Another review verging on fraudulent. It's absolutely proposterous to suggest that there will be a difference in sound quality beetween two USB cables.
I'm about to let off a pretty agist comment here, but I'm guessing that most people making these frankly ignorant comments are probably middle aged and older folk who did not grow up with computers to understand the shear "ridiculousness" of the claims.
Again, shame on What Hi fi for perpetuating this utter non-sense. I'm guessing they must be paid by the companies producing these products, it's the only logcal explanation?
There is a massive difference between USB cables so thinking any old cable does the same job is untrue the same with audio cables speaker cables ect.I have 2 Supras an D-Fi and a WireWorld Starlight USB and the tonal ballance is totally different between them all.The Supras are a bit like VDH audio mid priced cables smooth but not as clear or detailed as The D-Fi and the Wireworld is about on par with the D-Fi.But What HiFi always goes down the same old track of this cable is the best which is not true it is all about synergy so a D-Fi could work better in one system and not in another as it might make a bright system to sterile and in your face the same goes for the Supra this may not work in an over smooth system.But for the price the Supra is a great upgrade from cheap generic cables and the extra for the D-Fi and Wireworld is well worth the layout for the extra detail ect.But to the first comment I had a friend who got taught to be a sound engineer and he thought cables did not matter as paying more was a con but then worked in a HiFi shop for a couple of years and learned there is a big difference and the main difference in price comparable cables is the synergy in the system they are in so this thing about there being the best cable in these What HiFi tests are that they worked better with the systems used in the tests.I got bored of HiFi but the last system I had was MF KW550 Intergrated KW550 Mono's KW Dac Proac D15/Monitor Audio Platinums Chord Indigo Interconnects and Chord Signature Coax and speaker cable with a Titan mains cleaner and would not have bought those sort of cables if there was no difference.But I got bored with Higher end gear and the next step up was morgage money for very little increases in quality so there is a problem once you get so far up that the increases in quality do not justify the outlay.To be honest you do not need anything over £2k per unit to have a great HiFi and yes there are increases as you spend more but they are not worth it unless money is no object.One more point this spend 10/15% on your cables is rubbish buy the best cables you can afford and you will get the best from your system and when you upgade you will already have the cables it is only on budget and mid priced HiFi where you get greater gains from a better unit than the price the cable cost :/.
I don't know much abort curves or ones and zeros. But I do know what I hear. There has been quite enough of ironic comments, so I will skip that.
This cable has been reviewed as a cable that delievers a big bass. So if it was placebo, I probably should think so to. But I can't say that the bass or any other frequency stood out exceptionally. But there is an obvious increase of clearity and microdynamics compared with my previous 18£ usb-cable.
I can't tell if it's a good thing for me when my electronics allready are quite open and analytical.
But together with a little warmer and a little less analytical system, it could be a real nice upgrade. The feeling is good dynamics in the big picture as in the micros and a very dehazed and natural sound to voices, strings, drums etc.
I'll keep my Supra for upgrades of my system, signalsources are up next in that apartment. Can't decide today if i'm going for a cable with a slightly more warm feeling.. I'll guess I will wait and try out the Supra with different electronics. But the Supra is a cable for a higher level than my old one, that's for sure!
I've just plug my cable in and the improvement I got was instantly noticable. The bass suddenly became much bigger and tighter. I think the nay sayers need to research the difference between isochronous transfer and bulk transfer in the USB spec. USB-audio is isochronous and flows at a preset rate - if there is an error, it cannot be resent. This is unlike the bulk transfer mode used send data to printers and hard drives. Here CRC error checking is perfermed and if an error is detected the data is resent.
Five stars from me.
at the price it sports, this cable is a bargain!
let me enlighten you further! i sent a simple byte stream down this cable, the message being 111001101101 and to my amazement a complete stream of 111001101101 was received at the other end. Other cables had worryingly replaced some of the 1s with 0s and vice versa.
it totally transformed my experience of digital data. Highly recommend
I'd just like to echo Mister_dee's praise for the Supra USB cable. Don't let the uninformed, sceptical commenters below put you off - this is an unbelievable product. Here is my story.
After purchasing some magic beans this morning I had £29 left, which the seller kindly offered to let me exchange for one of two bargain items. Although I was tempted by the offer of an old piece of rope, I decided to plump instead for the Supra cable.
The difference between my old USB cable and the Supra is truly astounding. It reminds me of the time, many years ago, when I upgraded my pocket calculator and was astonished by the difference. Such arithmetical truths as 0 + 1 = 1, although expressed accurately and identically on both machines, seemed to be communicated in a cleaner and more easy-going manner on the more expensive product - fully justifying the extra cost which had caused me to infer those qualities in the first place. And so it is with the Supra cable.
Anybody who claims that the Supra performs no better than its cheaper rivals is just like the ignorant child who shouts "but he's not wearing anything!" in that famous satire of scepticism 'The Emperor's New Clothes'. So please: don't waste £2 on a cheap USB cable when you can get a functionally identical one in a different box for only £27 more.
Thanks for the review. Unlike the previous "educated" posts, I have actually bought one of these and would like to express my opinion which may actually count for something!
I was so impressed with this cable plugged into my DAC that I decided to use it for my inkjet printer and I can tell you that the results were amazing.
Photos printed with more intense colours and vibracy whilst each droplet of ink seemed to have a unique flavour of it's own. There was a real sense of 'being in the picture' with the rest of the cows in the photo.
Exposure of low level detail, which would have been otherwise lost in a lesser USB cable, were clear to make out.
All this from a 'digital' cable which some people argue DON'T make a difference with digital signals.
Come on guys - it's not just 1's and 0's - that's such a regular misconception. If scientific tests were an accurate how could I see this in a photo when it wasn't there in the first place?
USB requires FIFOs at either end of the connection. The electrical properties of the cable have *no* bearing on the timing, power, noisyness, cleanlyness, or any other metric that is important that leaves this FIFO and goes into the DAC, because they are totally decoupled from any further stages. Some equipment will even totally electrically decouple this.
Now, with S/P-DIF over coax, it is possible for them to cause an audiable difference, unless, like almost all high-end equipment, they use a FIFO to decouple.
In otherwords, if you can hear anything, it's as good as any other cable with which you can hear anything.
ABX testing for these would be hilarious. Reviews like this have made me lose any remaining respect I had for What Hi Fi.
Pretty much all respect I had for What Hi-Fi just disappeared with this review.
USB audio cables are digital. You can review the construction, the strength of the cable, the tolerances of the plug dimensions, that's fine. You can't claim that a different digital transport produces superior timing and presentation, because the data transfered is by definition identical. Any impression of detail, timing and presentation is entirely placebo due to expectation, and I'm disappointed that What Hi-Fi claim to hear a difference. If they claim to hear a difference with a £29 USB cable over a £2 cable because it's more expensive, why should I trust them that a £1000 amp sounds better than a £100 amp?
There are some reviews by this site that sometimes appear to be unfair or overly biased, which is why I value individaul opinions like these. Perhaps some products deliver a placebo positive effect or the reverse but everyone has different ears so all reviews should be taken into perspective...this includes those by Whathifi experts. You have to do your own ABX testing to find out...no matter what the physics predicts. Many years ago Hifi Choice used to show an electrical signal test graph with some of the products they reviewed. I suspect this stopped due to them all looking too smilar .
I enjoy Whathifi because they review more budget ranges and they give people the chance to post their own opinions be they biased or not.
Login or register to post comments
A seriously talented performer that has a few design issues
This is a top-notch surround package for the money. It’s a worthy alternative to the award-winning KEF R100 5.1
A great amp with some notable musical skills, but it loses a star compared with its better-performing, better-specified rivals
© 2014 Haymarket Publishing