doubt burn in occurs in a DAC.

H9

I have to agree. All electronic components require a settling / burn in period in order to preform at there best this go's for analog or digital, in the signal path or not.

sucks2beme

I would think that optical connections wouldn't have much difference.
There's an extra conversion layer at both sides to add into the fray as well.
Analog=cable has effect.
Optical=???not????
USB=remains to be seen how much effect. My theory is to a point it may make a difference.
Bad cables will stand out. once you reach a point, differences flatten out. The question is, what is that point?
I don't expect tonal differences so much as clarity when that point is reached.
But hey, as long as someone else is footing the bill, I'm looking forward to the results.

codyc1ark

gimpod wrote: »

Sorry guys I can't help myself, I'm sick and need help!

Quit telling us things we already know!

Can't wait to hear your results, I recently did some a/b on some ic's and I'm disappointed with my results. I'm led to believe that it's my sources fault after all, now I'm sure on what upgrade is next.

Good luck!

EndersShadow

codyc1ark wrote: »

I recently did some a/b on some ic's and I'm disappointed with my results.

Not to threadjack, but do tell..... via PM so we keep this thread clean......

PrazVT

The W4S manual specifies something like 200 hrs of break in time for the DAC-1 if I recall correctly - and it did take a good amt of time for the DAC to mellow, so I'm pretty sure burn in includes DACs as well.

I won't say much on the digital cable front. I have a healthy dose of skepticism - but I will say when I changed out my BJC digital coax for a Signal Silver digital coax (for the SB -> W4S connection), I could have sworn there was a noticeable difference.

On the other hand, I couldn't tell the difference b/t a run of the mill toslink cable and an Analysis Plus one.

Anyway - interested to see the outcome of the comparo.

thsmith

PrazVT wrote: »

The W4S manual specifies something like 200 hrs of break in time for the DAC-1 if I recall correctly - and it did take a good amt of time for the DAC to mellow, so I'm pretty sure burn in includes DACs as well.

I won't say much on the digital cable front. I have a healthy dose of skepticism - but I will say when I changed out my BJC digital coax for a Signal Silver digital coax (for the SB -> W4S connection), I could have sworn there was a noticeable difference.

On the other hand, I couldn't tell the difference b/t a run of the mill toslink cable and an Analysis Plus one.

Anyway - interested to see the outcome of the comparo.

Try a Kimber dl60, it is sweet cable.

SolidSqual

zingo wrote: »

A DAC does have an analog output stage, so wouldn't that have to burn in?

You guys crack me up. One word . . .

fa?ce?tious   [fuh-see-shuhs] adjective
1.
not meant to be taken seriously or literally: a facetious remark.
2.
amusing; humorous.
3.
lacking serious intent; concerned with something nonessential, amusing, or frivolous: a facetious person.



As an aside, another shootout that I would be seriously interested in reading is a shootout between Firewire and USB Dacs at certain price points.

Polkitup2

I use the Wyred 4 Sound USB cable with my DAC-2. It was a noticeable improvement from the stock and Audioquest cable I tried.

thsmith

Polkitup2 wrote: »

I use the Wyred 4 Sound USB cable with my DAC-2. It was a noticeable improvement from the stock and Audioquest cable I tried.

Which AQ CABLE?

thsmith

The guy that is doing this with me that has the 2nd system we will be using just added Chronos Labs Athena Silver/Copper USB Cable to the shoot out.

Still looking for ideas and feedback on how we can evaluate the cables. We have not done this before and are looking for guidelines to make this as useful as possible. This shoot out now has 6 cables to evaluate.

Face

Tonality, bass quality, spacial cues(imaging, soundstage).

falconcry72

Face wrote: »

Tonality, bass quality, spacial cues(imaging, soundstage).

Good thoughts. Also: clarity, dynamics, and overall richness.

thsmith

Ok, that will work. What about base lining the listeners to the system before comparing cables?

Looking to pic 3 songs that all listeners are very families with.

Should the listeners have a card with the above characteristics for each cable to rate and make comments or as a group discuss and agree on how each cable sounded? Well, I doubt we will agree but capture the review somehow.

Polkitup2

thsmith wrote: »

Which AQ CABLE?

Cinnamon

heiney9

Decay especially of something like a crash cymbal or a bass line.

A few things that stood out to me when evaluating a new linear power supply vs. the stock walwart with my SQB were the decay of cymbals as well as the "space" around all the instruments in a particular song. The bass with the walwart seemed like a ball rolling of a shelf, like it just hit a wall and stopped. With the linear PS, it kept extending to a natural decay or roll off.

These are the kinds of things to listen for and make notes. I did this over and over for a few weeks with about 3-4 very familiar songs. It can get tedious listening for differences, but it's really the only way to do it. If you use too many songs it gets more confusing because you need to do a lot of repetition and more than 3-4 songs just doesn't work as well, to much stimulus IMO.

H9

thsmith

Thanks H9, Decay is a definate area. I find this more of a problem with Digital than analog.

Here is the updated list of cables and evaluation areas.

Stock W4S cable that came with DAC 2, need to measure the lenght. Cost is price of owning DAC 2
Belkin Gold Series, 6'. Cost $7
Nirvana USB 1m without power leads. Cost $60
Kimber Silver 1m. Cost $50
Audioquest Carbon .75m. Cost $118
Wireworld Starlight 1m. Cost $99
Chronos Labs Athena Silver/Copper USB Cable (power leads lifted) 1m. Cost $379

Evaluation Areas:
Tonality
Bass quality
Spacial cues(imaging, soundstage)
Clarity
Dynamics
Overall richness
Decay

I think you are right H9, with 7 cables we should limit the evaluation to 2 songs that cover a lot of ground.

heiney9

I used one particular track off an Audioquest reference cd. Listened to it over and over switching the power supplies in and out. It was amazing the differences I heard when I listened for specific things.

Attack (snap) on the snare was better, the room acoustics were more pronounced, background singers were clearer not only in voice, but in the soundstage position, decay from a crash cymbal was longer and the crash was clearer, bass was extended, a certain crispness and clarity was added to the recording. All with the better power supply for the SQB. But, I admit you have to listen for these things (sometimes over and over) to notice them. A casual listen with both power supplies didn't reveal all the nuances. I can tell you, once you notice they are there, when you take them away, in my case using the lesser power supply, it becomes glaringly apparent something is missing.

H9

thsmith

There are reference CDs for stuff like this ? I need to check this out. FInding A song that covers all the evaluation points would surely make testing easier and consistant.

heiney9

I also noticed more soundstage "height" with the better power supply. It was slight, but nevertheless it was there and sounded better. And again, after noticing it and then taking it away by using the lesser power supply it was obvious.

This experiment took me about a month of different listening sessions to finally determine the differences, so it's not a short process if you want a really honest and good impression between whatever you are testing.

H9

thsmith

heiney9 wrote: »

I also noticed more soundstage "height" with the better power supply. It was slight, but nevertheless it was there and sounded better. And again, after noticing it and then taking it away by using the lesser power supply it was obvious.

This experiment took me about a month of different listening sessions to finally determine the differences, so it's not a short process if you want a really honest and good impression between whatever you are testing.

H9

Yep, I am starting to see that. When I was testing my Jolida CDP againest my Rotel I could simply change inputs on preamp which made for listening for differences quick.

In this case we will need to shut down the MAC and DAC to change cables, get everything loaded back up and start evaluation. I find the more time between comparsions the harder it is.

heiney9

thsmith wrote: »

In this case we will need to shut down the MAC and DAC to change cables, get everything loaded back up and start evaluation. I find the more time between comparsions the harder it is.

That's why I make notes, mental and physical. It's also why a minimum of familiar songs should be used. It's also why I advocate a long period of evaluation so things are repeatable several times. In the early stages each time you listen you will notice more and more differences and as you progress the changes will level out, then you will start to focus on differences based on the changes you heard/noted.

Since you have so many variables (the cables) I would think taking physical notes is a must, even if they are broad notes. Using more than 2-3 variables makes this challenging. I can't imagine if I hda to evaluate 7 different power supplies for the SQB, I'd probably go insane. :eek:

H9

falconcry72

May I make a humble recommendation of testing tracks?

- Steely Dan; Two Against Nature: "Gaslighting Abbey"
- Steely Dan; Two Against Nature: "Almost Gothic"
-

heiney9

falconcry72 wrote: »

May I make a humble recommendation of testing tracks?

- Steely Dan; Two Against Nature: "Gaslighting Abbey"
- Steely Dan; Two Against Nature: "Almost Gothic"
-

I will only make one other suggestion. While I have no doubt those are great tracks, if one is not all that familair with them I wouldn't use them for evaluation. IMO, the evaluator should use material they are already intimately familiar with. In my case, I wouldn't be familiar enough with those tracks to actually use them for evalutation. I suppose one could get "familiar" with them over the test period.

Again, this is just how I do it, there is no right or wrong way. Consistency is most important, IMO.

H9