USB audio cracked... finally!

[lmitche]

Ok folks, this thread is about the Lush cable.  Let's keep it there.

 

This thread has been useful to those of us that take an empirical view of this hobby.  We don't need another thread where the usual bunch of wankers tell us we are delusional, or buying snake oil. We already know your opinions about this innovation and any future innovations shared on CA.  Don't bore us with more of your rhetoric.

 

PUT UP or SHUT UP!

 

200 Euros is more than a reasonable price for an audio cable. Either buy one and offer an informed opinion or go away!

 

Thank you very much.

 

Larry

 

[Jud]

I suppose it's up to @PeterSt to give as much, or as little, of an explanation as he likes; and up to any potential customers to take that into account in their decisions whether or not to consider purchasing.

 

Meanwhile, I doubt anyone will be convinced this, the 10,001st time, of the wisdom of the "other side's" position, so can we just take the same old discussion as read?

[fas42]

6 minutes ago, Jud said:

I suppose it's up to @PeterSt to give as much, or as little, of an explanation as he likes; and up to any potential customers to take that into account in their decisions whether or not to consider purchasing.

 

Meanwhile, I doubt anyone will be convinced this, the 10,001st time, of the wisdom of the "other side's" position, so can we just take the same old discussion as read?

 

Part of the problem in the audio game is that sometimes things work or don't work, in SQ terms - and it makes no sense! I've come across a whole host of screwy things in my time - and I just put them into the "to be worked out some day" bin - and then years later the penny drops; I read some experience someone else has had, and the juxtaposition of that and what's occurred for me allows me to gain understanding - it's been a long, laborious journey, and I'm nowhere near finished, yet ...

[Speed Racer]

10 minutes ago, lmitche said:

Ok folks, this thread is about the Lush cable.  Let's keep it there. This thread has been useful to those of us that take an empirical view of this hobby.  We don't need another thread where the usual bunch of wankers tell us we are delusional, or buying snake oil. We already know your opinions about this innovation and any future innovations shared on CA.  Don't bore us with more of your rhetoric.

 

PUT UP or SHUT UP!

 

200 Euros is more than a reasonable price for an audio cable. Either buy one and offer an informed opinion or go away!

 

Thank you very much.

 

Larry

 

 

Guess what, Larry, we have been talking about this "Lush" USB cable.

 

Here's the deal, with USB we are talking about digital data here. It's digital when it is transmitted and it is digital when it is received by the DAC. It's digital when the DAC moves the data out of the USB section via I2S to be processed further inside the DAC. 

 

As I have said before, just about any cable will get the data to the DAC without any bits being flipped. So, exactly what kind of effect can this "Lush" USB cable have? What does the cable deal with? We are talking four wires here. We have a differential signal for data (two wires), a +5vdc VCC wire, and a GND wire. That's it. Assuming the USB PHY on the DAC passes the right bits over I2S, how can the USB cable affect what comes out the analog section of the DAC?

 

Once again, we must assume the bits are making it into the DAC without being flipped. Assuming that, the only thing the "LUSH" USB cable can affect is how much in our out of spec the signals on the wire are compared to what they would have been with another cable. The cable can be in our out of spec in capacitance, impedance, attenuation, and shielding. Variations in these specs will make the USB PHY work differently. The USB PHY working differently will cause the USB PHY to put out different signals (noise) to the internal circuitry of the DAC (Unless, of course, the USB PHY is isolated from the rest of the DAC).

 

Can you setup a USB cable to cause these signals to make the DAC sound better or worse? Sure. Why not. However, not every DAC has the same USB circuitry. Even if they use the same USB chip, the rest of circuitry is likely to be different from DAC to DAC and most certainly from DAC manufacturer to DAC manufacturer. What does this mean? It means that to get a DAC to sound better with a "LUSH" cable, that cable is going to have to be custom made with that particular DAC in mind. That means a cable that makes a Phasure DAC sound better may make a Chord DAC sound worse.

 

So Peter selling one "Lush" cable to make absolutely no sense to me which is what I asked how his cable is able to affect sound coming from a DAC.  

[fas42]

7 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

Can you setup a USB cable to cause these signals to make the DAC sound better or worse? Sure. Why not. However, not every DAC has the same USB circuitry. Even if they use the same USB chip, the rest of circuitry is likely to be different from DAC to DAC and most certainly from DAC manufacturer to DAC manufacturer. What does this mean? It means that to get a DAC to sound better with a "LUSH" cable, that cable is going to have to be custom made with that particular DAC in mind. That means a cable that makes a Phasure DAC sound better may make a Chord DAC sound worse.

 

So Peter selling one "Lush" cable to make absolutely no sense to me which is what I asked how his cable is able to affect sound coming from a DAC.  

 

Unless there is a generic problem with the interaction of the digital in on USB and the following analogue ... there's likely to be setups where it makes no difference, or even makes it worse. But if there is a solid return policy then one can try it, knowing that one is not "caught" with an accessory that doesn't fit, in a particular instance.

[Speed Racer]

2 minutes ago, fas42 said:

 

Unless there is a generic problem with the interaction of the digital in on USB and the following analogue ... there's likely to be setups where it makes no difference, or even makes it worse. But if there is a solid return policy then one can try it, knowing that  one is not "caught" with an accessory that doesn't fit, in a particular instance.

 

Odds are it makes it worse UNLESS specifically tuned for a particular hardware setup.

[Doak]

Sorry I broke my own rule "Do Not Feed The Trolls.

The best way to extinguish a behavior is to ignore it -- no reinforcement. 

 

[PeterSt]

2 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

That means a cable that makes a Phasure DAC sound better may make a Chord DAC sound worse.

 

Ah you got it. We are all on a strategic plan (even worse than the 10 years M$ works with) to get Phasure DACs in everybody's homes. Of course we start with moving in cables filled with snake oil so everybody starts to complain. Then we solve the problem not by having the cables returned but by sending DACs behind them.

 

@Speed Racer, I will try to come up with a more serious reply later.

[PeterSt]

3 hours ago, fas42 said:

I read some experience someone else has had, and the juxtaposition of that and what's occurred for me allows me to gain understanding - it's been a long, laborious journey, and I'm nowhere near finished, yet ...

 

Allow me to apply a small correction :

 

I read some experience someone else has had, and the juxtaposition of that and what's occurred for me allows me to gain understanding - it's been a long, laborious journey, and I'm nowhere near finished, yet ... 

[PeterSt]

9 hours ago, cmarin said:

Peter's new Lush USB cable has been in my system for only about ten hours. And while my system prior to the introduction of his cable was sounding the best I've ever heard in my room, the Lush cable has taken it to another level completely. 

 

It is simply the most realistic, natural reproduction of music I've ever heard in my room by a not insignificant measure. It's simply MUSIC!

 

Let me join the chorus and extend my hearty congratulations to Peter!! An amazing design achievement!

 

And allow me to add that while @cmarin may be known to own a Phasure NOS1a and it thus could be another of those "obvious" hoorays, he is not - and has not been using that for this Lushy experience; His NOS1a is on its way to here to become NOS1a/G3, so he must be using something else.

Now with this knowledge, let's have some deep interpretation on what I just said to Speed Racer in combination with each word from what I just quoted from cmarin, and then dare to draw some fine conclusion. Could be interesting.

?

[manisandher]

6 hours ago, mansr said:

And how, pray tell, does a piece of wire accomplish this miracle?

 

@mansr, this was specifically for guys who hold your POV:

 

On 14/07/2017 at 0:38 PM, manisandher said:

If you believe that there is no more issue using USB for audio than using it for a mouse, then simply move along to another thread that interests you. No need to waste your time posting here.

 

Mani.

[manisandher]

3 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

 

Guess what, Larry, we have been talking about this "Lush" USB cable.

 

Here's the deal, with USB we are talking about digital data here. It's digital when it is transmitted and it is digital when it is received by the DAC. It's digital when the DAC moves the data out of the USB section via I2S to be processed further inside the DAC. 

 

As I have said before, just about any cable will get the data to the DAC without any bits being flipped. So, exactly what kind of effect can this "Lush" USB cable have? What does the cable deal with? We are talking four wires here. We have a differential signal for data (two wires), a +5vdc VCC wire, and a GND wire. That's it. Assuming the USB PHY on the DAC passes the right bits over I2S, how can the USB cable affect what comes out the analog section of the DAC?

 

Once again, we must assume the bits are making it into the DAC without being flipped. Assuming that, the only thing the "LUSH" USB cable can affect is how much in our out of spec the signals on the wire are compared to what they would have been with another cable. The cable can be in our out of spec in capacitance, impedance, attenuation, and shielding. Variations in these specs will make the USB PHY work differently. The USB PHY working differently will cause the USB PHY to put out different signals (noise) to the internal circuitry of the DAC (Unless, of course, the USB PHY is isolated from the rest of the DAC).

 

Can you setup a USB cable to cause these signals to make the DAC sound better or worse? Sure. Why not. However, not every DAC has the same USB circuitry. Even if they use the same USB chip, the rest of circuitry is likely to be different from DAC to DAC and most certainly from DAC manufacturer to DAC manufacturer. What does this mean? It means that to get a DAC to sound better with a "LUSH" cable, that cable is going to have to be custom made with that particular DAC in mind. That means a cable that makes a Phasure DAC sound better may make a Chord DAC sound worse.

 

So Peter selling one "Lush" cable to make absolutely no sense to me which is what I asked how his cable is able to affect sound coming from a DAC.  

 

Listening impressions of the Lush from numerous people from around the world, with totally different systems, suggests the Lush's 'working as advertised'. (I won't list them all again - most are here in this thread.)

 

Mani.

[kravi4ka]

4 hours ago, Doak said:

 

All that matters is if it works.  I actually trust my ears, don't you?

Correct me please if it is not the case, but I think Peter has a 30 day refund policy. 

I expect very, very few of these cables are returned. 

You are missing the point. A friend of mine was really disappointed when he went to see Mona Lisa in the Louvre. It was small, behind a glass and there we too many people around,distracting. They did not allow pictures but when he secretly made one it was ruined by the glass. He was mad.

 

It doesn't matter if 200€ is actually a ridiculously small amount of money or if there is a 30day return policy or if Peter obviously does not make it for the money. Mona Lisa guys will always be disappointed by the explanation because they get no respect, how come somebody is doing something without them feeling ok???? And most of all they continue doing it when they are warned that it doesn't sound right to our Mona Lisa guys???

 

As the joke said- life was easier in the mid centuries, the girl says no, you tell people she is a witch, they burn the bitch...

[Speed Racer]

12 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

And allow me to add that while @cmarin may be known to own a Phasure NOS1a and it thus could be another of those "obvious" hoorays, he is not - and has not been using that for this Lushy experience; His NOS1a is on its way to here to become NOS1a/G3, so he must be using something else.

Now with this knowledge, let's have some deep interpretation on what I just said to Speed Racer in combination with each word from what I just quoted from cmarin, and then dare to draw some fine conclusion. Could be interesting.

?

 

What can I draw from those words? That he has expectation bias and that any cable you sent him would cause the same reaction.

 

Look, unless your "Lush" cable is flipping bits in the digital data stream, the zeroes and ones coming out of the computer are the same as those getting past the USB interface and into the the deeper parts of the DAC. Since you can't color zeroes and ones, your cable must be affecting the DAC USB interface in some other way. Whether that is good or not would be DAC specific.

 

Why don't you explain specifically what your cable is doing to affect the sound coming out of the analog side of the DAC? 

[manisandher]

12 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

What can I draw from those words? That he has expectation bias and that any cable you sent him would cause the same reaction.

 

From a fellow Yggy user:

 

On 24/07/2017 at 1:48 PM, Boleary3 said:

What is really remarkable about the sound of the Lush is that it is both smoother sounding and, at the same time, everything, instruments and voices, are more solid sounding. Everything has more "presence", thus everything sounds more natural. After listening for several hours I again reset the PP to 115, inserted the Clairixa and was shocked to hear how the airiness of female voices suddenly sound hollow compared to the solidness of the Lush. Incredible achievement.

 

[Highlights mine.]

 

Draw what you want from these words.

 

Mani.

[PeterSt]

26 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

Why don't you explain specifically what your cable is doing to affect the sound coming out of the analog side of the DAC?

 

Because something like IP exists.

Besides that, it seems that you already all summed it up perfectly (derived from what has been said in this thread, so the question seems strange to begin with, and if not derived from this thread then apparentlyyou are smart enough to come up with the answers yourself) ,,, but is seems that you just lack that last bit of drawing the right conclusions, or don't want to conclude or are in denial or ... I don't know. Anyway, might you be constructively thinking instead of destructively, we would have another kind of Speed Racer. This means I could talk to you. Now you don't allow me in.

Anyway I can say it again you summed it up nicely (and is not easy to do - just saying).

[PeterSt]

3 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

Odds are it makes it worse UNLESS specifically tuned for a particular hardware setup.

 

Just an example of being a bit too thick. It does NOT make it worse. You only like to believe that from your own reasoning + statistics (and admittedly you would be correct), but you can *see* that it does not make it worse.

[Speed Racer]

2 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Because something like IP exists.

Besides that, it seems that you already all summed it up perfectly (derived from what has been said in this thread, so the question seems strange to begin with, and if not derived from this thread then apparentlyyou are smart enough to come up with the answers yourself) ,,, but is seems that you just lack that last bit of drawing the right conclusions, or don't want to conclude or are in denial or ... I don't know. Anyway, might you be constructively thinking instead of destructively, we would have another kind of Speed Racer. This means I could talk to you. Now you don't allow me in.

Anyway I can say it again you summed it up nicely (and is not easy to do - just saying).

 

So, are you going to tell me that all DAC USB implementations react positively to the "tuning" you are doing with your "Lush" cable? How about USB implementations that utilize some form of galvanic isolation? Whether it be using  the Silanna isolator chip or transformers?

[Speed Racer]

6 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

 

Just an example of being a bit too thick. It does NOT make it worse. You only like to believe that from your own reasoning + statistics (and admittedly you would be correct), but you can *see* that it does not make it worse.

 

If you can use your cable to tune a DAC to perform better, it means you can use a cable to tune a DAC to perform worse. 

[PeterSt]

4 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

 

Guess what, Larry, we have been talking about this "Lush" USB cable.

 

Here's the deal, with USB we are talking about digital data here. It's digital when it is transmitted and it is digital when it is received by the DAC. It's digital when the DAC moves the data out of the USB section via I2S to be processed further inside the DAC. 

 

As I have said before, just about any cable will get the data to the DAC without any bits being flipped. So, exactly what kind of effect can this "Lush" USB cable have? What does the cable deal with? We are talking four wires here. We have a differential signal for data (two wires), a +5vdc VCC wire, and a GND wire. That's it. Assuming the USB PHY on the DAC passes the right bits over I2S, how can the USB cable affect what comes out the analog section of the DAC?

 

Once again, we must assume the bits are making it into the DAC without being flipped. Assuming that, the only thing the "LUSH" USB cable can affect is how much in our out of spec the signals on the wire are compared to what they would have been with another cable. The cable can be in our out of spec in capacitance, impedance, attenuation, and shielding. Variations in these specs will make the USB PHY work differently. The USB PHY working differently will cause the USB PHY to put out different signals (noise) to the internal circuitry of the DAC (Unless, of course, the USB PHY is isolated from the rest of the DAC).

 

Can you setup a USB cable to cause these signals to make the DAC sound better or worse? Sure. Why not. However, not every DAC has the same USB circuitry. Even if they use the same USB chip, the rest of circuitry is likely to be different from DAC to DAC and most certainly from DAC manufacturer to DAC manufacturer. What does this mean? It means that to get a DAC to sound better with a "LUSH" cable, that cable is going to have to be custom made with that particular DAC in mind. That means a cable that makes a Phasure DAC sound better may make a Chord DAC sound worse.

 

So Peter selling one "Lush" cable to make absolutely no sense to me which is what I asked how his cable is able to affect sound coming from a DAC.  

 

Now let's see ...

4 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

As I have said before, just about any cable will get the data to the DAC without any bits being flipped.

 

There you are completely wrong. At least for high speed USB (480) you are. Far most of the USB2 certified (or advertised) cables do not. BUT one needs error reporting to see it, or be able to hear the small ticks and scratching up to larger plops now and then. Besides that, a 480 interface may not even be initialized.

On a side note, 2ch 24/192 does not need USB2 high speed. Anything above that formally does.

Do please notice that I am not claiming that the Lush is to have less errors or something like that. So my base is an error free connection to begin with. But apparently this is not your base at all because you didn't know about the errors.

 

4 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

We have a differential signal for data (two wires), a +5vdc VCC wire, and a GND wire. That's it.

 

That's it eh ?

So I see that you don't know at all what we are dealing with. Mind you, you challenge for such a response because of what you stipulate yourself : "all is as easy as can be and thus no differences can exist anywhere; Peter, this can only be snake oil and people can only hope for the better.".

Of course you may decide to change your stiputalive tone and I won't claim you don't know "at all", OK ?

 

4 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

The cable can be in our out of spec in capacitance, impedance, attenuation, and shielding. Variations in these specs will make the USB PHY work differently. The USB PHY working differently will cause the USB PHY to put out different signals (noise) to the internal circuitry of the DAC (Unless, of course, the USB PHY is isolated from the rest of the DAC).

 

See ? you are good enough to join the discussion. I am serious.

 

4 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

Can you setup a USB cable to cause these signals to make the DAC sound better or worse? Sure. Why not. However, not every DAC has the same USB circuitry. Even if they use the same USB chip, the rest of circuitry is likely to be different from DAC to DAC and most certainly from DAC manufacturer to DAC manufacturer.

 

All still very OK here.

 

4 hours ago, Speed Racer said:

It means that to get a DAC to sound better with a "LUSH" cable, that cable is going to have to be custom made with that particular DAC in mind. That means a cable that makes a Phasure DAC sound better may make a Chord DAC sound worse.

 

But here you lighted something which must be bad for clear thinking;

Why on earth would I be designing an USB Audio cable with a specific DAC in mind. I tell you, some bits have flipped in your brain or you decided to be evil. It just does not make sense you know.

It is your conclusion though because in the end you can't see how it works. And this in itself is your good right.

 

Possibly you missed one of my earlier claims :

That we, a countless number of people, all come to the same XXHighEnd dials settings, actually mostly independently of each other. HOW ?

Because there is far more behind the audio horizon than "we" understand. I said "we" because when I talked about this (in this thread) I also said that at first I could not have guessed it would work out like that. But it did, and now many years later I am utilizing that knowledge. I say it again, it is your good right that this is beyond your understanding (easy : nobody does and for me it is also only 50%). But it is not a good thing to let that devil in and shut yourself from heaven. I mean, when you are capable of the reasoning I quoted above, why not be more constructive and even try to contribute to progress in this area. And I said that too : This is all not a development of my own, but of all the customers and a bit of me who "applies".

Moral : Similar to how I can by now expect people to value some new XXHighEnd (internal) feature for SQ, I can also do this in the more hardware realm. Well, so it seems. 

 

Thank you.

 

[PeterSt]

21 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

So, are you going to tell me that all DAC USB implementations react positively to the "tuning" you are doing with your "Lush" cable? How about USB implementations that utilize some form of galvanic isolation? Whether it be using  the Silanna isolator chip or transformers?

 

Yea yea yea, you start to be funny.

The Phasure NOS1 has no galvanic isolation.

The Phasure NOS1a has galvanic isolation behind the USB interface, in i2s.

The Phasure NOS1a/G3 has galvanic isolation in i2s and in USB in front of the USB interface. It can be bypassed.

Each of above situations can add e.g. the Intona, which of course is also used outside NOS1/xyz applications and this includes the IS Regen of which I have seen at least one using that with the Lush and with of course the same results.

 

Of course.

 

Anything else ?

 

PS: Maybe I can remind you that you guys started using the Intona as a first USB Highspeed galvanic isolation means because of me, myself and I (not that I created it, but someone brought it to your attention and this was me (after a small failure at first because my serial number #00001 had some failure in it)).

The i2s galvanic isolation Phasure was also the first with.

The in-built USB galvanic isolation - same story.

SQ influence by means of software ? again the same story (including proof by measurements).

And what you also should know is that because of this actually stupidness of the latter, I started building D/A converters. Just to counter attack that stupidness. Well, up to today I failed on that. It is actually getting worse because SQ improves progressively and we hear a 1000x more than 10 years ago.

[PeterSt]

32 minutes ago, Speed Racer said:

If you can use your cable to tune a DAC to perform better, it means you can use a cable to tune a DAC to perform worse.

 

Of course. And if you coincidentally read that eye-shattering page with the introduction of the Lush over at Phasure, you'll see that this really happened. Just to find "directions". So if someone wants, I can provide at least one other super interestingly sounding USB cable which is as differently sounding as the Lush compared to normal, but in the wrong direction. The good thing of my trials is that I can listen to such a cable with interest because it mainly shows all the frequencies and necessary dynamics, which is different to e.g. the Supra which won't stay in the chain for even a minute because it lacks all I like to have. But despite such a trial cable doesn't seem to lack much, it is just "bad sounding". Think like dead. So the exact opposite of the Lush. And this is no coincidence because electrically it *is* the exact opposite; or should be, because it is all theory (I say it again, read Marce's posts). 

[PeterSt]

Not addressing anyone specifically, but part of the crux :

 

USB was made to USB (as in the verb) and not to play audio over. This means that all contenders in the chain, behave to USB spec, driven by "electrical data". Electrically this also means that one element can quite far depict the behavior of the whole chain. Let's have an example :

 

If we like to control a loudspeaker driver, we must have sufficient current to ...

Now think. I will come up with a small clue in a few minutes. If you have an answer, don't hesitate.

[semente]

Counter-EMF? 

[manisandher]

14 minutes ago, PeterSt said:

If we like to control a loudspeaker driver, we must have sufficient current to ...

 

... create enough force to move the cone (in the way we want)?

 

Mani.