USB Cable Poll: Redux

[Robert]

Not really. What we lose in artisan tree carpaccio editions, we more than gain on tablet and PDF sales. I don't think we'll follow Tone Audio and go fully e-edition any time soon, because there's still a perceived gravitas extended to the printed word that doesn't have the same resonance in the online space, especially when it comes to international readers.

If and when the day comes when we turn the presses off, it'll be mixed emotions. It'll be a shame the magazine loses its paper edges, but we won't miss the print bill and the mandatory in-store promotional costs.

It must surely be a natural process and not something to be forced or gambled with.
Hi-Fi is currently a middle age to old mans game and many such folk are used to printed pages. But they're dying off, and younger enthusiasts don't have the same expectation or emotional connection to the printed magazine.

Sorry to be morbid but a decade from now we'll have lost a fair few at the older end. The younger enthusiasts, even if small in number will be fully attuned to the world of digital media.
I think we're slap bang in the middle of a major transitional period at the moment, both in terms of products and how we wish to read about them.

 

[Fox]

I think I'd feel a bit grimy and pervy buying an old skool hifi magazine from a newsagents to be honest. "Titties and Tech3" no prob "throbbing red car (featuring giant dual fuel jugs)" no problem, WHF or HiFiWürld or DIYHiFi (featuring acrylic laser cutting ROI machinist) no no and no. It's the sort of unsettling creepy with added "I haven't showered today" vibes about it. Its all a bit of a head**** to be honest to think such anachronisms as Turntable reviews and HDMI cable shoot outs still exist in this world of instant top-quality impartial advice we get on the Internet.

 

[Mescalito]

I think I'd feel a bit grimy and pervy buying an old skool hifi magazine from a newsagents to be honest. "Titties and Tech3" no prob "throbbing red car (featuring giant dual fuel jugs)" no problem, WHF or HiFiWürld or DIYHiFi (featuring acrylic laser cutting ROI machinist) no no and no. It's the sort of unsettling creepy with added "I haven't showered today" vibes about it. Its all a bit of a head**** to be honest to think such anachronisms as Turntable reviews and HDMI cable shoot outs still exist in this world of instant top-quality impartial advice we get on the Internet.

To be perfectly honest, I don't think I've actually seen a Hi FI mag on the racks for years.

Chris

 

[Robert]

To be perfectly honest, I don't think I've actually seen a Hi FI mag on the racks for years.

Chris

They definitely don't have the prominence on the shelf these days.
Catching a train from Stratford the other day and looking in WHS for a mag to read on the journey - nothing!

 

[whatsnext]

To be perfectly honest, I don't think I've actually seen a Hi FI mag on the racks for years.

Chris

and I haven't looked for years

 

[maxflinn]

Sorry to be morbid but a decade from now we'll have lost a fair few at the older end. The younger enthusiasts, even if small in number will be fully attuned to the world of digital media.
I think we're slap bang in the middle of a major transitional period at the moment, both in terms of products and how we wish to read about them.

+1, It's an inevitable transition.

 

[Robert]

and I haven't looked for years

I was a nerdy child who'd scan the newsagent's shelves every few days during school break eagerly looking for the latest issues of everything hi-fi. So now I'm one of the middle aged fogeys still needing his paper fix.
Though this only applies to audio magazines. Anything else and its digital editions.

 

[Joe Hutch]

Of course, if we printed the magazine on art paper, made every review 200 words long spread over eight pages of high-key photography, had a few pictures of those French tumbler glasses with artisan beer cocktails being served by some bearded stick insect to his vapid, fatuous 'friends' while gathered round a Dansette in the back of a VW Camper van, while a cheery fat bloke strums a ukelele, charged £30 an issue and called it something "fidEL", I could probably sell a few copies in Selfridges.

You could go downmarket instead; thinner paper, with garish pictures of TV reality 'stars' on the front, lots of 'a peep inside slebs homes' features, with discreet product placement of Naim, Audio Research et al.

Roy Gregory could have a 'money saving tips' column, pointing out the genuine hifi bargains to be had amongst five-figure loudspeakers.

Reflecting the demographic of the typical hifi enthusiast, the adverts should be mostly for comfy slacks, slip-on shoes and walk-in baths.

 

[h.g.]

I don't think 'dishonest' is the right term.

Enthusiasts sincerely think that - for whatever reason - USB cables have an effect on sound quality. Such enthusiasts will seek out a similar thought process in the enthusiast magazines they choose to read, and websites they choose to visit. As a result, the magazines are staffed by enthusiasts, and the whole scenario becomes self-selecting.

Paradoxically, I believe that a dishonest statement under these circumstances would be someone who sincerely thinks a USB cable sounds different, but claims they hear nothing to retain some modicum of credibility in the non-enthusiast world.

Audiophile jounalists will write good, glowing or best ever reviews about the sound of audiophile USB cables despite them being indistinguishable under controlled conditions. This appears to be dishonest. Whether it is dishonest requires more knowledge about what was involved when choosing the level of enthusiasm to express: tossed a coin, got to keep the cable and sell it on ebay, best ever review likely to lead to a long term loan of mega speakers, etc... The lack of information does tend to fuel suspicions. Of course this assumes the reader is neutral and informed rather than an enthusiastic believer in the sound of audiophile USB cables.

 

[Fox]

"Free trial application of anusol with every purchase."

I do recall I saw some copies of plush a few years ago round that Blzebub's place and he apologetically told me he was given them by a dealer, I believe him because while the car magazines pages were virtually sticking together, and were utter utter porn; the HiFi Plush was pristine: uncracked perfect bound spine, dreadful stuff inside, really just not my sort of thing, there was something to do with Wilson Benesch, I think, the music reviews were cryptic and showed little real engagement with the music and after a few paragraphs I was "oh god what's the point?" it actually made me feel less interested in HiFi than I already was and that is an impressive feat. Like being cornered at a party by a computer nerd.

It had a sickly malaise about it, a complete lack of enthusiasm and in its zeal at not talking down or up at the reader it was not talking at me either. Like reading something in a doctor's surgery. I really think the traditional hifi magazine, as it currently exists, is over.

 

[Alan Sircom]

Reflecting the demographic of the typical hifi enthusiast, the adverts should be mostly for comfy slacks, slip-on shoes and walk-in baths.

That's not really fair. Bristol, Munich, Estoril, and most of the Far Eastern and eastern European shows are very well frequented, with a good proportion of 'lads and dads', and even dads with their own hair and hair colour.

Events like T.H.E. Show are fully zimmerated now, but there are newcomers getting interested in audio. They are coming from the head-fi and the retro vinyl ends of the market. Most tend to go for good one-box solutions with floorstanders (you can divvy up the new bloods into those buying SuperUnitis with PMCs, and those buying Devialets with Sonus fabers).

What they aren't doing is engaging with the full geekery of the hobby. They are reading reviews, usually as promo PDFs from the manufacturers or on a Google search, but they aren't buying the mags, downloading the mags or going to forums, because all that is 'digital immigrant' stuff, and they are digital natives.

 

[ItemAudio]

Your comment was with regards to USB cables, suggesting that the Japanese market was less sceptical(wise).

I asked you to back that up. Still am really. You seem to misrepresent everything these days.

Here's how it actually went, so you can track the warpage. In post 281, I said:

“The press has barely paid any attention to audio USB cables. The market for them - although growing - is still small. The buying readership in the UK is not digital-literate enough to be interested: it doesn't sell copies. There isn't much advertising revenue attached to it. Cable reviews of any sort are a turn-off and will be interpreted by part of the audience as 'foo' - digital doubly so. It's very different in Japan . . .”

You replied:

“How? Do you have links to any Stereo Sound cable reviews? . . . Still waiting for those Stereo Sound review links Item. Incredible how many requests for any form of verification you seem to miss.”

Confused, I pointed out: “I haven't promised links to Stereo Sound reviews. I don't read Stereo Sound. I've never mentioned Stereo Sound . . . please see [Kent Poon] You'll notice that Stereo Sound has a subsidiary publication devoted to [computer audio], called DigiFi. Instead of being able to support three dedicated computer audio magazines, the creaky UK market struggles with copy sales unless there's a turntable or soundbar on the cover. ”

If (for whatever reason) you're still looking for USB cable reviews by Stereo Sound in Japanese, I would imagine they put them in their specialised computer audio publication, DigiFi. There are plenty of USB cables dotted around the web in English and European languages, though. Again, Google's searchiness is your friend.

 

[Robert]

That's not really fair. Bristol, Munich, Estoril, and most of the Far Eastern and eastern European shows are very well frequented, with a good proportion of 'lads and dads', and even dads with their own hair and hair colour.

Events like T.H.E. Show are fully zimmerated now, but there are newcomers getting interested in audio. They are coming from the head-fi and the retro vinyl ends of the market. Most tend to go for good one-box solutions with floorstanders (you can divvy up the new bloods into those buying SuperUnitis with PMCs, and those buying Devialets with Sonus fabers).

What they aren't doing is engaging with the full geekery of the hobby. They are reading reviews, usually as promo PDFs from the manufacturers or on a Google search, but they aren't buying the mags, downloading the mags or going to forums, because all that is 'digital immigrant' stuff, and they are digital natives.

Thank you for the insight Alan.
Always good to learn about happenings outside of audio nerdyland, and further afield.

 

[Paul R]

In terms of 'the longer the better', wouldn't at some point interference overtake the signal being carried, given that I beleive they are carrying analog pulses, (squarewave)? Say, e.g. 10,000 mile cable, would it lock? Sorry for the extreme example, it just goes against my mantra of shortest is best.

I think physical reality overtakes you at some point. And a 10000 mile cable might require some rather entertaining installation.

To take advantage of this theory there is clearly a window of suitable cable lengths, which will depend somewhat on the sample rates you choose to use. We want the time a signal takes to travel twice the cable length to be a bit greater than the transition time of an edge, and much less than the time between edges. I think about 20ns/metre is a good rule of thumb for signal travel. The cable has to be shorter than the maximum for secure transmission. Which for AES3 BNC 75R connections is 1000m. FWIW.

I'd have thought 2 or 3 meters would be worth a try. Good 75R coax doesn't cost very much at all, you could even try satellite feeder, with either adaptors or reterminated in BNC. Or phono if really necessary.

Paul

 

[darrenyeats]

It's both.

I get that you accept some dropouts can be audible, but your statements are still mutually exclusive.

In the event that no error correction is in place then any problems ... will manifest themselves as audio dropouts, pops, clicks etc, or no sound at all.

especially for audio where we can tolerate a huge number of bad samples without noticing.

 

[Fox]

Except when playing glitch music.
Ha!

 

[whatsnext]

if we're honest - most audio equipment is actually pretty same-sounding in the overall scheme of things. The whole exercise is counting angels dancing on pinheads - where do you draw the line?
.

Refreshing to see.

 

[Alan Sircom]

Audiophile jounalists will write good, glowing or best ever reviews about the sound of audiophile USB cables despite them being indistinguishable under controlled conditions. This appears to be dishonest. Whether it is dishonest requires more knowledge about what was involved when choosing the level of enthusiasm to express: tossed a coin, got to keep the cable and sell it on ebay, best ever review likely to lead to a long term loan of mega speakers, etc... The lack of information does tend to fuel suspicions. Of course this assumes the reader is neutral and informed rather than an enthusiastic believer in the sound of audiophile USB cables.

Stepping back from the cynical, have you considered the possibility that the person writing the review is also an enthusiast? If the reader is an enthusiastic believer in the sound of audiophile USB cables, then why can't the same thing apply to the person writing the review?

For the record, I've had the best part of 30 USB cables in for review to date. I've reviewed two formally, and mentioned three in despatches. I have one more on the roster. The rest have been sent back because they did not sound as good as a freebie beige one I got with an old Kodak printer. And of the three mentioned in dispatches, two I didn't like the sound of, while others on the blind panel liked them. We liked and disliked them for the same reasons but in different priorities. All but three of those cables (and the one that is work in progress) have been sent back; two of the three are in our storage unit awaiting collection and the last one is acting as 'winner stays on' reference point. It is not the best one, but I feel morally obligated to buy back the best one and I don't have the thousands of pounds it will cost me to buy it.

However, unless something comes along that manifestly improves on the performance of that cable, I will be spending the cost of a eight year old Mercedes estate on a USB cable. I can proffer no rational explanation why it does what it does, other than the merest sliver of at best questionable scientific or engineering explanations dreamed up by the people involved. However, I am confident enough in my own findings to have some skin in this game. And, for my part, an eight year old Mercedes estate would be a far better use of my money.

Now, here's the thing: the whole test criteria that I use for evaluating these cables might be mistaken. I might be flooding the tests with expectation bias, in precisely the same way as anyone who takes one of these cables out and listens to it might be flooding their test with expectation bias. But how come there are a whole bunch of no-thanks letters attached to USB cables being sent back? More importantly, how can people independently report the same criticisms levelled at the same cable under blind conditions? One person saying 'it makes things sound large' would be an outlier. But six saying the same specific thing independently (some saying it in a positive sense, some a negative)? How does that work?

So... are you calling me dishonest?

 

[ItemAudio]

According to local lore, what you say is impossible, therefore you are dishonest or stupid. Someone probably paid you to say that. Either way your credibility is shot.

Holy crap - unless it is possible . . .

 

[maxflinn]

I wonder if the chap that wrote this review of very expensive USB cables is dishonest, or imagining?

http://www.topaudiogear.com/index.php/kimber-select-usb-cables/