They would but not for the reason you think. It's like coke and pepsi. Put them both in the fridge and try to guess which is which. Most can't tell. If you know what you're looking for (I tell you the coke tastes slightly drier and the pepsi is slightly more carbonated and sweet) you'll instantly notice it... same thing. Two amps can sound similar but are you looking at their tonality, resolution, how they compare on highs, bass, etc. And you can't look for all these things at once you need a few listening sessions because different tracks sound different and it can take some testing to nail down its sound signature and even then it's in reference to each other. Having only one for a while might make you feel differently about it too
the scientific way yes; double blind placebo controlled. it is a way to filter out bias and other factors such as the difference between listening the first or second time. it would be interesting to see if few or many would say that they hear a difference.
Given the budget and space, I would have loved to have an identical setup with no variables as a control to see the percentage of people who heard differences between two identical setups. I hope to build this in to future tests.
From a process standpoint, I would swap the cables part way through the day to make sure that there wasn't other equipment variance that could account for the differences. It would also be interesting if there was a control setup that matched one of the other setups and we could see how often people could identify the identical systems.
Very surprising results! Love the test. As a cable skeptic, I'm surprised that 80%+ of listeners reported hearing a difference, BUT I can rationalize it away as... listeners are motivated to say that they hear a difference as a sort of hobbyist cred. In other words, if I answer no, it must mean my ears are not very good, ergo I am motivated to answer yes, I heard a difference. The second data point about preference seems to back this up. When asked which one was better, the answers were 50/50, a coin toss. So while listeners could placebo themselves into hearing a difference, they couldn't consistently identify the "better" one. In a world where there _is_ one "better" one, this would be pretty damning, but as you rightly point out, listener preference confounds that rationale. In other words, a 50/50 result, given a random distribution of listener preferences, is certainly plausible if indeed the setups sound different. At this point, game theoretically we're at... it's still plausible the difference is "real," but also just as likely it is placebo. The third level of data is the strongest support for the "reality" of different sounds of the setups: People used similar words to describe the each setup, and (presumably from here) without a high degree of overlap between Setup A and B. This is a result that could not be easily explained by placebo rationale and is indeed the data point that forces me as a skeptic to sit back... and open my mind a bit. This data point adds credibility to the prior two. I am not ready to replace USB cables in my setup, but I really appreciate the effort you've put into this test -- it's well-designed and something I'd love to see more of!
At an audio show, in a blind test booth, I think it's far more likely that even if people did hear a difference they'd say they didn't on the off chance the difference was cables so they don't look like they're backtracking on their stance on cables. Cables straight up objectively change sound, but to what degree and why is up to the cables being compared. The "cables don't matter" camp tends to be the ones that cant tell the difference in DACs, most likely have only ever owned the 6XX, think ASR measurments mean something and think getting headphones to volume means you have enough power and that amp topology differences are meaningless.
I think, respectfully, those who seek to completely ignore the possible implications of this test are going against their own reliance on the scientific approach. When provided measurement data (which doesn't tell the whole story) it is blindly accepted and yet, when offered solid (but not perfect) data suggesting a different possibility, it is denied. I hope more people can explore this for themselves with an open mind
@@PassionforSound Respectfully, whether a test is scientifically designed can be objectively measured, and need to be peer reviewed. I challenge that a drug company using this method to “blind test” their drug won’t get FDA approval, and it’s not because FDA is not “open-minded” enough.
First, Test still has an issue because you need an X example. ABX. Second, different headphones were used which could have had slight differences in drivers and therefore sound. Also, you told people before you started that there’s is a variation. You shouldn’t have mentioned a variation. Then, ask them whether there was or wasn’t a difference without them knowing that there was before the test started. You created bias right from the start. With ABX, you could have had a variation and then asked the participants which one was different and which 2 were the same.
Exactly! You are totally correct about the X example. I really appreciate the effort they put into the test, but telling people up front that the systems are different predisposed people to hear a difference. My guess--if they told the listeners the systems were totally identical, the numbers would have flipped and 80% would not have heard a difference.
Given budget and space, I would have loved to include a control of sorts, but this was the best we could manage. The degree of headphone variance is not a factor in my experience as these products are produced to within tiny tolerances when using a quality product like the Empyreans. As for the instructions, we had to explain to people why they needed to listen to both, but we made it very clear that there was a variable that may or may not make a difference. We asked the to listen and decide IF it made a difference so we deliberately created a question around that, not an expectation. In fact, many people (I'd guess 10-15%) asked at the end of there actually wasn't any difference and if this was a trick so there were plenty of people being very conscious not to hear things that weren't there. I don't think we'll ever get a perfect test because of the nature of the topic. My hope is that people will at least consider what this is demonstrating and not write off the possibilities out of hand
@@PassionforSound There may not be a “perfect” test, but there’s obviously better tests. If pharmaceutical companies are doing drugged test like that it’ll be a disaster. In fact, you don’t need to change anything in the hardware setting, but only change the question to “do you think the 2 systems are identical or different” would be much less biased than “there is a variable in the chain, can you hear the difference”. Other better designs include 1) ABX, and 2) setup another group of machines that’s truly identical, and ask people to tell which group has the variable.
I do like your suggested wording of the question - that would have been better. I'm not sure how much clearer I can be about the reasons for some not having a control setup - I get it and hope to factor that in for future tests where possible.
I've been looking at some of the comments and want to address a few things in one go here to save me typing it over and over: 1) the variation of performance between two products (headphones or DAC/amp) from reputable products would not produce the types of results shown in this test unless one was faulty (which they were not) 2) fit and positioning of a headphone can alter its sound slightly by shifting the size and exact frequency of some spikes in treble, etc. but not by a huge margin and, more importantly, it will not influence the types of factors people cited in the test (e.g. presentation of detail, spatial qualities and dynamics) 3) swapping cables on these devices takes time because the playback software has to be stopped and restarted to prevent crashes. This introduces a very challenging variable which is the reliance on medium-to-long term auditory memory and that is highly innacurate 4) given the budget and space, I would have loved to have an identical setup with no variables as a control to see the percentage of people who heard differences between two identical setups. I hope to build this in to future tests. 5) participants were told that there was a variable in the setups and asked to decide if it made a difference. That can lead to two thought processes/expectations - the expectation of a difference AND the expectation of no difference so some respondents may have also been biased towards a "no difference" response.
Hi Lachlan, I’m keen to try the Melbourne meet up and love your work! One way to address point 1 is to swap the USB cables halfway through the day, then you can split the data by before and after the USB swap and you’ll be able to check if it was just the different rig that made the difference, or the cable. Edit: agree that variances between those products is small, but it’s an easy way to rule out that hypothesis
Hi. I find your exercise very interesting and sympathize with the shortfalls, I think you did a great job. That said, I'm glad you mentioned missing a control group, but you are also missing replicates. These two factors are essential to isolate chance effects. For example, while it is definitive that subjects reported differences it would be also important to determine if such differences are consistent across subjects in all replicas. But then again, I understand the limitations and applaud your very interesting effort! If I may suggest something else that I'd love to see tested this way, is the perceived differences in type and location of op amps in the Burson Audio Conductor 3 Reference =) Cheers
I'll be happy to add op-amps to my list of tests in the future, Carlos. As for the replication, that's something I could not build into a setup like this, but we also aren't really interested in which is better (that would require replication for sure), but just if a difference could be heard and I think the modest, but decent sample size covers the reliability of that factor.
Dac/amp variation between units I can get behind it but headphones… cmon! unit variation is a thing with headphones even L and R channel are not 100% accurate. This variation is more likely more than the variations between the two usb cable you tested.
@@MaLaLiberty I'm with you on this. I respect Lachlan and what he is trying to do here, but there are proven measurable and audible differences between units of the same headphones. Until you control for this by using an A/B switch box and the same set of headphones, no meaningful conclusions are possible about anything else in the chain.
As far as this test, I think there would best be a third system, to mirror an "ABX" blind test. That way you can get at "which of these is different" and really drill into whether people who cite differences are doing so because they expect it or because they actually hear it. For future tests, I would love to see a volume matched test with different amplifiers as the variable, specifically a high powered vs. a lower powered amp. This would investigate claims that "some headphones need lots of power to be 'driven properly.'" It makes no sense to me from a physics standpoint why an amplifier with more headroom would "drive a power hungry planar" better *at the same volume* as a lower powered amp with less headroom.
My dude, if you give people an A and B setup tell them there might or might not be a difference, most people will ABSOLUTELY tell you there is indeed a difference. If you wanted to do this with actual scientific methodology you would have a setup with either A + B + Control (Same as B), and determine if people could detect a difference from A vs. Control against B vs. Control. Alternatively you Could do 2 setups, A + B with a difference, or a control A + B without difference and determine the first set has a larger amount of people claiming a difference over the control. In short, you didn't use a control and you introduced bias by implying there is likely a difference.
I had this revelation about 2 years ago, while testing a DAC that I was planing to buy, I was suggested to try out a "Good" usb cable, I was curtain that I won't hear any difference, but I did, then I asked to give me a blind test. 10 tests with random cable each time, I got 10/10 right. I brought the cable strait away and continued to test the DAC.
Great work, Lachlan! I really appreciate the step-by-step methodologies you use to investigate things, like in this instance to keep it as easy as possible for the participants with the 3 stages of response from simple to more complex.
I was lucky enough to be there and I'm honestly impressed. As for the 50/50 results, I'm not surprised, they both sounded very good but offered different presentations.
I have driven myself crazy with A-B testing all the new (expensive to me) gear I just bought. Going from gaming headsets traditionally to Edition XS and a $300 Schiit Stack is a leap for most of us. I got each item in isolation and tested for a week and kept adding finally the amp and then the Modi dac. All I can confirm is yes it all does sound very good and each piece added some kind of additional level of importance and well roundedness to the equation. For those on the fence, who are really tight on the money and are new to this game, my simple advice is once you get any kind of higher ohm or low sensitivity headphone you WILL need at least an amp. I think the best bang for buck here so you get the DAC too is Fiio K5 it seems like. I think I would have been happy with that over my Schiit stack but whatever, my XS eats all the energy you throw at it. I will say the DAC added a presence particularly in sound stage and the ability for my amp not to work so hard since its pushing 2v instead of 1v like most other onboard DAC's or XLR interfaces. The difference is not at all night and day for me. I still keep plugging my XS into my $40 UMC22 interface to see if I can tell the difference and it's incredibly subtle. I just know that the Modi/Magni sounds a bit more spacious and "interesting", hard to put my finger on it. Small, small differences. The biggest difference is that the UMC22 cannot drive any of my headphones to reasonable high volumes without distorting so this is where you are forced to make the leap into something with more power.
@@PassionforSound No, thank you for setting this up; providing the opportunity for other people to discover and learn something new. I just feel sorry that you have to push so hard up-hill to educate people and challenge misconceptions. Stay positive 😊!
Yes, shocking for me.. until the end I was convinced that the difference must be the power supply.. I always thought usb cables make the least difference but here we are... it is time to hear this for myself..
I hope you can try a few and let me know what you discover. There's no doubt that power supplies also make a significant difference, but I think the digital interconnects are maybe a larger influence
This is a fascinating test; thanks for doing it. I can maybe see a couple of possible improvements: (1) Have 3 configurations, 2 of them with cable A, and 1 of them with cable B. See how many people can identify the two configurations that are the same. (2) Swap which USB port each cable is plugged into, halfway through the test. This could identify if there is a random difference in the amount of noise leaking into one USB port, and the amount of noise leaking into the other USB port.
Thanks Michael, I have tested using the laptop before in this manner and the USB outputs don't differ in their performance in any audible way. Please see my pinned comment for response to the idea of additional controls
not a surprise. my friend and I did hear sound different from a USB DAC dongle when swapping different type-C cable. we were thinking of the powersupply to the dongle as it was power by the same TYPE-c cable., but after watching your tube, maybe the cable itself can make a different... As a engineer I didn't expect a digital cable will make a different, but data didn't lie and we have to find out why instead of yelling improssible.
I'm so glad you can see this data as posing questions rather than needing to deny any other possibilities - thank you for having an open and inquiring mind! I'd love to understand what is going on with digital interconnects, but I'm still searching for those answers
It’s interested that if people can hear a difference in such a loud environment then it should be an obvious difference when listening at home and there shouldn’t be any debate on it. Which can only mean one thing : most of audiophiles(arguing types) don’t have any hands on experience with the product they are talking/writing about.
To me this test mostly correlates to a "if you tell people there is a difference they will likely hear a difference" test. Would have been great if you could have swapped to same cables on both rigs half way through the data collection to put this theory further to the test.
We wouldn't have had large enough sample sizes then and everyone would have focussed on that as the shortcoming instead ☹️ People were told that there was a difference in the source chain and that their job was to decide if it created an audible difference so the expectation went in both directions - that there could be a difference and that there might not be a difference
@@PassionforSound this would be the perfect test: All through the day tell people the systems might be identical or they might not be identical. In the morning use 2 different USB cables. In the afternoon use 2 identical USB cables. (Or identical in the morning and different in the afternoon). Thanks again for making this video 😊
Hi Lachlan, great content! Now can you please tell us a) which laptop did you use exactly (Brand and model) and b) which USB ports did you use on that laptop ? The reason I ask is because some times the manufacturer may connect the USB outputs from different paths. As-in for example usb #1 might be connected through the chipset directly (ex. amd b550m or intel qm175) while usb #2 might be connected through a usb controller (as-in a usb hub if you will that multiplies the usb ports while using the same usb connection from the cpu or chipset, they do that because the actual bandwidth is the same but they split it up into many ports cause they can't dedicate a separate usb channel for each usb port). And understandably there might be different electrical noise coming out of those 2 ports. Another way to do it moving forward would be to use a usb splitter or external hub maybe or measure the electrical signal you get from your usb ports to make sure it's the same and also take a look at the block diagram of the computer's motherboard (either laptop or desktop) to see which usb port is connected where. (look it up, block diagram of a motherboard, which is usually in the motherboard's pdf manual, you'll need to know the exact model of the motherboard obviously) Many thanks. PS I totally agree with the approach to investigate and ultimately squash stereotypes on ambiguous things like: usb cables, xlr cables, power supply units, DDC/no DDC, power strips, fuses, and probably many other things I can't recall. PS2 If you're going through the trouble of an AB test with people, it might be good to collect more info from them for statistical reasons, like their age (which impacts hearing ability), their music preference (ex. EDM, classical, metal, pop, rock, etc..) (which may or may not impact their preference in bass, tremble or separation, etc)
Hi Panos, it's a Dell Inspiron 13" IIRC. I've used it multiple times and never heard any significant difference between the outputs. As for the demographic information, I didn't want to collect potentially sensitive information from strangers at a HiFi Show. I'm also not trying to run a peer reviewed, scientific study, but just collect a bunch of blind impressions from as broad a cross section as possible. To setup a proper study on this would require time and money I don't have (the channel isn't my day job and doesn't make anywhere near enough money to be) 🙂
I think adding a simple two-in-one-out physical switch after the amps and before the headphone would help eliminate a variable (multiple headphones). And the less time it takes to switch sources the better; its certainly much faster to flick a switch than it is to swap headphones. I suspect this kind of switch can be constructed (or bought) with more than enough quality to not affect sound quality.
I've played around with a relatively cheap and readily available one, but it degrades the sound quality enough to make a test like this more difficult. Given the budget (i.e. if the channel were larger and more financial) I could do this with a much more transparent one I think and it would be preferable
If I understand well what you did, all of the participants were told that there was an undisclosed difference up the chain. Given that, the fact that more than 80% (thought they) heard some difference was of no surprise. Given that, the fact that preferences were almost evenly split does not necessarily mean that preferences were split it may well mean that people did not hear a tangible difference after all, they just thought they heard because they expected to hear some difference since they had been told there was one. Excuse me if I did not correctly understand what took place but if I did, I can see little value in this test..
I guess what I’m trying to say is that this test created expectation bias from the get go, something proper tests should not do. I’m sorry but if you want to be scientific you have to go the whole way to an ABX test. There’s no cutting corners with a scientific test.
What people were told is that there was a variable between the setups and their job was to listen and tell us IF it made a difference. In other words, we raised the possibility that there might be no difference as well so you could equally say that expectation bias would be towards a "no difference" response from a lot of people too. This hobby has a very strong contingent of those who do not believe in many "snake oil" tweaks so the 80% result is too strong if factoring that in IMO
@@PassionforSound sorry but I have to disagree. Any self proclaimed audiophile likes to think he can hear subtle differences. The subsequent 50-50 result for preference’ could be easily explained by this (people thought they heard a difference but, since they really didn’t, they voted at random with regards to preference) unless one thinks that there happened to be a normal distribution of preferences towards the particular changes the variable introduced, which I find doubtful as research has shown that there tends to be statistically significant agreement when real differences are present. Once more, one cannot be partly scientific in these tests.
I'm basically cable agnostic with the assumption of quality construction, a modest cable length, and that the connections are clean (not oxidized or otherwise adding resistance to the signal path). In my experience you don't need to spend a lot of money for quality interconnect. That said I do understand that sonic changes can be imparted into a signal path based on the interconnects chosen, so fair play. Now, my favorite aspects of this video are: 1. Lachlan in the wild! - enjoyed watching you interact with a fellow enthusiast at the show 2. The concept - bringing people into the hobby in a way that is easy to digest and learn about the various components that go into it Much like describing wine or food, listening is a sensory stimulation that is often hard to wrap the proper words around. It's a common sensation without a common venacular, so getting out there with the people and sharing your passion for sound is great to see. Keep up the great work sir!
Headphones are definitely the biggest factor in a system, but if you're suggesting that the results are due to the two different (identical) headphones used then please see my pinned comment.
@@PassionforSound The USB link is digital, so if the "difference" heared by your testers was due to the USB cable, then it must be due to errors in digital data transmission. Meaning, bits were being dropped by one of the cables. If the error rate was high enough to be heard, I am surprised you would even be able to successfully connect the dac to the pc.
If you told people that was a variation before the test, why are you surprised the 85% can hear a difference?. Particularly with a selective group of people at a Hi-Fi show where nobody wants to admit to being deaf to nuances. Your description of experienced listeners and non-experienced listeners was a little too loaded for my liking. These are my initial thoughts and undoubtedly as heavily biased as anybody else's. I really enjoyed the video and really appreciate your work, it's a fascinating subject. Thanks.
Thanks Ged. On the topic of expectations, we told them there was a difference in the chains, not in the sound. We were asking them to decide IF there was a difference so that's loaded in both directions and hopefully avoided people feeling there was a "right" answer.
My ideal would be running the same test but with the same usb cables and the people at the booth not knowing that was the case. I hope the majority would say they were the same.
The TT2 is endgame level for most people so I’d be surprised if I’d be able to is discern any difference. I was listening to orchestral music with my Mojo today and heard chairs creaking, flute mechanisms clanking and players breathing. Can’t imagine what flagship level DACs can do. Glad this wasn’t a Solomon Asch type situation. Worthwhile experiment!
I think testing DACs is a good idea. At CanJam NYC, I could not tell the difference between DACs, it takes me a long time for me to notice the difference when I upgrade a DAC (except when getting a May). Also your natural "live" voice is far more Aussie than your presentations. Took me by surprise. But I also remember that you record softly to not disturb your family, so that's cool.
Haha, yes, my voice is a bit different in person and in a loud environment too. I agree that picking differences between DACs (particularly of similar designs like two ESS DACs) is hard and actually harder IMO than this USB cable test. I hope I can provide some of those tests in the future on the channel
As a retired accountant, I’m obviously not qualified to render a judgment on the viability of your test methodology, but it would be interesting to see what Floyd Toole, Sean Olive, Brent Butterworth, or other experienced, qualified experts think of it. In any event, I certainly enjoyed the video and appreciate your efforts.
We didn't, but I know both devices and headphones intimately (I've owned two pairs of Empyreans) and the variations in those (if any) couldn't account for the degree and types of differences between the two setups IMO
Hey Lachlan! Wow, I was not expecting to find that as interesting as I did. I was RIVETED! Loved your methodology. I thought your 'discussion' conclusions seemed reasonable. My view on cable differences can be summarised by Fox Mulder's poster: 'I want to believe'. You are making it easier. Loved it. Keep these vids coming, mate! I find it interesting that some are implying that because your methodology lacked the rigor required to be published in a peer reviewed scientific journal, that the results lacked any and all credibility.... Ummm, I think you're doing a terrific job of being a RUclips reviewer. I was entertained. And it made me think. KPI's achieved!! :)
Thanks so much, Kenno! I definitely recognise the limitations in these tests, but I also think they provide some interesting insights to prompt further consideration and exploration for some people. I hope to bring more of this type of content (with different variables) in the future
If you are using 2 headphones it'd be better if you used a physical switcher to switch between the two inputs while using the same headphones so the person does not have to take off headphones and they can do a direct A-B test
USB is a digital link so what comes out should match exactly what went in. If there’s any doubt of that being true the digital data output should be captured and compared to the input for both cables. After all, when you store data on an external hard desk drive, connected via a USB cable, you expect the stored data to match what was written to it. In order to test the possible psychological variations I would like to see the same test run for several hours where the set ups are identical
All equipment was essentially the same (i.e. there was not an audible difference between the headphones or TT2s). I've also personally tested these cables and heard the results for myself.
This channell is top 🤓 as a beginner I find all infos and all curiosities I need. I would like to tell my experience: I bought the Ollo s4x headphones, and I sadly must admit, I m not able to hear any difference with my 29€ HouseOfMarley headphones. What should I still know? For the sound test I used my 120€ dap, my home stereo, and my phone… I hope with the Dx240 coming next week, things could sound better! ☹️
The Ollo S4X is all about tonal accuracy. I haven't heard the HoM headphones, but I expect they'd have some boosted frequencies to make them sound fun in some way. The S4X don't do that and will be giving a more accurate representation of the music. That's really their key benefit so you might not find any other big differences in things like soundstaging, etc. as that's not their area of focus. With all that said, your incoming DX240 might also reveal some extra resolution and detail that the HoMs don't have.
@@PassionforSound thank you so much for letting me know your POV. I’m pretty sure the new DAP will manage my OLLO in order to take advantage from their quality. See you, good luck for your great job.
Impressive that you addressed and attempted to remove all variables. I am not surprised at all by your result but there is one more variable which may be relevant and that is the fit of the headphones on the participants heads. If the physical setting on each of the two sets used is the same then someone with a wide head will hear something different to someone with a narrow head. If they were allowed to adjust the sets to fit their head you are introducing too much uncontrolled variability. Tight fit will increase detail, immediacy and bass, possibly at the cost of space and depth. Loose fit will have the opposite effect. Perhaps speakers would work better though I accept that headphones are probably more revealing over all. I can hear differences between usb cables using speakers. I hope that you will be able to run this test again to establish consistency.
Thanks for your thoughts. The Meze Empyreans are very quick and easy to get well-fitted. Any slight variables from the fit of the headphone would not / could not account for the differences people described. Having measured a lot of headphones over the years, subtle shifts in fit and placement definitely alter the sound, but in very subtle ways (assuming the seal is consistent which is where the Empyreans are so good for this test). What would change is that the exact frequency of a peak might shift up or down by a few Hertz, but it won't alter spatial information and sense of separation in the ways that people were reporting. I'm always keen to remove variables, but I don't think the headphones were a concern in this case.
This was really interesting! I would love the chance to do this type of test as well but I feel being in a quiet room would be so much better! Especially using open backs like the Empyrean’s. That’s actually one of my pet peeves while Demoing headphones @ a dealer with lots going on. I’m scatterbrained enough without being distracted by ambient chatter and noise. I had a feeling it was going to be the cable because I’ve been watching your channel for a quite some time now. It’s great that you took it a step further and I look forward to more tests like this (in quiet rooms!! 😅) Very cool stuff Lockland!
Thanks Mr Chris. If you're in Melbourne, I'll be setting something up in the future in a quieter space so stay tuned... On this occasion, it was interesting to see that the background noise actually didn't affect the results, but a quieter environment would definitely be better.
Do the same test telling people there is one change and make no change. A large % might still hear a difference in exactly the same setup? Then you can remove "wanting to hear" bias away from the 80%.
I think that still depends on your personal preferences in sound, Roberto (i.e. not just the genre you listen to). What factors are important to you in the sound of a headphone? For example, do you prioritise the sense of space and size of the soundstage? Do you want a leaner sound or something more full-bodied? Happy to help if you can tell me a little more 🙂
@@PassionforSound I value the instrumental separation and the soundstage very much. For any genre, the more the better. It makes me feel immersed in the music. If it's easier for you instead of just one option you can give me two for example. Thank you.
Thanks for the extra info! I think I'd look at the HiFiMan Ananda (often on sale within your budget I think) and Edition XS. The HarmonicDyne Poseidon and Zeus could also be interesting I think. Finally the Sennheiser HD650/600/660 are all excellent too.
I wouldn't say they're the best, but seem to be most popular. The HarmonicDynes are quite uniquely tuned so some will love them and others might not, but the Sennheisers and HiFiMans have pretty broad appeal
Cool experiment, it's good to see some data and kudos on going through with the process of collecting it in a group of people. Having just bought an Audioquest Carbon USB cable and thrown it into my system, the results don't surprise me so much as I certainly hear quite a difference to the Carbon vs bog standard usb cable, and also previous experience with Mojo compared to Mojo with Poly had opened my ears to the fact that the digital source and transfer can matter.
Maybe if people are asked whether they hear a difference more than one time in a row (e/g in a A1-B1, A2-B2, C1-C2 configuration) fewer might feel pressed to answer "yes" by kind of "external" reason. Fear of failure or wounded pride, at least a woolly sense of honour may tempt some of them to answer "yes, I hear a difference" if just asked single-trial. In order to cull posers and saboteurs I guess it might require more than one A-B setup, at minimum three. Anyway, thank you for your efforts, these findings are good to know about.
Thank you for doing this experiment and for compiling it into this video! It was really interesting to see, and much appreciated! Just one added thought: I wonder if simply you being a recognizable person from your channel could skew results. For example, early in the video, I started to wonder if it were the USB cable that changed, just because I've seen many of your videos before, including the one where you compared measured analog output differences between cables. It seemed like something you would do based on that prior knowledge. But I realize there are practical limitations, since then you'd have to hire someone just to run the experiment, and it might not garner as many participants, etc. Separately, it would be awesome some day if there were some larger-scale ongoing experiment like this that occurred at audio events across the world, testing different things, including placebo. Fun thoughts. Thanks again!
That's a very cool idea to make this large scale! As for people's expectations, I wasn't always the one there and we often listed the types of things that could be different (e.g. power supply, file type, cable type, transport software, etc.) and this was to prevent any expectations of what we were testing or even if it should make a difference.
@@PassionforSound Thanks for the reply! Ah, that's great to know, it sounds like you accounted for that well and I may have forgotten that from the video. I really like that you were able to do this at an audio event and had as many participants as you did.
Thanks Jeff. Hopefully I can do more and better tests like this in future with additional controls in place and on different devices like power supplies, analog interconnects, etc.
Loved this video! I was guessing different USB cables...I already believed that cables could make a difference, but now I'm thinking about buying an even higher-end USB cable to connect my streamer. I do a lot of listening and spaciousness and separation and soundstage are super important to me. Primarily a speaker listener and differences in standstage are hugely apparent over my system.
Glad you liked it, Todd! As I said in the video, I think soundstage size and quality are factors that may people begin to prioritise as they progress in the audio journey. So far, the best staging USB cables I've heard are the Curious Evolved and the Tellurium Q Black USB cables.
@@PassionforSound I've started to realize that as I go higher in this hobby, the frequency response of headphones seem to matter less and less (assuming you have a great chain that pairs well with the hps). And, in return, things in the time domain, noise, dynamics, and timbre matter much much more. So, I guess in general the source starts to become the priority as you move up (generally in price). Also, I recommend trying to get your hands on an fta callisto (or sinope) usb cable. They're great cables and, imo, wipes the floor out of the excalibur (the callisto is what I use).
Thanks for the tip, David. That's an interesting point about the headphones. I think, once you hit a point, they're (almost) all well designed and well tuned plus they don't have the harshness of some cheaper headphones so you can start to focus on all the other factors you listed. Good point!
Excellent experiment Lachlan! Loves to do this kind of blind test because it reveals what I like in sound. Its nice to know that my sound preference comes from the usb cable that I already own. Otherwise, I will have itch to buy the other usb cable 😆
So true, Hadi (about you not having to try more cables now)! I have to admit that I didn't expect the results to show so clearly that people can hear the differences.
I'd believe that. I expect it's only a small difference, but once you reach a certain point in your audio setup, those are the tires of tweaks that people consider
One thing I came across recently is 'The Big Misconception About Electricity' on the Veritasium channel. It is of course controversial too (see other popular science channels). everything seems to be controversial by necessity nowadays... but Veritasium explains that electricity through a conductor (wire) is not just electrons flowing. this made me start thinking. what are implications for audio. Too early for me to draw conclusions from, need to dig deeper, but certainly worth checking out for many of us ;o)
That was a fantastic video and test you put together! I never would have thought that USB cables could make a difference. The question is, could it have been placebo? I think another test where people are asked if there is a difference, but the setups are exactly the same, would be very interesting to see after this video. Either way, keep up the great content!
I'll be honest, I was surprised to see the results. I appreciate the method and controls you implemented to try to keep factors consistent. As a scientist, may I suggest you check your methods against experts in the field who do control experiments all the time to help your data be more robust. You may not have access to that type of resource though but I think peer review work can help if you're going to be doing more experiments. Another suggestion is more repetition such as running experiments twice. More data can mean more statistical analysis. It can help develop more interpretations of the result. I hope to see more of this type of videos! As from where I stand on this subect, I think there will be differences from cables to DACs to amplifiers. Whether or not they are technically better, who knows. Whether they are worth the money is really up to the individual. I really enjoy this hobby and the journey it's taken me in so far. I can't see myself spending $500 on cables right now. But maybe in the future when all my gears are summit, cables will be the next step!
Thanks for the input, but I'm not looking to do peer reviewed studies. Having studied sciences in the past, I understand what's involved and don't have the time or budget to setup that type of thing while the channel ID still a side gig. Perhaps one day if it ends up growing enough to pay its way I can dedicate that sort of time and money to the channel.
Having owned and used both a Curious (original) usb cable and an Audioquest Carbon USB cable, I can attest there are audible differences between the 2.
Having an age demographic would be interesting and using a more resolving headphone like susvara and a switch box would eliminate any headphone variations. Nice work, thought it would be the usb cables seeing as how down the rabbit hole you are with them, hopefully I'll see you at the next one if work permits.
The demographics were largely male and 40+ (maybe 50+) but there was a good representation of younger males too, just not too many females. I contemplated testing something different, but I get so much grief about my USB cable reviews that I wanted to kick off by seeing if I could get some reliable proof that I'm not crazy 😁
I recently tried a few different USB cables between my Roon Nucleus and Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC. I noticed a difference and not always for the better. I didn’t like the Nordost Heimdall 2, liked the Shuntata Venom and Wireworld Platinum Starlight. Ended up keeping the Shunyata because it was affordable and sounded great.
Well done Lachlan! I’m a cable sceptic and don’t believe any differences exist so long as the given cable meets specifications for the appropriate application. However when my journey started decades ago I firmly believed I heard differences, I believed in so much audiophile nonsense, such as Mpingo Shun Mook discs, cable elevators, earth rocks EVERYTHING made a difference and I could not be swayed. Until I performed a blind test with cables that I could clearly hear differences between sighted, but they all sounded exactly the same, my journey changed from that day onwards, my pride was shattered but I faced a cheaper future and I’ve never looked back. What I think would be more beneficial and obvious to end the debate, would be a blind test between a lamp cord and a $20,000 cable, it would just put the nail firmly in the coffin. I mean even if there was a difference it would be riveting, let alone one being clearly better.
I am definitely a sceptic when it comes to cable lifters, etc. but with USB cables there's no doubt in my mind and that's after conducting many tests for myself and having results go against expectations when comparing some very expensive cables so I know it's not my expectations as play. As for your test idea, the problem I have is that this type of video just encourages every non-believer to want to pick hopes in the methodology rather than consider the actual results. Your suggestion would sadly just result in thousands of comments saying it's an invalid test because the lamp wire doesn't meet specs. Or, if you meant just the most basic, generic cable then I think the results would be no different to this in that it would still prove that there is an audible difference and that's all I was looking for here - the rest was just "colour"
Andy Reichert correctly makes the case that it could be the USB sockets on your laptop that aren't identical. I would be very curious to hear how removing that variable would change the data. On my different laptops, I think I hear a difference in detail and resolution depending on which USB port I use, although I could be self-biased also! Thanks for a wonderful and thought provoking video. More please!
Swapped my usb to the lowest tier Supra cable. Got that for $60. The sound difference was immediate for me. Much better! Would love to hear what these very expensive cables are doing but don't need to chase that dragon. Satisfied with the sound coming out of my system right now... so...... :) If you have the means and the desire i would definitely try them! Even that "budget" Supra made a sweet and noticeable difference at my desktop setup.
Very interesting! I wouldn't have thought the cables alone would make a perceptible difference, absent manifest differences in their composition/material etc; I thought this was going to end up with a reveal that one was playing a 96kHz 24-bit FLAC file and the other, a 128kbps MP3. Perhaps that would be too obvious. Appreciate there would be time/cost/sample size constraints, but it would have been interesting to not flag to participants whether there was a difference or not and let them decide, then elaborate as to why? Or alternatively to change the setup half way through so that they were identical (but still telling people they were different) to see if that affected the results. Either way, easy to throw in one's 2c after the event and from behind a keyboard. This was quite fascinating.
So glad you enjoyed it! If we didn't tell people that there was a difference in the chain, there would be no purpose in them listening to both setups. The key was that we asked them to decide IF the change we made had resulted in a difference. 🙂
All expected that it would be a difference, so I'm not surprised 80% think it was, I would be curious to see if leaving no change at all had given the same result, I think it would.
I have no doubt that there was an audible difference, although playing with different USB cables in my own setup did not lead to audible differences -- so far. What would be VERY interesting for most semi tech-savvy people like me: HOW can different USB cables still influence sound, if it's all 0 and 1. I guess I know the answer to a certain degree -- but maybe you could dive into the topic, get some insights from people of Chord / others, and enlighten us? :-)
I've been trying to find someone to help with this discussion for years now and I find that DAC engineers often say it makes no difference while cable manufacturers are less inclined to be interviewed because it stirs up too many trolls ☹️
USB cable does make a difference, and it's especially noticeable if you listen through IEM. I had a centrance DAC that had a slight background hiss which was audible while only using IEMs. I was using a USB C to C cable out of my laptop. I also had a thunderbolt 3 cable lying around (which is compatible with USB C but not vice-versa) and it immediately got rid of the hiss. Now, thunderbolt cables are usually not cheap but they are also usually better built than your regular cheap USB C cables. And I think that was the reason, the better built quality. Anyway, advice to someone shopping for USB C cables for DACs, look at thunderbolt cables. You can get one for $20-$30 and they are much better built.
Edit: before watching the whole thing, lemme guess. The variable are the cables? XD Oh and what about the burn in time of the units? Because DAPs like the Walkman Wm1A and Wm1z sounds significantly different when it’s fresh at 0hr and one at 500hrs…
I knew it! I knew it must have been one of the most controversial topics of all which is even referenced on one of your t-shirts :D I still can't wrap my head around how a USB cable can make such a change, I even remember you previously mentioning that while you believe different cables to be slightly different, you're not sure if you'd be able to tell them apart in a blind test. Half-jokingly - maybe it just goes to show that the USB implementation in the Hugo TT2 is not that good, hehe. ;-) It's interesting but it also makes me think of what I'm doing at this very moment - playing with upsampling on Roon and I kid you not, 50% of the time I think I am hearing a difference (not necessarily for the better, just a difference), but the other 50% of the time I am convinced that this is auto-suggestion. As someone here has already pointed out - even if the two set-ups had been identical, perhaps the majority of people would have been inclined to say (and genuinely believe) that they heard a difference. After all, you play the same track twice in a row - you're gonna hear different things, i.e. focus on different aspects of sound. But a great idea regardless - thanks!
I believe we controlled for expectation by telling people that while there was a difference in the source chain, their job was to decide if it actually did or did not influence the sound. Interestingly, and somewhat counter-intuitively, USB cables have more impact than upsampling in my experience
I hate to ask someone to ruin expensive cables but... hey maybe someone can get a logic analyzer to decode USB, and create splices between the DAC and PC to monitor to logic levels of the USB digital signal. Let's see if what is seen as the digital signals from these cables actually vary at all? Perhaps there will be differences in amplitude and phases of the signals between data and the clock.
I was actually chatting about that with Peter (who did the reveal) as it would be very interesting and his up his alley in terms of the tech apparently
it's great that you used 'ridiculously' capable equipment so as to preemptively cancel that recurring discussion that without top tier stuff it's not worth doing any test.
The methodology is kinda flawed since the listeners were primed to look for differences. Another variable not controlled for were the headphones, even two identical model of headphones might not sound the same.
Unrelated but I just want to say that I got an ad before this video on a website you can get feet pics called feet finder. Interesting. Also nice video.
I reckon the biggest confounding variable is the person listening. Listening to a ? Unknown piece of music….How should it sound…..what is better…the expectation that one should be better than the other. The mood I am in….trying to remember what the first time I listened sounded like. Listening in a strange environment to how I listen at home. Oh and I’ve just argued with my wife. And is that my bladder telling me I need a pee…..the list goes on😊
That's why it was important to have lots of people do the test and also to listen to the exact same piece of music across two identical systems (except the one chosen variable)
This analysis seems very peculiar. Spotting a difference with no direction (more or less of something) and arriving at a 50/50 shows that no one could tell any difference essentially. Like throwing a coin. Exactly what one would expect. Why not compare a $1 cable against the $500 one to start with. Because you don't sell those?
I was firmly in the "it's only 1s and 0s" camp until quite recently. I had been using stock USB cables until I was loned a Wireworld Starlight Platinum 7. It sounded great, but I did not bother with a back and forth compare with the cheaper cables. Fearing I would soon have to return the Wireworld cable, I looked for something to replace it. I bought a fairly cheap Supra cable that had some good reviews. I really wanted the Supra to perform but it was like someone put a thick blanket over my speakers. In fairness to Supra, I did not compare their £30 cable to the £1 cables I had been using, but next to the £700 cable it was night and day. Happy to say, I picked up a Starlight Platinum off ebay and I remain very happy with it.
I was also under the impression for the longest time that expensive cables were snake oil.. until I heard it for myself. It's a subtle, yet noticeable difference. For example, going from a 100% Copper to 100% Silver headphone cable definitely changes a headphones sound. Whether it's better or worse is a different story.
Glad you were open minded enough to try it for yourself and not convince yourself there was no difference. I completely agree that the differences aren't always better.
Interesting. The obvious flaw in your comment that the two sets of hardware are exactly the same which they are not. They're very similar but there's always unit variation. The scientific approach would have been to swap cable over halfway through the tests. If you can get consistent results the next few times you repeat the test you might have something.
I respectfully think that suggesting two pieces of hardware from a reputable manufacturer would hold the kind of variance that's shown here is a bit of a stretch. These products are all measured and quality controlled for conformity to the design and performance. I've also tried tests where cables are swapped and it takes way too long and is far more damaging to the test's reliability because it brings in greater influence from auditory memory which is very inaccurate after even a moderate delay. I'm confident that this was the right approach. Given budget and space, the only change is make is to add a control with a separate pair that had no difference to see how many still thought they heard a difference
@@PassionforSound you don't understand. You only need to swap the cable once. Headphones are notorious for not being inconsistent. If you can repeat the test and get the same result a few times then you're really on to something.
Ah, you mean to swap Config 1 to the Supra and Config 2 to the Curious. Sorry, I thought you meant to use a single setup and swap the USB cables. Yes, that would have been a good idea and I actually thought about it briefly, but dismissed it (clearly without proper consideration of how it might help)
Great idea, Lachlan! However, the result that there was a nearly 50-50 split of which configuration sounded better is not very helpful to support that there was a difference.
The test was focussed purely on if there was a difference, not which was preferable (the 50/50 was on preferences only). The first question asked if there was or was not a difference and that was a pretty strong ~80% who heard a difference.
@@PassionforSound No, I am not sarcastic. After 50 years of electronics study, experience and hobby I can't find a theoretical reason for that. Maybe some checksum correction? But digital signals are used just for that: to prevent signal distortion and interference. In analog cables anything can happend. We are talking about thea digital USB-cable between computer and DAC, right?
Yes, just USB straight from the PC the DAC. Logically/theoretically it makes no sense that the sound could be influenced and yet my consistent experience with USB, optical and coaxial connections is that the cables are able to influence the sound. I just can't work out how it find anyone who can clearly explain it to me.
Talking about confirmation biais… trained listeners picked 1 🤦🏻♂️ Even thought nice work. Can’t wait for more tests. This useful and needed. Should have done it with the same headphone with an a/b switch because to me this was the biggest variable.
Yes, that's a point. I suggested that if he had the resources, it would also be useful to have replicates and control. Having a large number of people reporting differences may be due to different reasons, including chance, which means there are not significant differences. I nevertheless congratulate Lachlan for the effort under the limitations of his experiment.
The resources are the key restriction. I appreciate the acknowledgement of this as it wasn't a lack of thought or intent to do this as best I could. As for the picking of Config 1, Mat Lab, that's not confirmation bias, but me talking to at least half the people who did this test and drawing some conclusions that I flagged strongly as pure speculation, but based on some strong anecdotal evidence and reasoning.
Yeah and if the results were still the same we should try better songs and yet the results are the same then choose musicians who use better personal hygiene products 😂 … may be listen in good weather?
I've actually got a review of the Singxer SU-6 DDC coming soon and (without giving too much away) it's shown me that the quality of the cable is equally as important regardless of the source feeding to the DAC
Lachlan doing proverbial "god's work" here... so much still to be tested for audio, sound preferences, and a/b comparisons. The existing way of measuring the aspects of sound performance are so very limited. If we can move the needle just a bit on this respect perhaps we can one day get objective datasets that provide meaningful outputs.
Thanks Ace. According to most of the comments, it seems it's the devil's work, but I'll keep digging. I'm giving up on trying to prove anything about USB cables now though as it's clearly fruitless for those with extreme denial on the topic. I'll still review them for those who are open minded and interested in how they sound though 🙂 I've got a fascinating power cable and filter review coming soon too 🙂🙂
@@PassionforSound I wouldn’t give up.. in fact the harder people push means the more work that needs to be done on convincing. We all crave objective data to make informed decisions but in audio the ways Of measuring performance through objective means is just not there. Consider yourself a Trail Blazer where you’re braking fresh ground.
Why don't you get an xlr switch box And I have a better way for a blind test, especially to remove placebo and expectation bias as much as possible in audio, because when you tell them there is 1 different, there're expectation bias and the fact that it's almost a 50-50 fight between those usb cable make me think that there're pure guessing/affected by placebo So this is my testing setup : Tell the subject that there're may or may NOT be a difference in the chain, and we maybe or maybe NOT(if we aren't, we still pretend that we did change smth) change that element when someone finished there test, and create 2 different data for how many people get it right or wrong when there's no different in the chain and when there's 1 different.
Please see the pinned comment regarding expectation bias. As for the switch box, the ones I've tried (and can afford) are not transparent and will mask fine details in the audio that can be important for tests like this
I noticed a difference in depth and smoothness between a non-shielded printer USB cable and a Supra 50 dollar USB audio cable but I am surprised that there was a significant difference between a 100 dollar USB audio cable and a 500 dollar USB audio cable since they both appear to be shielded and designed for audio .
Yes, I think this shows that there's more to it than simple external noise isolation. Unfortunately, I don't know what the next part of the puzzle is...
Really interesting, would enjoy more of this type of content. As I understand it, USB is an analogue representation of digital information, subject to external interference as any other signal. improvements can be made by the quality & purity of materials and also by insulation. I noticed a sizable improvement when I went from bog standard USB to Audioquest Cinnamon. There are many naysayers. I have no problem having them tell me I'm wasting my money.
Thanks, Keith. Glad you liked it. I've got plans for more of this type of content (with different variables) in the future. I'm glad you've found a setup you like and that you're ok hearing the naysayers nay 🙂
Looks like my prior comment got sacked, didn't really add anything so no great loss. I'll save commenting till you actually publish the videos from now on. In reading through the comments it's about what I expected. I think I agree with the folks pointing out that HiFi community peoples are more likely to say they heard a difference in a test if you tell them there's a difference. That's a belief statement, I don't know that for certain just something that I'd agree with. I don't know that it'd be ego driven or outright deception, could just be the mind inventing or accentuating the slightest of differences. But I definitely disagree with the unit variation arguments. If that's the case then reviews and critiques on sound impression are 100% moot. I think where I'd add my own 2 cents is with regards to audio memory. I'm sorry but I trust precisely no one's audio memory, even my own, even after seconds. Trying to retain what something just sounded like with accuracy and perform non-continuous playback tests (take off headphone A, put on headphone B, etc.) I'm certain would account for perceived differences. I think continuous playback allowing the listener to switch blindly between two or three options would be the more convincing blind test though I know, I know.. that wasn't something within your immediate control or resources to provide. This was an interesting test, a good exercise imo but I'm not really sold on the results. Though it's important for me to say that I don't disparage cables or cable makers. I don't see a reason why they can't make a difference in improving or changing the sound of a particular set up. I'd just rather spend my money elsewhere, for now. Maybe future experiments will yield more compelling evidence. I think it's awesome you waded into this. Happy to see most everyone being respectful. It's like we're adults or something.
Don't talk too soon about the respectfulness 😉 I've added a few points in a pinned comment including one that addresses the expectation bias as I really don't think that was a deciding factor (see pinned comment) I respect everyone's choice to ignore cables, but I'm conscious that there's a strong current of cognitive dissonance and denial around this topic.
it is not a revelation at all... there are people that plug the headphone into an oscilloscope and listen perfect sinusoial wave, those think that it is matter of only 0 and 1 and a cable good for printer is good also for hifi... then there are stupit crazy people, like me, that understand what Haas explained many times... usb in audio it is matter of timing, it is an analog signal... and when it is time for analog signal things like geometry inside the cable, materials, shield, RCL values, can make differences not subtle at all... for sure not for a printer, but we are not printers ;)
Your testing is significantly flawed. There’s no control group, meaning there’s no way to verify or falsify the answers, so there’s no way to confirm that they really heard a difference. It’s like in a drug testing, you only give the patients the drug (no placebo) and ask them if they feel better. No matter whether they answered yes or no, there’s no way for you to verify whether the drug is effective. To make things worse, asking people attending a hifi show whether they can hear the difference KNOWING there’s a veriable in the chain is an extremely biased setting. It’s almost like questioning their ear, questioning their qualifications as an audiophile or justification for spending money on these gears. Of course people will be biased to answer there is a difference, even if they are not sure. And from your follow up questions such as preferences or descriptions of the difference, I think your conclusion that most people did hear a difference is very, very doubtful. A nice effort, but the significant flawed design of the test rendered the conclusion pretty much meaningless.
From what I understand even designers of speakers couldn't consistently pick out their own speaker among 4 or 5 they listened to at Harman's double blind tests. I guess that scares a lot of people, but puts into question how much people really need to spend to have a decent system; a question the manufacturers want left unexplored.
Audio is a very complex thing to measure in any sense (subjectively or objectively) because it includes elements such as frequency response, timing, spatial queues, overall tonality/timbre, etc. There is likely no particularly reliable way to measure audio because the thing we are measuring contains many variables and a well designed test will aim to isolate a single variable - impossible with music
I respect the testing process of ABX or measuremenst, but its a hobby. People will buy/collect what ever makes them happy. Apply this to any hobby, golfing fishing art cars watches anything at all share the same end result, subjective pleasure and satisfaction. When people get too invested in the objective or subjective and start argueing and putting each other down thats when it gets toxic.
That one I'd doubt. I've tried that type of test and the moment you're listening for specific queues to determine which is which, things get very dicey due to the vast number of variables contained in a piece of music
The result is good enough. There different between USB cable. Good job! I think you are not trying to persuade ppl into believing cable, just sharing the results? LoL
The cable that transmits the digital signal cannot affect the quality of the sound tract, it is physically impossible. There is no explanation from the physics and engineering point of view.
Other than the fact that the signal in any digital interconnect (other than optical) is an analog signal (fluctuating voltage) and therefore could be influenced by all the same factors as a music signal - impedance, conductance, capacitance, skin effect, dielectric constant, EMI, RFI, etc. These are all scientific principles proven to affect the voltages travelling in wires.
The absence of YOUR knowledge doesn't render the subject "impossible". People should finally start being humble and admit that they don't know EVERYTHING in this world.
I would be curious to see if, leaving no change at all, people would say they hear a difference.
They would but not for the reason you think. It's like coke and pepsi. Put them both in the fridge and try to guess which is which. Most can't tell. If you know what you're looking for (I tell you the coke tastes slightly drier and the pepsi is slightly more carbonated and sweet) you'll instantly notice it... same thing. Two amps can sound similar but are you looking at their tonality, resolution, how they compare on highs, bass, etc. And you can't look for all these things at once you need a few listening sessions because different tracks sound different and it can take some testing to nail down its sound signature and even then it's in reference to each other. Having only one for a while might make you feel differently about it too
the scientific way yes; double blind placebo controlled. it is a way to filter out bias and other factors such as the difference between listening the first or second time. it would be interesting to see if few or many would say that they hear a difference.
Given the budget and space, I would have loved to have an identical setup with no variables as a control to see the percentage of people who heard differences between two identical setups. I hope to build this in to future tests.
@@PassionforSound just need three not four setups
@@V1ralB1ack I think most people can tell coke from Pepsi. Pepsi is a lot sweeter.
From a process standpoint, I would swap the cables part way through the day to make sure that there wasn't other equipment variance that could account for the differences. It would also be interesting if there was a control setup that matched one of the other setups and we could see how often people could identify the identical systems.
Seconded! :-)
Indeed only real test is to swap cables on the same device, otherwise you likely listen to differences between the devices and variances in components
Very surprising results! Love the test.
As a cable skeptic, I'm surprised that 80%+ of listeners reported hearing a difference, BUT I can rationalize it away as... listeners are motivated to say that they hear a difference as a sort of hobbyist cred. In other words, if I answer no, it must mean my ears are not very good, ergo I am motivated to answer yes, I heard a difference.
The second data point about preference seems to back this up. When asked which one was better, the answers were 50/50, a coin toss. So while listeners could placebo themselves into hearing a difference, they couldn't consistently identify the "better" one. In a world where there _is_ one "better" one, this would be pretty damning, but as you rightly point out, listener preference confounds that rationale. In other words, a 50/50 result, given a random distribution of listener preferences, is certainly plausible if indeed the setups sound different.
At this point, game theoretically we're at... it's still plausible the difference is "real," but also just as likely it is placebo.
The third level of data is the strongest support for the "reality" of different sounds of the setups: People used similar words to describe the each setup, and (presumably from here) without a high degree of overlap between Setup A and B. This is a result that could not be easily explained by placebo rationale and is indeed the data point that forces me as a skeptic to sit back... and open my mind a bit. This data point adds credibility to the prior two.
I am not ready to replace USB cables in my setup, but I really appreciate the effort you've put into this test -- it's well-designed and something I'd love to see more of!
At an audio show, in a blind test booth, I think it's far more likely that even if people did hear a difference they'd say they didn't on the off chance the difference was cables so they don't look like they're backtracking on their stance on cables. Cables straight up objectively change sound, but to what degree and why is up to the cables being compared. The "cables don't matter" camp tends to be the ones that cant tell the difference in DACs, most likely have only ever owned the 6XX, think ASR measurments mean something and think getting headphones to volume means you have enough power and that amp topology differences are meaningless.
@@pokrog Yes that's me.
I think, respectfully, those who seek to completely ignore the possible implications of this test are going against their own reliance on the scientific approach. When provided measurement data (which doesn't tell the whole story) it is blindly accepted and yet, when offered solid (but not perfect) data suggesting a different possibility, it is denied. I hope more people can explore this for themselves with an open mind
@@PassionforSound Respectfully, whether a test is scientifically designed can be objectively measured, and need to be peer reviewed. I challenge that a drug company using this method to “blind test” their drug won’t get FDA approval, and it’s not because FDA is not “open-minded” enough.
The results are not surprising at all. It's an absolutely embarrassing and useless test.
First, Test still has an issue because you need an X example. ABX. Second, different headphones were used which could have had slight differences in drivers and therefore sound. Also, you told people before you started that there’s is a variation.
You shouldn’t have mentioned a variation. Then, ask them whether there was or wasn’t a difference without them knowing that there was before the test started. You created bias right from the start. With ABX, you could have had a variation and then asked the participants which one was different and which 2 were the same.
Exactly! You are totally correct about the X example. I really appreciate the effort they put into the test, but telling people up front that the systems are different predisposed people to hear a difference. My guess--if they told the listeners the systems were totally identical, the numbers would have flipped and 80% would not have heard a difference.
Given budget and space, I would have loved to include a control of sorts, but this was the best we could manage.
The degree of headphone variance is not a factor in my experience as these products are produced to within tiny tolerances when using a quality product like the Empyreans.
As for the instructions, we had to explain to people why they needed to listen to both, but we made it very clear that there was a variable that may or may not make a difference. We asked the to listen and decide IF it made a difference so we deliberately created a question around that, not an expectation. In fact, many people (I'd guess 10-15%) asked at the end of there actually wasn't any difference and if this was a trick so there were plenty of people being very conscious not to hear things that weren't there.
I don't think we'll ever get a perfect test because of the nature of the topic. My hope is that people will at least consider what this is demonstrating and not write off the possibilities out of hand
@@PassionforSound There may not be a “perfect” test, but there’s obviously better tests. If pharmaceutical companies are doing drugged test like that it’ll be a disaster.
In fact, you don’t need to change anything in the hardware setting, but only change the question to “do you think the 2 systems are identical or different” would be much less biased than “there is a variable in the chain, can you hear the difference”.
Other better designs include 1) ABX, and 2) setup another group of machines that’s truly identical, and ask people to tell which group has the variable.
I do like your suggested wording of the question - that would have been better. I'm not sure how much clearer I can be about the reasons for some not having a control setup - I get it and hope to factor that in for future tests where possible.
I've been looking at some of the comments and want to address a few things in one go here to save me typing it over and over:
1) the variation of performance between two products (headphones or DAC/amp) from reputable products would not produce the types of results shown in this test unless one was faulty (which they were not)
2) fit and positioning of a headphone can alter its sound slightly by shifting the size and exact frequency of some spikes in treble, etc. but not by a huge margin and, more importantly, it will not influence the types of factors people cited in the test (e.g. presentation of detail, spatial qualities and dynamics)
3) swapping cables on these devices takes time because the playback software has to be stopped and restarted to prevent crashes. This introduces a very challenging variable which is the reliance on medium-to-long term auditory memory and that is highly innacurate
4) given the budget and space, I would have loved to have an identical setup with no variables as a control to see the percentage of people who heard differences between two identical setups. I hope to build this in to future tests.
5) participants were told that there was a variable in the setups and asked to decide if it made a difference. That can lead to two thought processes/expectations - the expectation of a difference AND the expectation of no difference so some respondents may have also been biased towards a "no difference" response.
Hi Lachlan, I’m keen to try the Melbourne meet up and love your work! One way to address point 1 is to swap the USB cables halfway through the day, then you can split the data by before and after the USB swap and you’ll be able to check if it was just the different rig that made the difference, or the cable.
Edit: agree that variances between those products is small, but it’s an easy way to rule out that hypothesis
Hi. I find your exercise very interesting and sympathize with the shortfalls, I think you did a great job. That said, I'm glad you mentioned missing a control group, but you are also missing replicates. These two factors are essential to isolate chance effects. For example, while it is definitive that subjects reported differences it would be also important to determine if such differences are consistent across subjects in all replicas. But then again, I understand the limitations and applaud your very interesting effort!
If I may suggest something else that I'd love to see tested this way, is the perceived differences in type and location of op amps in the Burson Audio Conductor 3 Reference =)
Cheers
I'll be happy to add op-amps to my list of tests in the future, Carlos.
As for the replication, that's something I could not build into a setup like this, but we also aren't really interested in which is better (that would require replication for sure), but just if a difference could be heard and I think the modest, but decent sample size covers the reliability of that factor.
Dac/amp variation between units I can get behind it but headphones… cmon! unit variation is a thing with headphones even L and R channel are not 100% accurate. This variation is more likely more than the variations between the two usb cable you tested.
@@MaLaLiberty I'm with you on this. I respect Lachlan and what he is trying to do here, but there are proven measurable and audible differences between units of the same headphones. Until you control for this by using an A/B switch box and the same set of headphones, no meaningful conclusions are possible about anything else in the chain.
As far as this test, I think there would best be a third system, to mirror an "ABX" blind test. That way you can get at "which of these is different" and really drill into whether people who cite differences are doing so because they expect it or because they actually hear it.
For future tests, I would love to see a volume matched test with different amplifiers as the variable, specifically a high powered vs. a lower powered amp. This would investigate claims that "some headphones need lots of power to be 'driven properly.'" It makes no sense to me from a physics standpoint why an amplifier with more headroom would "drive a power hungry planar" better *at the same volume* as a lower powered amp with less headroom.
My dude, if you give people an A and B setup tell them there might or might not be a difference, most people will ABSOLUTELY tell you there is indeed a difference. If you wanted to do this with actual scientific methodology you would have a setup with either A + B + Control (Same as B), and determine if people could detect a difference from A vs. Control against B vs. Control. Alternatively you Could do 2 setups, A + B with a difference, or a control A + B without difference and determine the first set has a larger amount of people claiming a difference over the control. In short, you didn't use a control and you introduced bias by implying there is likely a difference.
I'd just like to say that I appreciate the efforts to make this a controlled test with as little bias as possible, hats off Sir!
Thank you. I'm glad you like the approach! 🙂🙂
X2!
I had this revelation about 2 years ago, while testing a DAC that I was planing to buy, I was suggested to try out a "Good" usb cable, I was curtain that I won't hear any difference, but I did, then I asked to give me a blind test. 10 tests with random cable each time, I got 10/10 right. I brought the cable strait away and continued to test the DAC.
Thanks so much for sharing your experiences, Alex! That's great that you gave it a try for yourself. There's no better judge
Great work, Lachlan! I really appreciate the step-by-step methodologies you use to investigate things, like in this instance to keep it as easy as possible for the participants with the 3 stages of response from simple to more complex.
My pleasure 🙂🙂
I was lucky enough to be there and I'm honestly impressed. As for the 50/50 results, I'm not surprised, they both sounded very good but offered different presentations.
Thanks for being a part of it, Dean!
I have driven myself crazy with A-B testing all the new (expensive to me) gear I just bought. Going from gaming headsets traditionally to Edition XS and a $300 Schiit Stack is a leap for most of us. I got each item in isolation and tested for a week and kept adding finally the amp and then the Modi dac. All I can confirm is yes it all does sound very good and each piece added some kind of additional level of importance and well roundedness to the equation. For those on the fence, who are really tight on the money and are new to this game, my simple advice is once you get any kind of higher ohm or low sensitivity headphone you WILL need at least an amp. I think the best bang for buck here so you get the DAC too is Fiio K5 it seems like. I think I would have been happy with that over my Schiit stack but whatever, my XS eats all the energy you throw at it. I will say the DAC added a presence particularly in sound stage and the ability for my amp not to work so hard since its pushing 2v instead of 1v like most other onboard DAC's or XLR interfaces. The difference is not at all night and day for me. I still keep plugging my XS into my $40 UMC22 interface to see if I can tell the difference and it's incredibly subtle. I just know that the Modi/Magni sounds a bit more spacious and "interesting", hard to put my finger on it. Small, small differences. The biggest difference is that the UMC22 cannot drive any of my headphones to reasonable high volumes without distorting so this is where you are forced to make the leap into something with more power.
Thanks for sharing your experiences 🙂
I'm not a high-end cable user but I have always kept an open mind when it comes to cables and I'm honestly not surprised.
I think that's the key - an open mind. What you do with the information is then entirely up to you 🙂
As a participant, there was a discernible difference; I'm just clarifying this here because there are a lot of...opinions.
Thanks for checking in to share that, CR. Nicely put too 🙂
@@PassionforSound No, thank you for setting this up; providing the opportunity for other people to discover and learn something new. I just feel sorry that you have to push so hard up-hill to educate people and challenge misconceptions.
Stay positive 😊!
Yes, shocking for me.. until the end I was convinced that the difference must be the power supply.. I always thought usb cables make the least difference but here we are... it is time to hear this for myself..
I hope you can try a few and let me know what you discover. There's no doubt that power supplies also make a significant difference, but I think the digital interconnects are maybe a larger influence
digital input actually makes the most significant difference, and then the power supply, and then analog cables
I like this, after all a blind test is what is necessary for finding out if there is a difference that a certain piece of equipment makes.
That was my thinking 🙂
The thing which has made a consistent improvement to my system over the years has been a good malt whisky. 🙂
That'll do it! 🥃
Ah ha! Now there's something that not many people will argue with. I've found similar results.
Scientifically proven, rock solid yes! :)
This is a fascinating test; thanks for doing it. I can maybe see a couple of possible improvements: (1) Have 3 configurations, 2 of them with cable A, and 1 of them with cable B. See how many people can identify the two configurations that are the same. (2) Swap which USB port each cable is plugged into, halfway through the test. This could identify if there is a random difference in the amount of noise leaking into one USB port, and the amount of noise leaking into the other USB port.
I too have good grades in statistics 😊
Thanks Michael, I have tested using the laptop before in this manner and the USB outputs don't differ in their performance in any audible way. Please see my pinned comment for response to the idea of additional controls
not a surprise. my friend and I did hear sound different from a USB DAC dongle when swapping different type-C cable. we were thinking of the powersupply to the dongle as it was power by the same TYPE-c cable., but after watching your tube, maybe the cable itself can make a different... As a engineer I didn't expect a digital cable will make a different, but data didn't lie and we have to find out why instead of yelling improssible.
I'm so glad you can see this data as posing questions rather than needing to deny any other possibilities - thank you for having an open and inquiring mind!
I'd love to understand what is going on with digital interconnects, but I'm still searching for those answers
It’s interested that if people can hear a difference in such a loud environment then it should be an obvious difference when listening at home and there shouldn’t be any debate on it. Which can only mean one thing : most of audiophiles(arguing types) don’t have any hands on experience with the product they are talking/writing about.
Sound true! LOL
To me this test mostly correlates to a "if you tell people there is a difference they will likely hear a difference" test. Would have been great if you could have swapped to same cables on both rigs half way through the data collection to put this theory further to the test.
We wouldn't have had large enough sample sizes then and everyone would have focussed on that as the shortcoming instead ☹️
People were told that there was a difference in the source chain and that their job was to decide if it created an audible difference so the expectation went in both directions - that there could be a difference and that there might not be a difference
@@PassionforSound this would be the perfect test:
All through the day tell people the systems might be identical or they might not be identical.
In the morning use 2 different USB cables. In the afternoon use 2 identical USB cables. (Or identical in the morning and different in the afternoon).
Thanks again for making this video 😊
The sample size of the non-control group would have been too small if I did that. I did consider it. 🙂
Hi Lachlan, great content!
Now can you please tell us a) which laptop did you use exactly (Brand and model) and b) which USB ports did you use on that laptop ?
The reason I ask is because some times the manufacturer may connect the USB outputs from different paths. As-in for example usb #1 might be connected through the chipset directly (ex. amd b550m or intel qm175) while usb #2 might be connected through a usb controller (as-in a usb hub if you will that multiplies the usb ports while using the same usb connection from the cpu or chipset, they do that because the actual bandwidth is the same but they split it up into many ports cause they can't dedicate a separate usb channel for each usb port). And understandably there might be different electrical noise coming out of those 2 ports.
Another way to do it moving forward would be to use a usb splitter or external hub maybe or measure the electrical signal you get from your usb ports to make sure it's the same and also take a look at the block diagram of the computer's motherboard (either laptop or desktop) to see which usb port is connected where. (look it up, block diagram of a motherboard, which is usually in the motherboard's pdf manual, you'll need to know the exact model of the motherboard obviously)
Many thanks.
PS I totally agree with the approach to investigate and ultimately squash stereotypes on ambiguous things like: usb cables, xlr cables, power supply units, DDC/no DDC, power strips, fuses, and probably many other things I can't recall.
PS2 If you're going through the trouble of an AB test with people, it might be good to collect more info from them for statistical reasons, like their age (which impacts hearing ability), their music preference (ex. EDM, classical, metal, pop, rock, etc..) (which may or may not impact their preference in bass, tremble or separation, etc)
Hi Panos, it's a Dell Inspiron 13" IIRC. I've used it multiple times and never heard any significant difference between the outputs.
As for the demographic information, I didn't want to collect potentially sensitive information from strangers at a HiFi Show. I'm also not trying to run a peer reviewed, scientific study, but just collect a bunch of blind impressions from as broad a cross section as possible. To setup a proper study on this would require time and money I don't have (the channel isn't my day job and doesn't make anywhere near enough money to be) 🙂
I think adding a simple two-in-one-out physical switch after the amps and before the headphone would help eliminate a variable (multiple headphones). And the less time it takes to switch sources the better; its certainly much faster to flick a switch than it is to swap headphones. I suspect this kind of switch can be constructed (or bought) with more than enough quality to not affect sound quality.
I've played around with a relatively cheap and readily available one, but it degrades the sound quality enough to make a test like this more difficult. Given the budget (i.e. if the channel were larger and more financial) I could do this with a much more transparent one I think and it would be preferable
Excellent test!
Thanks George!
So configuration 1 was the curious cable right?
If I understand well what you did, all of the participants were told that there was an undisclosed difference up the chain. Given that, the fact that more than 80% (thought they) heard some difference was of no surprise. Given that, the fact that preferences were almost evenly split does not necessarily mean that preferences were split it may well mean that people did not hear a tangible difference after all, they just thought they heard because they expected to hear some difference since they had been told there was one. Excuse me if I did not correctly understand what took place but if I did, I can see little value in this test..
I guess what I’m trying to say is that this test created expectation bias from the get go, something proper tests should not do. I’m sorry but if you want to be scientific you have to go the whole way to an ABX test. There’s no cutting corners with a scientific test.
What people were told is that there was a variable between the setups and their job was to listen and tell us IF it made a difference. In other words, we raised the possibility that there might be no difference as well so you could equally say that expectation bias would be towards a "no difference" response from a lot of people too. This hobby has a very strong contingent of those who do not believe in many "snake oil" tweaks so the 80% result is too strong if factoring that in IMO
@@PassionforSound sorry but I have to disagree. Any self proclaimed audiophile likes to think he can hear subtle differences. The subsequent 50-50 result for preference’ could be easily explained by this (people thought they heard a difference but, since they really didn’t, they voted at random with regards to preference) unless one thinks that there happened to be a normal distribution of preferences towards the particular changes the variable introduced, which I find doubtful as research has shown that there tends to be statistically significant agreement when real differences are present. Once more, one cannot be partly scientific in these tests.
I'm basically cable agnostic with the assumption of quality construction, a modest cable length, and that the connections are clean (not oxidized or otherwise adding resistance to the signal path). In my experience you don't need to spend a lot of money for quality interconnect. That said I do understand that sonic changes can be imparted into a signal path based on the interconnects chosen, so fair play.
Now, my favorite aspects of this video are:
1. Lachlan in the wild! - enjoyed watching you interact with a fellow enthusiast at the show
2. The concept - bringing people into the hobby in a way that is easy to digest and learn about the various components that go into it
Much like describing wine or food, listening is a sensory stimulation that is often hard to wrap the proper words around. It's a common sensation without a common venacular, so getting out there with the people and sharing your passion for sound is great to see. Keep up the great work sir!
Thanks, MJ! 🙂🙂
My hypothesis is the Biggest difference is variation in headphones.
OR the music we are listening to ;o)
- but yes I agree the headphones is where most of the magic happens - the rest is supporting the show.
Headphones are definitely the biggest factor in a system, but if you're suggesting that the results are due to the two different (identical) headphones used then please see my pinned comment.
@@PassionforSound The USB link is digital, so if the "difference" heared by your testers was due to the USB cable, then it must be due to errors in digital data transmission. Meaning, bits were being dropped by one of the cables. If the error rate was high enough to be heard, I am surprised you would even be able to successfully connect the dac to the pc.
I can't explain how they influence the sound, but digital interconnects (USB, coax, optical, etc.) all have influence and not from dropped data
@@PassionforSound The only way that could be is from power supply noise or poor grounding
If you told people that was a variation before the test, why are you surprised the 85% can hear a difference?. Particularly with a selective group of people at a Hi-Fi show where nobody wants to admit to being deaf to nuances. Your description of experienced listeners and non-experienced listeners was a little too loaded for my liking. These are my initial thoughts and undoubtedly as heavily biased as anybody else's. I really enjoyed the video and really appreciate your work, it's a fascinating subject. Thanks.
Thanks Ged. On the topic of expectations, we told them there was a difference in the chains, not in the sound. We were asking them to decide IF there was a difference so that's loaded in both directions and hopefully avoided people feeling there was a "right" answer.
My ideal would be running the same test but with the same usb cables and the people at the booth not knowing that was the case. I hope the majority would say they were the same.
I've got some plans for 2023 that will allow for testing with some controls like this in the mix 🙂
The TT2 is endgame level for most people so I’d be surprised if I’d be able to is discern any difference. I was listening to orchestral music with my Mojo today and heard chairs creaking, flute mechanisms clanking and players breathing. Can’t imagine what flagship level DACs can do. Glad this wasn’t a Solomon Asch type situation. Worthwhile experiment!
Glad you enjoyed it. The TT2 really is brilliant, but then so is the Mojo. 🙂
Ok I am upgrading all my cables, kids can wait on their schooling few more years
Haha. Home school them on the merits of a great audio setup 🤣
I think testing DACs is a good idea. At CanJam NYC, I could not tell the difference between DACs, it takes me a long time for me to notice the difference when I upgrade a DAC (except when getting a May). Also your natural "live" voice is far more Aussie than your presentations. Took me by surprise. But I also remember that you record softly to not disturb your family, so that's cool.
Haha, yes, my voice is a bit different in person and in a loud environment too.
I agree that picking differences between DACs (particularly of similar designs like two ESS DACs) is hard and actually harder IMO than this USB cable test. I hope I can provide some of those tests in the future on the channel
As a retired accountant, I’m obviously not qualified to render a judgment on the viability of your test methodology, but it would be interesting to see what Floyd Toole, Sean Olive, Brent Butterworth, or other experienced, qualified experts think of it. In any event, I certainly enjoyed the video and appreciate your efforts.
Glad you enjoyed the video, No. Thanks for commenting 🙂
I wonder if factory variances could have had a factor here. did you mix the dac/amps and the HPs?
We didn't, but I know both devices and headphones intimately (I've owned two pairs of Empyreans) and the variations in those (if any) couldn't account for the degree and types of differences between the two setups IMO
Hey Lachlan! Wow, I was not expecting to find that as interesting as I did. I was RIVETED! Loved your methodology. I thought your 'discussion' conclusions seemed reasonable. My view on cable differences can be summarised by Fox Mulder's poster: 'I want to believe'. You are making it easier. Loved it. Keep these vids coming, mate! I find it interesting that some are implying that because your methodology lacked the rigor required to be published in a peer reviewed scientific journal, that the results lacked any and all credibility.... Ummm, I think you're doing a terrific job of being a RUclips reviewer. I was entertained. And it made me think. KPI's achieved!! :)
Thanks so much, Kenno! I definitely recognise the limitations in these tests, but I also think they provide some interesting insights to prompt further consideration and exploration for some people. I hope to bring more of this type of content (with different variables) in the future
If you are using 2 headphones it'd be better if you used a physical switcher to switch between the two inputs while using the same headphones so the person does not have to take off headphones and they can do a direct A-B test
USB is a digital link so what comes out should match exactly what went in. If there’s any doubt of that being true the digital data output should be captured and compared to the input for both cables. After all, when you store data on an external hard desk drive, connected via a USB cable, you expect the stored data to match what was written to it.
In order to test the possible psychological variations I would like to see the same test run for several hours where the set ups are identical
Could it be unit variation outside of the USB cable, like if all equipment were the same the result would still come out the same?
All equipment was essentially the same (i.e. there was not an audible difference between the headphones or TT2s). I've also personally tested these cables and heard the results for myself.
This channell is top 🤓 as a beginner I find all infos and all curiosities I need. I would like to tell my experience: I bought the Ollo s4x headphones, and I sadly must admit, I m not able to hear any difference with my 29€ HouseOfMarley headphones. What should I still know? For the sound test I used my 120€ dap, my home stereo, and my phone… I hope with the Dx240 coming next week, things could sound better! ☹️
The Ollo S4X is all about tonal accuracy. I haven't heard the HoM headphones, but I expect they'd have some boosted frequencies to make them sound fun in some way. The S4X don't do that and will be giving a more accurate representation of the music. That's really their key benefit so you might not find any other big differences in things like soundstaging, etc. as that's not their area of focus.
With all that said, your incoming DX240 might also reveal some extra resolution and detail that the HoMs don't have.
@@PassionforSound thank you so much for letting me know your POV. I’m pretty sure the new DAP will manage my OLLO in order to take advantage from their quality.
See you, good luck for your great job.
Impressive that you addressed and attempted to remove all variables. I am not surprised at all by your result but there is one more variable which may be relevant and that is the fit of the headphones on the participants heads. If the physical setting on each of the two sets used is the same then someone with a wide head will hear something different to someone with a narrow head. If they were allowed to adjust the sets to fit their head you are introducing too much uncontrolled variability. Tight fit will increase detail, immediacy and bass, possibly at the cost of space and depth. Loose fit will have the opposite effect. Perhaps speakers would work better though I accept that headphones are probably more revealing over all. I can hear differences between usb cables using speakers. I hope that you will be able to run this test again to establish consistency.
Thanks for your thoughts. The Meze Empyreans are very quick and easy to get well-fitted. Any slight variables from the fit of the headphone would not / could not account for the differences people described. Having measured a lot of headphones over the years, subtle shifts in fit and placement definitely alter the sound, but in very subtle ways (assuming the seal is consistent which is where the Empyreans are so good for this test). What would change is that the exact frequency of a peak might shift up or down by a few Hertz, but it won't alter spatial information and sense of separation in the ways that people were reporting.
I'm always keen to remove variables, but I don't think the headphones were a concern in this case.
This was really interesting! I would love the chance to do this type of test as well but I feel being in a quiet room would be so much better! Especially using open backs like the Empyrean’s. That’s actually one of my pet peeves while Demoing headphones @ a dealer with lots going on. I’m scatterbrained enough without being distracted by ambient chatter and noise. I had a feeling it was going to be the cable because I’ve been watching your channel for a quite some time now. It’s great that you took it a step further and I look forward to more tests like this (in quiet rooms!! 😅)
Very cool stuff Lockland!
Thanks Mr Chris. If you're in Melbourne, I'll be setting something up in the future in a quieter space so stay tuned... On this occasion, it was interesting to see that the background noise actually didn't affect the results, but a quieter environment would definitely be better.
Awesome video really insightful yet great entertainment. :)
Thanks, mate. Glad you enjoyed it! Sorry we didn't catch up for long enough at the show
Do the same test telling people there is one change and make no change. A large % might still hear a difference in exactly the same setup? Then you can remove "wanting to hear" bias away from the 80%.
I hope to do that in future tests when I can. Budget and space prevented that on this occasion
Interesting test, interesting results.
Glad you liked it 🙂🙂
Hi! As a fan of classical music. Which is the best headphone under 600€ that gives me the best experience? Thanks
I think that still depends on your personal preferences in sound, Roberto (i.e. not just the genre you listen to). What factors are important to you in the sound of a headphone? For example, do you prioritise the sense of space and size of the soundstage? Do you want a leaner sound or something more full-bodied?
Happy to help if you can tell me a little more 🙂
@@PassionforSound I value the instrumental separation and the soundstage very much.
For any genre, the more the better. It makes me feel immersed in the music.
If it's easier for you instead of just one option you can give me two for example.
Thank you.
Thanks for the extra info! I think I'd look at the HiFiMan Ananda (often on sale within your budget I think) and Edition XS. The HarmonicDyne Poseidon and Zeus could also be interesting I think. Finally the Sennheiser HD650/600/660 are all excellent too.
@@PassionforSound thanks. Of those list Amanda and Edition Xs are the best?
I wouldn't say they're the best, but seem to be most popular. The HarmonicDynes are quite uniquely tuned so some will love them and others might not, but the Sennheisers and HiFiMans have pretty broad appeal
Cool experiment, it's good to see some data and kudos on going through with the process of collecting it in a group of people. Having just bought an Audioquest Carbon USB cable and thrown it into my system, the results don't surprise me so much as I certainly hear quite a difference to the Carbon vs bog standard usb cable, and also previous experience with Mojo compared to Mojo with Poly had opened my ears to the fact that the digital source and transfer can matter.
So glad that you've been able to experience it for yourself. That's ultimately the best way to decide 🙂
🤦
Maybe if people are asked whether they hear a difference more than one time in a row (e/g in a A1-B1, A2-B2, C1-C2 configuration) fewer might feel pressed to answer "yes" by kind of "external" reason. Fear of failure or wounded pride, at least a woolly sense of honour may tempt some of them to answer "yes, I hear a difference" if just asked single-trial. In order to cull posers and saboteurs I guess it might require more than one A-B setup, at minimum three. Anyway, thank you for your efforts, these findings are good to know about.
just found you discussed similar objection with "Super* Review", got that!
Thank you for doing this experiment and for compiling it into this video! It was really interesting to see, and much appreciated! Just one added thought: I wonder if simply you being a recognizable person from your channel could skew results. For example, early in the video, I started to wonder if it were the USB cable that changed, just because I've seen many of your videos before, including the one where you compared measured analog output differences between cables. It seemed like something you would do based on that prior knowledge. But I realize there are practical limitations, since then you'd have to hire someone just to run the experiment, and it might not garner as many participants, etc. Separately, it would be awesome some day if there were some larger-scale ongoing experiment like this that occurred at audio events across the world, testing different things, including placebo. Fun thoughts. Thanks again!
That's a very cool idea to make this large scale!
As for people's expectations, I wasn't always the one there and we often listed the types of things that could be different (e.g. power supply, file type, cable type, transport software, etc.) and this was to prevent any expectations of what we were testing or even if it should make a difference.
@@PassionforSound Thanks for the reply! Ah, that's great to know, it sounds like you accounted for that well and I may have forgotten that from the video. I really like that you were able to do this at an audio event and had as many participants as you did.
Thanks Jeff. Hopefully I can do more and better tests like this in future with additional controls in place and on different devices like power supplies, analog interconnects, etc.
Loved this video! I was guessing different USB cables...I already believed that cables could make a difference, but now I'm thinking about buying an even higher-end USB cable to connect my streamer. I do a lot of listening and spaciousness and separation and soundstage are super important to me. Primarily a speaker listener and differences in standstage are hugely apparent over my system.
Glad you liked it, Todd! As I said in the video, I think soundstage size and quality are factors that may people begin to prioritise as they progress in the audio journey.
So far, the best staging USB cables I've heard are the Curious Evolved and the Tellurium Q Black USB cables.
@@PassionforSound I've started to realize that as I go higher in this hobby, the frequency response of headphones seem to matter less and less (assuming you have a great chain that pairs well with the hps). And, in return, things in the time domain, noise, dynamics, and timbre matter much much more. So, I guess in general the source starts to become the priority as you move up (generally in price).
Also, I recommend trying to get your hands on an fta callisto (or sinope) usb cable. They're great cables and, imo, wipes the floor out of the excalibur (the callisto is what I use).
Thanks for the tip, David. That's an interesting point about the headphones. I think, once you hit a point, they're (almost) all well designed and well tuned plus they don't have the harshness of some cheaper headphones so you can start to focus on all the other factors you listed. Good point!
Excellent experiment Lachlan! Loves to do this kind of blind test because it reveals what I like in sound.
Its nice to know that my sound preference comes from the usb cable that I already own. Otherwise, I will have itch to buy the other usb cable 😆
So true, Hadi (about you not having to try more cables now)! I have to admit that I didn't expect the results to show so clearly that people can hear the differences.
According to dcs you can hear the difference between separate clock and build in clock
I'd believe that. I expect it's only a small difference, but once you reach a certain point in your audio setup, those are the tires of tweaks that people consider
One thing I came across recently is 'The Big Misconception About Electricity' on the Veritasium channel. It is of course controversial too (see other popular science channels). everything seems to be controversial by necessity nowadays... but Veritasium explains that electricity through a conductor (wire) is not just electrons flowing. this made me start thinking. what are implications for audio. Too early for me to draw conclusions from, need to dig deeper, but certainly worth checking out for many of us ;o)
I saw that too and thought exactly the same as you did. I hope we (as a race) are able to understand this more in the near future.
That was a fantastic video and test you put together! I never would have thought that USB cables could make a difference. The question is, could it have been placebo? I think another test where people are asked if there is a difference, but the setups are exactly the same, would be very interesting to see after this video. Either way, keep up the great content!
I agree that a control group to see how many hear differences that aren't there will be very valuable next time. Glad you liked the video!
I'll be honest, I was surprised to see the results. I appreciate the method and controls you implemented to try to keep factors consistent. As a scientist, may I suggest you check your methods against experts in the field who do control experiments all the time to help your data be more robust. You may not have access to that type of resource though but I think peer review work can help if you're going to be doing more experiments. Another suggestion is more repetition such as running experiments twice. More data can mean more statistical analysis. It can help develop more interpretations of the result. I hope to see more of this type of videos!
As from where I stand on this subect, I think there will be differences from cables to DACs to amplifiers. Whether or not they are technically better, who knows. Whether they are worth the money is really up to the individual. I really enjoy this hobby and the journey it's taken me in so far. I can't see myself spending $500 on cables right now. But maybe in the future when all my gears are summit, cables will be the next step!
Thanks for the input, but I'm not looking to do peer reviewed studies. Having studied sciences in the past, I understand what's involved and don't have the time or budget to setup that type of thing while the channel ID still a side gig. Perhaps one day if it ends up growing enough to pay its way I can dedicate that sort of time and money to the channel.
@@PassionforSound Indeed they are very time consuming. I'm hoping your channel keeps growing. One of my favorite audio channels on RUclips.
Thanks for the support - it's deeply appreciated 🙂🙂
Having owned and used both a Curious (original) usb cable and an Audioquest Carbon USB cable, I can attest there are audible differences between the 2.
Thanks for sharing your experiences, Scott!
can you describe the cables and where to get
Hi Paul, I've reviewed both here on the channel. They're the Supra Excalibur (cheaper) and Curious Evolved (not cheaper) 🙂
Having an age demographic would be interesting and using a more resolving headphone like susvara and a switch box would eliminate any headphone variations. Nice work, thought it would be the usb cables seeing as how down the rabbit hole you are with them, hopefully I'll see you at the next one if work permits.
The demographics were largely male and 40+ (maybe 50+) but there was a good representation of younger males too, just not too many females.
I contemplated testing something different, but I get so much grief about my USB cable reviews that I wanted to kick off by seeing if I could get some reliable proof that I'm not crazy 😁
I recently tried a few different USB cables between my Roon Nucleus and Mola Mola Tambaqui DAC. I noticed a difference and not always for the better. I didn’t like the Nordost Heimdall 2, liked the Shuntata Venom and Wireworld Platinum Starlight. Ended up keeping the Shunyata because it was affordable and sounded great.
So glad you tried it for yourself. Ultimately, it's about what you like, not what's most expensive or claimed to be "best" 🙂🙂
Well done Lachlan!
I’m a cable sceptic and don’t believe any differences exist so long as the given cable meets specifications for the appropriate application.
However when my journey started decades ago I firmly believed I heard differences, I believed in so much audiophile nonsense, such as Mpingo Shun Mook discs, cable elevators, earth rocks EVERYTHING made a difference and I could not be swayed. Until I performed a blind test with cables that I could clearly hear differences between sighted, but they all sounded exactly the same, my journey changed from that day onwards, my pride was shattered but I faced a cheaper future and I’ve never looked back.
What I think would be more beneficial and obvious to end the debate, would be a blind test between a lamp cord and a $20,000 cable, it would just put the nail firmly in the coffin. I mean even if there was a difference it would be riveting, let alone one being clearly better.
I am definitely a sceptic when it comes to cable lifters, etc. but with USB cables there's no doubt in my mind and that's after conducting many tests for myself and having results go against expectations when comparing some very expensive cables so I know it's not my expectations as play.
As for your test idea, the problem I have is that this type of video just encourages every non-believer to want to pick hopes in the methodology rather than consider the actual results. Your suggestion would sadly just result in thousands of comments saying it's an invalid test because the lamp wire doesn't meet specs. Or, if you meant just the most basic, generic cable then I think the results would be no different to this in that it would still prove that there is an audible difference and that's all I was looking for here - the rest was just "colour"
Andy Reichert correctly makes the case that it could be the USB sockets on your laptop that aren't identical. I would be very curious to hear how removing that variable would change the data. On my different laptops, I think I hear a difference in detail and resolution depending on which USB port I use, although I could be self-biased also! Thanks for a wonderful and thought provoking video. More please!
Swapped my usb to the lowest tier Supra cable. Got that for $60. The sound difference was immediate for me. Much better! Would love to hear what these very expensive cables are doing but don't need to chase that dragon. Satisfied with the sound coming out of my system right now... so...... :) If you have the means and the desire i would definitely try them! Even that "budget" Supra made a sweet and noticeable difference at my desktop setup.
Thanks for sharing your experiences, Craig! The Supra is a great cable for a very good price
Very interesting! I wouldn't have thought the cables alone would make a perceptible difference, absent manifest differences in their composition/material etc; I thought this was going to end up with a reveal that one was playing a 96kHz 24-bit FLAC file and the other, a 128kbps MP3. Perhaps that would be too obvious. Appreciate there would be time/cost/sample size constraints, but it would have been interesting to not flag to participants whether there was a difference or not and let them decide, then elaborate as to why? Or alternatively to change the setup half way through so that they were identical (but still telling people they were different) to see if that affected the results. Either way, easy to throw in one's 2c after the event and from behind a keyboard. This was quite fascinating.
So glad you enjoyed it! If we didn't tell people that there was a difference in the chain, there would be no purpose in them listening to both setups. The key was that we asked them to decide IF the change we made had resulted in a difference. 🙂
I think your regular viewers would have all guessed that it would be usb cables
Haha. I did contemplate analog interconnects and power supplies too 😁
Yes let's all go to Loki's house for some sound tests and a BBQ...lol
Haha. Not quite at my house, but that's kind of the idea 🙂🙂
All expected that it would be a difference, so I'm not surprised 80% think it was, I would be curious to see if leaving no change at all had given the same result, I think it would.
We'll see. I have more tests planned for the future
I have no doubt that there was an audible difference, although playing with different USB cables in my own setup did not lead to audible differences -- so far.
What would be VERY interesting for most semi tech-savvy people like me: HOW can different USB cables still influence sound, if it's all 0 and 1. I guess I know the answer to a certain degree -- but maybe you could dive into the topic, get some insights from people of Chord / others, and enlighten us? :-)
I've been trying to find someone to help with this discussion for years now and I find that DAC engineers often say it makes no difference while cable manufacturers are less inclined to be interviewed because it stirs up too many trolls ☹️
USB cable does make a difference, and it's especially noticeable if you listen through IEM. I had a centrance DAC that had a slight background hiss which was audible while only using IEMs. I was using a USB C to C cable out of my laptop. I also had a thunderbolt 3 cable lying around (which is compatible with USB C but not vice-versa) and it immediately got rid of the hiss. Now, thunderbolt cables are usually not cheap but they are also usually better built than your regular cheap USB C cables. And I think that was the reason, the better built quality. Anyway, advice to someone shopping for USB C cables for DACs, look at thunderbolt cables. You can get one for $20-$30 and they are much better built.
That's an interesting example. Thanks for sharing!
Edit: before watching the whole thing, lemme guess. The variable are the cables? XD
Oh and what about the burn in time of the units? Because DAPs like the Walkman Wm1A and Wm1z sounds significantly different when it’s fresh at 0hr and one at 500hrs…
All four devices (TT2s and headphones) were very well used
I knew it! I knew it must have been one of the most controversial topics of all which is even referenced on one of your t-shirts :D I still can't wrap my head around how a USB cable can make such a change, I even remember you previously mentioning that while you believe different cables to be slightly different, you're not sure if you'd be able to tell them apart in a blind test. Half-jokingly - maybe it just goes to show that the USB implementation in the Hugo TT2 is not that good, hehe. ;-)
It's interesting but it also makes me think of what I'm doing at this very moment - playing with upsampling on Roon and I kid you not, 50% of the time I think I am hearing a difference (not necessarily for the better, just a difference), but the other 50% of the time I am convinced that this is auto-suggestion. As someone here has already pointed out - even if the two set-ups had been identical, perhaps the majority of people would have been inclined to say (and genuinely believe) that they heard a difference. After all, you play the same track twice in a row - you're gonna hear different things, i.e. focus on different aspects of sound.
But a great idea regardless - thanks!
I believe we controlled for expectation by telling people that while there was a difference in the source chain, their job was to decide if it actually did or did not influence the sound.
Interestingly, and somewhat counter-intuitively, USB cables have more impact than upsampling in my experience
I hate to ask someone to ruin expensive cables but... hey maybe someone can get a logic analyzer to decode USB, and create splices between the DAC and PC to monitor to logic levels of the USB digital signal. Let's see if what is seen as the digital signals from these cables actually vary at all? Perhaps there will be differences in amplitude and phases of the signals between data and the clock.
I was actually chatting about that with Peter (who did the reveal) as it would be very interesting and his up his alley in terms of the tech apparently
Cool video. Was sort of hoping it was the mscaler, results would have made me feel better for not being able to afford one. Haha
Haha. Hopefully I can do that test one day. It would be interesting
it's great that you used 'ridiculously' capable equipment so as to preemptively cancel that recurring discussion that without top tier stuff it's not worth doing any test.
That was somewhat accidental and was based on the gear we could pull together and that have the ability to accurately match volumes
The methodology is kinda flawed since the listeners were primed to look for differences. Another variable not controlled for were the headphones, even two identical model of headphones might not sound the same.
Unrelated but I just want to say that I got an ad before this video on a website you can get feet pics called feet finder. Interesting. Also nice video.
Lol. That's hilarious! Glad you liked the video 🙂 👣
I reckon the biggest confounding variable is the person listening. Listening to a ? Unknown piece of music….How should it sound…..what is better…the expectation that one should be better than the other. The mood I am in….trying to remember what the first time I listened sounded like. Listening in a strange environment to how I listen at home. Oh and I’ve just argued with my wife. And is that my bladder telling me I need a pee…..the list goes on😊
That's why it was important to have lots of people do the test and also to listen to the exact same piece of music across two identical systems (except the one chosen variable)
This analysis seems very peculiar. Spotting a difference with no direction (more or less of something) and arriving at a 50/50 shows that no one could tell any difference essentially. Like throwing a coin. Exactly what one would expect.
Why not compare a $1 cable against the $500 one to start with. Because you don't sell those?
I think you should do a test where everything is the same. Also, I would be interested to see results by age of participant.
I hope to include that type of test in the future. Demographic info could be useful too - I agree. I just didn't want to get too personal 🙂
I was firmly in the "it's only 1s and 0s" camp until quite recently. I had been using stock USB cables until I was loned a Wireworld Starlight Platinum 7. It sounded great, but I did not bother with a back and forth compare with the cheaper cables. Fearing I would soon have to return the Wireworld cable, I looked for something to replace it. I bought a fairly cheap Supra cable that had some good reviews. I really wanted the Supra to perform but it was like someone put a thick blanket over my speakers. In fairness to Supra, I did not compare their £30 cable to the £1 cables I had been using, but next to the £700 cable it was night and day. Happy to say, I picked up a Starlight Platinum off ebay and I remain very happy with it.
Thanks for sharing your experiences, Kevin. And good on you for being open to trusting your ears despite your expectations being a little different!
Reddit headphones made me believe cables don't matter at all, now i'm not so sure 🤔. Can't wait to see more experiments like this.
Yes, Reddit is a dangerous place for unsubstantiated claims and the "echo chamber" effect that perpetuates misinformation
I was also under the impression for the longest time that expensive cables were snake oil.. until I heard it for myself. It's a subtle, yet noticeable difference. For example, going from a 100% Copper to 100% Silver headphone cable definitely changes a headphones sound. Whether it's better or worse is a different story.
Glad you were open minded enough to try it for yourself and not convince yourself there was no difference. I completely agree that the differences aren't always better.
Interesting. The obvious flaw in your comment that the two sets of hardware are exactly the same which they are not. They're very similar but there's always unit variation. The scientific approach would have been to swap cable over halfway through the tests. If you can get consistent results the next few times you repeat the test you might have something.
I respectfully think that suggesting two pieces of hardware from a reputable manufacturer would hold the kind of variance that's shown here is a bit of a stretch. These products are all measured and quality controlled for conformity to the design and performance.
I've also tried tests where cables are swapped and it takes way too long and is far more damaging to the test's reliability because it brings in greater influence from auditory memory which is very inaccurate after even a moderate delay. I'm confident that this was the right approach. Given budget and space, the only change is make is to add a control with a separate pair that had no difference to see how many still thought they heard a difference
@@PassionforSound you don't understand. You only need to swap the cable once. Headphones are notorious for not being inconsistent. If you can repeat the test and get the same result a few times then you're really on to something.
Ah, you mean to swap Config 1 to the Supra and Config 2 to the Curious. Sorry, I thought you meant to use a single setup and swap the USB cables. Yes, that would have been a good idea and I actually thought about it briefly, but dismissed it (clearly without proper consideration of how it might help)
@@PassionforSound yes that's what I meant.
Great idea, Lachlan! However, the result that there was a nearly 50-50 split of which configuration sounded better is not very helpful to support that there was a difference.
The test was focussed purely on if there was a difference, not which was preferable (the 50/50 was on preferences only). The first question asked if there was or was not a difference and that was a pretty strong ~80% who heard a difference.
Hard to belive a digital signal in usb cable could change. But a personal experience is never wrong.
audio is analog
@@ydid687 After DAC, yes
Not sure if you're being sarcastic, Terho, but I think the results show a significant influence from the cables
@@PassionforSound No, I am not sarcastic. After 50 years of electronics study, experience and hobby I can't find a theoretical reason for that. Maybe some checksum correction? But digital signals are used just for that: to prevent signal distortion and interference. In analog cables anything can happend. We are talking about thea digital USB-cable between computer and DAC, right?
Yes, just USB straight from the PC the DAC. Logically/theoretically it makes no sense that the sound could be influenced and yet my consistent experience with USB, optical and coaxial connections is that the cables are able to influence the sound. I just can't work out how it find anyone who can clearly explain it to me.
Talking about confirmation biais… trained listeners picked 1 🤦🏻♂️
Even thought nice work. Can’t wait for more tests. This useful and needed.
Should have done it with the same headphone with an a/b switch because to me this was the biggest variable.
Yes, that's a point. I suggested that if he had the resources, it would also be useful to have replicates and control. Having a large number of people reporting differences may be due to different reasons, including chance, which means there are not significant differences. I nevertheless congratulate Lachlan for the effort under the limitations of his experiment.
The resources are the key restriction. I appreciate the acknowledgement of this as it wasn't a lack of thought or intent to do this as best I could.
As for the picking of Config 1, Mat Lab, that's not confirmation bias, but me talking to at least half the people who did this test and drawing some conclusions that I flagged strongly as pure speculation, but based on some strong anecdotal evidence and reasoning.
Very interesting.
I'm glad you thought so 🙂
I wonder if the differences would be the same if you used a better usb source.
Yeah and if the results were still the same we should try better songs and yet the results are the same then choose musicians who use better personal hygiene products 😂 … may be listen in good weather?
I've actually got a review of the Singxer SU-6 DDC coming soon and (without giving too much away) it's shown me that the quality of the cable is equally as important regardless of the source feeding to the DAC
Lachlan doing proverbial "god's work" here... so much still to be tested for audio, sound preferences, and a/b comparisons. The existing way of measuring the aspects of sound performance are so very limited. If we can move the needle just a bit on this respect perhaps we can one day get objective datasets that provide meaningful outputs.
Thanks Ace. According to most of the comments, it seems it's the devil's work, but I'll keep digging. I'm giving up on trying to prove anything about USB cables now though as it's clearly fruitless for those with extreme denial on the topic. I'll still review them for those who are open minded and interested in how they sound though 🙂
I've got a fascinating power cable and filter review coming soon too 🙂🙂
@@PassionforSound I wouldn’t give up.. in fact the harder people push means the more work that needs to be done on convincing. We all crave objective data to make informed decisions but in audio the ways Of measuring performance through objective means is just not there. Consider yourself a Trail Blazer where you’re braking fresh ground.
Thanks Ace!
Why don't you get an xlr switch box
And I have a better way for a blind test, especially to remove placebo and expectation bias as much as possible in audio, because when you tell them there is 1 different, there're expectation bias and the fact that it's almost a 50-50 fight between those usb cable make me think that there're pure guessing/affected by placebo
So this is my testing setup :
Tell the subject that there're may or may NOT be a difference in the chain, and we maybe or maybe NOT(if we aren't, we still pretend that we did change smth) change that element when someone finished there test, and create 2 different data for how many people get it right or wrong when there's no different in the chain and when there's 1 different.
Please see the pinned comment regarding expectation bias.
As for the switch box, the ones I've tried (and can afford) are not transparent and will mask fine details in the audio that can be important for tests like this
I noticed a difference in depth and smoothness between a non-shielded printer USB cable and a Supra 50 dollar USB audio cable but I am surprised that there was a significant difference between a 100 dollar USB audio cable and a 500 dollar USB audio cable since they both appear to be shielded and designed for audio .
Yes, I think this shows that there's more to it than simple external noise isolation. Unfortunately, I don't know what the next part of the puzzle is...
I can hear the difference between stock fuses and hi-end fuses.
I've never tried fuses, but I'm delving into power cables and filters soon...
Oh no.. what have you done?
Please choose your desired response: (A) I'm sorry or (B) You're welcome!
Only what was necessary!
Really interesting, would enjoy more of this type of content. As I understand it, USB is an analogue representation of digital information, subject to external interference as any other signal. improvements can be made by the quality & purity of materials and also by insulation. I noticed a sizable improvement when I went from bog standard USB to Audioquest Cinnamon. There are many naysayers. I have no problem having them tell me I'm wasting my money.
Thanks, Keith. Glad you liked it. I've got plans for more of this type of content (with different variables) in the future. I'm glad you've found a setup you like and that you're ok hearing the naysayers nay 🙂
Looks like my prior comment got sacked, didn't really add anything so no great loss. I'll save commenting till you actually publish the videos from now on. In reading through the comments it's about what I expected. I think I agree with the folks pointing out that HiFi community peoples are more likely to say they heard a difference in a test if you tell them there's a difference. That's a belief statement, I don't know that for certain just something that I'd agree with. I don't know that it'd be ego driven or outright deception, could just be the mind inventing or accentuating the slightest of differences. But I definitely disagree with the unit variation arguments. If that's the case then reviews and critiques on sound impression are 100% moot.
I think where I'd add my own 2 cents is with regards to audio memory. I'm sorry but I trust precisely no one's audio memory, even my own, even after seconds. Trying to retain what something just sounded like with accuracy and perform non-continuous playback tests (take off headphone A, put on headphone B, etc.) I'm certain would account for perceived differences. I think continuous playback allowing the listener to switch blindly between two or three options would be the more convincing blind test though I know, I know.. that wasn't something within your immediate control or resources to provide.
This was an interesting test, a good exercise imo but I'm not really sold on the results. Though it's important for me to say that I don't disparage cables or cable makers. I don't see a reason why they can't make a difference in improving or changing the sound of a particular set up. I'd just rather spend my money elsewhere, for now. Maybe future experiments will yield more compelling evidence. I think it's awesome you waded into this. Happy to see most everyone being respectful. It's like we're adults or something.
Don't talk too soon about the respectfulness 😉
I've added a few points in a pinned comment including one that addresses the expectation bias as I really don't think that was a deciding factor (see pinned comment)
I respect everyone's choice to ignore cables, but I'm conscious that there's a strong current of cognitive dissonance and denial around this topic.
@@PassionforSound it's much better than what I expected lol. I've yet to read anyone calling for your scalp so 👍
That's a fair point
it is not a revelation at all... there are people that plug the headphone into an oscilloscope and listen perfect sinusoial wave, those think that it is matter of only 0 and 1 and a cable good for printer is good also for hifi... then there are stupit crazy people, like me, that understand what Haas explained many times... usb in audio it is matter of timing, it is an analog signal... and when it is time for analog signal things like geometry inside the cable, materials, shield, RCL values, can make differences not subtle at all... for sure not for a printer, but we are not printers ;)
Well said, Lupoal!
Your testing is significantly flawed. There’s no control group, meaning there’s no way to verify or falsify the answers, so there’s no way to confirm that they really heard a difference. It’s like in a drug testing, you only give the patients the drug (no placebo) and ask them if they feel better. No matter whether they answered yes or no, there’s no way for you to verify whether the drug is effective.
To make things worse, asking people attending a hifi show whether they can hear the difference KNOWING there’s a veriable in the chain is an extremely biased setting. It’s almost like questioning their ear, questioning their qualifications as an audiophile or justification for spending money on these gears. Of course people will be biased to answer there is a difference, even if they are not sure. And from your follow up questions such as preferences or descriptions of the difference, I think your conclusion that most people did hear a difference is very, very doubtful.
A nice effort, but the significant flawed design of the test rendered the conclusion pretty much meaningless.
From what I understand even designers of speakers couldn't consistently pick out their own speaker among 4 or 5 they listened to at Harman's double blind tests. I guess that scares a lot of people, but puts into question how much people really need to spend to have a decent system; a question the manufacturers want left unexplored.
Audio is a very complex thing to measure in any sense (subjectively or objectively) because it includes elements such as frequency response, timing, spatial queues, overall tonality/timbre, etc. There is likely no particularly reliable way to measure audio because the thing we are measuring contains many variables and a well designed test will aim to isolate a single variable - impossible with music
cool
I respect the testing process of ABX or measuremenst, but its a hobby. People will buy/collect what ever makes them happy. Apply this to any hobby, golfing fishing art cars watches anything at all share the same end result, subjective pleasure and satisfaction. When people get too invested in the objective or subjective and start argueing and putting each other down thats when it gets toxic.
Well said, Surya. It's about enjoying the music in the end 🎶🎧🙂
I bet I could tell it's Supra vs Curious cable because I am so familiar with both of them.
That one I'd doubt. I've tried that type of test and the moment you're listening for specific queues to determine which is which, things get very dicey due to the vast number of variables contained in a piece of music
The result is good enough.
There different between USB cable.
Good job!
I think you are not trying to persuade ppl into believing cable, just sharing the results? LoL
Yes, there's no persuading some people anyway, but the results speak for themselves IMO 🙂
The cable that transmits the digital signal cannot affect the quality of the sound tract, it is physically impossible. There is no explanation from the physics and engineering point of view.
Other than the fact that the signal in any digital interconnect (other than optical) is an analog signal (fluctuating voltage) and therefore could be influenced by all the same factors as a music signal - impedance, conductance, capacitance, skin effect, dielectric constant, EMI, RFI, etc. These are all scientific principles proven to affect the voltages travelling in wires.
The absence of YOUR knowledge doesn't render the subject "impossible". People should finally start being humble and admit that they don't know EVERYTHING in this world.
Of course not. All placebo effects