# Anyone heard / own USB Wireworld Starlight, Starlight 7, or Starlight USB 3.0?



## Poetik

Hey guys,
  
 I was wondering if anyone of you could chime in on these cables? I know there are a few different versions of it.  They have a the regular Starlight, the Starlight 7, and the Starlight usb 3.0.  Can anyone comment on the sound of these? I found a good deal on the starlight but would it be worth it to upgrade to the starlight 7 from it? What about the usb 3.0 starlight?
  
 I'm so confused on this and was hoping someone would help me out.  I'm currently using a monoprice usb cable right now and wanted to upgrade a bit.  Please lend me your thoughts and impressions if you've ever used any of these cables.


----------



## 24bitbob

An interesting question.
  
 I've often wondered whether USB 3.0 would offer any advantages over USB 2.  This hobby, or passion of ours, is chock full of discussions of improvements to sound quality based on the  most meagre of differences in technical specification.  I have to imagine that it is only a question of time before the advantages of USB 3.0 get touted.
  
 On USB cables, I bought my first audiophile USB cable nearly 3 years ago (from a specialist hifi shop in Singapore).  I am unconvinced about the subjective qualities of USB cables.  My attempts at evaluating the differences flounder after I have my first glass of wine.  Now I can recommend a fine Merlot that makes nearly all cables sound great....


----------



## StudioSound

USB3 cables have larger connectors than USB2 cables. They also don't seem very well designed compared to Thunderbolt and Lightning connectors, but I suppose that's what happens when you have to keep legacy support.
  
 A USB3 port will accept a USB2 cable and operate at lower speeds, but you cannot connect a USB3 cable to a USB2 device.
 And there should not be any difference between a monoprice cable and a more expensive one.


----------



## Poetik

studiosound said:


> USB3 cables have larger connectors than USB2 cables. They also don't seem very well designed compared to Thunderbolt and Lightning connectors, but I suppose that's what happens when you have to keep legacy support.
> 
> A USB3 port will accept a USB2 cable and operate at lower speeds, but you cannot connect a USB3 cable to a USB2 device.
> And there should not be any difference between a monoprice cable and a more expensive one.


 
  
 Interesting, so you won't be able to connect a usb 3.0 cable to a dac that isn't designed for usb 3.0.  I guess that totally rules out the usb 3.0 then. 
  
 I guess the main question now is the difference between the starlight and the starlight 7?  Anyone have any thoughts on that?


----------



## FraGGleR

poetik said:


> Interesting, so you won't be able to connect a usb 3.0 cable to a dac that isn't designed for usb 3.0.  I guess that totally rules out the usb 3.0 then.
> 
> I guess the main question now is the difference between the starlight and the starlight 7?  Anyone have any thoughts on that?


 
  
 The structure is the same, but the 7 series uses the second generation of Composilex dialectric instead of the first in the 6 series.  No clue how much a difference it makes.  Might be difficult to ascertain since few will have bought and compared the exact same cable from each series to try.  Wireworld will definitely tell you series 7 is better


----------



## cel4145

poetik said:


> I'm so confused on this and was hoping someone would help me out.  I'm currently using a monoprice usb cable right now and wanted to upgrade a bit.  Please lend me your thoughts and impressions if you've ever used any of these cables.




Upgrading your USB cable may make no difference at all.


----------



## Poetik

Thanks for the opinions guys and keep them coming!


----------



## scottosan

I just responded to a different thread regarding digital interconnects. People often invest unnecessary money on digital interconnects. Unlike analog connects, they do not sound different from one another, as the analog audio signal does not pass through the cable.  They are used to transmit a binary stream of 1's and 0's.  As long as all of the 1's and 0's are transmitted on $30 cable A, then it will not sound any different than the $200 cable B that is also transmitting all of the 1's and 0's.  Even the cheaper cables rarely experience data loss.


----------



## 24bitbob

Hi,
  
 I agree with you, USB cables like HDMI cables, are transmitting a digital signal, and provided the integrity of the cable is fine, then one cable should do exactly the same as any other.  However, it hasn't stopped the spawning of a minor industry in selling a wide range of USB cables, at prices in to the $'000's.
  
 Check out the blog post 'Archimago's Musings'  ( http://archimago.blogspot.com.au/ ) for a series of objective, and subjective reviews of this sort of stuff.  If you go back through the last few months of articles there's some good stuff in there. ( I loved his review of power chords, where amongst others, he compared a 25ft length of old outdoor cable - the cable that he used, literally to feed his Christmas lights over the last few years).
  
 I respect those who do find benefit in a 'good' USB cable, and I do not challenge them, nor ridicule them.  If that choice is based on an informed decision even better, and if someone can afford it, then a $50 USB cable, or even a $200 USB cable might buy peace of mind, if not that last piece in the jigsaw that they're looking for.  I've bought a couple of $60 ish USB cables - peace of mind, rather than a 'sparkling top end' or whatever, if truth be told.  I'm comfortable with that.
  
 Overwhelmingly, and by an enormous margin, the quality of what I listen to is affected by the source, i.e. the recording I am listening too.  I have around 100 music cassette tapes I have recorded into 16/44 FLAC - no USB cable will give me what doesn't exist in those recordings (and they're crap for the most part).  With 24/96 recordings, I've yet to discern any difference using any reasonable quality USB cable.
  
 Regards,
  
 Bob


----------



## Poetik

I understand and respect that everyone has their own opinions at the subject. However, can I please get some opinions from people that actually believe in them?


----------



## scottosan

Although much of what you read on this forum is opinion, some things are as simple as science and can be proved with science. I am not trying to talk anyone out of anything. I just need to respond first as an Engineer, then as an audiophile. I'm just trying to save you some money. I suggest researching digitial data transmission rather than taking my word for it. If we were talking analog cables I would be on te other side of the isle.


----------



## cel4145

poetik said:


> I understand and respect that everyone has their own opinions at the subject. However, can I please get some opinions from people that actually believe in them?




Well, science and engineering says that you should not expect any benefit. It's a digital transmission. If you start losing bits in that transmission, you'll probably know. A working $10 cable is just as good as a working $200 cable. The opposing "opinion," well there's plenty of scientific theory to support the lack of reliability of subjective opinion when it comes to comparing minute differences in audio equipment. I personally think that anyone that wants to spend a lot of money on expensive USB cables has a better chance of getting a return on their money from buying Powerball tickets.


----------



## FraGGleR

Unfortunately, Poetik, just about all USB or digital threads end up like this, where folks are more interested in "saving you money" despite your interest in hearing from actual owners about actual experiences. 

Two be quite frank with you, what I did notice with the Wireworld cable is a slightly blacker background, which gave me a little bit more resolution. I will also say that it could have been imagined, as it was subtle, and it is very difficult to properly A/B USB cables. What Wireworld offers beyond some other USB cables is the separation of power from data lines, in theory reducing the likelihood of harmful interactions.

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.


----------



## scottosan

What was rude about giving my honest and technical evaluation of his question?


----------



## FraGGleR

scottosan said:


> What was rude about giving my honest and technical evaluation of his question?




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.


----------



## cel4145

fraggler said:


> 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. 



fraggler said:


> 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

cel4145 said:


> 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

fraggler said:


> 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:



fraggler said:


> 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

cel4145 said:


> 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.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


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


----------



## cel4145

fraggler said:


> 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

bones13 said:


> 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

scottosan said:


> 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).


----------



## atsq17

I've read that some people can discern a difference using a starlight cable for the hard disk. A smaller difference but still noticeable (according to them).    I don't want to speculate on anything I haven't tried myself so I will just say I am intrigued about it and would love to hear from those who've actually tried.


----------



## gevorg

There is more to USB cables than just transferring 1's and 0's. In addition to data, USB cables also deliver power. Even if your DAC is not USB powered, its USB board section might still at least partially use USB power, which may or may not make an audible difference. This is why even the basic Wireworld cable might worth its asking price. If your DAC does not use USB power at all, consider severing the +5V power line. A zero cost tweak. Another side to USB cable is its role with *ground plane noise* that *might* affect your DAC's performance. This is a very niche and experimental territory that is still somewhat controversial. IMHO, a fancy pure silver USB cable is a waste/useless, but a well built one with power line in mind for ~$50 can be a justifiable upgrade.


----------



## NotAnAngel

atsq17 said:


> I've read that some people can discern a difference using a starlight cable for the hard disk. A smaller difference but still noticeable (according to them).    I don't want to speculate on anything I haven't tried myself so I will just say I am intrigued about it and would love to hear from those who've actually tried.


 
 Hard disk? I personally don't know about that ... (if you were serious, of course). But if it was a joke, it was a good one 
  
 NOTE: I did try Starlight 7 with a portable hard drive, for the sake of a scientific experiment , and all I can tell is "it works".
  
 I tried to copy a large (5.5GB) file to it using different cables (regular then S7 then regular then S7...). I found that once the file was cached by OS, the time it took to copy the file stopped shortening and stabilized to exactly the same value (up to a second - 1:55, 3 attempts). So in my limited scientific experiment I did not find any improvement.
  
 Seriously speaking though, USB cables like S7 are designed for streaming digital audio and not for data transfer, which would be a different design goal. 
  


gevorg said:


> There is more to USB cables than just transferring 1's and 0's. In addition to data, USB cables also deliver power. Even if your DAC is not USB powered, its USB board section might still at least partially use USB power, which may or may not make an audible difference. This is why even the basic Wireworld cable might worth its asking price. If your DAC does not use USB power at all, consider severing the +5V power line. A zero cost tweak. Another side to USB cable is its role with *ground plane noise* that *might* affect your DAC's performance. This is a very niche and experimental territory that is still somewhat controversial. IMHO, a fancy pure silver USB cable is a waste/useless, but a well built one with power line in mind for ~$50 can be a justifiable upgrade.


 
  
 Totally agreed, and I could not have said it better: "There is more to USB audio cables than just 1s and 0s".
  
 Speaking of silver (plated/clad) cables though. Silver is an excellent conductor, especially for high frequencies. This does result in smaller loss and less signal degradation, which I have seen in all kinds of cables including audio, digital audio, USB, and HDMI cables. Examples: (1) Pangea HDMI HD-24PCe would be one great example (try it for yourself and see how it changes color, contract, and clarity); (2) performance of Kimber Kable AGDL Silver (digital audio) is way ahead of anything I tried in this price range (including higher end AudioQuest cables). Yet another example would be Kimber Silver Streak - it sounds much cleaner, more smooth, and with more details than, for example, a typical copper cable, including Cardas Quadlink 5C (same price).
  
 Wireworld Starlight 7 is also a silver-clad cable, btw.
  
 I have not tried pure silver USB cables due to the cost factor, so I cannot speak of their performance, but even looking at a simple fact that such companies as Wireworld do make them (top of the line Wireworld Platinum USB), makes me think they do provide even greater performance and make sense for someone who has a very high end system (and can afford them ).


----------



## Ari33

Interesting debate guys. My apologies for taking the discussion slightly off topic.. 

NotAnAngel - If long Hdmi cables are used & data bandwidth exceded, it makes itself manifest in 'sparkles', pixelation or a complete loss of picture.

I suggest you read the following test for a better understanding of the symptoms of HDMI data loss before making such outlandish claims.

http://hdguru.com/all-hdmi-cables-are-the-same-or-are-they-full-test/

The audio side I'm still open minded on as I think I can see how ground noise from a noisy source or power supply and increased jitter could be introduced with inferior USB cables when used with non asynchronous DAC's in theory at least... but my question is... isn't audio data passed over USB to a DAC packetised, buffered *and* error corrected ? (unless it is PCM of course)


----------



## gevorg

notanangel said:


> Speaking of silver (plated/clad) cables though. Silver is an excellent conductor, especially for high frequencies.




This is true for analog cables like a headphone cable, but digital cables like USB cannot discern between high or low frequencies. They don't even "know" that they're transmitting audio.  They are dumb devices that transmit low-power pulses that define 1's and 0's on pins 2 & 3. This is why, IMHO, silver digital cables are a waste.


----------



## NotAnAngel

ari33 said:


> Interesting debate guys. My apologies for taking the discussion sligbtly off topic..
> 
> NotAnAngel - If long Hdmi cables are used & data bandwidth exceded, it makes itself manifest in 'sparkles', pixelation or a complete loss of picture.
> 
> ...


 
  
 Thanks for your honest opinion 
  
 Surely it sounds outlandish *to you*, and I see no problem with that. To clarify it for yourself though, I would suggest you read HDMI spec and especially section on underlying transport protocols, cable categories, supported frequencies, signal attenuation, and also on what "error correction" really means there. Or read at least a consumer-level Wikipedia article.
  
 There is nothing wrong with being ignorant on this topic, btw (I was). The article you mentioned was written by a guy who understands no more than a bad cable can cause "snow" or no signal. That is way too far - I have never seen this in my life (well, maybe just once with a $1.69 HDMI cable I once had - you see, I did! ).
  
 In general though, it is not my goal to change your opinion on anything; you are certainly free to ignore it or call whatever you want and continue believing in $1 cable. You would not do any disservice to me in any form by believing in something different.
  
 Once you are ready to challenge what you know though (or just curious), I'd suggest you invest $59 and get 1m of Pangea HD-24PCe cable from Audio Advisor, and connect a good quality Blue-ray player (or an HD satellite receiver from your provider such as directv) to your good quality plasma or other TV and see for yourself. Do your own A/B test.
  
 If you won't see any difference, hey, good for you. I did, and I took advantage of it by replacing *all* HDMI cable (and I already had AudioQuest Cinnamon or higher everywhere) in my home theater/living room/bedroom/you name it.
  
 And you are right, HDMI is a kind of off-topic here.


----------



## NotAnAngel

gevorg said:


> This is true for analog cables like a headphone cable, but digital cables like USB cannot discern between high or low frequencies. They don't even "know" that they're transmitting audio.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


 
  
 Correct, just keep in mind that 1s and 0s are still transmitted as analog signals, and depending on the specification, required bandwidth (to transmit digital signals) could be and is normally much higher than 20KHz.
  
 Also, just something to consider, to properly transform a square wave signal, the cable would need to have an unlimited bandwidth (see Fourier Transform for details). This is never the case in reality, and silver simply helps to increase the required bandwidth.


----------



## atsq17

I wasn't joking about the Hard Disk. The reviewer used the Starlight cable to connect to the hard disk he was streaming from and another starlight cable to connect to the DAC. To him there was a clear and discernable difference between using the stock cable for the hard disk and when using the starlight cable for the hard disk, in both cases using another starlight cable for the DAC.


----------



## Ari33

notanangel said:


> Thanks for your honest opinion
> 
> Surely it sounds outlandish *to you*, and I see no problem with that. To clarify it for yourself though, I would suggest you read HDMI spec and especially section on underlying transport protocols, cable categories, supported frequencies, signal attenuation, and also on what "error correction" really means there. Or read at least a consumer-level Wikipedia article.
> 
> ...



 




You may think I'm ignorant and you are entitled to your opinion but that doesn't necessarily make you right either. You may have a masters in EE but you do seem much less familiar with basic neuropsychology.

Re- The link, The guy that tested these cables is a TV Calibrator with no apparant hidden agendas and he did study image quality closely... good enough for me! 

I am more than happy with the picture quality provided by a bluray on my HDTV, it is so good that I can't imagine it being improved by much if at all. Even if it was possible that it could be improved by a small percentage, I certainly don't think it would be noticable at my12-15ft viewing distance through a pair of 38 year old MK1 eyeballs. 


I can understand not buying the cheapest of USB cables, but I’d do that for reliability, not audio quality. As Bones stated in the last page. On average, digital links deliver one bit error for every 1012 bits sent. You can’t possibly hear that!... a fact highlighted by blind ABX tests, an example of which I'll happily provide a link for, if you so wish?


Noise on the ground plane caused by wrongly chosen, poor spec switching diodes in budget equipment is quite obvious and apparant at low volume levels with certain systems and can probably be improved in some cases by better sheilding, ferrite beads or even providing a seperate ground plane altogether to avoid 'ground loop'.

'Jitter' caused by timing discrepancies in non asychronous DAC's is identifiable to the trained ear and cannot alter the overall sound signiture. This is another subject all together and although linked should not be a factor with a correctly designed cable that meets the design specifications just as much as it is not with a so called 'audiophile' cable.



You suggest I A/B test a particular HDMI cable? Don't you see an inherant flaw in that suggestion? Never underestimate the power of the subconscious. In my first year studying Aero Eng we looked at the 'Human factors' which can contribute to pilots making errors in judgement, refusing to believe what their instrumentation was telling them, be it from fatigue, information overload, arrogance, lack of visual cues or a combination of these factors. We then went on to study how the brain works, how it uses visual cues to predict a scenario based on previous experiences often filling in the blanks which can make us even see and hear things that simply do not exist.

Last summer I was cleaning the bottom of the pool with a brush for maybe 30 minutes or so. Once finished I climbed the ladder and looked across the meadow at Tina (my Girlfriends horse) I suddenly became aware of a fairly intense, deep strawberry red coloured tint to my vision, in shock I even looked up at the sun to see what was causing it ... nothing there!, It was merely that my brains colour balance had been skewed from staring at the bottom of the aqua blue pool for so long.

Try this experiment. If you have a graphic or parametric equaliser, reduce a band somewhere in the midrange area (say, between 500Hz and 1kHz). Listen for about 15 minutes, then restore the missing frequency range. Suddenly it will sound as if it has a hugh peak in the midrange, and for a time will sound awful. Within another 15 minutes or so, everything will have settled back to normal. Therefore, can you trust what you hear? Do you know why? Do you even care? 


With regards to audio/visual cue impairment, here is a good example called 'the McGurk effect' (Google it if the UK link doesn't work for you) which perfectly demonstrates how what we see can make our brains interpret what we hear to sound completely different.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G-lN8vWm3m0

It might seem far removed for you, but yes, what I am suggesting is that without blind ABX testing you are leaving yourself open to what you hear (or see, in the case of HDMI) being influenced by your preconceived, subconscious idea that this beautifuly built, well designed cable with it's lovely finish and colour WILL produce superior results. 

There are two particular things to which one can easily fall prey - the 'experimenter expectancy (or bias) effect' and the 'placebo effect'. Both are potentially very powerful, and can shape the outcome of a test at the subconscious level. If you change a passive component in a system and expect to hear a difference, then you probably will. What actually caused the difference will be curdled by your brain (at a subconscious level), and you will be left thinking that the component change made the difference, when in fact it was 100% imagination. This is why all proper medical tests are double-blind, to guard against these well known phenomena. It is a BIG mistake to think that you are immune - no-one is immune because we don't even know it's happening. 





"'Critical thinking, logic, reason, science — these are all terms that apply in one way or another to the deliberate attempt to ferret out truth from the tangle of intuition, distorted perception, and fallible memory. The true critical thinker accepts what few people ever accept — that one cannot routinely trust perceptions and memories. Figments of our imagination and reflections of our emotional needs can often interfere with or supplant the perception of truth and reality. Through teaching and encouraging critical thought our society will move away from irrationality, but we will never succeed in completely abandoning irrational tendencies, again because of the basic nature of the belief engine."

James Alcock- 'The Belief Engine' - http://www.csicop.org/si/show/belief_engine



As an open minded objectivist- If you can present me with a solid ABX test that supports/backs up your findings/perceptions I'll certainly be more than happy to re-evaluate my current views on the subject.



Ari


----------



## NotAnAngel

ari33 said:


> You may think I'm ignorant and you are entitled to your opinion but that doesn't necessarily make you right either. You may have a masters in EE but you do seem much less familiar with basic neuropsychology.
> 
> ...
> 
> ...


 
  
 Good stuff 
  
 Let me clarify a few things. The "ignorant in this area" expression simply means "lacking knowledge in this area" so (1) nothing personal, and (2) definitely nothing offensive. Also, I am not or trying to be "right", I simply expressed my opinion - just like you did. It's an "opinion exchange". And I do have a degree in psychology, if you are curious.
  
 The difference that Pandea silver HDMI introduced: easily seen color saturation (cold/lifeless with old cable, warm and more saturated with Pangea), higher contrast, black background is more intense (if that makes sense), very tiny details are better defined - have sharper edges (as tested on a 92" screen with Optoma 1080p 3D projector), and some gradient shadows are wider (for example, a blue shadow with a gradient, on a black background, is wider at the side where is becomes more transparent and disappears - tested on 1080p AppleTV (UI)/Marantz Blueray player (VUDU Streaming UI). Sound wise: dialog is less muddy and much easier to understand; 3D sound imagining is improved, plus others. Yes, there is a lot of subjectivity here.
  
 You see, to protect your opinion/point of view, you wrote such a long post - love it!  The thing is, I respect yours, even mine is different. So let's not bore other people with our HDMI stuff anymore as other headfiers came to this thread to discuss Wireworld USB cables (but feel free to PM me on this off-topic, if you'd like). Thanks!


----------



## atsq17

notanangel said:


> ...let's not bore other people with our HDMI stuff anymore as other headfiers came to this thread to discuss Wireworld USB cables (but feel free to PM me on this off-topic, if you'd like). Thanks!


 
  
 Amen to that!   
  
 While I respect the right to debate, I find that it's often done on a thread where the OP was meant to be about the impressions people have of particular USB cables by those WHO HAVE ACTUALLY TRIED THEM. I respect people who come in saying that they tried it and couldn't tell the difference from stock. That's a fair opinion and valid for that person. 
  
 The unwanted guests are those who come into these threads to share their LACK of knowledge on the subject matter of jitter and how it relates to USB audio streaming and attempts to preach a gospel nobody asked for. I have learnt how to just ignore these posts now so it doesn't bother me much. I just don't like how it clogs up the thread and chases away people who might have legitimate opinions to offer.


----------



## Lappy27

I had a 0.5 meter Starlight 6 for about a year with a Bryston BHA-1 + W4S DAC-2 + LCD-2 and was happy and never bothered to compare with stock/generic cable as I get peace of mind with a reputable brand and apparently good design (separation of power and signal in a flat cable).
  
 This summer I have decided to change my dac for a NAD M51 with Audiophilleo2 with PurePower and organized my desk in a different configuration so I needed a longer USB cable. I ordered a Starlight 7 in one meter lenght. The cable arrived and I found it more resolute, open and quieter (noise floor) than the generic that came from W4S. But I also found it a bit agressive, edgy and lacking bass in my new set-up. I let the cable broken in for about 200 hours and despite the fact that it improved a bit, I was still not satisfied. So I bought a use Transparent Performance USB in one meter also.
  
 Oh boy, oh boy! The non-believer in USB cable sound difference should really hear these cable in a shootout. Blind test, double blind or whatever...these cables are the most opposite sounding USB cables I compared to date (more on my last experiments later). The Transparent is MUCH MORE thicker sounding and smoother than the Starlight. It sounds more realistic but also more veiled and less resolute than the Starlight. The bass for one is so more there, almost too much. At the end I decided to keep the Transparent but knew I had to try to find a good balance in resolution and low end register and with good mids in the middle of course.
  
 So came a Silnote Poseidon pure 7N silver conductors. Wow! That cable brought me much closer to my goal. More resolution than the Starlight but without any harshness and with better bass. Much better performer all around. I sold the Transparent and bought an Oyaide Continental 5S, a really well review cable. Same kind of difference between the Silnote and the Oyaide as I experimented with the Starlight and Transparent but at a smaller degree and higher quality. The Oyaide was more robust with a deep, impactfull bass but lacked the air and details of the Silnote. I would have like to combine the best qualities of both cables and could be happy forever. Alas, I live in a real world. Gone the Oyaide and welcome Audioquest Diamond. That was the first time the Silnote lost in my system. The Diamond was really well balanced with better bass than the Silnote and with same resolution if not more. Gone the Silnote.
  
 So happy and the quest is over? Hummm...not so much. The store where I bought the Diamond is also a Transparent dealer. My saleman offered me to try a Transparent Premium and will be willing to give me full credit with the Diamond to apply on the Transparent if I liked it better (I got a special price - 50% off on the Diamond but have to pay significantly more for the Premium if I liked it better). With the tests the store made with different USB cables, The Premium was clearly the best the owner and my salesman told me. I also read a user feedback in Computer Audiophile who said the Premium killed his Diamond. So I took the offer. I had nothing to lose I told to myself.
  
 Well, it wasn't actually true. I lost about $200. The Premium is so much more superior to the Diamond in my system it's not even funny. More resolution, more open, much more dynamic and realism with a deep, controled and impactfull bass to die for. It's superior to the Diamond in any conceivable way to my ears in my system. 
  
 So YES FOR ME USB cables can sound different. To subtle to extremely evident ways.
  
 Finally, if the OP still read this post, I suggest to buy a Silnote (they could be found for around $150-200 on some sites). Much more realistic price than the $595 retail on Silnote site. The Silnote is a much, much better sounding cable than the Starlight 6 or 7 IMHO.


----------



## Lappy27

I had a 0.5 meter Starlight 6 for about a year with a Bryston BHA-1 + W4S DAC-2 + LCD-2 and was happy and never bother to compare with stock/generic cable as I get peace of mind with a reputable brand and apparently good design (separation of power and signal in a flat cable).
  
 This summer I have decided to change my dac for a NAD M51 with Audiophilleo2 with PurePower and organized my desk in a different configuration so I needed a longer USB cable. I ordered a Starlight 7 in one meter lenght. The cable arrived and I found it more resolute, open and quieter (noise floor) than the generic that came from W4S. But I also found it a bit agressive, edgy and lacking bass in my new set-up. I let the cable broken in for about 200 hours and despite the fact that it improved a bit, I was still not satisfied. So I bought a use Transparent Performance USB in one meter also.
  
 Oh boy, oh boy! The non-believer in USB cable sound difference should really hear these cable in a shootout. Blind test, double blind or whatever...these cables are the most opposite sounding USB cables I compared to date (more on my last experiments later). The Transparent is MUCH MORE thicker sounding and smoother than the Starlight. It sounds more realistic but also more veiled and less resolute than the Starlight. The bass for one is so more there, almost too much. At the end I decided to keep the Transparent but knew I had to try to find a good balance in resolution and low end register and with good mids in the middle of course.
  
 So came a Silnote Poseidon pure 7N silver conductors. Wow! That cable brought me much closer to my goal. More resolution than the Starlight but without any harshness and with better bass. Much better performer all around. I sold the Transparent and bought an Oyaide Continental 5S, a really well review cable. Same kind of difference between the Silnote and the Oyaide as I experimented with the Starlight and Transparent but at a smaller degree and higher quality. The Oyaide was more robust with a deep, impactfull bass but lacked the air and details of the Silnote. I would have like to combine the best qualities of both cables and could be happy forever. Alas, I live in a real world. Gone the Oyaide and welcome Audioquest Diamond. That was the first time the Silnote lost in my system. The Diamond was really well balanced with better bass than the Silnote and with same resolution if not more. Gone the Silnote.
  
 So happy and the quest is over? Hummm...not so much. The store where I bought the Diamond is also a Transparent dealer. My saleman offered me to try a Transparent Premium and will be willing to give me full credit with the Diamond to apply on the Transparent if I liked it better (I got a special price - 50% off on the Diamond but have to pay significantly more for the Premium if I liked it better). With the tests the store made with different USB cables, The Premium was clearly the best the owner and my salesman told me. I also read a user feedback in Computer Audiophile who said the Premium killed his Diamond. So I took the offer. I had nothing to lose I told to myself.
  
 Well, it wasn't actually true. I lost about $200. The Premium is so much more superior to the Diamond in my system is not even funny. More resolution, more open, much more dynamic and realism with a deep, controled and impactfull bass to die for. It's superior to the Diamond in any conceivable way to my ears in my system. 
  
 So YES FOR ME USB cables can sound different. To subtle to extremely evident ways.
  
 Finally, if the OP still read this post, I suggest to buy a Silnote (they could be find for around $150-200 on some sites). Much more realistic price than the $595 retail on Silnote site. The Silnote is a much, much better sounding cable than the Starlight 6 or 7 IMHO.


----------



## atsq17

Thanks Lappy. I've taken a punt on Black Cat Silverstar. I'll report back my findings. 
  
 I'm currently using the old WW Ultraviolet and Audioquest Forest. Of these the Forest seems to improve sound over stock cable noticeably whereas the Ultraviolet less so. I am currently burning in the Ultraviolet to see if things improve. 
  
 I have an Ultraviolet 5.2 in another system that sounded terribly harsh but came good after 100 hours burn in. 
  
 It was a big jump to get a Black Cat Silverstar from those entry level cables but I am very curious about Black Cat cables. I am expecting great things... hope it doesn't let me down.


----------



## NotAnAngel

lappy27 said:


> I had a 0.5 meter Starlight 6 for about a year with a Bryston BHA-1 + W4S DAC-2 + LCD-2 and was happy and never bother to compare with stock/generic cable as I get peace of mind with a reputable brand and apparently good design (separation of power and signal in a flat cable).
> 
> ...
> So YES FOR ME USB cables can sound different. To subtle to extremely evident ways.
> ...


 
 Great info, love it!
  
 This is a kind of experience that costs a lot of money and requires great effort, and we are getting it in one neat post, for free  Thanks *Lappy27*, appreciate you sharing this 
  
 I had a similar experience with Pangea Silver USB; it had more bass, sounded slightly warmer and more substantial than Starlight 7 but seemed to have less resolution. Now I am trying to go back to Pangea and do more listening as I agree, S7 seem to sound a bit edgy/harsh.
  
 Has anyone had any experience with Kimber/Cardas (silver) USB cables? I was wondering how they would compare to Starlight 7 (I found performance of Kimber interconnects/HDMI to be very good so now I am curious about USB).
  
 Judging from your post, it sounds like it would be worth going back to the search and trying some more options.


----------



## Lappy27

notanangel said:


> Great info, love it!
> 
> This is a kind of experience that costs a lot of money and requires great effort, and we are getting it in one neat post, for free  Thanks *Lappy27*, appreciate you sharing this
> 
> ...


 
 You're welcome NotAnAngel 
  
 In fact, after calculation, I invested (I prefer this word to lost) about $200 in this search project for the best USB cable I could afford for my system. I knew it from the start and accepted that fact. I saw it as a R & D. This is part of the game if you really want to experiment with more options than your original purchase. I don't have any single regrets. I heard significant differences from all the cables and I choose the one I prefered for my taste in my system. Of course, it happened that the one I liked the most (by far) was also the most expensive! I really wished USB cables made no differences. I could have invested this money in music purchase. But the simple and sad truth is USB cables do sound different and have huge impact of the result you get in your system.
  
 If you're ready to invest some money and also important, time (break in of cables is important), I really encourage you to do so. You're evaluation of the S7 reflected mine and I think you will never be satisfied with this sonic signature. The S7 was, in my system, the cable I disliked the most apart from the flat, veiled and dull sounding generic cable.
  
 BTW, there is a general consensus that silver is a better conductor than copper but that could be compensate by increasing the gage of the copper conductor. Silver is more expensive than copper, hence the higher price of the cables made with this material. Some manufacturers make Silver clad/plated conductors with great results to reduce the cost. But some some really expensive cable and highly regarded USB cables like Light Harmonic Lightspeed at $999 is silver clad/copper. Even my Transparent Premium is silver clad copper but in a extra large size conductors design with quadruple isolation from external/internal noise. 
  
 If you like to have really good resolution, air and details without harshness and with a satisfying bass, I highly suggest you the Silnote Poseidon Silver 7N if you can find it for about $150 to $200. A much better sounding cable thann the S7. I am sure you will be pleased.
  
 But if you want to have it all (resolution, air, total silence between notes, realism and accuracy of timbre, deep, tight and extremely accurate and impactful bass AND musicality), accept to shell out about $500 on the Transparent Premium and be done with it. It is so much superior to the highly regarded as a reference Audioquest Diamond in my system. In all sonic parameters.
  
 Finally, I will be comparing my Premium to a custom made 20AWG OCC silver extra large conductors somewhere in the beginning of 2014. The conceptor is Steven Huang of AudioSensibility, a canadian cables and power accesories (iI bought is Power Distribution box - fantastic performance over my now sold PS Audio Power Plant regenerator) maker. Highly knowledgeable, skilled and passionate guy to deal with. I actually have his Statement USB (24AWGOCC silver conductor) cable with me for an evaluation. His cable is better than the Silnote, on par with the Diamond but behind the Premium on my last comparison but it didn't have a full 200 hours of burn in. Now it have, I will do more comparison in my holidays vacation.
  
 Regards.
  
 Steve


----------



## RichardH09

A fool and his money are soon parted.


----------



## Ari33

richardh09 said:


> A fool and his money are soon parted.




Yes, but unfortunately our opinions are not welcome or valued here. I guess the believers in the supernatural don't care about being ripped off. If it makes them happy I guess we should just let them get on with it. :/


----------



## Sxooter

I would love to do some double-blind testing on the folks who hear a difference between various USB cables. I simply do NOT see how the digital path can have any real effect on the audio unless it is simply failing (i.e. bad cable.) 
  
 Since the only path that can really be affected by the cable is the analog +5v/GND power path, a double blind study would really allow you to identify the differences without any placebo effect.
  
 tl;dr: never trust your own brain too much.


----------



## atsq17

sxooter said:


> I would love to do some double-blind testing on the folks who hear a difference between various USB cables. I simply do NOT see how the digital path can have any real effect on the audio unless it is simply failing (i.e. bad cable.)
> 
> Since the only path that can really be affected by the cable is the analog +5v/GND power path, a double blind study would really allow you to identify the differences without any placebo effect.
> 
> tl;dr: never trust your own brain too much.


 
  
 If you do sufficient research, there is a lot of material on how jitter applies to USB as well. 
  
 I do agree that a double blind test should be how all tests are done as the placebo effect is potentially a factor. 
  
 I definitely appreciate a skeptic that is interested in finding out the truth and not just throw around unsubstantiated statements. You wouldn't be able to tell from what I've posted here so far but I too am a skeptic. 
  
 So far I've tried stock and entry level cables and I thought that an Audioquest Forest sounded better when I tested it but I doubt I would be able to pick them out in a double blind test. My girlfriend did pick the Wireworld cable over the stock cable in a double blind test (that I conducted) though. This lead me to believe that there could be more to this. My ears might just not be acute enough. Since then I've purchased an expensive cable (waiting for it to arrive next week). I will be trying this cable to see if it makes any appreciable difference. If it does not or if the difference is negligible, I will definitely report this result here too.


----------



## Happy Camper

sxooter said:


> I would love to do some double-blind testing on the folks who hear a difference between various USB cables. I simply do NOT see how the digital path can have any real effect on the audio unless it is simply failing (i.e. bad cable.)
> 
> Since the only path that can really be affected by the cable is the analog +5v/GND power path, a double blind study would really allow you to identify the differences without any placebo effect.
> 
> tl;dr: never trust your own brain too much.


There is a forum for DBT and this IS NOT IT. It's considered a safe haven for subjective experiences. As strongly as you think DBT is a standard and infallible, there's also a feeling that uneducated listening tests are flawed and useless.


----------



## atsq17

I acknowledge that I don't understand everything about electronics and audio and I will at least give it a try before judging. One forgets that in something as subjective as sound and music, if the listener thinks it is better then they will get increased enjoyment regardless of whether it is placebo or not. In such a case the user has gotten his money's worth. Of course this can be an issue when recommending said placebo to others who want something substantial. 
  
 Either way the believers have the right to believe and share impressions. If someone has tried and found no difference, I am sure no-one will hold it against them if they shared this.
  
 However, one should not come in here with nonconstructive criticisms or broad sweeping statements without sufficient knowledge to back it up and wonder why they are not welcome.


----------



## atsq17

happy camper said:


> It's considered a safe haven for subjective experiences.


 
  
 Precisely.


----------



## misha0209

hi all,
 just bought me a starlight7, and after reading this, thread, i'm thinking i might have made a mistake 
 i plan on using it with my new X-Sabre DAC.
 could you please elaborate on the "thin" and "harsh" sound?
 what are you using the cable for (link directly to usb input of the DAC, or do you use it for a usb to spdif transmitter).
 is it that thin compared to other cables? i like bass as much as the next fellow, but if my sound is vailed, then no thanks 
 could someone recommend a cable has more low end than the starlight7, but is transparent, and 3d? (within the same price range ~100$$ - someone here was talking audioquest diamond.. i have no doubt it is better )


----------



## atsq17

Hi, 
  
 My personal recommendation is for you to use the cable and burn it in for hundred plus hours and if you like the sound then you should just hang on to it. I know many who love the Starlight 7 and think that it's awesome. 
  
 Some people love the Audioquest Carbon whereas some don't like it at all. Some have said the Audioquest Forest (entry level) tops the more expensive ones in their system. In my experience the Audioquest Forest is definitely superior to the Wireworld Ultraviolet but Starlight 7 is meant to be a significant improvement on the both of them. I have no first hand experience though. 
  
 Chord Silver Plus is a highly recommended "first usb cable". It is meant to be slightly less revealing than the Starlight 7 but have a more enjoyable signature. 
  
 Another potentially very good cable in that price range is the Black Cat Silverstar USB (I own this one). 
  
 Other good ones I know of include Cardas Clear, Kimber Kable Cu(copper) (I own this one too) or Ag(silver) USB. 
  
 In the end though, every system is different and every preference is different. Give the Starlight a shot first. 
  
 Almost every USB cable manufacturer recommend a good burn in to get the most from the cable. See how you like the Starlight after 100-200 hours burn in.


----------



## misha0209

thanks for the impressions.
  
 thing is, i have yet to receive the starlight7 as i ordered it 2 days ago.
 it is interesting you should mention the audioquest forest. wanted to get that one, but then i got a little more $$ left over from the holidays and i went for the wireworld
 if you have any experience with the forest, cinnamon, and ultraviolet, could you please try to identify some of the main characteristics/differences between them?
  
 thanks much !


----------



## atsq17

I must say that I haven't been able to discern major difference in USB cable but I will give you the main points. 
  
 Normal USB Cables (Normal B - like the USB printer cables) - Tested on Schiit Modi
 1. Audioquest Forest - Noticeably clearer and smoother than stock/cheap cables (and Ultraviolet). Has been burnt in for 40 hours+. Sounded better than stock cables out of the box but was more noticeable after the few hours of burn in. My results verified by my non-audiophile girlfriend in a blind test and a fellow head-fier at my workplace who has a belkin gold usb cable. 
 2. WW Ultraviolet - Could barely tell it apart from the stock cable. Only burnt in for 20+ hours but I can't be bothered as I doubt it will make more than a miniscule improvement. Worst of the lot. Also verified by the above mentioned people. 
  
 Mini USB Cables (mini B - like the old portable hard disks) - Tested on RSA Predator Dac/Amp and MuteAudio PupDAC
 3. WW Ultraviolet 5.2 - Slightly better than stock cable. It IS noticeable but it's subtle. Burnt in for 150+ hours. Results concurred by another Headfier at my work place (not the same as the one who tested the Forest). 
 4. Kimber Kable Cu - Didn't A-B with the Ultraviolet 5.2 but it wasn't harsh at the start and after 100+ hours burn in it sounds great. Better than I remember the Ultraviolet 5.2 sounded. Nobody has verified this as I haven't yet setup a test.
  
 Coming Soon
 Black Cat Silverstar USB cable... waiting on my ASUS Xonar Essence One Muses Edition DAC to arrive as I would expect the improvement on that to be more pronounced than the Modi. In my impatience I might test it with the Modi on Monday.


----------



## misha0209

wooooow...
 did not expect that from the ultraviolet  it was on my to by list.
 actually i chose between the starlight7 and the audioquest cinnamon.. starting to regret my choice..
 i will post some impressions when the cable gets here... but damn.
 also, would not have thought the forest would outshine the ultraviolet so much.. all things i could find, these 2 cables were pretty close.
 thanks for the opinion, and if anybody else has experience with the cinnamon i would like to hear it. prefferably in comparison to starlight 7
 thanks!


----------



## atsq17

A couple of interesting things from my research... the people who liked the forest preferred it to even the higher end Audioquest offerings! Like I said, some used the Forest as a stepping stone to $100+ cables and never looked back. Some said they ditched the others and went back to Forest. 
  
 On the other hand I have not met anyone who said they liked the Ultraviolet more than the Starlight. You either like the Wireworld signature or you don't. If you do then you are likely to much prefer the Starlight. If not then just get a different cable. 
  
 I just did a test after making my post I did an A-B test between the Ultraviolet 5.2 and the Kimber Kable Cu. 
  
 Results: 
  
 Ultraviolet 5.2: In some songs, some instruments were clearer. Less bass than Kimber Cu. Slightly narrower soundstage and a little more congestion. 
  
 Kimber Kable Cu: More bass! Makes me think that the extra "clarity" in the ultraviolet was perhaps an absence of bass presence and therefore I could hear more detail in mid and treble. Trying different songs also showed that the soundstage was wider with the Kimber. 
  
 Personal preference: The Ultraviolet is good but the Kimber is better. The Ultraviolet has about 5% more perceived detail but the Kimber has about 20-30% more bass presence and still plenty of detail. I believe that they both cost about the same at around $50ish. 
  
 I believe that the Starlight will be an much improved version of the Ultraviolet but if you find that it lacks bass then you will be better off with another cable. It's hard to know without first trying. If you do like their signature, I hear that Starlight is amazing value for money. 
  
 I got the Kimber from here: https://www.gcaudio.com/cgi-bin/store/showProduct.cgi?id=592
  
 Obviously if you will be after the normal B one and not the mini B one unless you have a portable DAC.


----------



## atsq17

misha0209 said:


> wooooow...
> did not expect that from the ultraviolet  it was on my to by list.
> actually i chose between the starlight7 and the audioquest cinnamon.. starting to regret my choice..
> i will post some impressions when the cable gets here... but damn.
> ...


 
  
 You sound like a person who is quite into this hobby so why not just give the Starlight a nice burn in and then try it for a few weeks. Worse comes to worse sell it and try another... trying different things and finding out what you like is half the fun.  
  
 Not trying the Starlight is one of my mini-regrets. I am a mini bass-head so I don't think the Starlight will suit me but then again I didn't think the Burson Soloist SL would suit me but I ended up using it as my primary amp instead of my old favorite, the ECP Audio Torpedo which I really loved.


----------



## atsq17

One thing I'd like to mention is that even when I say there is noticeable difference... it takes me a lot of back and forth testing to discern it... if it wasn't for others verifying the same thing without me telling them... I'd actually half-doubt my own judgment and wonder if it's all just some form of proverbial kool-aid that I am on. In other words, while there is a difference, I've never noticed it to be day and night so to speak. If somebody switched cables on me... it'd probably take me a few hours to actually wonder if there was perhaps something different. While I still pour in tonnes of money in the quest for small improvements and to get that little bit closer to my definition of perfection, I acknowledge that USB cable for me has been more of a fine tuning exercise than a game changer. 
  
 Having said that, I really can't wait til my new DAC arrives so I can test my Black Cat Silverstar on it. If that isn't an obvious improvement I will be very disappointed given how much I spent on it.


----------



## misha0209

yeah, am into this audio thing..
 but it always comes down to $
 also, i do like bass, but i also like details, and soundstage, hence my choice of headphones the hd800
 but they are bass shy.
 i will be changing the cable with a black dragon or alo audio in the near future, but i would like to avoid anything that will make my setup bass shy 
 so i get starlight.. i don't like it.. i want to sell it. if i can not, the game stops there sadly for about a year, as i have other more important investments to make, both for audio, and in real life. if i would have got me a cinnamon, i could live happier until i had the moolah to upgrade that part of the system again, that's all.
 thanks for the comparison, i will post a comparison of my no name cable, and the starlight7 when i get it. best i can do, maybe it will help someone make a more documented decision 
 thank you


----------



## Lappy27

misha0209 said:


> yeah, am into this audio thing..
> but it always comes down to $
> also, i do like bass, but i also like details, and soundstage, hence my choice of headphones the hd800
> but they are bass shy.
> ...


 
 If you have HD 800, and you are looking in the $100 Starlight price range, I can definitly recommand you the Transparent Performance cable. A much, much more robust sounding in the low end register than the Starlight. But less resolute also. A good trade off with the hyper detailed HD 800 IMHO.


----------



## misha0209

thanks for the recommendation.
 i was going to upgrade the cable eventually, when i'm done with the setup.
 currently just got the x-sabre to replace my meier stagedac, and the upcoming upgrades are: headphone audio cable, then the BH-1, going fully balanced.
 after this i was planning on upgrading to the audioquest carbon.
 so in case i do not like the starlight, if i can get it sold easily enough, i might take the advice you gave 
 if i can not sell it, i live with it until the time comes when i can get the carbon


----------



## Paolo Jose

USB 3.0 transmits faster compared to 2.0 therefore there will be more parasitic noise and chances of jitter.


----------



## sep90

WW starlight is slightly warmer and more emphasize on lower register.
 However the usb 3 starlight has more midrange bass compare to usb 2 version.
 Must be 3x the conductors in usb3 compare to older version.


----------



## audioguy67

Digital signal  is going through cables in form of 0 and 1 but that does not mean anything.
 Those zeros and ones are represented by regular current and voltage so it is like analog audio signal which is again current and voltage.
 I think good USB cable is better than inexpensive one but again if one does not hear difference it does not make any sense to buy more expensive cable.


----------



## Noobzilla

Gotta say.. this is one of the better USB threads I found here on head-fi. I was thinking of getting Audioquest Cinnamon, but now curious about higher end other cables. I like my bass so it looks like Starlight 7 is out :/ other recommended cables is definitely above my budget


----------



## Happy Camper

All these bass shy comments makes me think your amps are weak. Ever try a speaker amp for your headphones?


----------



## allhifi

24bitbob said:


> An interesting question.
> 
> I've often wondered whether USB 3.0 would offer any advantages over USB 2.  This hobby, or passion of ours, is chock full of discussions of improvements to sound quality based on the  most meagre of differences in technical specification.  I have to imagine that it is only a question of time before the advantages of USB 3.0 get touted.
> 
> On USB cables, I bought my first audiophile USB cable nearly 3 years ago (from a specialist hifi shop in Singapore).  I am unconvinced about the subjective qualities of USB cables.  My attempts at evaluating the differences flounder after I have my first glass of wine.  Now I can recommend a fine Merlot that makes nearly all cables sound great....



Lol -the wine. But, I suggest you indulge a bit deeper into the Merlot; loosen up, relax, and listen again -SQ distinctions (between any USB cable -of any value) are blatantly obvious. 

pj


----------



## allhifi (Nov 19, 2018)

Happy Camper said:


> All these bass shy comments makes me think your amps are weak. Ever try a speaker amp for your headphones?



Or that he loves bloated bass -and believes it's a sign of superior hi-fi ? 

Low Frequency Resolution (LFR) 'performance' is paramount in defining superb SQ.

pj


----------



## Dan Fuentes

Guy was selling a bunch of older starlight clearance usb cables on eBay for like $30 .5 meter have that going to Eitr with Starlight 7 coax coming out and its a very good thing.


----------



## allhifi

misha0209 said:


> hi all,
> just bought me a starlight7, and after reading this, thread, i'm thinking i might have made a mistake
> i plan on using it with my new X-Sabre DAC.
> could you please elaborate on the "thin" and "harsh" sound?
> ...



More "low-end" than (X-Y-Z)  is simply a LF coloration that ruins the performance of any product category that imparts this excessive low-frequency bloat/coloration. Proof ? Listen to vocal clarity, to begin. Follow the 'words' easily. Or not so much.  Continue listening for (electric) bass guitar clarity/definition, hall/studio ambiance, the 'snap' of snare drum strikes; all of it is severely impaired with any component/cable demonstrating poor low-frequency performance/ articulation. 

pj


----------



## allhifi

RichardH09 said:


> A fool and his money are soon parted.



As are comments otherwise reserved for the wise.

pj


----------



## allhifi

Sxooter said:


> I would love to do some double-blind testing on the folks who hear a difference between various USB cables. I simply do NOT see how the digital path can have any real effect on the audio unless it is simply failing (i.e. bad cable.)
> 
> Since the only path that can really be affected by the cable is the analog +5v/GND power path, a double blind study would really allow you to identify the differences without any placebo effect.
> 
> tl;dr: never trust your own brain too much.



In your case, I must agree (RE: "...never trust your own brain too much")

pj


----------



## allhifi

atsq17 said:


> One thing I'd like to mention is that even when I say there is noticeable difference... it takes me a lot of back and forth testing to discern it... if it wasn't for others verifying the same thing without me telling them... I'd actually half-doubt my own judgment and wonder if it's all just some form of proverbial kool-aid that I am on. In other words, while there is a difference, I've never noticed it to be day and night so to speak. If somebody switched cables on me... it'd probably take me a few hours to actually wonder if there was perhaps something different. While I still pour in tonnes of money in the quest for small improvements and to get that little bit closer to my definition of perfection, I acknowledge that USB cable for me has been more of a fine tuning exercise than a game changer.
> 
> Having said that, I really can't wait til my new DAC arrives so I can test my Black Cat Silverstar on it. If that isn't an obvious improvement I will be very disappointed given how much I spent on it.



System resolution capability is rather important. I'd suggest/recommend to audition a AC Regen. (for source/particularly digital gear). The gains in SQ are immense.

pj


----------



## allhifi

scottosan said:


> I just responded to a different thread regarding digital interconnects. People often invest unnecessary money on digital interconnects. Unlike analog connects, they do not sound different from one another, as the analog audio signal does not pass through the cable.  They are used to transmit a binary stream of 1's and 0's.  As long as all of the 1's and 0's are transmitted on $30 cable A, then it will not sound any different than the $200 cable B that is also transmitting all of the 1's and 0's.  Even the cheaper cables rarely experience data loss.



Your "brilliance" is staggering !

pj


----------



## allhifi

scottosan said:


> 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.



scotsman: Find another topic so as to flatter readers by your intelligence.

pj


----------



## allhifi

NotAnAngel said:


> Hard disk? I personally don't know about that ... (if you were serious, of course). But if it was a joke, it was a good one
> 
> NOTE: I did try Starlight 7 with a portable hard drive, for the sake of a scientific experiment , and all I can tell is "it works".
> 
> ...



And indeed it would. Solid post.

pj


----------



## allhifi

Ari33 said:


> You may think I'm ignorant and you are entitled to your opinion but that doesn't necessarily make you right either. You may have a masters in EE but you do seem much less familiar with basic neuropsychology.
> 
> Re- The link, The guy that tested these cables is a TV Calibrator with no apparant hidden agendas and he did study image quality closely... good enough for me!
> 
> ...




Way too much time on your hands. Do something useful with it.

pj


----------



## atsq17 (Nov 20, 2018)

allhifi said:


> System resolution capability is rather important. I'd suggest/recommend to audition a AC Regen. (for source/particularly digital gear). The gains in SQ are immense.
> 
> pj



Since I wrote that post a long time ago, I've found items like the Lightspeed 10G cable and the Curious USB Cable to make changes noticeable even to a clueless person doing a quick A-B test.

USB Cable is now one of my priority fixes and no longer a nice-to-have. The nice-to-haves in my list now are power cables, power boards, network cables etc. The scary thing is I have heard very noticable differences from some power cables and power boards as well.

I have USB cleaners, power cleaners, LPS cables, Singxer SU-1 USB to I2S converter (super steroids edition) with every major part swapped out for some of the most expensive money can buy. I also use Ultrarendu. I figured if I was going to do it, I'd go as far in as my budget allowed.

EDIT: I did buy a UPS with regenerating sine wave. Problem is it has a noisy fan and I intended to open it up to replace it with quieter fans. I never got around to doing it though. It's collecting dust in my hifi rack. Wasn't a straight forward replacement. Would need to dig into the inner components and then cut the wiring and re-attach. No easy molex or 2/3 pin plugs.


----------



## scottosan

allhifi said:


> Your "brilliance" is staggering !
> 
> pj


Ahh the passive aggressive insult.


----------

