I’m always impressed with the creativity employed by audiophiles when it comes to explaining why they couldn’t hear the difference between cables, hi quality music files, etc. in blind testing. I’m no exception, as those of us who do a lot of critical listening tend to develop an over inflated opinion of our ability to hear a flea fart. Of course, such an admission is probably not a good idea for those who profit from reviewing 300$ dongles. At least you had the courage to do a blind test, most refuse, for a number of creative reasons.

I just sold my audioquest carbon usb cable recently after AB testing with an amazon basics cable and not being able to tell any difference between them whatsoever after about 6 hours of testing. Im keeping the basics cable as it works flawlessly for what it is.

Nothing went wrong. The test result is consistent with decades upon decades of blind tests of interconnects.

Nothing went wrong with your blind test apart from it producing a result that you clearly have difficulty accepting. Some vague description from your wife that was elicited under sighted conditions means _absolutely nothing_. While she may not have paid much attention to your videos I suspect she's heard you many times in the past in another room talking about the differences you think you hear and managed to pick up the subjectivist lingo through simple osmosis. Credit where it's due: well done for performing the test and honestly reporting the results. But you'll have to face the fact that full honesty involves accepting the results rather than wriggling around trying to find nebulous reasons you should reject them. The notion that your test was invalidated by the presence of a switch in the circuit or the use of a DAC that didn't cost the earth can be rejected out-of-hand, but a complaint that critical listening made the generic cable sound better is rather amusing.

Damn. I didn't know you were into "usb cable makes a difference."

Thanks for making this vid! We've discussed this topic before. Perhaps in the future you can consider doing an ABX test instead of an A/B test. That will rule out expectation bias. I still don't believe there is a difference, but I fully agree that this is not settled science. Thank you for your honesty, the courage to do a blind test and making a video about it 👍

The fact is that your blind testing results conflicted with your beliefs and you try to justify your beliefs even in the face of these results.......that is what blind testing is suppose to weed out. Can your wife describe 8 out of 10 times times the same description she gave after switch randomly ? How about do a check boxes of different descriptions and she just ticks as she goes......

Science, logic and blind testing tell you there's no audible differences and you choose to believe sighted listening tests that are strongly influenced by expectation and other biases. The price tag, the press hype, the attention to detail on the shiny new cable all affect what we hear. And it happens at a subconscious level as well, so 'i'm open minded', 'i wasn't expecting to hear a difference' doesn't cut it. Glad that you were honest about your doubts and thought processes though.

Just found your channel and I love the work that you do. But as an engineer I'd like to add a few things here, which by the way I love that you're tackling this subject! First and foremost is to breakdown how DACs are connected to the host device using a USB standard. USB protocol dictates that audio devices utilize an isochronous transfer, which means data stream with no error correction to achieve time sensitive data transfer. (Asynchronous and isochronous are different things, all USB audio devices will use isochronous transfer but asynchronous means the target device, aka the DAC, sets and determines the clock for data synchronization). While isochronous transfer does not have error correction, it means there's no delay or retry in the sent data packet. All USB data packets will retain CRC for error detection. In this case if a data packet fails the CRC, the data packet is essentially dropped. Going back to USB cables, what this means that a poorly made USB cable can increase data packet loss due to higher CRC errors, but essentially these packets are just dropped from the stream. It will not transfer the data packet if it is corrupted. This might make the assumption that as long as the data transfers with minimal errors, any single USB cable can work. While this is mostly true there are a few caveats. First, USB up to 2.0 (as common for audio DACs) have Vcc, Ground, Data+, and Data- pinouts. If the DAC in question relies on the voltage from the USB cable, there could be variations in the output due to the sensitivity of the Vcc and Ground signals. To be honest this isn't something I've looked into and depending on how the DAC is implemented may or may not be a factor. The other factor is how the DAC itself handles error correction. If the USB protocol drops a packet then there are a missed frames going into the DAC. The DAC itself will usually employ a filter to handle such errors. How this is done probably varies between companies but could use a type of interpolation that may manifest itself in audible variations. In my personal opinion, the quality of a USB cable only impacts the data packet integrity as most high quality DACs will have a robust power circuit. Additionally, a properly built, shielded USB cable should produce very minimal packet loss, tho CRC errors are inevitable. Any audible changes is a product of lost data packets and/or how the DAC handles missing frames or time alignment issues. Signal degradation is definitely a thing, but if you follow best practices, you'll likely see minimal errors with a simple USB cable. Don't use long cables, and avoid sources of interference like power lines, etc. I would rather save my money on USB cables and use that for purchasing a higher tier headphone, amp, or DAC. Linus Tech Tips has an excellent video that uses a very complete tester suite, albeit on HDMI cables, but the premise is virtually the same. Just on a different format.

How does a string of ones and zeros becomes better with a different cable? Honestly seems dumb... And the inability to differentiate between the two in a blind test puts the final nail in the coffin.

Expectation bias is a common way we fool ourselves.

Here's a question for audiophiles who think that a USB cable makes the difference: What about the interconnects in the computer? What about those SATA cables? What about the cables carrying power from the PSU to the motherboard? What about the computer's motherboard's external connections? Does your motherboard have gold-plated, oxygen-free copper connectors for your USB connector? What about the person who made the digital audio to start with? How about the hard drive itself?

I asked an engineer friend of mine if usb cables could sound better/worse and the answer was “Yes, definitely.” I can’t share the entire explanation since I don’t have the technical expertise to recall it all but in short, cable material, lack of shielding or length can create waveform interruptions that can affect the filtering. USB is a digital signal but it is traveling along an analog path and this signal can have errors/deviations. But you’re right, it’s often not significant if the filters and clocks are doing their job and the cable is decent quality.

USB is a digital format. 1's and 0's. On or Off. It either works or it doesn't. You cant "improve" the sound. As long as the cable is properly shielded from interference. then it should work as its supposed to. I wont fall for snake oil.

A calm, reasoned, balanced point of view. This is wildly inappropriate the internet.

Very interesting video mate

I'm not hearing much difference between USB cables. But how you listen will greatly influence the result.

Timely video! I just spent: - $477 on six USB cables ranging from $12 to $170 - $238 on six pairs of XLR cables ranging from $15/pair to $88/pair - $84 on two XLR headphone cables ranging from $24 to $60 (...and $18 on shipping and $63 on tax.) I plan to mix and match these with my Bifrost 2, Jotunheim 2, and Arya v1 to see whether I can distinguish between them and to determine what's worth keeping (thank goodness for Amazon free returns). Unfortunately, I have no way to blind test them, but if I can't tell whether I prefer the $12 or $170 USB cable or the $15 or $88 XLR cables from A/B testing, then I'll either save my money and go for the cheapest option, opt for the most expensive option just for peace of mind, or maybe just pick the middle-priced option as a compromise. Or maybe just pick whatever I think looks best...lol. I don't have a switch box or two pairs of identical DACs or amps, so A/B testing will be clunky. I'm honestly not expecting to hear any difference (I have a very unrefined sense of taste, smell, and hearing), but I'll be pleasantly surprised if that turns out not to be the case. I'm especially hopeful I'll be able to hear a difference between the $12 and $170 USB cable, but perhaps my chain is not high-end enough (would you agree that, compared to the Bifrost 2 and Arya v1, the much cheaper Jotunheim 2 would be the bottleneck of the three?). In any case, I'm excited to finally have the opportunity to try my Bifrost, Jotunheim, and Arya after I had ordered all three way back in mid-April. My Jotunheim was on back-order for the longest time, and it should finally be arriving today. Wish I had ordered my cables sooner... As always, great video! A lot of the critical comments in response to this video are clearly made by people who didn't bother paying attention to everything you had said in the video. And differences of opinion aside, many of them are just being inexcusably rude. Props for keeping your patience with them. :)

One of the things that makes and a/b or blind test more difficult is when you have an end goal or expectation. As in you are trying to identify a specific product compared to another one. This turns it into a test and puts pressure and stress on you to choose an outcome. This makes your brain think there is a correct or wrong answer and it messes with you mentally. Another way to do it would have been to just listen to the cables randomly a number of times over the course of a few days or so and make a note of what one you liked better in that particular listening session. There is no longer a right or wrong answer. It just boils down to how much did you enjoy the experience. If at the end of it all there isn't a clear winner then that means that either 1) There was no difference between the cables. Or 2) Even if there is a difference your brain can't percieve the difference from one session to another and it simply doesn't matter. Now if at the end you clearly liked one more than the other then bingo you have a winner. However don't be shocked if the winner isn't the better cable lol. Your brain likes what it likes.

Great video. It's hard to create standardised testing conditions appropriate for addressing this question, but there are a few things that those who attempt to do so should probably report on, in addition to whether they can hear a difference: - *Content familiarity.* What they were listening to. Is it a piece of music that they are already very familiar with or something new? What was the length of the piece? - *Trial number, randomisation, and interval length.* How many trials they completed and was the input source randomised across trials? Was the length of each trial constant or did it vary, depending on when the person made their decision (A or B)? - *Trial feedback.* Did the person receive feedback on whether their decision was correct after each trial or they did only learn the proportion of correct responses at the very end, once all the trials were done? I think it would be interesting to see this all managed experimentally with more than one or two people participating. Unfortunately, I'm not aware of any attempt to do this on a larger scale, presumably because of the cost and effort involved, but it would certainly help to resolve the question of where these reported differences are coming from and to what extent, if any, they are due to the input cables themselves. Either way, you're probably right that, all other things being equal, the USB cable is the last component that one should be looking to change as a means of improving sound quality.

Really enjoy that you keep exploring even the topics can get heated. Thanks for continuing to test and question everything!

Thanks for revisiting the topic. Everything you said is completely correct and I appreciate your thoughtful analysis of the testing situation. My main outstanding concern, especially with a digital signal such as a USB cable is that we can measure it. We can measure exactly what comes out of the cable. We can Measure the exact digital signal, that includes distortion, and any additional gains or losses that occur. Therefore, would this not be a definitive test of the equipment? Digital signal is all either ones or zeros. We can see it. We can see what is noise and what is the intended signal. I’m not sure how a listening test is superior to this taking into account all the placebo affects you discuss.

Thanks for a fascinating discussion. It's admirable that you are willing to take on such a controversial topic. I can't say for certain that I have ever heard differences among USB cables. However, as audiophiles, we like to think we are investing in the best cables we can afford, in order to achieve better sound. Buying a well-built USB cable seems a good idea if for nothing but reliability. But it does seem a foolish waste of money to buy really expensive ones.

Very good perspective. I believe better connection will result better sound

Your approach to this toxic topic as well as the fact that you decided to tackle it, again, is a proof of your honesty, transparency and above all, Passion for sound.

Earlier this year I did some testing on generic USB 2.0 cables . It wasn't audio testing, it was data storage performance testing. I was having trouble with the storage devices/caddies I was using so I started investigating them, out came the multi-meter and some tools. It turned out I was having trouble with the cables I was using. Sometimes they worked, sometimes they didn't. Sometimes they gave really good data rates (39-40MB/s), other times they gave rubbish data rates (10-15MB/s and less) for the same end device. Apart from length the cables looked identical, they weren't. They were a mix of shielded and non-shielded cables. I found the cables worked in different circumstances:- *). The shielded cables worked best when the end device had an external power supply *). The non-shielded cables worked best when they were supplying the power I found that that in all other circumstances either the data rate was severely degraded or the device was not-recognised. I came to a few of conclusions:- *). Shielded cable is required to maintain signal integrity, the better the signal integrity the faster the data rate, up to the maximum of the interface, as it does not have to correct as many errors *). Shielded cable could not be used to power a device, it's power conductors were too light *). Devices with eternal power were doing nothing to tame the +5V line of non-shielded cable so it was probably acting as an antenna and interfering with the data carrying lines I needed shielded cables to protect the data lines and heavy enough power cables to power devices which required power. The upshot of this is I decided to buy some connectors and cable and now custom make my own cables, with shielded data lines and separate current carrying cables (this is not a business adventure). How does all this relate to audio? Read into it what you want.

Nice work. You proved a point with your test but for some reason spent most of the video trying to say it isn’t so anyway. Maybe it’s time to concentrate on something else than USB cables from now on? Cheers!

I appreciate your trying to get to the bottom of this and trying to understand what you feel/believe to be true, and you may be right that objectively speaking, from a technical point of view, there is some difference between different USB cables, albeit common sense would suggest that this difference would potentially relate to the speed of the data being transferred and any added noise if the cable is of a very bad quality (not insulated properly). Even though it sounds almost inconveivable that a USB cable could potentially affect certain sound frequencies thus making the sound "warmer", "bassier" or whatever else, I still admire you for attempting to test it without making assumptions about it. However, at the end of the day, if you (and probably the rest of us) cannot conclusively differentiate between the different cables in a blind test, then the final conclusion must be that whatever the science behind it - it is simply not worth any extra money and thinking about it can do more harm than good (by making us constantly second-guess ourselves as to whether what we're hearing is the best our system can produce). I am 100% convinced from my own experience that analog headphone cables can make a difference (at least silver-plated vs pure copper with the latter sounding so much more natural) because I always hear the same pattern, regardless of what headphones I use. But as your research has shown, digital cables are much more controversial and the more you think about it, the more you're gonna end up convincing yourself that there's more to it. It's also worth remembering that every time you hear a song, especially when you've got it on repeat, you're gonna hear different things, pay attention to other details, and even perceive things like bass and sharpness slightly differently as your ears adjust to it and start taking certain things "for granted". How much of the perceived differences are due to that phenomenon and how much possibly due to the digital cable used remains uncertain, but the bottom line remains the same - it is so insignifcant that thinking about it seems to do more harm (stops us from enjoying music) than good.

The force is strong in this one...... MY GOD!

Interesting video. I have not conducted blind listening tests of usb cables. I do have a few at varying price points and the differences are so minor as to be difficult to pick out in a double blind test. I think one may be a tad brighter than another but can’t say I have ever heard a difference in detail. It is so easy for us to fool ourselves. I have been evaluating a set of expensive interconnects for a possible review article. The cables are over $1000. I thought I heard differences between them and my 30 year old reference. I listened to each set for a couple of weeks. When finished, I put the old cables in and realized that the stuff I didn’t think was there actually was. Again, the differences were tiny at best. I have no doubt that our measurement suites are inadequate but in many cable listening tests, we are really spitting hairs.

Ideally this test would be better doing it with 4 or 5 different cables across the spectrum (2$-to whatever crazy prices people pay) and where the person helping you also does not know what cable is currently being tested.

For cables I just purchased a decent one around $50 - $100 and never worry about them anymore, I know for sure I won't be able to tell the difference as I even made some mistake when blind testing SS amp and Tube amp (Burson Soloist vs Feliks Euforia)...

Good and I have to say my own results are similar. Once I bought a small length of Curious. It sounded nice in some ways but I definitely preferred (wait for it) the generic no-name USB cable I had lying around! (where it came from I don't even know). I sold the Curious so I no longer had it avaible for test when I bought a Denafrips Pontus Dac. I also at one time had a Supra Exc. I A-B'd it quite a bit but again, I found no reason to prefer it over the no-name USB cable. Latest purchase was an Oyaide cable ($50 or $60?). Also fine, but recently testing it vs the no-name cable, again I could not say that instantly preferred the Oyaide and in some ways liked the no-name. So to me these results indicate either that my system, my Dac or other components are doing something to negate the supposed superiority of a more pricey cables, or else there really is no substantial diff. Thanks for your work.

Basically, you talk about expectation bias for all that time. Do the null test, you'll have clear data to start with ;)

Null hypothesis: "there is no difference". First prove / disprove there IS a difference, and then select which one you prefer. Do this 15-20 times in a row and then see if your guesses are more than random chance. Stop trying to overthink the process and try to guess which cable is which. This leads to expectation bias. USB is pretty bulletproof as-is, and is probably less impacted by extraneous things like ground hum than analog cables. A properly designed USB port should be connected to the chassis and not to ground. Etc. All workarounds do is add complexity. Jitter is also a red herring. If the differences are too small to measure, then pick whatever cable looks best, has the right color, length, or strokes your ego the most, and move on. Focus on a better DAC and speakers.

I had the same experience recently when comparing my old Yggy to the Focusrite Scarlett. Huge price difference so surely I’d hear it right? And after all, I knew I didn’t have a doubt about the huge improvement, and my mate heard the same stuff independently. So to test it I created a multi device on my Mac to route the signal to both DACs, then into the 789 and Utopia. Instant switching and I couldn’t hear a damn difference! I switched occasionally over days while I was relaxed and still couldn’t pick it. But then! I listened to the Yggy as the multi device, then listened to it natively and low and behold, the difference was there. Sanity was preserved after all.

Cool, thanks for re-looking at this topic. Enjoyed hearing about your experiences with the different testing methods.

Curious, when you both were able to tell the difference, was that blinded or sighted? If you can tell when blinded once, but when repeated multiple times you no longer can tell the difference because of fatigue, then perhaps do it only once a day?

Although they are disappearing, at least on 🍎 products, I prefer using Optical Cables, for farther isolation between stages.

DACs and Amps next?

Conclusion: Stop wasting money on snake oil. Even if its a tiny bit 'better' which you can't tell, its not worth the money obviously. It is a little laughable that anyone would spend 1k plus on a USB cable. Just get a decent quality and shielded cable that adhered to standards and your good to go. The most obvious give away is when someone like Rob Watts designs a 3-5grand DAC and supplied a standard $2 usb printer cable to connect it to your PC. Do you think he would do that if USB made it sound worse? No! pretty funny.

So you wrote an article describing how all the USB cables you listened to sound completely different from one another. Now when doing blind testing, you can't tell a difference. You almost tricked me into buying an AudioQuest Carbon. I understand we all continue to learn things and grow but you just lost any credibility. UNSUBBED

I am confused. How a passive switch can add artefacts? Can you please measure the nosbound switch and see if it does anything to the chain?

Love the way you explain why your own blind testing is invalid and you were right all along on USB cable sound

Thanks for this. Your results indicate a severe problem with subjective sighted cable listening tests. The great majority of subjective reviewers describe huge improvements in sound....not barely perceptible ones. You do prove that they are wrong, at least in your tests. The fact that we might blame listener fatigue, or DACs lacking resolution, or switch boxes, proves that differences if they exist are tiny. How do you span this gap without stating unequivocally that subjective reviewers who hear major differences are mistaken? Its not that they are lying, lets posit that they do hear these differences. But the huge differences they perceive are absolutely not the result of the output of their headphones. A solid conclusion is that there are non-sound related factors that contaminate sighted/subjective listening that far exceed the tiny differences in DAC resolution or the impact of a simple switch.

What was the name of the perfect 90ohm USB cable that was used on the blind test?

I have got schiit Asgard with their proprietary usb. I got a simple usb b printer cable and audio quest green usb b. I was not able to tell the difference. I also got balanced cables which are connected to Singxer sa 1 amp. Question is. 1. Does the normal genaric cable loose information or add noise till it reaches the dac? 2. Does the information is lost moving from dac to amp? If above is true doesn’t it make more sense to get one integrated system(dac amp wifi) bcz cost of good quality cables is just crazy.

So basically, anecdotal evidence that USB cables make a difference and denying the efficiency of a test to adhere to your own beliefs. I love the scientific integrity.

I would imagine as the DACs get more expensive they have better filters to correct for errors. So I am assuming a properly made DAC may not be as affected by differences in cables as long as they meet spec and are not defective. A Chord TT2 and a Geshelli labs DAC are most likely made properly. Can you wrap the cables around a CRT or a cellphone to see if electrical noise makes a difference ? If you introduce noise you may actually be able to definitively tell which cable is better.

The only difference between DACs and AMPs(Exception for Tube AMP) is only their output impedance(It affects some headphones in bass region), that is the only aspect that changes sound a little bit, everything else won't change FR. Let alone cables...

the famous but my wife argument. there is also scientific explanation for such synchronisations.

Well done for giving it a try and congratulations for proving there is no significant difference so buy the cable that looks the best.

If I want to evaluate a cable, I need to have it in my system for minimum 4-5 days and play my playlist over and over again. Not every day one is in the same mood. Only then change to another cable and leave it in the system for an other 4-5 days. Then switch back and go through your favourite playlist again. That’s when you find out, which one is more to your liking and fits better in your personal “sound” system. So fare I have not ever came across 2 different cable which did “sound” the same. My most scientific test procedure to measure, if a cable fits in my system, is the time to fall a sleep!!! The shorter this time is, the more “real” my system may sound and the less my “ear-brain” system has to work hard to compensate for the “non-realistic” reproduction of instruments and voices! A-B testing or A-B-X testing can not help, as our “ear-brain-system” is not made for such a scenario.

How do you know i just bought an expensive usb cable today?

When I test my equipment, I have a list of songs that I know pretty well, and I also test at the same time period. At night, my hearing is a lot better for music, so I test at night too. I don't rely on A/B tests because it's hard to hear differences in interconnects (unless something is very wrong or misconfigured). instead I take notes about the things that I like (or dislike) in the music I am listening too. then when I change a part, I spend about a week listening to it, and then another week listening to it taking notes, so that I can overcome the biases I had from the other piece of equipment. Then I compare my notes and look at the differences.

I just watched this after seeing a bit of "An Objective Test of USB Cables" where you ran a file generated with a normal USB cable against the inverse of the same audio created with a pricey cable, then claimed the remaining audio play back showed the pricey cable was better. Because having additional audio left from the normal track would mean the normal track had less information or something? I hope you have assistance available for crosswalks. Review audio equipment and tell people what you do and don't like about it. It's ultimately subjective after a certain point.

It's digital. Love the tap dancing!

James Randi is having a laugh in his grave.

This is great, as it gets at the heart of the perception and sensory aspect of listening. Our brains and auditory processing are still infinitely more mysterious than what equipment measurements alone would suggest. In my own highly inconsistent and unscientific comparisons, the only differences that I could perceived were with shorter usb cables vs longer cables of the same brand and type. The shorter ones seemed to be better in many aspects and typical criteria. Or just a better experience overall. But that in itself may be affected with my expectation that shorter cables would render these results!

This hobby is a bit of a ouroboros. Expectation bias seems to drive a lot of the initial momentum with gear but then you sort of ride that back around having less of an idea about whether something is really making a noticeable difference. Provided you're being honest with yourself of course 😏. Interesting video, I definitely think experiential testing should go hand in hand with measurements and maybe via the two we can have a better overall picture as to the results something may have in a chain.

I think its just best to learn the science behind how USB works, then you'll see why they can't make a difference in the way an analogue cable does. I keep seeing this "its an analogue signal that represents a digital signal" but thats only half the story. It can't make any difference in terms of bass, treble, balance of any kind, stereo, because that is not possible. What happens when not blind testing is confirmation bias. Its easy to recreate it in someone. Just tell them a switch connected to nothing is changing something, they'll claim to hear all kinds of minute differences. I've even done it myself in the studio: been changing controls thinking I'm making a difference, and the device is bypassed. Doh! But its best to admit the mistake and move on, not decide that reality must be incorrect because your premise has failed to stand up to testing.

Blind testing ONLY works when ONE (1) single difference can be isolqted and compared. In music, no such isolation is possible because the music signal is changing from moment to moment, in frequency, dynamics, etc. See my articles on this subject in several audio publications.

Hilarious. Almost made it to 10 minutes.

you content was...was... wait what was it? ohh your voice helping people go to sleep, that was it!

Great vid, thanks. If accuracy is your end goal, add to the puzzle whether what you are hearing is an exact reproduction or not or just a personal preference for colouration....

My guess is that you and your wife have similar biases and perspectives, which is why you both described the sound similarly before switching cables. Also, she may have simply been describing how that particular setup sounded with relative accuracy. _Your_ bias that the other cable was somehow different or inferior, may have originally altered your perception of the setup once the cable was switched out. This bias may have stuck with you as your desire for the exotic cable to offer an improvement won over your common sense.

"I refuse to acknowledge placebo, and it's the tests, not me, that are wrong." -PoS, 2021 Watching this helps explain your lack of critical thinking and gullibility during the whole DAVE and M-Scaler debacle.

OMG yet another of these situations where the null hypothesis (no difference) survives, THREE TIMES, and somehow STILL we come up with rationalizations and (horridly cliche) anecdotes about wives hearing stuff. Get over yourself. There's no *audible* difference, it is in you and your wife's head. You just did yourself a service, got what you *claimed* you wanted, but you've created a tower or rationalization. You do a huge disservice to your viewers. Or perhaps you realized you'd lose them if you declared the emperor has no clothes? And by the way, it's not that we don't "believe in cables", whatever that means, it's that we've tried this ourselves and looked at mountains of blind tests and reached a conclusion that's been obvious for ages.

I have a saying. Cables dont make a difference until you hear a difference. I used to be in the camp that copper was copper and cables didnt make a difference. Heard a difference between 2 different $10 cables and it opened my eyes. I appreciate the work your putting in to understanding this phenomenon.

Nothing wrong here, they are no different like fuel for your car. If you still telling they are better then you are snake oil liar. Stop replace a meaning of better when use good material and finish labor with better in sound quality.

One day the reviewer / author will develop the self awareness to accept the reality that there was no difference between the cables. Today is not that day. The truth can be a bitter and difficult pill for some to swallow.

If usb cables make a difference, which I believe is true, then do usb filters (Jitterbug, isilencer for instance) also make a difference? Having used them, I believe they also make a difference.

Thanks for putting in the work and tackling this controversial topic.

Blind A/B audio testing has flaws, and only works if differences are pretty big. For example, of you switch from A to A, back to A etc. (never to B) - most listeners, unless they know this is happening, will think that they spotted differences. Because cable differences, if any, are nearly always small A/B testing is simply not a good method.

your testing methodology is hard to follow. maybe you have too many variables. just switch between two cables and use one system that you're familiar with. In terms of testing results, I don't think it matters that the more expensive cable sounds better. at this point, it's a win if you can hear any difference between cables then work from there.

I still believe usb cables make a differance especially to my wallet, my suggestion is to get some under 18 year olds for testing, my kids are my headphone lab rats.

Believe what we have here is called "blaming the messenger". Cognitive dissonance? Denying objective truth in favor of preconceived subjective notions? Best of luck to you in the future though.

Well done ! There are so many ways to skin this cat of improving sound quality that one can go a bit bonkers.. But the pursuit is super exciting. I am sure USB cables make a difference BUT the differences are probably more like splitting hair. BUT... I wonder if the "noisiness" of USB ports itself has anything to do with not being able to tell much difference between them?

Or it could be that she just has a lexicon of what you consider better sounds like...

The best usb cable I tried isn't a cable at all , it's a pcb made by uptone audio. Only $35 but also only 2 inches long.

What happened to my previous comment?

Total bullshit. Why? Because buffers. Put this stuff on a scope, run sweeps and THD tests, ignore your ears. It's going to be the same, all the time, because digital.

What a maroon.

man... too much words... just keep it short and simple --> do not feed usb power into your dac via the same cable used for the signal transmission! DIY a Y cable with two different input, one for data e one for power... if your usb at dac do not require to work to feel +5Vdc at the input... JUST DO NOT SUPPLY IT. This is a very simple but important step... usb power from pc is full of rubbish, avoid it and you will clearly listen the differences... of course if you are deaf not but then there is your wife there to help you. Then, after that, you will be in good position to perform a blind test.

"the conclusion I came to is that I don't like the results of the blind test"

I've personally been able to tell a difference with USB cables (although I haven't tried that many) especially when scaling up in gear. But I did no scientific testing whatsoever. What do you think about muscle memory in our ears? I'm not talking about recalling audio perceptions through our memory which, as you know, is fallible as well. But more like when you're so familiar with your audio system that any changes, big or small, are easily noticeable. Similar to how athletes develop muscle memory in their respective sport. I feel like that muscle memory can be relied upon to a certain point. I'm no expert in the field but it was just a thought...

You know the overexposed video is BS!!!!!!!!! I shouldn't have to sit here and, wait, what does overexposed mean?

Digital cables make no difference. Speakers and power cables do make a difference.

lol at the "we don't understand sound + can't measure it" bit ffs why do people not educate themselves before putting shit like this out on youtube?

I will step forward n say: the Shellies aren't high end enough. Using an identical setup should include extremely fast n resolute speakers such as Maggie's! Now I could here differences more easily! Standard dynamic drivers make it tougher for anyone...but the knob-box killed res quality and no audiophile would ever introduce junk like that in his esteemed rig!!! Try a splitter cable between preamp and 2 identical amps or better yet; 2 identical integrated amps with remote control of input selection in 2 different corners of the room independently controlled then.

Oy Vey......