The Absolute Sound "review" of USB cable reads suspiciously like a press releaste
My approach is to try to provide the cleanest signal possible from streamer to DAC within reason, if for nothing other than peace of mind. This does not include cables made from unobtainium however.No need for unobtainium or exotic metals as long as you adhere to USB 2.0 regs, which require: copper wire of the appropriate gauges, a real aluminum sheath and not some aluminum vapor deposited onto some cheap, thin mylar sheet covering 100% of the cable, a copper sheath covering 65% of the cable, and able to meet transmission rates. Think of all the meat you buy and realize that not one major meat packing company meets USDA requirements, yet the meat has the USDA stamp of approval on it. Same goes for USB 2.0 compliant cables. Do your due diligence and you'll find companies that'll gladly appraise you of what's inside their cables, meeting or exceeding standards, that won't break the bank. All the best, Nonoise |
A sufficiently corrupted data stream cannot be reconstructed at the receiving end, but the corrupted packets can be identified and dropped.Agreed. The reviewer did state that it would result in dropouts, affect depth, dynamics, impact and sound staging. As for any effects on ambience and/or shimmer, I'd have to hear it for myself as I've heard differences in those aspects with different cabling and from cleaning up noise on the AC. All the best, Nonoise |
@wynpalmer4, I appreciate and respect your background on this matter and would like to know, or clear up, the matter of the signal being corrupted when being transmitted by a poorly made USB cable. First, did you read the link I provided on the previous page and if so, did it correctly describe what happens with USB transmission? Second, if so, then does it make sense that a corrupted data stream cannot be faithfully reconstructed on the receiving end? All the best, Nonoise |
Hey andy2, Well, I summarized what another reviewer mentioned, so I'll post the link here:https://6moons.com/audioreview_articles/audiocadabra/ The beginning of the review has a primer for the hows and whys of USB cables. In it, he states that the audio signal has to arrive in an uncorrupted form as it cannot be reassembled on the receiving end, it being not just ones and zeros, but a signal current representing ones and zeros. Once the representation of the signal is damaged (by jitter), it's over. Or something like that. He's been around a long time and knows a thing or two about asynchronous USB architecture as well. All the best, Nonoise |
It's not just ones and zeros. Like stated, it's a representation of ones and zeros (+200mv for one, -200mv for zero) and it must be stable and unaffected. Per USB regs, USB 2.0 cable must have an aluminum shield covering 100% of the cable and a copper shield covering at least 65% of the cable, and it must handle a 90ohm impedance while conveying 480mB of data density per second. Also, the data wires must be at least 28GA copper and the power wires 20-28GA. How many, crummy, off the shelf or amazon bought USB cables does anyone think meet those requirements? Or just barely using crappy quality materials? All the best, Nonoise |
@jond , Agreed. I've seen this type of thing many times before with other releases of new product. Sometimes, when perusing reviews at dailyaudiophile.com, I'll notice a few sites that have the very same mention of the very same product. Some don't even bother to change a word while others edit it slightly, to give their readers the impression that they were the ones to discover it. It looks like what TAS did put their spin on a simple press release. What I don't understand is some here getting a good case of the vapors. All the best, Nonoise |
