[cel4145]

What would be nice, but not likely would be for the engineering folks to respect the thread instead of stubbornly, and at this point rudely forcing their opinions on you.

Quite frankly, it's clear at the beginning of the thread that the OP understood almost nothing at all about USB cables. You could have chosen to let him know that the overwhelming evidence is that there is little reason to suspect that a more expensive USB cable offers any benefit, but chose not to inform him so that he could make an educated determination.

I wrote "at this point" meaning going forward anyone who continues to go down that path is being rude because the OP has confirmed that he now wants user experiences.

I've used more expensive digital cables. In my experience, they make no difference unless the cable they replace was not functioning properly. Does that count as user experience? :rolleyes:

 

[FraGGleR]

Quite frankly, it's clear at the beginning of the thread that the OP understood almost nothing at all about USB cables. You could have chosen to let him know that the overwhelming evidence is that there is little reason to suspect that a more expensive USB cable offers any benefit, but chose not to inform him so that he could make an educated determination.
I've used more expensive digital cables. In my experience, they make no difference unless the cable they replace was not functioning properly. Does that count as user experience?

 
I will assume the best of you even though you didn't of the OP or me, and say that despite your good intentions, you still haven't answered the OPs specific questions or requests about the differences between two specific cables.  Your user experience was invaluable, I am sure in your own pursuit, but unless you listened to the two Wireworld cables or at least one of them, in relation to another USB cable, your experience isn't as valuable to the OP.  
 
I speak up in most of these types of thread trying to answer the specific questions that the OPs have since I know that folks like you, good naturedly, and sometimes not, will swarm trying to save the OP from the folly of fancy cables.  I don't make outlandish claims one way or the other and don't force my opinion on anyone else, which I believe the most responsible and respectful thing to do.
 
Sadly, if our discussion continues, I have done as much a disservice to the thread as anyone else by trying to keep it on track.  My apologies to the OP.  I hope people with Wireworld USB cable experience will find this thread and help you out.

 

[cel4145]

I will assume the best of you even though you didn't of the OP or me . . . I don't make outlandish claims one way or the other and don't force my opinion on anyone else, which I believe the most responsible and respectful thing to do.

And yet you clearly tried to silence those whose opinion differs from your own, telling some of us we are disrespectful for posting in this thread, and that we are rude, while finally making evaluative judgments about what I think of you and the OP. Double standard. :rolleyes:

Your user experience was invaluable, I am sure in your own pursuit, but unless you listened to the two Wireworld cables or at least one of them, in relation to another USB cable, your experience isn't as valuable to the OP.  

It's certainly your right to believe that. Although, this seems in conflict with what you have said not forcing your opinion on others. Based on what others have posted in this thread, my experience is valuable because it reinforces what others have said.

So rather than you playing at self-imposed moderator, why don't we just talk about USB cables?

 

[scottosan]

Some things are a matter of opinion and some are not.  This is not about thinking ones opinion is better than the other. This is truely as simple as saying that they have different physical characteristics, but the comparison ends their.  We are talking about how the same pattern of 1's and 0's getting to the DAC.  It is not until there is analog conversion or transport that we can compare differences in sound.  You cant hear 0's and 1's.  It's like an original CD vs the sound of a copied .wav file on a PC.  Both converted by the same DAC will not sound any different.

 

[FraGGleR]

And yet you clearly tried to silence those whose opinion differs from your own, telling some of us we are disrespectful for posting in this thread, and that we are rude, while finally making evaluative judgments about what I think of you and the OP. Double standard.

It's certainly your right to believe that. Although, this seems in conflict with what you have said not forcing your opinion on others. Based on what others have posted in this thread, my experience is valuable because it reinforces what others have said.

So rather than you playing at self-imposed moderator, why don't we just talk about USB cables?

Sigh, you have it all wrong.  Or maybe you are just looking for a fight.  Either way, I'm not playing anymore.

 

[cel4145]

Sigh, you have it all wrong.  Or maybe you are just looking for a fight.  Either way, I'm not playing anymore.

Does that mean we can get back to talking about USB cables now, instead of what you think other people should be doing in this thread?

 

[Happy Camper]

The science Templars are ever vigilant.

 

[24bitbob]

To Poetik,
 
To expand and clarify on my earlier response to your query:
 
I own a Wireworld Starlight USB cable.  I also have an Atlas Element USB cable, and a no brand audiophile USB cable that I bought for $120 from a specialist shop in Singapore 4 years ago (way before anyone in N America or Europe was marketing audio grade USB cables).  In a nutshell, I hear no difference between any of these cables.  For me, now, the value of the cable is the peace of mind it brings and the compatibility it offers in terms of how it looks and feels with the rest of my (expensive) kit.  At the time of buying the Wireworld and Atlas USB cables I was willing to hear differences, but I can't.
 
Some context here:  I have two laptops, each with ssd's for the C drive, and each with 1TB HDD's mounted in the CD drive bay.  I use JRiver Media Center 18 on both.  On one, my main system, I use JPlay.  I can clearly make out the difference between JRiver with and without JPlay, and I prefer JPlay.  I have a number of phono interconnects from manufacturers such as Wireworld, Atlas, Audioquest, Kimber and a few others.  I hear the differences between these cables, but I struggle to determine a preference amongst my top 2 or 3, simply because for this type of music I prefer that cable, and for that type of music I prefer this cable - and I can't be bothered changing cables every 10 minutes.  I use a Chord QuteHD DAC, a Luxman DAC and I have an Audio-GD DAC, and I have headphone amplifiers from Luxman, Violectric and Sugden.  My preferred headphones are Sennheiser HD800's, though I have others too.  I think of myself as a discerning listener; I look and listen for 'better'.  I haven't found that 'better' in any USB cable, yet.  I could be wrong, but you sought opinions on the Wireworld, and I offer you mine.
 
Now to stir the pot:  Having willingly bought 2 or 3 USB cables in the hope they would offer something, now I just don't buy it that a signal in the digital domain can be changed significantly over a 1m length of cable.  Bits in = bits out, or it doesn't work. (That's a full stop - '.')  And that's the conclusion I've come to.  I'm willing to be persuaded otherwise, but on this matter, for me, the onus of proof lies with the proponents of the case that USB cables do matter. That the bits can somehow be changed in that 1m cable such that "the trumpet is further back in the sound stage" or "cable x is much better for female vocals" is a load of nonsense that needs to be exposed for what it is.  So now we are supposed to believe that you can buy pieces of copper with the ability to process bits that the best of DAC's can't manage?  Stop and think about it for a moment - how can a cable rearrange bits such that they sound better in the manner that some people describe?  Ah, you say, but USB cable x lets more bits through and that's what gives the better sound - so a $100 USB cable lets through more bits than a $50 USB cable?  Now we're clutching at straws.  Incredible, literally incredible.
 
I live in Perth, Western Australia.  It is the antipode of N America.  You cannot find a city further away from N America than Perth, WA.  I download music regularly, and I would guess (but don't know) that much of the music I download comes from servers in N America.  If a copper cable with an interface can manifest a change in a digital signal, I should be affected by that.  Is the music I download different from that of someone who lives a lot closer to the server (lots and lots of cable and lots and lots of cable/device interfaces to get to Perth from N America)?  If so, then how much different?  If on the other hand, the bits I have stored on my HDD that were downloaded from N America are the same as the bits you have for that same piece of music, then nothing has changed in transmission.  How then does a 1m USB cable alter things?
 
Much more likely is the role of confirmation bias that dominates much of HiFi (I'm subject to it myself - I've spent nearly $300 on USB cables, and I declare a preference for JPlay!).  My advice is, buy the cable that makes you feel good.  If you can afford $100, and if it doesn't stop food being on the table, then buy it.  You'll feel better for it.  Your system may even sound better, and that's what you're after.
 
Regards,
 
Bob

 

[Bones13]

There are many objective things that can differentiate digital cable.
 
1) some cables are made with the power line either absent, or separated by distance from the signal wires.
2) some cables are poorly designed, and have signal reflection issues that make the signal inconsistant (length can make a difference, as well as connectors, and how they are implemented)
3) the whole concept of "digital cable" needs to be better understood.  The USB sending unit raised and lowers the signal sent over the wire in a certain pattern, as a certain frequency.  The USB receiver gets this fairly analog signal, and parses it into the 0s and 1s that everyone talks about.  There are no 1s, and 0s sent down the wire, either the signal is high or low.  Timing is critical, which is why the asynchronous devices we all use reclock the signal at the reciever end.  Poor signal connection, signal reflection and electromagnetic interference can indeed cause the signal to not be transmitted/conducted/received perfectly.  Date transmission to USB storage devices include checksums to be be certain the correct data was received, if it does not add up, that part is sent again.
 
Even with optical cables, the light is turned on and off, with some latency of the on/off cycle, and latency with the receiver accepting the signal.  Life is not perfect, and I still want to see those 0s and 1s, getting sent through a cable.
 
Like as not there will be people who can tell a difference in their system, and many who can not.  I could hear some interferance from the power cable with one of my cheaper USB cables.  I have the cheapest Wireworld USB cable with separation of the power and signal lines (its a flat cable), and could tell it sounded better.  Was my cheap cable defective?, perhaps.  I would not go so overboard on the super expensive cables, but some folks swear by them, I guess I just don't appreciate them.

 

[cel4145]

The USB receiver gets this fairly analog signal, and parses it into the 0s and 1s that everyone talks about.  

It's still a binary signal, though. The 0's and 1's is just an analogy to help people understand that this is a digitally encoded signal which works differently from music sent in analog form. People describing increased sound stage or lower noise thresholds with digital cables (not saying you) clearly don't understand how that transmission works. It's not possible, any more than when I thought Santa Claus was on my roof when I was 6 years old.

 

[scottosan]

As for 0's and 1's being transmitted, the high/low signaling does in fact represent 0's and 1''s.  The separation of power may effect noise, but I contend that a cheaper cable operating within industry specifications absolutely will not sound any different. If there was data loss they would present themselves as pops, crackles, or dropouts. On average, digital links deliver one bit error for every 10¹² bits sent. That's 1,000,000,000,000 bits.  Keep in mind that there are only 5,872,025,600 bits on an audio CD. 

 

[atsq17]

I have bought:
 
Mini USB for my PupDAC and RSA Predator
Audioquest forest 
Wireworld Starlight 5.2
 
Normal Sized USB for my Schiit Modi and ASUS Xonar Essence One Muses Edition
Wireworld Ultraviolet
Black Cat SilverStar USB 
 
I will do some blind A-B tests with some other Head-Fiers along with stock/Belkin USB cables. 
 
I will publish my opinions when I have some free time. 

 

[Happy Camper]

I bought the WW Starlight and my initial impression was that I heard an improvement in the microdetails and background was quieter. Going back to my original cable, I can't reliably confirm this.

 

[atsq17]

Thanks for your feedback Happy.
 
As far as my cables are concerned, I expect there to be a big difference between my Wireworld Ultraviolet (which is entry level) and the Black Cat Silverstar which is a very highly rated cable by a very highly rated cable maker. Furthermore, I recently upgraded my order to a limited edition double cable which separates power and ground from the data part (similar to what the $1000 Light Harmonic Lightspeed cable does). 

 

[NotAnAngel]

  As for 0's and 1's being transmitted, the high/low signaling does in fact represent 0's and 1''s.  The separation of power may effect noise, but I contend that a cheaper cable operating within industry specifications absolutely will not sound any different. If there was data loss they would present themselves as pops, crackles, or dropouts. On average, digital links deliver one bit error for every 10¹² bits sent. That's 1,000,000,000,000 bits.  Keep in mind that there are only 5,872,025,600 bits on an audio CD. 

I own Wireworld Starlight 7 (actually, two of them, A/B and A/Mini), and I can tell you there was a significant difference among all the USB cables I tried before WW S7. I tried a bunch of AudioQuest USB cables (up to $160 or so), Pangea Silver USB, and some others (including no name cables I could find at home).
 
Starlight 7 won this by a large margin (I still use both of them and love the performance). Second place took Pangea Silver USB, although performance wise it was easy to see the degradation (in cable world, it is not about the gain, it is all about losing the least about of signal possible, right?). Even higher priced AQ cables were not even close to the Pangea (I used to swear by AudioQuest cables but not anymore).
 
Now, why there was a difference?
 
First, my system could reveal a difference. Hopefully we are on the same page about this very obvious requirement. Audirvana Plus (Mac OS X) -> {USB Cable under test} -> Musical Fidelity VLink192 -> Kimber AGDL Silver Digital -> Arcam rDAC -> Kimber Hero ->  Beyerdynamic A1 -> Beyerdynamic T90.
 
Second is not as obvious. As I see, a lot of people believe in this "digital is digital, it's either 1 or 0 and $1 digital cable will have exactly the same performance as $300 cable". I was there too (I have Masters in EE but was ignorant enough not to know some things).
 
Now, when I could clearly hear the difference, I got confused. What I believed in previously did not make any sense anymore, so I started digging into protocols.
 
So what I learned was that that most of the digital audio/video protocols are *lossy*. This includes USB audio streaming, S/PDIF audio (coax/optical connections), and even HDMI video/audio (hey, you probably thought this "digital" thing applied to HDMI video too? I did).
 
Look at this as a continuous stream of data (1/0) traveling from a source (computer) to a destination (DAC). Each data chunk is transmitted within a very small time slot. If it arrived as the other end in the same time slot, same 1s and 0s, everything would be perfect.
 
In real world though, perfect cables do not exist. Cheap cables lose some of ones and zeros on the way from source to the DAC, and generate some that were not originally present (signal reflections, for example). Yes, there is a check-summing in USB audio, but there is no retransmission of lost/corrupted data (no time for that; if the data did not make it within its time slot, it's gone forever).
 
Now, DAC gets this "digital" signal at the receiver end (which is not the same as at the transmitting end, subject to the cable's ability to lose as little data as possible), converts it back into analog domain, and we have a different analog signal already. Just imagine how (randomly?) wrong/missing/extra 1s and 0s could affect original message, and what DAC has to do in this case. Interpolate/extrapolate/apply some digital processing/you name it (so we can still have the sound without artifacts that one can hear)?
 
That's how we get slightly different sound (or video from a good HDMI cable). To be honest, this loss is not 50% loss, but it is there, and it is *large enough* so given appropriate environment we can detect it in a form of "this cable sounds different".
 
"What about my portable Hard Drive? I don't lose any data if I use a cheap USB cable!" Correct. Because USB works in a data/bulk mode, and in this case corrupted data is being retransmitted (your hard drive can wait a few more milliseconds while audio cannot).
 
I recently upgraded all AudioQuest HDMI Cinnamon cables and replaced with Pangea HD-24PCEe (4% silver) cables and what a difference it made. Not to digress, but USB audio is a similar beast, one just needs to be able to see what is out there (and not all of us want/can/care to, especially if one cannot find a reasonable explanation).