AES/EBU cable shootout

@rudyb 

You didn’t cause any issues. Questions, explanations, debate and answers have always been welcome at Audiogon.

I was at a dinner some years ago with some really smart people (definitely not me) where part of the room was contemplating investing in the company represented by the other part of the room.

One of the key leaders in the company in question also happened to enjoy music and while he didn’t have an elaborate system by some standards, he was a streaming only user. This was in the earliest (pre JayZ) days of Tidal. Unprovoked, when he found out I was also streaming my music, he became quite animated and we had a terrific conversation. I came away with a quasi explanation that satisfied my curiosity and also has guided my streaming decisions since. I asked the question why some streamed music sounded different than the same track from the same hard drive streamed differently. At the time I was struggling with why USB feeding a Berkeley USB to SPDIF converter sounded better than USB direct to the same dac.

The explanation he gave was well over my head but it was clear to me he had given it a great deal of thought. He explained that not only does ethernet and USB data transmission have error correction built in, it was designed to deal with the errors because there errors are a foregone conclusion. The premise is that errors are to be expected because they will ALWAYS be present so the protocols were designed to deal with the presence of errors. The reason it isnt a big deal with most data is that the absolute timing of the data and more importantly, the lack of requirement for CONTIGUOUS data isn’t necessary in most applications. If a one billion dollar electronic transfer from bank to bank begins “on-time” and concludes 1 millisecond later than expected, it isnt a big deal. In fact, its a desired outcome in that it is likely that the data was error checked. Now, imagine streaming music. It absolutely requires proper buffering. FULL STOP. You cant have the data stream begin and then “error check” on the fly. Jittery at best, drop outs at worst. SO, how is the buffering performed, how much of the data is able to be buffered into memory, what and how is the data streamed from the buffer and what/where/method is the clocking/reclocking performed? There was alot more to the conversation and todays streamers/dacs do a wonderful job with the challenge. Some do it better than others and some do it completely differently.

Anyway, fast forward to today. We are still in the process of understanding why certain materials, lengths of cable, shielding or lack thereof along with which method of transmission provides the best results and which do not. But it is audible. Ive tried to buy equipment from companies that seem to have a grasp of the importance of timing, lower jitter and clocking. The good news for us all is that most of what’s available today does a decent job of dealing with the aforementioned. Its when we get to the point where we are trying to maximize performance. The bits are bits camp just simply havent explored the topic deeply enough to understand how much there is to be discovered.

@rudyb you are welcome and keep the curiosity going. It depends on your dac and how much buffering it can do and its internal methodology but yes, in general, the fewer steps, processes and handoffs will typically result in fewer challenges.

$5k spent today represents bleeding edge from 10 years ago. Read up about products from Innuos, Antipodes, Aurender, Grimm and Taiko on the streamer side of the equation and Audio Note, Bricasti, DCS, Holo, PS Audio and Totaldac on the dac side of the equation. No two do it the same way but each of these companies (and there are many others) are pushing the boundaries of what is possible. For instance, Audio Note isn’t doing much different today than it did 20 years ago but they don’t try to manipulate the data, they just want a well clocked spdif data signal. Six figure systems are anchored by Audio Note dacs. Try things, listen and see what you think. If you hear no differences then you are done. If you hear differences that are pleasing…then the $$$ problems begin. LOL. Best wishes.

Some people hear night and day differences between USB cables (I did when I utilized USB) and some hear night and day differences between AES/SPDIF digital cables (I hear differences, just not night and day)…it all depends on your environment and gear.

@panzrwagn no one owes you anything. You hopped onto a thread where the OP tested multpile AES cables in his system. He heard differences. I’ve heard differences and don’t recall anyone soliciting your wise counsel.

@panzrwagn since you’ve determined there is no difference, then for you there is no difference. Congrats.

But for those who have heard differences…positive differences…considerable positive differences by optimizing cables and optimizing their ethernet chain, your vast and relevant experience in IT becomes moot. They hear the differences clearly that you say don’t exist.

No one is questioning the validity of your experience. In fact, no one has asked you anything. Before commenting further, your words might carry more weight if you actually bothered to listen to two different cables and then opine. 

@invalid alot of the better studios do indeed use better cables, especially if they are audiophile oriented. Steve Hoffman, Gray, et al.

@panzrwagn you still seem to be in the wrong thread. This isn’t the thread asking retired IT guys if digital cable quality matters in hifi, this is the thread where the original poster communicated what he heard between multiple digital cables. For those of us who hear clearly the differences, your opinion doesn’t seem to overlay well with our experience.

Also, you may want to recheck your “facts”…spdif/aes data doesn’t get resent.

@panzrwagn @david1964 you are both well-intentioned, intelligent gentlemen, of that I’m sure. You are both technically correct in an ASR kind of way and yet, here we are….other well-intentioned, reasonably intelligent souls have experienced audible results that are inconsistent with you two fine gentlemen as well as many others. Many of us also may have once been in your camp but managed to keep an open mind and try things from time to time.

I have found alot of the high end fussiness to varying degrees of “less effective” than others have communicated be they footers, some cables, power conditioners, etc, etc. You don’t have to believe that there are considerable gains (or less degradation) to be had by utilizing different digital cables, thats cool. I too was skeptical before trying them. I don’t understand why one well made cable sounds better or worse than another but I have experienced it and made choices based on what I hear.

@panzrwagn  You made a claim earlier in the thread that you had tested some cables and found no differences but you didn’t say what cables you tried and with what gear. I cringe though that you might think I’m asking you to share it with us with a blow by blow recap, which I am absolutely NOT doing. Your test was sufficient for you with your gear in your home. Our tests are sufficient for us so again I wonder what your motivation is participating in a thread where some fellow audiogon members are exchanging ideas and commentary about WHAT THEY HAVE HEARD, IN THEIR OWN SYSTEMS. What is your motivation and what can you possibly add to the dialogue?

@donavabdear 

So just think of this, everyone agrees the signal isn’t going to get any better because of cables. 

Using your logic then, do cables on the recording side of the equation do any harm? If so, and there are cables on the playback side of the equation that do less harm than others, then wouldn’t they by default do some good?

Believe me, I’m not trying to debate things with experts…its just that so many of us hear absolute, undebateable improvements between various cable brands. The only thing I’m certain of is there are those who are certain I’m imagining things….and they are incorrect.