The $60 ddHiFi M120A is a well-made, haptically, and optically very appealing earphone cable with a great jewelry effect that is sadly only available as single-ended with a 3.5 mm plug.

The M120A cable was supplied by ddHiFi for my review…and I thank them for that. You can get it from the DD Official Store.

Arrgh, I was talked again into analyzing an earphone cable that came piggyback with the ddHiFi Janus3 earphone. I don’t like doing this as such reviews give a reviewer a bad name. Why? Because every single cable reviewed “sounds better”, frequently “instantaneously better” than any stock cable or competitor it is compared to.

There is no doubt that analog cables contribute to sonic differences, although they may “measure the same”. No surprise here either as there is no physical correlation between impedance and capacitance on one hand, and soundstage, note definition etc. on the other.

Another problem with testing cables is the reviewers’ expectation bias, fueled by the lack of memory between re-cabling the test earphones. My memory is certainly insufficient and A/B-ing on the push of a button is not possible. There was only one analyst, the revered B9Scrambler, who never included sonic characterizations or comparisons in his reviews.

Even if such were real, they would only apply to that particular test setup and would not be universally valid.

ddHifi are a Chinese company that specialize on audio accessories (with a few exceptions such as the Janus earphone line). Their products are imaginative, practical and of high quality. If you want to get a cross section of their gear, check our reviews of their products. The M120A analyzed here is an earphone cable that comes optionally with MMCX or 2-pin connectors, and a 3.5 mm plug (no balanced version available).

The specs need some explanation:

• CTIA standard refers to the plug with the microphone connector on the sleeve end, which works with all modern smartphones.
• Litz refers to the internal cable structure; it is a special type of multistrand cable designed to reduce skin and proximity effect losses in conducturs below 1 MHz.
• AWG is the short for American Wire Gauge and relates to the wire diameter.
• OCC characterizes the wire material and stands for “Ohno Continuous Casting”. It refers to a method of copper refining developed and patented by Professor Ohno of the Chiba Institute of Technology in Japan. The process results in essentially oxygen free pure copper, which has ultra-low impedance that results in rapid signal transmission. And the lack of impurities makes the material corrosion resistant.

The cable is built extremely well with sturdy metal connectors on both ends. It feels rigid and minimizes noise transmission. The jacket is of rather hard polycarbonate and is dirt and water repellent. What I find most appealing is the fact that this cable lacks memory wires…it can be worn over and under ear. Strange that nobody else has had this great idea before. The cable is thin, almost spindly, and light, which contributes to its comfort.

I chose the 0.78 mm two-pin connectors over the MMXX. The two-pin connectors have a universal fit, which includes recessed sockets in earpieces.

When it came to testing this cable, it was initially catching dust. I could not be, pardon, arsed, to tell you how good or bad it sounded. But one fine evening, I ripped the CEMA RX series cable off my LETSHUOER EJ07M iems, and plugged the M120A in. First: it really upgrades these >$600 in terms of haptic and appearance. Second, the M120A is haptically a pleasure. And third, I liked listening to it.

Using the iPhone SE (1st gen.) with the AudioQuest DragonFly Cobalt, my latest “Deutsche Grammophon” classical music acquisitions sounded full and balanced. Whether this is better than the CEMA cable is completely irrelevant for you, everybody has to test a cable with their own equipment. All I can say is that I really like using this cable, and that I am positively surprised.

If you want to test this or any other cable for your yourself, please consider these points:

1. Cables can make a sonic difference, mainly with multi-driver earphones
2. This difference possibly relates to impedance, wire material, and wire structure
3. Impedance differences may in some cases be large enough to result in different sound volumes and can also alter the earphone’s frequency response; such changes in the frequency response can be calculated
4. Cables may not make any difference with some earphones
5. Listeners often mistake volume increase due to lower impedance for sonic improvement
6. The sonic differences between cables are largely independent of price
7. If sonic differences between cables exist, they are not universally valid but only relate to that particular earphone and the cables used in that particular comparison
8. Eartips are the cheaper alternative to achieve a different sound
9. Expensive upgrade cables may sound worse with your favourite earphone than stock cable
10. One may be better off spending the upgrade cable’s price on better earphones

And what does the mic sound like? Here my test recording:

In summary, the M120A works for me. It sits at the upper end of what I cheapskate have spent on an earphone cable in the past. I am just sad that a balanced version does not exist.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Gallery ddHiFi M120A

Disclaimer

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post ddHiFi M120A Earphone Cable With Mic Review – Sexy Hexy appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The ddHiFi TC09BC is a well-made 50/100 cm long USB-C to USB-B Hifi Audio USB cable for connecting your computer to a DAC. Haptic and functionality are premium…and whether it sounds better than ??? (as claimed), well you have to read the whole article...

Introduction

I recently published an article on ddHiFi’s Mfi09S cable. It features a Lightning plug on one end, and a USB-C plug on the other, connecting an iOS device with a DAC. In my writeup I went way beyond my target – characterizing that cable – by reflecting on the general physics evolving around the question whether digital cables can make a sonic difference. After all, ddHiFi claim theirs do.

The answer is not that easy – and not as clear cut as you think. A cable is just one piece in the puzzle – and the best cable you can get is…no cable at all. But whilst there are incredible claims by some cable manufacturers, there are also wild couterclaims of “snake oil”. In reality, one cannot generalize, and the truth is somewhere in between.

I have no issues claiming that analog cables make a difference, that this is not expressed by any measurements (except perhaps impedance), and that there is no link between measurements and audible result by means of a physics equation. Such a link does not exist, although some opinionated claim it does because the measurements are “objective”. And at night it is darker than outside?

The discussion is getting even more polarized when it comes to digital cables. Proponents of the “snake oil” dismissal argue that digital cables only transport zeros and ones, hence there is no difference in quality (because it can’t happen), which also is a circular argument. That’s because none of these can tell you what the zeros and ones actually mean…which shifts the snake oil claims into the territory of the crazy company claims, that is urban myths.

If you belong to one side of the discussion, just enjoy that you save money. And if you belong to the other, enjoy the fact that you have something beautiful in your hands. But please, all of you, don’t lecture the rest of us.

Spoiler alert: bit perfect does not mean perfect data transmission, there can be contaminants in these bits. You better read my Mfi09S article. One thing for sure: a cable cannot improve sound as it cannot clean up a data stream. A cable can can only minimize deterioration of the signal. Whether that’s enough to justify its purchased is in the eye of the beholder.

The TC09BC belongs to the same series as the Mfi09S, both are technically identical, just the plugs are different. and the latter comes in shorter versions. This one is used to connect a computer with a DAC for transferring music (it can also be used as a printer cable, but only if you are a star lawyer, heart surgeon, or oligarch).

The cable comes from ddHiFi, a company y that has been on our Wall of Excellence for their combination of ingenuity and quality.

Specifications ddHiFi TC09BC

Physical Things/Technology

The materials used are in the specs above. Power line and data line are made with different wires that are well shielded against each other. The USB-C connector is rather large, therefore easy to grip, and bother connectors are made of metal and very sturdy. Fit is very snug. You find technical details on ddHiFi’s USB-data cables product page. Overall, this cable is haptically and visually very attractive.

Price wise, the TC09BC is placed between AudioQuest’s Forest and Cinnamon models.

Company Claims

ddHifi claims that the TC09BC offers a “noticeable sound quality improvement“. They fail to specify over what the improvement would be, but it appears obvious that it must be any other such cable. I therefore compare the ddHiFi TC09BC with a well-regarded USB cable.

Physical Theory

I have discussed the theoretic benefits in great detail in my ddHiFi Mfi09S article, which you find repeated behind this spoiler. TL;DR: not all digital cables a equal although they may “sound” the same in some cases…well cables don’t have a sound per se…

Listening Test

Please have a good look at the equipment. I used three different DAPs as sources, the Hidizs and TempoTec connected to the DACs by alternating USB cables (1m ddHiFi TC09BC and 3 m Belkin Gold). The Questyle connected via optical was my reference. I played the same music on all three sources.

The Belkin Gold is a discontinued USB cable that used to be Stereophile’s reference before the fancy USB cables were introduced. Audio pioneer Gordon Rankin confirmed that it is a decent cable. Today, it trades 2nd hand for horrendous prices.

The Questyle/optical combo was my test standard (as it sounded best). I used it to A/B with the other two DAPS. With the Belkin, these Hidizs and TempoTec sounded less dynamic and more subdued compared to the Questyle — independent of the DAC used.

The ddHifi TC09B really made quite a difference — and to the better. Using it, the music sounded crisper with better transparency, which resulted in better resolution and accentuation, but it still could not beat the Questyle/optical combo. In comparison, the Belkin contributed to a less clear, less nuanced sound.

This was evident when flipping (A/B-ing) between USB and optical inputs (my testing standard), which saved me comparing the USB cables against each other from memory (which is inaccurate). The quality difference between optical and ddHiF was simply smaller than with the Belkin. This indirect testing worked well.

A cable (digital or analog) cannot improve sound, it can only minimize signal deterioration.

One has to interpret this with caution, as the sound differences may also rely on other factors such as cable length (maybe the Belkin was too long). Testing the lightning version of the ddHiFi cable, the MFi9S, a while ago, I found zero difference between USB cables. This may relate to the garble/noise, that comes out of the iPhone to begin with, since it has all sorts of clocked non-audio components (cellular, Wifi etc.) — whereas the DAPS are dedicated music players. After all, a cable cannot fix a contaminated signal, it can only minimize signal deterioration.

Concluding Remarks

If you think, USB cables make no difference, then either test them, or just get them from the dollar store — and save your money.

My analysis showed that the ddHiFi TC09BC is a good USB cable that does justice to a >$2000 desktop stack (plus source). With my setup, it does sound better than the popular Belkin Gold cable I tested it against — and I therefore still use it in this application. How it fares with other setups and against really pricey cables, I don’t know. But I would not lose much sleep over it either.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

THE MFi09S cable weather supplied by the ddHiFi for my review upon my request – and I thank them for that. I also thank Alberto for his input to this article.

Get them it from the DD Official Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

Gallery

The post ddHiFi TC09BC USB-C To USB-B Digital Cable Review – Bit Perfect appeared first on Music For The Masses.

I recently spent quite some time reassessing from scratch all of my analog cables, aiming at spotting the most beneficial pairing for each, with particular regards to the IEM cables of my preferred drivers.

This article is the first of a (short) series on such topic. It covers Dunu’s DUW-02S IEM cable.

You can find it from multiple sources including Dunu’s own website of course. A reliable, and even economically convenient outlet is Hifigo, which lists them for $79,00 (and puts them on sale quite often, too).

At-a-glance Card

One-off introduction

These articles of mine about cables will be very short, much shorter than an average piece regarding a pair of IEMs or Headphones.

For this one first piece of the series, however, I reckon a general introduction is due. I will put it in this first article only. Boy scout word.

Let’s go.

I won’t begin to articulate on audio cables (analog and digital, by the way) making a difference or not. They do, period. If you believe the opposite you are welcome to consider me a moron. In such case do yourself a favor and quit this page immediately.

That said, cable effects can be quite varied.

Sometimes, especially in a low end configuration, the difference a cable makes is lost in the big ocean of noise and distortion, or is somehow made irrelevant by the other elements in the audio chain (from the track recording quality, to the transport, all the way to the transducers).

In some other cases, [some of] the virtuous differences cables introduce correspond to weak spots in some other component of the stack, and this results into a negative instead of a positive effect.

Thirdly, and perhaps most importantly when in conjunction with modest budget (let’s say <3000€ overall) chains, the most frequent difference a cable makes is a negative one, simply due to its bad quality – either in terms of conductive components, or even most frequently in construction quality, or both.

With all this in mind a first problem about cables is: where the heck do I get the information on which cable(s) I better avoid, and which I better get ?

Look around you: how many sources can you name whose opinions about audio gear historically lead you towards purchases which, once put on personal use, turned out to accurately match what you thought you would get based on what you had read?

Now, assuming the answer to the previous question is a number greather than 0 : how many of such sources cover the cables topic, even only occasionally ?

Good. Now you know why I had to go through almost naked hands on this, experimenting in first person, of course in small steps.

Very much expectedly I had to kiss quite a few frogs before even understanding how a frog looks like – let alone getting a princess up.

This piece is about the qualities of one particular IEM cable (more articles will follow about other models) so I won’t go into specific details about all the frogs I kissed the cables I bought (and binned).

It might however be quite interesting to recap the passages of the process I went through:

One: every single one of the <75$ IEM cables I tested (in total surely more than 150 different models, if I factor stock cables in) introduced some or a lot of distortion / negative coloration.

Two: Same can sadly be stated for quite a few more expensive ones, too :(.

Three: I identified an extremely short list (less than 5 models) of <75$ IEM cables offering at least “some” positive sonic benefit. Sadly, those come alongside other distortive side effects. Pairing such cables within an audio chain which is somehow not particularly sensitive to their particular negative effects does result in a moderate bottomline benefit. Joy.

And lastly, four: I identified an (for now) even shorter list of >75$ IEM cables offering way more obvious sonic benefits, and hardly any negative ones. Biiiiigger joy.

From all this I drew a couple of quite logical conclusions:

One: cheap cables come with statistically cheap quality. Unsurprising, isn’t it. Surely by searching a lot I might be lucky and find more gold straws in the haystack – but that’s simply not me: in Las Vegas I wouldn’t be a penny machine gambler. I am not going to spend one more euro researching “rarely decent, wonderfully inexpensive cables” – same as I won’t be looking for the next budget priced “giant killer” (??!?) IEM, or DAC, or DAP of course. I can’t be arsed, really, and that’s final.

Two: higher tier cables are a very risky but at least more rewarding gamble. There are uninspiring, and even downright crappy expensive cables, and that’s the damned risky bit. But, there are also very good ones, which do make a big difference when paired to the IEMs I love.

This article is about one of those, until now the least expensive one I found by the way.

Features and description

Physicals and their impacts

DUW-02S is an IEM cable, in the very common length of 1.2m.

Its conductors are high purity silver-plated OCC copper wires, arranged in Type-1 Litz configuration. Conductors are structured in 4 cores, each one protected inside a non-declared polymer sheath, brided together.

The overall result is very lightweight, soft, with great haptics. It’s also very smoothly flexibly, it doesn’t tend to “keep the shape”, and it’s almost impervious to tangling. Simply put: it’s very “pleasing” when in service.

On the IEM end DUW-02S features (fixed) terminations: either MMCX or (protruded) 0.78mm 2pin plug models are available. Either model must be selected apriori, IEM terminations can’t be swapped later.

The 0.78 2pin plug is long enough to perfectly fit Final Audio A-series connectors (known to be particularly recessed). On the flip side, when plugged onto un-recessed 2pin female connectors (e.g. those on Ikko OH10, or many other IEMs) the aesthetic effect is less than ideal, and the total connector length is on the edge of inconvenience, too.

Regarding MMCX connections, all Dunu cables I tried (3 different models, a dozen total different samples, and counting) always proved mechanically slick, convincingly firm and reliable when stuck onto the female MMCX sockets found on so many IEMs, diverse by brand and model.

A special mention deserve Intime MMCX IEMs : DUW-02S plugs into Miyabi, Miyabi-II, Yo, and Sho DD housings “better” than those drivers’ own stock cables (!). This does not happen with Intime IEMs only, indeed, but in Intime’s case it happens all the times.

One last note about the IEM end is about ear guides: I find their shape too “tight”. That’s totally subjective of course, and in facts it happens with many other cable brands/models in my case. YMMV.

On the host side, DUW-02S features Dunu’s proprietary, patented modular plug system named “Q-Lock PLUS”.

Unlike pretty much all of their lower priced competitors I assessed to date, Dunu’s Q-Lock system offers seriously firm, reliable connections, free from any risk for the cable to slip off the back of the end-plug in conjunction with an even modest pulling force.

If something, I very occasionally got the opposite: on the various Dunu cables I assessed some plugs required a little bit higher insertion force when applied to the cable, and/or the Q-Lock ring sliding felt not perfectly fluidly. In no occasion however such relative hardness turned into connection failure or impossibility, so I can’t fairly book any of this as a non-conformity.

DUW-02S comes commercially bundled with a 3.5mm TRS (single ended) Q-Lock plug. It is not possible to opt for a different standard plug when purchasing the cable.

It is indeed possible to buy extra plugs, first of all those with 2.5mm TRRS or 4.4mm TRRRS balanced analog terminations, the special 3.5mm TRRS balanced analog (fantastic option, to fully exploit Ifi’s S-Balanced architecture, e.g. on their GO link dongle), or the Digital special plug, which includes a mini DAC-AMP inside and is in its turn available either with a USB-C or a (genuine Apple certified) Lightning male plug.

Dunu’s Q-Lock modular plugs are a major benefit if I look at my preferred host gear collection. DUW-02S is the least expensive amongst Dunu cables featuring it.

Sonic impact

And finally after all this bla bla here we come to the main course. The sonic benefits brought along by DUW-02S are:

• Tighter and fuller midbass notes. Notes are better rounded, and slammier.
• Higher central mids resolution.
• Improved note and instrument separation, especially in the midrange
• Some improvement on stage depth.
• More vivid high mids.

Such benefits are in some cases just blatant, other times more modest, but they are always there pairing DUW-02S with my preferred drivers, namely

• Final B3 and E5000, vs stock final C106 cable
• Final E4000, vs stock final C112 cable
• Final A3000, A4000 vs stock final 2pin black sheathed cable
• Final A5000 vs stock final 2pin braided cable
• Intime Miyabi, Miyabi MK-II, Sho DD Halloween, Sho DD and Yo Electro, vs both Intime-M Sound and Intime-M Drum cables
• Tanchjim Oxygen vs stock 2pin cable (easy win : Oxy’s stock cable is horrible)
• Ikko OH10 vs Ikko stock 2pin cable

I feel it’s particularly worth to underline how DUW-02S makes final B3 and E5000 “sound better” on all counts in comparison with their original final C106 cables (same bundle on both models), retailing for twice the price of the DUW-02S. Ditto for A5000, in comparison with their newly designed, braided stock cable.

Even most importantly: out of all those I tried, to my experience DUW-02S is the least expensive cable bringing multiple, consistent sonic benefits to all those IEMs, systematically doing better than their relevant stock cables. All other more or even much more affordable cables I tried on those same drivers either don’t improve over stock cables, or they do, but very lightly and partially, and always introducing some (negative) side effect too.

For example: there are cheap cables improving on bass tightening, but overexciting highmids at the same time. Others nicely add on note body across the spectrm, but cut on microdynamics in the process. Etcetera.

Talking about limitations, DUW-02S tend to give high-mids some more beer while keeping a more than decent control on them. However when pairing with signatures already featuring important elevations on 3 – 4KHz they might get too hot. Intime Miyabi is an example of such a borderline situation: DUW-02S is still a good pair for me, probably won’t be for a more high-mids sensitive person. Akoustyx S6 + DUW-02S is instead beyond acceptable.

And lastly, I found one single case which I tend to consider an “absolute lack of synergy”, and that’s final F7200 + DUW-02S. Compared with stock final C071 cable pairing we have improved midbass but too hot high-mids and most central mides moved wwway too much forward. A no-no.

Considerations & conclusions

While IEM cables are not something to start bothering with until reaching a certain stability in one’s audio tastes and equipment fleet, they may indeed bring obvious sonic improvements once properly identified and paired with selected drivers.

The bad news, if you wish, is that inexpensive cables are in the overwhelming majority of the cases a pure waste of money – so much so that I tend to recommend everyone to totally disregard the topic until he/she feels ready to get involved with cables costing 75-100$ at the very least.

In hindsight, I would actually do the same if it weren’t for the (partial) need of swapping fixed-terminated 3.5mm stock cables with balanced terminated ones to enable pairing to some sources. Not that this can be considered vital: a 50$ driver will stay a 50$ driver even if better amped, or driven by a better DAC. Nevertheless, now that I identified some at-least-half-decent budget cables I basically crystallised them as my “safe cheap harbors”, and I use them when I need a “balanced swap” on a driver I’m reviewing or whatever I am not particularly committed to. A future article of this series will be dedicated to them.

The more expensive cables market does instead offer good, and very good options, if mixed and hidden amonst pure lemons. Same to what happens on any other market, after all…

Dunu’s DUW-02S is until now my least expensive find in terms of an IEM cable bringing evident sonic benefits to most of my preferred drivers, very few and occasional sonic caveats, reliable modular host termination technology, very high quality MMCX implementation, and convincing general construction quality.

At $79 plus the cost of extra modular plugs DUW-02S is not something I would recommend buying to pair with a sub-100$ driver. However, the improvement it brings to quite a few mid-tier IEMs (those I explicitly listed above and some more others…) makes for an obivous recommendation when in search of an effective way to improve on an already loved mid tier driver.

Hifigo offered me a modest “reviewer discount” on DUW-02S, as always without expectations strings attached in terms of my subsequent review contents, and I thank them for both things.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

The post DUW-02S Headphone Cable Review – Most Affordable Significant Upgrade appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Since all digital cables are sonically identical (aren’t they?), AudioQuest products protect our health whereas cheapos may lead to premature death. Here‘s why we cannot afford the latter…

Introduction

It is well known that all digital cables sound the same as they only transport zeros and ones. You don’t believe me? You do?

Where I got my information from? I had simply followed the advice of the audioquestsciencereview.com blog. It is the one where the Emir of SINDBAD measures cables and DACs etc.

He always comes to the same conclusions: all cables (digital and analog), DACs, and amps sound the same, as long as they measure the same. And his followers agree.

The pragmatic budget audiophile therefore buys a cheap DAC and gets their cables from the dollar store, saves a lot of money…and laughs at these rich old bearded men who hang out at audio shows. You know, those graveyard blondes who can’t let go of Dire Straits, Pink Floyd, and Toto.

And that’s where my problem started: the dollar store. Spending so little on quality cables left me plenty of funds for junk food: cookies, chips, chocolate, pop, etc.

Unfortunately, my increasing knowledge of budget audiophilia was positively correlated with my blood-sugar levels, which resulted in insulin resistance. I also got fatter. Yep, I was moving steadily towards type 2 diabetes.

While my physical shape kept pace with that of the aging members of Dire Straits, Pink Floyd, and Toto, my doctor gave me the choice between Ozempic injections [what’s Ozempic?] and AudioQuest cables as a last resort. I chose the latter – and lost 14 kg in a few months.

My blood values are now normal and I can wear pants again that had been catching dust in the basement for years. No more danger of type 2 diabetes. No more risk of heart attacks and stroke.

How I did that? I purchased an AudioQuest USB-A to Lightning cable, model “Cinnamon”. Not that cinnamon would be rich in antioxidants, antibacterial properties, or reduce the effects of bad cholesterol (all of which is true)…no, it was simply pricey for a dollar-store customer like me.

AudioQuest, in contrast to audioquestsciencereview.com, promotes the idea that not all (digital and analog) cables sound identical. The company offers a wide variety of product covering the whole market spectrum.

Does the AudioQuest Cinnamon Lightning to USB-A cable make a Difference?

I purchased the 0.75 m AudioQuest Cinnamon USB-A to Lightning cable for personal use (and not for review purposes) from the company and thank them for their discount. You find it in the spice aisle of your local supermarket and on the AudioQuest website.

My first test related to clean power. After charging my iPhone through the AudioQuest Cinnamon cable, Apple’s music player sounded better. Brass instruments and violins emitted rounder notes…and there was lot more transparency.

This was not measurable, but had to do with the cable’s insulation, which absorbed energy. This absorption re-aligned the dilithium crystals in uniform order.

As a side effect, the display of the battery charger appeared brighter and sharper.

Non-Health Aspects: Sound

You may have noticed that the writeup so far has been an April Fools’ Day joke. Getting serious, I plugged my iPhone with the AudioQuest Cinnamon Lightning cable in the Marantz SA8005 SACD player (see title photo) that was connected to a Luxman L-410 amp (via AudioQuest Sydney RCA interconnects) and Heybrook HB1 speakers.

In comparison to my Amazon Basics Lightning cable, the Cinnamon contributes a tad more richness, warmth, and more rounded notes. The question is whether one cares.

Subjectivity vs. Subjectivity

The difference between these digital cables will have different impact on different people with different attitudes. The measurement-guided enthusiast will not bother, the tight-fisted aficionado will not care either, but the more fine spirited soul (with deeper pockets) will.

To me, such nuances add up and will make a substantial cumulative difference over time. I treasure the fact that the sound will be improved with this cable every time I listen to the music.

An example of cumulative benefits: I like the AudioQuest DragonFly Red and Cobalt dongle DACs – and have used them for a couple of years now. I hear a huge difference between the two, the Cobalt is just richer and rounder playing whereas the punchier Red has some shrillness in the upper mids (which can be tamed to some extent with the JitterBug). Therefore, the Cobalt gets way more eartime than the Red.

Measurement-guided analysts Archimago and a friend could not hear a difference between these two dongle DACS that justified their $100 price difference. Sound-guided analyst Steve Guttenberg begged to differ.

In the end all of us are right: each person decides what is good for themselves because it is their ears – and their wallets.

A problem arises when one group mobs those who disagree, backed by “objectivity” claims of measurements. This is invalid as any measurement setup is subjective and no correlation between quantitative measurements (“observation”) and qualitative sound (“interpretation”) has been established. The self-proclaimed objectivity is in reality just “internal consistency”, which is of limited usefulness.

In order to get around this logical fallacy, one has to subscribe to a belief system. Herd mentality is added to boost each other’s confidence resulting in a carnival of bullying know-it-alls.

It is actually grotesque that anybody refuses to use their ears for evaluating sound.

But the world is not black and white. On the other hand, cable companies such as Kimber and AudioQuest also come up with unsubstantiated correlations between physics and sound….the physics may be correct but may not influence the sound at all. Paradoxically, their cables may sound as good as claimed, but for the wrong reasons.

This fallacy is principally not any different from the previously mentioned one and I wonder whether these claims are just defence mechanisms against the “measurement crowd”.

At least, the “quality crowd” keeps to themselves and does not feel the need to impose themselves on others…except perhaps bore us with endless discussions of cable break-ins and the “critical period between hours 150 and 200 on the way to the recommended 500 hours” (yes, I read that).

From my own experience: I once helped tune the KBEAR Diamond earphone. After we got the frequency response (used as a guiding tool to record differences) to our liking, I received the final pre-production prototype. And it sounded offensively bad to my ears. But all the company had done was exchange the cable.

Luckily, the original cable was also in the package – which fixed the sound for my ears. The difference between the two cables? The offensive one had an OCC wire, the preferred one was made of oxygen-free copper.

Both were $15 cables, therefore cost was not an issue. The Diamond yielded the same frequency response graph with either cable.

In summary, the sound of music cannot be characterized by (quantitative) measurements of sine waves. That’s apples and oranges. On top of that, quantity and quality are not correlated in a linear manner. We have to use our ears…and it may take trial and error…which can be pricey.

Concluding Remarks

We at www.audioreviews.org are all keen on trying things out. We principally don’t believe any claims before we have tested and verified them, which includes the use of our ears without prejudice. Our blog offers many examples of dismissing unjustified hype generated by companies and influencers.

We also consult measurements but refrain from overinterpreting them. We use every available line of evidence to arrive at a coherent, meaningful interpretation. And we are open to learning.

We are also aware that quality audio is not black and white, and that there is snake oil out there…but our approach minimizes our risk falling for that. In the end, the controversy does not matter as the quantity crowd stays away from the (pricier) quality, and the quality crowd frowns upon dollar-store Hifi. They simply don’t mix – and only one of them barks up the tree of the other, sadly.

I personally enjoy the Cinnamon and my weight loss (the 14 kg and the pre-diabetes are real). And I can use this cable with generations of iPhones over years to come [unless Apple changes over to USB-C], which makes it a worthwhile acquisition in the long run.

Now let’s get some chips from the dollar store to celebrate the day. Potato chips that is, not DAC chips.

Please check your blood pressure regularly!

Until next time…keep on listening!

The post How An AudioQuest USB Cable Saved My Life appeared first on Music For The Masses.

I purchased some of these cables myself, and later AudioQuest where kind enough to match them with different-length/connectors ones. Thank you very much. You find more information on AudioQuest’s website.

Introduction: digital Christmas in New Orleans

It all started on one Christmas eve, in a hotel in downtown New Orleans, LA. Our first visit to the city, we had just checked in and I was nervously awaiting the delivery of my first AudioQuest (digital) cable at the lobby: Cinnamon, 16-pin for connecting iPod Classic to Marantz SACD8005. It was not available (anymore) back home in Canada – and time was running out. If it was not delivered within the next few hours, the holidays would have started – and we would have left town before the postal service had resumed. Last chance that afternoon. Now or never!

I nervously checked tracking: St. Louis, MO, at noon. We inspected our room…and found a bottle of champagne in a cooler, some fancy strawberry parfait, and a personal note…but not to us. I called the hotel lobby, they told us to consume the goodies anyway and without regret…and also that the cable had arrived.

It was our day in the end. Merry Christmas, New Orleans.

My next Encounter, analog

I don’t believe in snake oil, I am a scientist, but I also have a classical music training. I am aware that ears don’t rely on measurements outside an otolaryngologist’s office (that would shift me towards the engineering corner). And I know about the claims AudioQuest, Kimber, and Co. make about some of their cables.

No, I am pragmatic, use my ears, and try to define value for myself applying criteria exceeding mere sound quality. In the case of the Cinnamon 16-pin cable, it was certainly more than that. I had a beautiful Hifi system, a number of stylish iPods…and a cheap looking, optically and haptically little appealing Apple cable, made by the hundreds of millions. So why not an eye-catching, well-built, and somewhat unique cable…which provides pleasure every time I look at/handle it.

My next encounter with AudioQuest cables happened more recently. And in contrast to the New Orleans event, it was with analog cables. I had ordered a set of Evergreen analog RCA connectors to connect devices to my Magni 2 Uber headphone amp. I had used a sturdy >15 year-old Monster cable – but I really liked the Evergreen’s green colour and braided textile jacket. After all, cables are also jewelry. Don’t call me shallow.

But when I unpacked the light Evergreen interconnects, I wanted to instantly return the cable, as the less fancy Monsters felt much more substantial. This changed when I tried the Evergreens out. I had been listening to Chopin cello suites (cello and piano), and it sounded ok with the Monsters.

But when I plugged the Evergreen connectors in, the effect was sharpening a picture that had been slightly out of focus. The cello and piano became clearer, better contoured, and more natural sounding. With the Monster cables, the sound was washed out in comparison.

This difference was actually rather large. Co-blogger Larry let me know that Monster cables, in his experience, had been known for this lack of focus.

I was truly surprised. And the Evergreens fulfilled another one of my requirements for investing in a cable: it must make a substantial sonic difference (beyond haptic and looks) to fork out good money for an upgrade.

The Problem with Cable Manufacturers/Reviews/Reviewers

Premium cables both digital and analog typically polarize music enthusiasts. Some hear distinct sonic differences, others consider them as being snake oil. The snake oil is based on sometimes esoteric claims by the manufacturers hidden behind fancy cable optics to justify outrageous prices. But optics and sound quality are not correlated. There’s frequently clearly marketing departments spreading misconceptions.

Nevetheless, reviewers taking on cables almost always report universal sonic improvements, independent of the gear these are connected to. Many of these reviewers want to stay on the manufacturers’ gravy train by playing the extension of their marketing departments, or simply to cash in on their affiliate links.

All of these contribute to a terrible reputation of cables for some.

The Problem with Science: Observations vs. Interpretations

As you may have noted by now, there are two kinds of cables: digital and analog. It is well known that digital cables transport bits as ones and zeros – and hence it is argued there is no audible difference between them. But nobody ever bothers what ones and zeros in reality are…they are small voltage fluctuations.

True is that any cable delivers bit-perfect results, but any of these bits may also contain stuff we don’t want – which deteriorates the signal: jitter, timing, and noise. A digital cable cannot fix these contaminations, however a poorly made one can exacerbate these issues and therefore further deteriorate sound.

A good cable minimizes sonic deterioration – and it does not have to be expensive. On the other hand, Gordon Rankin, pioneer of digital audio, reported “bad” expensive USB cables to me. Therefore snake oil does exist, however not every pricier cable is snake oil.

But here we are talking analog cables. There are different wire materials (copper, silver etc.), material purities, and wire structures that cooperate differently with speakers/headphones at the receiving end. Certain cable properties can be measured, for example impedance, but the results are of limited use.

Some analysts, however, conclude from their measurements whether a cable “sounds good” or not. But since most cable measure essentially the same, many followers believe there is no sonic difference between them. And none of these really bothers listening.

In summary, their observations may be correct, but their interpretations are irrelevant. In reality, no scientific link exists between a SINAD (or similar measurements) and sound characteristic. It remains trial and error to find the right sonic fit between electronics and cables.

Physicals of the Evergreen and Golden Gate Interconnects

Both models belong to AudioQuest’s “Bridges and Falls” series and are available with different connectors. Their prices vary with plugs and length, but run broadly between $70 and $140 (0.6 m to 2 m). You find details in AudioQuest’s 2022 North American retail price book.

The lower-priced Evergreen features a “solid long-grain copper structure” and the more premium Golden Gate “solid perfect surface copper”. Bother feature braided jackets and cold-plated gold-plated terminations.

Sound with the Evergreen and Golden Gate Interconnects

I did initially not perform A/B listening tests comparing the Evergreen and Golden Gate (and with other cables) as I could not be bothered. This is difficult anyway as my auditory memory does not hold well over the time it takes to change cables. All I can say is that both cables worked well with my electronics over a long time. Well enough that they are still on there to the present day.

In the end, I did a quick one connecting my Questyle QP1R dap through its dedicated line out to the Burson Funk amp. As described above, I had issues with A/B-ing owing to the time it takes to exchange the cables. This means, the difference between the two is not that obvious (it was a different story for two Burson power supplies – one made a huge difference over the other).

Perhaps the Golden Gate offered a tad more bass, which raises the question which of the cables transfers the low frequencies more authentically – considering all other factors such as headphone cable, operational amp (I used the less bassy Burson V6 classic) etc. You tell me…

Comparing the two AudioQuest cables with a generic one revealed a more obvious sonic difference (to my ears): music through the generic one lacked presence, dynamics and clarity in comparison…though it was still not outright bad. Some may find this difference subtle, others substantial. That’s where the snake oil claims come in as many will not hear any difference at all…or they do not bother.

I belong more to the “substantial” fraction as this difference is cumulative: it is there all the time, whenever music is running.

In summary, the two AudioQuest cables tested were better than the generic one, and you have to decide for yourself whether connecting electronics of value $$$$ is worth the price $$ of a cable. In my case, dap and amp added up to $1800, and the generic cable was $4.

Even $100 would not be extravagant! After all, a cable is a potential bottleneck.

Concluding Remarks

So, am I shilling AudioQuest cables? Hardly, as I have used these for almost two years. The company never asked me to write a review – and I could not be bothered doing sophisticated listening tests telling the world how much better these are (or not). These cables fit my electronics, budget wise, and they work for me sonically, haptically, and optically.

And that’s all I want.

With this experience with AudioQuest products, I recently purchased a Forest USB-B to USB-A cable to connect a DAC to my Mac. Very satisfied with this one, too! Wasn’t dirt cheap but also did not break the bank.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

The post AudioQuest Evergreen vs. Golden Gate Analog Interconnects – A Christmas Carol appeared first on Music For The Masses.

The ddHiFi MFi09S is a 10/50 cm long Lightning to USB-C cable claimed to make an obvious sonic difference. This article also generally addresses the contentious issue of sound improvement by digital cables.

Introduction

ddHiFi have been one of the most innovative companies for portable audio. They produce functional, imaginative, high quality accessories, from bags, through cables to adapters, and even a couple of earphones. Their latest endeavour is the Nyx series of audiophile digital cables, which are all share the same wire material and insulation: a USB-B to USB-A, a USB-C to USB-C, a Ligthning to USB-A and a Lightning to USB-C for connecting iPhones to a DAC.

Therefore, today we are…no, that was already last week. And its only me once again. Therefore, in this article, I examine the ddHifi MFi09S Lightning to USB-C, mainly for its sonic capabilities. There are many crying “snake oil” now (and pull out some questionable measurements in their support), but whining is one thing, and listening is another. As we will see, the situation is not as black and white as it seems.

This article also has another purpose: to summarize our current knowledge of digital data transfer in layman’s terms. Although this is presented rather compact, you may want to re-visite this article for the occasional refresher.

Specifications MFi9S

Physical Things/Technology

You have seen the materials used in the specs above. Power line and data line are made with different wires that are well shielded against each other. The connectors are rather large, therefore easy to grip, and they are very rugged. These plugs fit even the smallest phone case. The cable as such feels substantial but it is a bit stiff, which works better for the shorter 10 cm version. You find technical details on ddHiFi’s USB-data cables product page. Overall, this cable is haptically and visually very attractive.

The MFi09’s lightning connector features a decoding chip which draws a small current from the phone. I did not test this one specifically, but all other non-Apple lightning cables previously in my hands have the same power consumption, as tested here.

Company Claims

ddHifi claims that the MFi09S offers a “noticeable sound quality improvement“. They fail to specify over what the improvement would be (maybe their own MFi06 cable?, but it appears obvious that it must be any other such cable.

Physical Theory

Noise and Timing

So what sonic improvement (over what?) can we expect in a digital cable? After all, it transports zeros and ones, right (which are transmitted as voltage fluctuations)? Actually, it carries data and power in two separate lines.

Principally, there is lots of “digital crap” coming out of a phone: jitter (timing errors) and noise. That’s because a phone is not a dedicated music player. I has no proper audio clock and lots of other functionalities that require different electrical components, which are cramped in a small case and affect the outgoing digital signal negatively, mainly by electromagnetic interference (EMI), radio frequency interference (RFI), and timing errors (jitter). In some cases, interference is caused by the client DAC, as demonstrated on the example of the EarMen Sparrow by Biodegraded. And noise can also be produced inside the cable (through poor insulation).

What’s in a Digital Cable?

Fact is, there is no difference in incoming vs. received data between expensive and budget cables, bits are bits, and the result is “bit perfect” in every case. So, no sonic difference, right? Stop, we have to examine what’s in a bit: jitter, timing, and noise. Jitter and timing can be measured (and corrected for by re-clocking), which leaves us with noise. It is a bit of an unlucky choice of words, I’d call it impurities superimposed on the digital signal which may (or not) degenerate the sound.

A metallic digital cable is principally a conductor that also transports pre-existing noise (it cannot distinguish between the good and bad things in the data stream) but it is also an “antenna” for near-ambient RFI/EMI, and it generates its own stray/spare magnetic and electrical fields (when carrying a constant current).

So what can go wrong during digital data transfer? When signal voltage is transported, the host and the cable may pick up stray signals in addition to the intended one…just like dirt being added to the bathwater. In addition, host, cable, and client can be on different “electrical” ground levels. Third, interferences during transport may generate time delays.

Timing errors need filtering by decrappifiers such as the ifi Nano iUSB 3.0 and re-clocking, typically not done in the phone host but in the DAC client at the other end of the digital cable. EMI can be minimized or avoided by the use of high-quality, well-shielded electronic components in the phone – and by a good digital cable.

In a well-designed cable, data line and power lines are separated and well shielded from each other (and from outside electromagnetic interference from, let’s say, power supplies), and it is twisted to minimize the contact areas between the two. Material also plays a role for data integrity: for example, in networks, fibre optic cables are not susceptible to EMI, copper is. EMI is important not only for the design of cables, but also for the electronics and the circuit board.

In summary, noise contamination happens in the source and/or during transport through the digital cable. The old rule “garbage in, garbage out” is also valid for digital data. If the data stream leaving the phone is compromised, the cable cannot fix it. All it can do is not let it further deteriorate. It cannot reclock or filter, and therefore not correct for the phone’s EMI/RFI and/or jitter.

Therefore, if the source emits a noisy signal, even the best cable makes no difference, but a bad cable further deteriorates the signal. If the host signal is clean, cables may make a difference. A dedicated music player may generate a cleaner data stream than a computer or a phone.

What Others say

The Audiophiliac Steve Guttenberg compared “fancy” optical and coaxial cables with generic, low-cost ones. He recorded substantial sonic differences between the expensive and the generic ones. Steve is a reputable analyst: was he dreaming and putting his good reputation at stake? In contrast, no test of Lighting cables has been conducted yet. Actually, I did test a few in my analysis of the ddHifi MFiS06…and found no obvious difference.

Self-acclaimed “objectivists” claim digital data don’t make a difference. This is based on measurements that do not reflect the quality of the data stream – and no physical connection between them and sound is established. And because the measurement setups are as arbitrary as the interpretation of the results, there is nothing objective about them. Nada. Zilch.

To add insult to injury, such protagonists typically don’t bother testing the gear with their ears they lecture the rest of us about. As we know already from earphones: graphs are insufficient for characterizing the sound of a device. And nothing is objective anyway.

Being opinionated is not being objective!

Whatever the theory tells us is one thing, listening is another. What’s important in the end is sound and not opinion. I have written all of the above before any listening test of the MFi09S cable.

Sonic Effects of Noise

I have experienced and described the effects of EMI and RFI (as well as switching noise, but not jitter) on the example of power supplies, for example the Burson Super Charger or the Allo Nirvana & Shanti and ifi Audio Power X. Contamination muddles the sound, it loses clarity and transparency. In the Burson case, I have no desire to go back to the stock power supply, the difference in the amp’s sonic performance was that huge.

Listening

We have learnt that the ddHifi MFi09S Lightning to USB-C cable is just one piece in the noise puzzle, sandwiched between a potentially noisy phone and a USB noise filter and a reclocker. That’s when the less imaginative audio linguist pulls out the phrase “your mileage will vary”. It is not a black and white affair. If the signal incoming from the phone is clean (just switch the Wifi and cell connection off), all a poor cable can do is deteriorate the signal, whereas a good cable has a high data integrity.

Round 1: iPhone SE (1st gen.) with different Lightning Cables

For my testing, I connected my iPhone SE (1st gen.) to the Questyle M15 DAC/amp with different lightning cables:

• ddHiFi MFi09S
• ddHiFi MFi06
• ifi Audio
• makeshift lightning cable 1: TC28i adapter with USB-C charging cable
• makeshift lightning cable 2: Apple camera adapter with USB cable

I then listened with the Moondrop Katos the Final E5000s. If there is a sonic difference between these cables, it is not obvious…and therefore negligible. In order to remove all doubt, I moved on to round 2.

Round 2: iPhone SE (1st gen.) vs. Hidizs AP80 Pro-X DAP

I listened with the Moondrop Kato’s to the following two setups:

• iPhone connected to the Questyle M15 via ddHiFi MFi09S cable
• Hidizs AP80 Pro-X DAP connected to the Questyle M15 via a generic UGREEN USB-C charging cable

Phone and DAP served as transports only – but both use different music softwares. The Hidizs setup sounds obviously better: richer, deeper, cleaner, with better dynamics and more headroom. I speculate the cleaner data stream and/or the different encoding from the dedicated (and therefore less noisy) player make the difference, but not the cable. The paradox is that a technically superior cable may not matter at all in many cases because of the other sound-influencing factors.

In the two test rounds, I toggled the phones cellular connection, Bluetooth, and Wifi on and off in all possible combinations, which also made no sonic difference.

Round 3: iPhone into Marantz SA8005 with different Lightning Cables

To put the lid on the pot, I played the iPhone through the Marantz SA8005 SACD player into the home stereo – and listened with the Sennheiser HD25 headphone with its integrated headphone amp. The MFi09S did not work at all, neither did the ifi Audio OTG cable – the iPhone was not recognized by the Marantz. Only the Apple Lightning cable, an MFI-certified Startech USB cable, and even a cheaper MFI-certified UGREEN charge cable worked. And no, there was no audible difference either.

Reasoning is the fact that the Marantz, like a Mac computer, requires a bi-directional power line (with charging functionality) to communicate with the phone. OTG cables generally do not offer that.

Interpretation

All cables tested “sound” the same. They appear to be reasonably well shielded against EMI/RFI and the metallic wire material used makes no sonic difference but rather other factors such as the source (software, noise) in the phone’s case.

In other words, the MFi09S is overkill for my applications. It may be as good as intended but cannot show its qualities in my setups. It would make a difference if the client DAC was emitting EMI/RFI, but this is a special case. The other fact to consider is that a DAP without network/general computing capabilities sounds better than a phone, even with a budget cable.

Although the MFi09S makes no sonic difference in my tests, it is still not snake oil!

Concluding Remarks

Whether a digital cable makes a sonic difference depends mainly on the data quality of the host. If my phone emits a noisy signal, even the best cable is wasted on it. On the other hand, even the cleanest signal can be contaminated by a poorly designed cable.

ddHiFi’s series of “audiphile” digital cables connects computers, daps, and phones to client DACs. Phones typically produce the noisiest data stream. The fact that I don’t hear a difference in sound quality between the MFi9S and other lightning cables may lie in the problematic phone source. An “audiophile cable” may simply be overkill for this job.

In summary, the lack of “obvious sonic improvement” as claimed by ddHiFi may not reflect on the cable – such a general claim is simply not tenable as such “improvement” (rather call it “lack of deterioration”) would depend on many other factors, too.

But just as with earphones cables, the MFi9S is a haptically substantial, well-handling, durable cable with quality connectors that also adds a visual “jewelry” effect to your OTG setup. Unless you are keen on the overpriced, white, easily fraying Apple equivalents…And there is still ddHiFi’s lower-priced MFi6 cable.

UPDATE 2023-01-03: I also tested the USB-C version of this cable, the ddHiFi TC09BC, and it does make a difference in my test setup. And there is a good explanation why…

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

THE MFi09S cable weather supplied by the ddHiFi for my review upon my request – and I thank them for that. I also thank Alberto for his input to this article.

Get them it from the DD Official Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

Gallery

The post ddHiFi MFi09S Digital Cable Review – Fancy Overkill! appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Current-hungry DACs drain our DAP/Android Devices fast – and Apple’s current-draw limit frequently just results in an error message. The solution is an external power bank – which is easy in the DAP/Android case, but still problematic with iOS devices. Here’ s how to do it…with the E1DA splitter (2 kinds) and the Apple Camera Adapter.

This article is based on discussions with Alberto and I thank him for his insights…which have cost me lots of sweat in the meantime. Gordon Rankin or Wavelength Audio pointed the Apple restrictions out to me. I purchased all these cables myself. My testing refers to extreme cases. The E1DA splitters work as advertised as they are optimized for their own products.

Introduction

Dongles are little DAC/amps that draw their operating current from the host, which is either a computer, phone, DAP, or tablet. They have the advantage that they do not subscribe to planned obsolescence as they do not rely on an internal battery that dictates their life span. And they are small because of it. That’s why I like them.

There are principally two kinds of dongles, such that limit current draw to preserve the host’s battery, and such that…don’t (I wrote about this here). The first are limited in their performance, and the second drain the host (too) fast. Remember the 36 hours we got out of our iPod Classics?

Apple adds the “fun fact” of limiting current draw to 100 mA for most of their iOS devices. Reason is their fear of dissatisfied customers falsely claiming battery failure on warranty when their phones’s batteries drain “too fast”. If we connect our dongle with a current draw exceeding 100 mA, we get no music but a cryptic error message instead. Not good.

There are exceptions, when the iOS device is fooled to believe the draw is below 100 mA…by means of fudging the descriptor table in the software (according to Gordon Rankin of Wavelength Audio). Hidizs S9 Pro and ifi Go Bar (both around 140 mA), for example, appear to get around the restrictions, as both work with my iPhone SE (1st gen.), Astell & Kern’s PEE51 does not.

Luckily, some third-party Lightning cables exist that trick the iPhone to believe the current draw is lower than 100 mA…which is only a short-term solution, as it does not stop the battery from draining fast. E1DA have published a useful spreadsheet that tells you which Lightning cables work with which iPhones with their 9038SG3 and 9038D DACs (which draw above 130 mA).

Android devices and most DAPs are more forgiving – and work even with the biggest current w**res (excuse my Italian). But not for long in each case before you have to hook your device back up to the charger.

Therefore, in order not to run out of juice prematurely – and to entice Apple devices to play through our monster dongles – we need to use an external power source to drive those – and the readiness of the host to accept them.

The theory is simple: just separate power line and data line in the cable connecting host and dongle. As a result, the dongle draws its power from an external 5V power bank (or out of our 5V wall charger), and its data (“music”) from the phone/DAP/tablet. Computers are exempt in our discussion as they always provide enough power to any dongle (USB 2 up to 500 mA).

Stop! The theory may be easy for Android devices/DAPS, but things can be way more complicated for iOS devices, when the 100 mA current-draw limit needs to be circumvented.

What we need for DAPs/Android devices is a splitter cable (with separate data line and power line), an external battery, and the music host. This also works for iOS devices with <100 mA draw, but the Apple Camera Adapter is needed for anything higher. And that’s not all: you also need an MFI-certified USB-A (or USB-C) Lightning charging cable to make it work. Let’s test all possible cases.

DAPs/Android Devices with external Battery and E1DA Splitter

The easy case first to warm you up for things to come. What we need:

• Music source
• $4.99 E1DA USB-C to USB-C splitter cable
• Power bank
• Dongle (here the current hungry, 280 mA consuming, very powerful Apogee Groove…with micro USB to USB-C adapter
• Headphone

We plug it all in – and it works. The source device is not charged during music play and the Groove receives the required current from the power bank. Easy peasy!

iOS Devices with external Battery and E1DA Splitter vs. Apple Camera Adapter

1. Dongles with a Current Draw <100 mA (or a Software Manipulation pretending it is <100 mA) –> E1DA Splitter and Apple Camera Adapter work

Well, that’s smooth when the connected dongle draws less than 100 mA as it essentially works like the DAPs/Android device above. It just need a different E1DA USB-C to Lightning splitter cable that sets you back $19.99. Just in the case above, your iOS device is not being charged during operation.

2. Dongles with a Current Draw >100 mA (and without Software Manipulation pretending it is <100 mA) –> only Apple Camera Adapter works, E1DA Splitter does not

In this case, the E1DA USB-C to Lightning cable does not work. All you get is an error message. The power bank fuels the Groove properly, but there is no chip telling the iPhone it does actually not have to supply power to the Groove. Hence the iPhone reacts as it would without power bank: it does not want to do it. Thank you, Apple.

We still can drive the Groove but need different equipment to do so. Please fasten your seat belt! We need the following ingredients:

• iOS device
• $49 Apple Lightning to USB 3 Camera Adapter
• Power bank
• MFI-certifed Lightning charge cable
• Dongle (here again the current hungry, 280 mA consuming, very powerful Apogee Groove)
• Micro USB to USB-A cable
• Headphone

This works beautifully. The power bank funnels current into the Apple Camera Adapter with its controller chip that informs the iPhone that it does not have to supply current to the Groove. And the Groove draws its power from the power bank, which is controlled by the iPhone. On top of that, the iPhone charges while playing.

But there is still another hurdle: the charging cable has to be MFI certified to be able to communicate with the Apple Camera Adapter’s controller chip. Lightning cables by Amazon (Basics), Apple, IKEA, Startech and UGreen worked in my tests, OTG cables by ifi Audio, ddHiFi, and OE Audio did not (they are unidirectional “the wrong way” and not designed for charging). No power through the latter – and the well known error message appears on my iPhone. Bummer!

Concluding Remarks

Driving dongles with DAPS/Android devices and power bank using the E1DA USB-C to USB-C splitter cable works universally.

In contrast, iPhones (tested with SE 1st gen. and 13) do not like to draw zero current when they are not told to do so by a controller chip. As it appears, the Apple Camera Adapter draws some current from the iPhone but also from the power bank. E1DA’s USB-C to Lightning splitter works different from Apple’s Camera Adapter as it talks to the dongle and not to the iPhones’s power management. Therefore, iPhone does not charge while being connected to the E1DA splitter.

And I wished E1DA added a chip (as in Apple’s Camera Adapter) to make their Lightning splitter universally usable (Apple apparently makes this impossible for audio designers without an MFI license – and E1DA are probably not an accredited MFI contract manufacturer). E1DA’s USB-C to Lightning splitter is therefore of limited use for third-party dongles – but it works as intended with E1DA’s own DACs. This cable is not MFI certified.

As a rule of thumb, E1DA’s USB-C to Lightning splitter will only work with dongles that iPhone believes are drawing less than 100 mA current. And Apple’s Camera Adapter only works with MFI-certified charge cables. Nothing is perfect.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

The post Driving Power-Hungry Dongles With DAPs/Android Devices and iPhone (E1DA Splitter and Apple Camera Adapter Review) appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — None.

Executive Summary

The ddHiFi MFi06 and TC03 are digital cables that are well conducting, well insulated, built rugged and priced right. And they add optical appeal to our devices.

Introduction

ddHiFi have been favourites of our blog for quite some time. They produce very well designed, functional AND optically appealing audio accessories and even earphones.

I have tested their TC25i and TC28i adapters, their Carrying Case C-2020 as well as their Janus E2020A and Janus E2020B earphones. And I purchased a few of their audio adapters. For their accessories, the whole company is attached to our Wall of Excellence.

In this article, I am analyzing the MFi06 and TC03, two USB cables in the broadest sense. Both have a USB-C connector on one and, the MFi06 has a lightning plug on the other, and the TC03 a micro USB plug.

And all USB cables are equal, right? Zeros and ones transfer the sound, the stock cable is as good as the snake oil ones at $$$.

Erm, stop. Not always. The signal carried by the cable is not only zeros and ones (which are actually transmitted as voltage fluctuations), there may be some noise riding along the lines that affects sound quality. Two kinds of noise exist, “Electromagentic Interference” (EMI) and “Radio-Frequency Interference” (RFI).

If the data line is not effectively shielded, nearby electrical components (e.g., switching power supplies, other fluctuating electrical/magnetic fields from computer circuitry) can contribute to EMI that might pollute the USB data.”

Running power and data lines (from a phone or computer) through a single USB cable can cause additional interference and exacerbate the issue. Decrapifiers such as the AudioQuest JitterBug FMJ act as filters to reduce such pollution, but a “good” USB cable adds to this effect, too.

“Good” does not refer to the wire (that’s where the snake oil is) but to the insulation of the power and data lines against each other. In other words, a quality cable does not add anything, it makes sure that nothing is taken away from the signal quality.

A well-known example of the positive effects of insulation is the EarMen Sparrow dongle, that, when operated with a phone, can show strong interference in the shape of intermittent buzzing and clicking (subsides when switching the phone function off). The culprit is the stock cable, and a good third-party cable strongly reduces (but might not completely eliminate) the problem.

One measure of the shielding effectiveness of different cables, the resistance of shield terminations, was investigated in this thread.

Good-quality, well-shielded USB cables do not have to be expensive. USB audio pioneer Gordon Rankin reported very poor $$$ USB cables to me. It is all about the cable’s design, not the price.

ddHiFi are a company that offer a large range of imaginative, well designed, and well built accessories….and even a couple of earphones.

Physical Things

Both cables are 8 cm long. Wire material is high-purity silver-plated OCC copper.

Four strands of separately insulated wire serve as conductor. The inner insulation is teflon. The outer insulation is thermoplastic polyurethane imported from Germany. The aluminum alloy connector are cased in stainless steel to minimize external interference.

Thermoplastic polyurethane (TPU) is any of a class of polyurethane plastics with many properties, including elasticity, transparency, and resistance to oil, grease, and abrasion. Technically, they are thermoplastic elastomers consisting of linear segmented block copolymers composed of hard and soft segments.

As it appears, these cables are technically sound. They feature good conductors and sufficient internal and external insulation. Sonically, they are indistinguishable from the OEOTG cable and one other brand of which I could not identify (see photo at the bottom of this article).

Haptically, the MFi06 and TC03 are vastly superior over the typical stock cables and the Apple Camera Adapter. The connectors feel rugged, the cable is flexible and the shiny, pearly white TPU is dirt and grease resistant.

And, let’s face it, these cables also add a jewelry effect to our gear. Yep, they don’t just feel good between the fingers, they also look good.

All good so far, only one worry remains: the MFi06’s battery consumption.

MFi06’s Battery Consumption

The MFi06’s lightning connector features a decoding chip which draws current from the phone. The question is how much it contributes to the phone’s battery drain.

I measured battery consumption of different dongles (AudioQuest DragonFly Red, Shanling UA2 single ended, Hidisz S9 Pro single ended) with the Apple Camera Adapter vs. the MFi06. I then repeated these tests with two other Lightning to USB-C cables (OEOTG and an unknown brand) for comparison purposes. All tests were performed under identical conditions. The absolute values are meaningless, what is important are the relative values.

.

Results:

1) The Apple Camera Adapter has by far the lowest power consumption.

2) In my 3 h tests, the 3rd-party MFi chip in the ddHiFi MFi06 cable consumed between 130 and 220 mAh (23%-36%) more (for my specific test parameters) than the one in the Apple Camera Adapter.

3) All three tested 3rd-party cables appear to have the same MFi chip (approx. same battery consumption with Shanling UA2).

4) Battery consumption of the ddHiFi MFi06 cable varies vastly between dongles. It is much lower for the DragonFly Red that consumes by far the least battery with the Apple Camera Adapter.

In summary, the MFi06’s power consumption is acceptable for today’s ever increasing phone battery capacities.

Concluding Remarks

The ddHiFi TC03 and MFi cables do what they are supposed to do: they work as promised while adding appeal to our devices. And they don’t break our piggy banks.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

Disclaimer

THE MFi06 and TC03 cables were supplied by the ddHiFi for my review – and I thank them for that.

Get them from the DD Official Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

Gallery

The post ddHiFi MFi06 and TC03 Digital Cables Review – Unplugged appeared first on Music For The Masses.

To the extent I ever think about cables, I’m a moderate—generally, I neither believe that all well-made cables sound the same nor that you can radically change an IEM’s  tuning with a cable. I’ve also previously rejected as fantastical the notion that silver cables are brighter than copper or that heavier gauges are somehow better. However, the Leyding did have enough of a sonic impact that I’m starting to rethink some of my preconceptions.

The plastic-sheathed 8-core braided Kinera Leyding doesn’t look or feel especially luxe, except for its modular output design, which provides for detachable 2.5mm balanced, 3.5mm single-ended and 4.5mm balanced plugs. Build seems solid, with metal connectors and gold-plated plugs, but the 3.5mm plug is too stubby to fit in the protective case on my mobile (I had to use a M to F extender, which admittedly is not a great sacrifice). The cable does feel soft and supple around your ears, and (in contrast to the stock Bravery cable) is free from microphonics and awkward memory.

Contrary to my preconceptions, the Kinera Leyding very significantly changed the presentation of the SeeAudio Bravery. First and foremost, it boosted the volume considerably—while I leave measurements to my more technogeek colleagues, I hypothesize that the Leyding has lower impedance than the stock Bravery cable (less impedance=greater volume).

However, it also made the already-bright Bravery brighter and made the low end, which had somewhat slow decay with the stock cable, audibly tighter. Not all of these changes were favorable—guitar strings and female vox with the Leyding sounded a little more shrill/digital, albeit more detailed. Overall, however, the Kinera Leyding was an improvement.

Results with the ($49) KZ ZS10 Pro were less successful. Again, the phones sounded louder with the Leyding than with the stock copper cable (which is $9 on KZ’s website) and notes seemed weightier. However, the Kinera Leyding tended to bloat the bass to a painful level, which was better-controlled with the cheaper original.

With the Moondrop Kanas Pro, whose stock cable is thinner but also silver plated copper, the differences were much more subtle—I may have heard a bit more weight in the notes with the Leyding, but I can’t swear that there wasn’t some expectancy bias in play. 

I’m happy to own the Kinera Leyding—the detachable plugs are useful gimmick, it’s very comfortable to wear and a definite enhancement to some phones. You could probably find an equivalent performer for less  (though given its lavish presentation the Leyding seems fairly priced). Above all, it made me actually care about cables for the first time, which is worth something. 

Disclaimer: gifted by and available from HifiGo. Thanks, guys and gals. 

Our generic standard disclaimer.

Contact us!

The post Kinera Leyding .78mm 2 pin Cable Review – Better Living Through Science appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Pros — Cheapest snake oil in audio; excellent build, haptic, and looks; rugged and attractive looking; reasonable price and shipping.

Cons — Shipping cost only calculated upon checkout.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Snake Oil Taipan are sturdy RCA connectors made from German Sommer cable and American premium Amphenol connectors, and they are assembled in the USA.

INTRODUCTION

We love snake oil. If you search our blog for these keywords, you get…just try it:

https://www.audioreviews.org/?s=snake+oil

Snake Oil Sound is a 2-men startup out of a garage in San Jose, CA. 2 guys? Garage? California? Sounds familiar?

That’s how he world’s most valuable company started. But whereas Apple have never had any self irony, Snake Oil have. The company specializes in after-market accessories for Schiit products (cables, connectors, even a streamer), and they certainly have come up with some good ideas. Check out their catalogue.

I came across Snake Oil when looking for RCA interconnects for the Khadas Tone2 Pro/Topping L30. There are tons of quality cables out there, which were either too pricey for me – or the extraordinary shipping cost higher than the product itself made them cost prohibitive.

Snake Oil sell directly without middlemen. They offer international shipping at cost – per USPS, which is about $12 to Canada. They obviously understand their customers. Unfortunately (for them) I had already submitted an order to some Chinese budget cables. And fortunately – for them – these were too short for my purposes, so that we agreed on me reviewing one of their cables. I opted for the Snake Oil Taipan, their TOTL model, which retail at a reasonable $33 per footlong pair.

SPECIFICATIONS

Product Name: Snake Oil Taipan
Length: 6 in to 1000 ft
Wire Material/Conductor: 0.5 mm² German SOMMER cable
RCA connectors: Premium Amphenol
Tested at: $33 for1 ft/pair
Purchase Link: Snake Oil Sound

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

There is really not much to say. The cables were hand assembled upon ordering and arrived in a simple plastic bag. The amphenol premium connectors are well known to and appreciated by audiophiles. They are sturdy and sit as snug in place as it gets. The rugged cable part is imported from Sommer Cable in Germany. Two quality items, brought together in California.

The overall construct is highly functional and therefore rather substantial and very sturdy. The cable is reasonably supple and rebranded with the Snake Oil label. And it is this visible irony that makes this product unique.

SOUND: REFINING SNAKE OIL

I have reviewed quite a few earphone cables in my life – but never dared to make broad statements that one cable sounded universally better than another. Differences in sound rely on a lot of factors and are always tied to the properties of the electronics the cable is used with, the source and the amp.

Now I have finally arrived at the Snake Oil itself. And yes, the Snake Oil Taipan sounds good. So good that I use it to connect the Khadas Tone Pro to the Schiit Magni 2 Uber and Topping L30. Yep, it works well, it connects well, and it looks good. And that’s all I need. I compared the Taipan with some well-made but older Radio Shack cables. The Taipan delivered a fuller sound at the bottom end, the Radio shack sound was less bassy and visceral – which only applies to this particulate setup. This does not mean it sounds better than the Radio Shack cable, it only means it transfers more of the lower frequencies. Depends which signature you prefer.

Snake Oil Taipan – The Movie

CONCLUDING REMARKS

I had done a few cable reviews before – and had mentioned the term “snake oil” in each of them. Yes, any two cables can sound different (with the same electronics), but this has, in many cases, little to do with price (or optics). A well-constructed, well-shielded cable with good connectors is all you need for decent sound transfer.

The Snake Oil Taipan incorporates German and American quality parts and does the job – and it does it well. It is assembled in the USA and affordable. I really liked the company’s “at a cost shipping” to Canada.

What else do you want?

You can have never enough Snake Oil in your audio…which is typically highly overpriced! But not in this case.

Oh, and I append a few images below that give you some idea of the Taipan’s physicalities – and an accompanying video is in the works.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

I received the Taipan cable from Snake Oil Sound for my review – and I thank them for that.

Get the Taipan directly from Snake Oil Sound.

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

Gallery

The post Snake Oil Taipan RCA Cable Review – Sonic Poison Attack appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Not the most pliable design.

INTRODUCTION

NICEHCK 4N Litz OCC Copper Earphone Cable: in the last few years, third-party earphone cables have been a desirable asset for listeners and sellers (!) alike. I was recently talked into reviewing a few budget cables – and will retire from this duty in the near future as it is difficult to make universally valid statements on cable sound. there is no established physical relationship between wire material/structure and sound. Sonic quality is not measurable. Sonic differences between cables vary between earphones and it takes some cable rolling to find the right one in each case. I have always recommended a selection of budget cables of different materials (silver, silver-plated copper, pure copper etc.) for everybody’s toolbox. This NICEHCK 4N Litz OCC Copper Earphone Cable: cable can be a budget addition to your cable collection.

SPECIFICATIONS

Product Name: NICEHCK 4N Litz OCC Copper Earphone Cable 
Wire Material/Conductor: 4N Litz UPOCC copper (purity 99.99%)
Internal Core Structure: Litz
Number Of Cores: 0.1*10 each strand
Skin Material: PVC
Insulating Material: Polyurethane
Length: 1.25 m ± 3 cm
Solder: WBT containing silver
Impedance:< Ω
Inductance: 0.4 uG/ft
Propagation Delay: 80% speed of light
Plug Types: straight 3.5 /2.5 /4.4mm
Plug Material: aluminum alloy
Spitter Material: aluminum alloy
Connector: MMCX/0.78mm 2Pin/QDC 2Pin
Tested at: $17-19
Purchase Link: NiceHCK Audio Store

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

TECHNOLOGY

The important technologies used in the NiceHCK Blocc 4N UPOCC Copper Litz Cable are UPOCC (material) and Litz (internal cable structure). You may have come across these terms before, but, like me, do not remember the details. OCC stands for “Ohno Continuous Casting”. It refers to a method of copper refining developed and patented by Professor Ohno of the Chiba Institute of Technology in Japan. UP stands for “Ultra Pure”. The process results in essentially oxygen free pure copper, which has ultra-low impedance that results in rapid signal transmission. And the lack of impurities makes the material corrosion resistant. 

The “N” number in 4N refers to degree of copper purity. 4 refers to four nines as in 99.99% pure copper (5N would mean 99.999% and so on). 

Litz is a special type of multistrand cable designed to reduce skin and proximity effect losses in conducturs below 1 MHz. It consists of many thin wire strands, individually insulated and twisted or woven together, following one of several carefully prescribed patterns frequently involving several levels (groups of twisted wires are twisted together, etc.). The result of these winding patterns is to equalize the proportion of the overall length over which each strand is at the outside of the conductor. This has the effect of distributing the current equally among the wire strands, reducing the resistance.

HAPTIC & BUILD

The NICEHCK 4N Litz OCC Copper Earphone Cable  is exceptionally light in comparison to others. It is also comparatively (PVC)) stiff when bending and of medium hardness between my fingers. And it is rather loosely braided. Certainly not the most pliable one – but extremely resistant/less prone to tangling. The connectors are of good quality and pretty much standard across companies in this price class.

COMFORT

The NICEHCK 4N Litz OCC Copper Earphone Cable is reasonably comfortable. The tension of the memory wires is again standard in this class, and the cable itself is a bit lighter but also stiffer than the budget competition.

NOISE TRANSMISSION

None. Very good.

COMPATIBILITY

The NICEHCK 4N Litz OCC Copper Earphone Cable is available with all possible connectors: 3.5mm/2.5mm/4.4mm MMCX/NX7/QDC/0.78 2Pin

JEWELRY EFFECT/LOOKS

The loose braiding and shiny copper appearance makes this cable look a bit inconspicuous in comparison. The PVC is rather “ordinary” and probably not the. The PVC material is extremely dirt and greaseresistant.

SOUND: REFINING SNAKE OIL

Try it out yourself.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The NICEHCK LitzOCC 4N Litz OCC Copper Earphone Cable: another budget cable that presumably works as well for you as it did for me. It is just another stone in the wall of anyone’s cable collection. I advise to spend money on a number of budget cables rather than on a single expensive one – at least in the early stages of this hobby. There is always time to upgrade based on experience gained with these.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Get this cable from NiceHCK Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

RELATED…

The post NICEHCK 4N Litz OCC Copper Earphone Cable Review – Another Brick In The Wall appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — None.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The <$0.2 Inasmile cable protectors are super low-priced add-on strain reliefs that effectively prevent cable fraying and breakage – and therefore extend cable life. They also help fixing damaged cables such as the notoriously fraying Apple cables. A great solution for disgruntled Apple customers and protective audiophiles alike.

INTRODUCTION

I rarely come across a product that puts a smile on my face. The Inasmile cable protector is one of them. It is very useful and cheap. I use it for protect cables but reinforcing the strain relief but also developed a simple and fully reversible method for fixing frayed cables. No heat think, Sugro, or similar goo needed. The fix is fully reversible. I am convinced that you will throw in an order for these. By they way, I purchased this product myself.

HOW IT WORKS

Just wrap the protector around as seen in the video. These Inasmile cable protectors work for both, protection but also fixing. I will show you how in the following.

SPECIFICATIONS

Material: rubber
Length: 3.5 cm
Outer Diameter: 0.8 cm
Compatibility: any cable with a diameter between 2.5 and 4 mm (Apple power supply, iPhone, OTG or headphone/earphone cable
Flexibility, stretchability: very good ductility and tensile strength
Softness: perceived very good
Colours: wide variety
Tested at: $1.60 for 10
Purchase Link: Inasmile Official Store

USE 1: MOST INTIMATE PROTECTION

The Inasmile cable protectors simply reinforce any flimsy strain reliefs as in the Sennheiser PX 100-II or the heavy used/highest bent areas around usb etc. connectors in computer cables. This can extend the life of a cable and save money.

USE 2: FIXING CABLES

FRAYED APPLE POWER-SUPPLY AND iPHONE CABLES

Apple’s iPhone cables and power-supply cables are notorious for fraying at high bending areas – and Apple never acknowledged the problem. Unfortunately, two of my power supplies fell victim fo cable fraying near the mag-safe connector for no good reasons. The material simply had become brittle. The “genius” at the Apple bar just raised his shoulders. Out of warranty, sorry. As you see in this example, the frayedd segment was quite long. I first wrapped it with ultra thin however sturdy thread-sealing tape and then added two of the strain reliefs to hold the tape in place and also to armour the cable. Works like a charm – and also does for iphone cables. And it is MUCH cheaper than Sugro goo and Kickstarter-type strain reliefs at Apple pricing. And If you don’t like your fix in the end, it is easily reversible. No risk here.

SENNHEISER VS. DYSON

In yet another battle of Britain, my Dyson vacuum cleaner chewed up a Sennheiser headphone cable. In this process, the cable’s PVC cover disintegrated at a couple of ca. 10-20 cm long segments so that the wires were exposed. The cable was still fully functioning. In order to fix this, I first covered up the wires with electrical tape, then kept the tape in place with Inasmile cable protectors. And bingo.

WHAT THE COMPANY SAYS

“Simple crossover convenience wide compatibility more practical”

“Soft without hurting the line”

“Most intimate protection”

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The Inasmile cable protectors are truly the “most intimate protection” one could think of. And not only that. While they will extend the life of weaker, brittle, and older cables, they also saved me a lot of money by assisting in repairing frayed cables permanently attached to two Apple power supplies at $80 CAD each. Considering the cost of less than 20 cents per protector, I expect these to sell like hotcakes. Highly recommended.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

None. I purchased the cable protectors myself but felt like writing a review. They are that good. So far, I have ordered 40 pieces.

Get them from Inasmile Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post Inasmile Cable Protectors Review – Most Intimate Protection For <20 Cents appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — The 3.5 mm balanced version does not work with some single-ended outputs.

INTRODUCTION

This NICEHCK C16-5 16 Core Copper Silver Mixed Earphone Cable comes with the NiceHCK NX7 Pro Mk3 earphone reviewed by us. But since it is also individually available, and because it is haptically and wire-wise so different from the usual budget fare, I decided to write a short characterization of it. Please note that I approach this from the aspect of jewelry effect and practicality of use only. I will not go into sonic details as these are likely vastly different for different earphones.

As a reviewers/analyst, I need to have a selection of eartips and cables as the stock accessories are frequently not working for me. Most of these cables cost between $10-15, but I recently treated myself to a $40 cable to check out differences.

In my experience, cables can make a sonic difference (to the stock cable), however the differences do not rely on price but rather on the cable materials, cable structure, the amplifier’s output impedance, load impedance, the earphone sensitivity, and many more parameters. We have more unknowns than equations to make universally valid statements sound. But as a simplistic first approach, we look at cable materials. According to the hypothesis, pure copper tames the signature whereas silver and silver-plated copper add perceived treble. This is likely not generally true, however it is a reasonable assumption to base our testing on – each earphone/cable combination has to be tested individually with different electronics and the results cannot be generalized. When talking on sonic differences between cables, these are not expressed in frequency response measurements: measurements with different cables are usually identical. What this tells us it that cables don’t change quantity (dBs) but quality. But inhowfar this quality change can be quantified and its exact causes be determined remains an enigma.

SPECIFICATIONS

Product Name: NICEHCK C16-5 16 Core Copper Silver Mixed Earphone Cable
Conductor: 16 copper silver mixed
Purity: 99.997%
Conductor Core: 23AWG
Number of Cores: 14*16
Outer Diameter of Internal Single Core: 0.05mm
Single Outer Skin Diameter: 1mm
Internal Core Structure: SPC silver plated copper + OFC high purity copper
Outer Skin Material: PVC
Plug Types: straight 3.5 /2.5 /4.4mm
Connector: MMCX/0.78mm 2Pin/QDC 2Pin/NX7 2Pin
Splitter Material: pure copper plating
Tested at: $37-39
Purchase Link: Nice HCK Store

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

TECHNOLOGY

The technologies used in the NICEHCK C16-5 16 Core Copper Silver Mixed Earphone Cable are the 16 cores and the silver-plated copper/OFC high purity copper mixed wire. Each of the 16 cores has 14 0.05 mm thick strands. NiceHCK does not specify the cable structure, however OFC copper refers to “oxygen-free copper”. OFC copper has a high conductivity and it is particularly resistant to corrosion, which can impact sound quality. 99.997% purity constitutes 4 N in my books. How this affects sound remains to be seen.

HAPTIC & BUILD

The NICEHCK C16-5 16 Core Copper Silver Mixed Earphone Cable is particularly soft, smooth, and supple. Outer material is PVC and it appears to be dirt and grease resistant. It is actually very pleasant between the fingers. Plug, splitter/chin slider, and connectors are all made of heavy metal with a polished surface. They are heavy and solid. The regular 2-pin and QDC 2-pin versions I tested were sturdy but I would generally recommend the regular 2-pin. Both fit snug on the earpieces I tried them out with. As pictures tell more than 1000 words, here some technical photography of the cable’s key features.

COMFORT

No problems in this department. The memory wire fits snug around the ears without exerting pressure. The softness and pliability make the cable particularly comfortable against the skin and the chin slider holds everything nicely in place. Weight is middle of the pack as the headphone jack, splitter, and chin slider are pretty solid.

NOISE TRANSMISSION

There is zero microphonics. As we like it.

COMPATIBILITY

The NICEHCK C16-5 16 Core Copper Silver Mixed Earphone Cable comes with a variety of connectors to fit any conventional earphone shells: MMCX/0.78mm 2Pin/QDC 2Pin. You can also choose the plug: 3.5 /2.5 /4.4mm. I advise against the QDC 2 pin as it limits connectivity, a regular 0.78 mm 2 pin connects to more earphones. I also warn from getting the 3.5 mm balanced version as such a standard does not exist (with a very few exceptions) and this connector does not work with all single-ended output. For example, the Audioquest Dragonfly Black and the Earmen Sparrow both produced only sound in one channel. But it worked fine with the 3.5 mm output of my iPhone SE (1st generation) or my MacBook Air’s output.

JEWELRY EFFECT/LOOKS

The NICEHCK C16-5 16 Core Copper Silver Mixed Earphone Cable is more on the flashy side with its shiny speckled cable skin and shiny metal connectors. Its visuals cannot be missed.

SOUND?

I had mentioned above that no general definite statements can be made about sound. Any cable may have different sonic effects with different setups. But one thing for sure is that sound quality is not related to price. In fact, you always have to try different cables wth each setups for optimal sound.

I had expressed my informed opinion on cable sound differences in my recent NiceHCK Blocc 5N UPOCC Copper Litz Cable review [HERE]. My main points are summarized as follows:

1. Cables can make a sonic difference, mainly with multi-driver earphones
2. This difference possibly relates to impedance, wire material, and wire structure
3. Impedance differences may in some cases be large enough to result in different sound volumes and can also alter the earphone’s frequency response; such changes in the frequency response can be calculated
4. Cables may not make any difference with some earphones
5. Listeners often mistake volume increase due to lower impedance for sonic improvement
6. The sonic differences between cables are largely independent of price
7. If sonic differences between cables exist, they are not universally valid but only relate to that particular earphone and the cables used in that particular comparison
8. Eartips are the cheaper alternative to achieve a different sound
9. Expensive upgrade cables may sound worse with your favourite earphone than stock cable
10. One may be better off spending the upgrade cable’s price on better earphones

Value

Hard to assess as cable pricing is all over the place and as the exact interior is not revealed. But in terms of haptic, this cable and its connectors are clearly a good step up from the usual $10-15 fare I have in my collection.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The NICEHCK C16-5 16 Core Copper Silver Mixed Earphone Cable is a well-made, good looking cable with a somewhat cryptic, however interesting mixed silver-copper wire inside. This kind could be one of a few budget cables in your collection, together with a silver one, a silver-plated copper one, an occ copper one, and a pure copper one. Now you are ready to test your earphones without breaking the bank. Have fun!

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

Complicated. I received two NICEHCK C16-5 16 Core Copper Silver Mixed Earphone Cables. The first came unsolicited with the NiceHCK NX7 Pro Mk3 review unit – but it was the wrong connector (balanced 3.5 mm plug). I then received a balanced 2.5 mm cable upon request. And I thank Jim NiceHCK for that. As to my review above, I was never asked to write one, I just thought it would be a good idea as this cable is so much different from the usual budget fare.

Get it from NiceHCK Audio Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post NICEHCK C16-5 16 Core Copper Silver Mixed Earphone Cable Review – The Soft Parade appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — None.

INTRODUCTION

The NiceHCK Litz 4N Pure Silver Cable is the company’s budget offering in terms of pure silver Litz wire at around $20. In this price category, most earphone cables are either pure copper, occ copper, or silver-plated copper. Since different materials harmonize differently with different earphones in some (but not all) cases, it is always good to have a cable of each material in your modding box.

SPECIFICATIONS

Product Name: NiceHCK 4N Litz pure silver cable
Material: 4N pure silver
Internal Core Structure: 0.08*10, 4 Strands 40 Cores; 1.2m±3cm, Internal Core 0.092mm with Litz
Cable Diameter: 28AWG（Inside Diameter 0.33mm，Cross Sectional Area 0.0553mm²）
Outer Material: American PVC
Insulation Material: Litz
Length: 1.2 m ± 3cm
Impedance: < 0.3ohm
Inudctance: 0.4uF/ft
Solder : WTB Solder Silver Solder
Plug Types: straight 3.5 /2.5 /4.4mm
Connector: MMCX/0.78mm 2Pin/QDC 2Pin/NX7 2Pin
Plug material: Carbon Fiber & Stainless Steel
Splitter Material: Carbon Fiber & Stainless Steel
Tested at: $20
Purchase Link: Nice HCK Store

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

TECHNOLOGY

The important technologies used in the NiceHCK 4N cable are “Pure Silver” (material) and Litz (internal cable structure).

Litz is a special type of multistrand cable designed to reduce skin and proximity effect losses in conducturs at below 1 MHz. It consists of many thin wire strands, individually insulated and twisted or woven together, following one of several carefully prescribed patterns frequently involving several levels (groups of twisted wires are twisted together, etc.). The result of these winding patterns is to equalize the proportion of the overall length over which each strand is at the outside of the conductor. This has the effect of distributing the current equally among the wire strands, reducing the resistance.

The “N” number in 4N refers to degree of copper purity. 4 refers to four nines as in 99.99% pure copper (5N would mean 99.999% and so on). 

HAPTIC & BUILD

NiceHCK Litz 4N Pure Silver Cable is rather filigree: it is thin, light, and inconspicuous. The braid is rather loose. The wire is is covered with PVC, which makes the cable soft and pliable, and that shiny outer material appears to be dirt and grease repellent. The MMCX connectors are of good quality…they clicked in snug wherever I tried. The memory wire is also thin and of intermediate tension. The wires were comfortable around my ears. The headphone plug is also robust and the chin slider comes in handy. I underline my description with some photos below.

COMFORT

The memory wire fits snug around the ears without pressure and the cable is as light as it gets so that the NiceHCK Litz 4N Pure Silver Cable is as comfortable as it gets – it is also comfortable against the skin. The chin slider helps holding the cable in place.

NOISE TRANSMISSION

There is zero microphonics. Very good.

COMPATIBILITY

The NiceHCK Litz 4N Pure Silver Cable comes with a variety of connectors to fit any conventional earphone shells: MMCX/0.78mm 2Pin/QDC 2Pin. You can also choose the plug: 3.5 /2.5 /4.4mm.

JEWELRY EFFECT/LOOKS

The NiceHCK Litz 4N Pure Silver Cable – as said – is on the subtle, inconspicuous side. The silver-and-black connectors are neutral enough looking to fit any earphone.

SOUND?

I had expressed my informed opinion on cable sound differences in my recent NiceHCK Blocc 5N UPOCC Copper Litz Cable review [HERE]. My main points are summarized as follows:

1. Cables can make a sonic difference, mainly with multi-driver earphones
2. This difference possibly relates to impedance, wire material, and wire structure
3. Impedance differences may in some cases be large enough to result in different sound volumes and can also alter the earphone’s frequency response; such changes in the frequency response can be calculated
4. Cables may not make any difference with some earphones
5. Listeners often mistake volume increase due to lower impedance for sonic improvement
6. The sonic differences between cables are largely independent of price
7. If sonic differences between cables exist, they are not universally valid but only relate to that particular earphone and the cables used in that particular comparison
8. Eartips are the cheaper alternative to achieve a different sound
9. Expensive upgrade cables may sound worse with your favourite earphone than stock cable
10. One may be better off spending the upgrade cable’s price on better earphones

From my experience, a silver-plated copper or an occ copper cable may add brightness, and therefore some sparkle to a warm sounding earphone, and a pure-copper cable helps taming boosted, piercing upper midrange peaks. This is just a rule of thumb that needs to be re-confirmed for every earphone. But these sonic differences are independent of price.

The NiceHCK Litz 4N Pure Silver Cable works very well with the rather polite KBEAR TRI I3 earphone that requires amplification and has an early treble rolloff – and I just kept this cable on as my go to. With this earphone, the pure silver cable works equally well or better than the NiceHCK Blocc 5N UPOCC Copper Litz Cable at 5 times the price (but was certainly not worse sounding) – but this is only valid for this particular earphone. 

CONCLUDING REMARKS

The main characteristic of this cable is its pure silver conductive material at a relatively low price. Pure silver may have – but not always – favourable sonic effects on certain earphones. It is therefore good to have a pure silver cable in the toolbox, along with pure copper, occ copper, and silver-plated copper. With any given earphone, cable materials may make no difference at all or they make a big difference — but potential sonic improvements are mostly not correlated with price.

What makes no difference is price — and looks are not correlated with sonic quality either. Don’t get carried away by snake oil, buy responsibly, look for deals, and be aware that your earphone and “upgrade” cable don’t harmonize or that the cable is pure jewelry. And why not.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

The NiceHCK Litz 4N Pure Silver Cable was provided unsolicited by NiceHCK store – and I thank them for that.

Get it from NiceHCK Audio Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

The post NiceHCK Litz 4N Pure Silver Cable Review – Well Well Well appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Cons — Some microphonics.

INTRODUCTION

Third-party “upgrade” cables with prices up to the sky have always played a role in the premium earphone segment. But in the last few years, with the uprise of budget/mid tier Chi-Fi, such cables have become standard staples even at the very low end.

In fact, fixed cables are a deal breaker for many potential buyers even of $20 earphones. Some Chi-Fi earphone brands have their own line of cables that range from a few $ to the price of a mid-tier earphone.

NiceHCK are such a company. They have impressed us with more or less good sounding but always well-built earphones, and I have purchased quite a few of their $10-15 pure copper or silver- plated copper cables, which have been always to my satisfaction.

Now I am in the situation where I hold a $110 cable in my hands for the first time. Is it any better than the cheap fare – and if so – is the “NiceHCK Blocc 5N UPOCC Copper Litz Cable” worth the “upgrade”?

SPECIFICATIONS

Product Name: NiceHCK 5N UPOCC copper cable
Model name: NiceHCK Blocc
Material: 5N UPOCC copper (purity 99.999%)
Internal core structure: Litz
Outer material: black nylon
Length:
Plug Types: straight 3.5 /2.5 /4.4mm
Connector: MMCX/0.78mm 2Pin/QDC 2Pin
Number of Cores: 982 {(980.06mm)*2}
Conductor Core: 26AWG
Outer diameter of internal single core: 0.06 mm
Single Outer Skin Diameter: 2.7 mm
Tested at: $110
Purchase Link: NiceHCK Audio Store

PHYSICAL THINGS AND USABILITY

TECHNOLOGY

The important technologies used in the NiceHCK Blocc 5N UPOCC Copper Litz Cable are UPOCC (material) and Litz (internal cable structure). You may have come across these terms before, but, like me, do not remember the details. OCC stands for “Ohno Continuous Casting”.

It refers to a method of copper refining developed and patented by Professor Ohno of the Chiba Institute of Technology in Japan. UP stands for “Ultra Pure”. The process results in essentially oxygen free pure copper, which has ultra-low impedance that results in rapid signal transmission. And the lack of impurities makes the material corrosion resistant.

The “N” number in 5N refers to degree of copper purity. 5 refers to five nines as in 99.999% pure copper (4N would mean 99.99% and so on).

Litz is a special type of multistrand cable designed to reduce skin and proximity effect losses in conducturs below 1 MHz. It consists of many thin wire strands, individually insulated and twisted or woven together, following one of several carefully prescribed patterns frequently involving several levels (groups of twisted wires are twisted together, etc.).

The result of these winding patterns is to equalize the proportion of the overall length over which each strand is at the outside of the conductor. This has the effect of distributing the current equally among the wire strands, reducing the resistance.

HAPTIC & BUILD

With four words: this cable feels very substantial. I have never had a more substantial cable in my hands. The coating is of thick nylon and the metal pieces at the ends and the splitter are made of shiny, sturdy metal alloy.

All metal parts are plain cylindrical in shape – the design is minimalistic and pragmatic and would fit the German Bauhaus school of design “Die Form folgt der Funktion” (the shape should reflect the functionality). The actual nylon coating feels pleasant, sturdy/robust yet very pliable, and water repellent. It is certainly not a dust and dirt attractor. Despite being thick, the cable is very light and does not drag you down.

The ear hooks are mantled with some sturdy however reasonably flexible pvc. This cable is way more substantial than any of the $10-15 plastic cables I own and could easily be used to strangle someone – please don’t try this at home. I underline my description with photos below.

The MMCX connectors are very sturdy. I swapped the cable around more than 10 times between different earphones – and the connectors clicked in with precision. Unplugging also has never been a problem.

COMFORT

The stiffness of the memory wire is ok, and their thickness distribute the weight evenly so that this cable is very comfortable around the ears. In fact, I don’t feel it at all – in contrast to the silicone tips inside my ear canals. The cable is – as said- light, and does not pull my ears or head down. In any case is the cable comfortable against the skins.

NOISE TRANSMISSION

The two cables strands between the ear hooks and the splitter are audible when rubbing against my designer beard near the jaws. While there is some microphonics, I am not sure whether this is also the case for the shaven individual.

COMPATIBILITY

The Blocc cable comes with a variety of connectors to fit any conventional earphone shells: MMCX/0.78mm 2Pin/QDC 2Pin. You can also choose the straight plug: 3.5 /2.5 /4.4mm.

JEWELRY EFFECT/LOOKS

Because of its universal design and black colour with shiny silvery metal parts, the NiceHCK Blocc 5N UPOCC Copper Litz Cable looks great on most earphones. It looks particularly good on the KBEAR TRI I3 (see photo) as the connectors fit seamlessly to the brushed metal shells. The simple cylindrical shapes of the metal parts generate this appeal of plain beauty, something I have always liked. Call it a designer cable.

SOUND: REFINING SNAKE OIL

I did a listening comparison using the $250 Kinboofi MK4 earphone [reviewed HERE] (the only MMCX-connected earphone I can offer to be worthy for a $100 cable). I did compare it to the $10 silver-plated copper stock cable and also to the $10 Yinyoo 8-core pure copper cable.

If my perception was correct, the pure copper had less life than the other two (in combination with the MK4 earphone only) – and I retired it prematurely. When A/B-ing the stock and the BLOCC, I could not find any noticeable difference considering the error of slightly different insertion depth, my lack of auditory memory, and variation in impedance…the latter would have resulted in a slight volume difference which most reviewers would interpret as sound change.

Different eartips would very likely result in a much bigger sonic difference than swapping between these two cables. If people go for the sound of an upgrade cable, there should be a HUGE sonic improvement over the stock cable at 10 times the price. But for the $100 extra you would probably get a much better sounding earphone – even with its stock cable. So, the reason for purchasing this or any other expensive cable cannot be sound.

And that’s where the snake oil dries out. Yes, cables can make and do make a sonic difference, but in my experience, this does not at all rely on price and the effect is different between earphones – and therefore not universal. The sonic differences – where they exist – are mainly in the wire materials (and to some extent in the structure) used.

From experience, a silver-plated copper or an occ copper cable CAN add brightness, and therefore some sheen and sparkle to a dark sounding earphone, and a pure-copper cable helps taming boosted, piercing upper midrange peaks. This is just a rule of thumb, a hypothesis that needs to be re-tested for every earphone. But these sonic difference are already evident in $10-15 cables. A good example is the very sensitive KBEAR Diamond earphone, which sounds awful with an occ cable but great with cheap pure copper. KopyOkaya and I recorded the cable-material issue of the KBEAR Diamond earphone ad nauseam.

And what does the physics say? Cables may differ in their impedance and this difference affects most multi-driver earphone. Depending on the earphone’s impedance profile, different-impedance cables can change their frequency response [albeit these differences are small in most cases – they are more important when comparing iems with amplifiers].

This most often does not apply to single DDs, which typically have a flat impedance profile. The frequency response can be calculated and co-blogger Biodegraded offers a spreadsheet for this HERE. Again, impedance does not rely on price. In fact, expensive cable that don’t match well, impedance wise, will compromise sound quality, and constitute a downgrade rather than an upgrade.

Some reviewers describe cable tonality at great length, typically relative to the stock cable (and the upgrade cable is always better – audio engineers alway appear to fork out great premium earphones but then always fail with the cable? C’mon!). While any such cable-sound review cannot be universally valid – it only works for that particular comparison AND that particular earphone (minus the fantasies applied) – the differences in sonic quality perception may simply be generated by impedance differences and therefore by sonic quantity.

If somebody wants to claim that a certain cable is a universally valid upgrade for any earphone, this has to be established by comparing the upgrade cable vs. stock for many earphones. Another alarm bell should ring when the BETTER LOOKING upgrade cable (nicer outer materials and fancier connectors) ALWAYS sounds better.

It also needs to be established that it is the pricier materials that make the difference. Good luck. Most cable reviews that touch sound should therefore be digested with caution.

So, why bother with this NiceHCK Blocc 5N UPOCC Copper Litz Cable? Well, a good cable is like a nice watch: the latter also just tells you the time – and probably not more accurately than your Timex, but a Rolex on your wrist looks and feels nicer – and it is a status symbol.

So, the you spend $$$$ on a sports car, pardon earphone, you may want some nice tires and hubs, pardon cable with it. Get it? A nice cable is mainly jewelry, it is the looks and feel, and it may have some improved functionality (microphonic, weight etc.), but this is probably filed under “diminishing returns”.

CONCLUDING REMARKS

I was new to fancy cables and this one is impressive, but for the wrong reasons! It is simply a well working and optically/haptically appealing accessory that upgrades your setup in terms of looks and feel. It feels substantial and sturdy, the thick ear hooks are comfortable, and it has some microphonics. The NiceHCK Blocc 5N UPOCC Copper Litz Cable is simply a nice piece of jewelry.

Let’s put it like that. Someone’s wife could do with a cheap handbag, it doesn’t work any better than a Louis Vuitton. However, every time she picks up her Louis Vuitton, she gets this wow feeling – and one of gratefulness for her husband’s generous Valentine’s day gift. And if you are the wife, you know what I am talking about. So, gentlemen, why not getting your own hand bag in the shape of a nice cable. Just for pleasure.

Until next time…keep on listening!

Contact us!

DISCLAIMER

NiceHCK Blocc 5N UPOCC Copper Litz Cable was provided unsolicited by NiceHCK store – and I thank them for that.

Get it from NiceHCK Audio Store

Our generic standard disclaimer.

About my measurements.

You find an INDEX of our most relevant technical articles HERE.

RELATED…

The post NiceHCK Blocc 5N UPOCC Copper Litz Cable Review – Die Form Folgt Der Funktion… appeared first on Music For The Masses.

Doubt exists that TRN T1 “Tiger” does not have ALL 8 cores connected to the jack (it means TRN selling fake 8-core cable). The two-part video documents a brand-new TRN T1 cable being dismantled, from start to finish, to show the inside cores are INDEED soldered to the jack and are all good.

WARNING: You may fall asleep over these two videos!

The post Dissecting The 8-Core TRN T1 “Tiger Cable” appeared first on Music For The Masses.