WireWorld Starlight CAT 8 cable review

[plissken]

See how THIS Ethernet cable blows away standard CAT6 cabling.

 

"The Starlight CAT8 is very different sounding Ethernet cable when compared to my AudioQuest Diamond or Vodka Ethernet cables. The Starlight CAT8 is more extended sounding at the high and low end. This cable has a bit of midrange presence that I liked and didn’t find to be annoying in terms of brightness. The retrieval of high-end detail is outstanding."

 

"

Incidentally, for those of you that feel that there are no differences between Ethernet cables, I did some comparisons with a CAT6 Belden Ethernet cable and the Starlight CAT8. The Starlight CAT8 trounced the Belden in terms of sound quality. "

[Tintinabulum]

Looks like an eyebrow clipper.

 

I love seeing "trounced" when describing SQ. Given it a good beating I daresay.

[Thinman72]

As always - have you even listened to the cable?

[plissken]

As always - have you even listened to the cable?

 

I've had Chord and AudioQuest. The least expensive being $340. No audible nor measured difference.

 

Furthermore I'm stating that Steven Plaskin can't hear a difference either. Nor Michael Lavorgna. But they won't actually provide anything other than opinion.

 

If either of them actually sat down for a bias controlled evaluation they would be in deep shit.

[haxter1]

I share the same results with Plissken. In addition the sound stage is somewhat deeper. Try it you'll like it.

[Tecnik1]

I use these three exact cables in my system and to me the Wireworld was a bit of disappointment after reading so many positive reviews of it. I felt the sound stage was clearly deeper but lacked the weight and timber of both AQ Vodka & Diamond. The AQ just sounds more natural , has better separation of instruments. Things may change since I have only 200 hrs on the cables" all have to compare again at each 100 hr mark till they have 5 or 600 hrs on them.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

[theppd]

I use these three exact cables in my system and to me the Wireworld was a bit of disappointment after reading so many positive reviews of it. I felt the sound stage was clearly deeper but lacked the weight and timber of both AQ Vodka & Diamond. The AQ just sounds more natural , has better separation of instruments. Things may change since I have only 200 hrs on the cables" all have to compare again at each 100 hr mark till they have 5 or 600 hrs on them.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

 

Thanks for your feedback!

Could you please share your findings regarding the difference between the Vodka & Diamond? Since I own Vodka and waiting for the delivery of WW to compare but also maybe will look at the Diamond in the end.

[plissken]

I use these three exact cables in my system and to me the Wireworld was a bit of disappointment after reading so many positive reviews of it. I felt the sound stage was clearly deeper but lacked the weight and timber of both AQ Vodka & Diamond. The AQ just sounds more natural , has better separation of instruments. Things may change since I have only 200 hrs on the cables" all have to compare again at each 100 hr mark till they have 5 or 600 hrs on them.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

 

Do your movies look more 3D over the Vodka/Diamond? How about photos? More color? Better contrast?

 

If you streamed something from a service how did it manage to make it 3000 kilometers to you to have the last meter of magic cable fix it all?

[theppd]

Do your movies look more 3D over the Vodka/Diamond? How about photos? More color? Better contrast?

 

If you streamed something from a service how did it manage to make it 3000 kilometers to you to have the last meter of magic cable fix it all?

 

This thread is not for you obviously. What are you trying to get in the end? The declaration that Ethernet cables can't sound dufferent? Ok, they can't but they do for us, so can we please continue the conversation with the rest of the believers?

[plissken]

This thread is not for you obviously. What are you trying to get in the end? The declaration that Ethernet cables can't sound dufferent? Ok, they can't but they do for us, so can we please continue the conversation with the rest of the believers?

 

I think people believe stuff all the time. Doesn't make it so. The Earth isn't flat, people landed on the moon, vaccines don't cause autism, water doesn't have memory, and Ethernet cables don't have the ability to effect sound stage, bass or treble response ect...

 

With a GBe Ethernet connection 24/96 audio uses 0.5%, 24/192 0.9%, 16/44.1 0.15% (roughly). And you aren't even listening off the cable. You can start playback, and please try it, pull the network connection. Your audio will still play for a bit.

 

Go ahead and try to tell me that the effects are all still there because that's another point we can talk about in terms of copying a file with one cable and then another and you should be able to hear the difference, no?

 

One of these days I'll meet an honest Audiophile that will actually sit for some bias controlled evaluation. I think they are an endangered species. So no comment on the video? No ability to pick my response apart?

 

So do your movies look better? More 3D? Better contrast? Better color saturation? Less motion blur? Sound effects better? Explosions louder, more defined? Dialog from the center channel more intelligible?

 

Photos look better?

[d_elm]

If ethernet cables sound different it is likely the noise delivered is different. Noise delivery over wire is why fibre media converters are being used. I expect the next step in SQ will be optical ethernet into the DAC.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

[plissken]

If ethernet cables sound different it is likely the noise delivered is different. Noise delivery over wire is why fibre media converters are being used. I expect the next step in SQ will be optical ethernet into the DAC.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

 

Ethernet is 4 pairs of copper. You are talking induction. I'm all ears for how AQ's copper DOESN'T conduct noise on the cable but DOES conduct data? This is like saying WW can develop an electrical cord that can power a lamp but won't shock a human if they touch the exposed blades. You can't have it both ways.

 

Realize this: If silver or silver plated copper conductors are BETTER at transferring audio or data, then it also means it is better at conducting anything else electrical, like noise, that is generated internally by the switch or it's power supply.

 

Ethernet is wired to a standard. Fluke makes a $10,000 tester that will give you all the metrics in real world terms.

[plissken]

I expect the next step in SQ will be optical ethernet into the DAC.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

 

You better believe I've pointed out in the past to all the 'howl @ the moon' crowd Linn, Naim, Bryston, NAD, Sonore all have copper based Ethernet in their products.

 

I mean what are these outfits thinking!?

[Mercman]

Thanks for your feedback!

Could you please share your findings regarding the difference between the Vodka & Diamond? Since I own Vodka and waiting for the delivery of WW to compare but also maybe will look at the Diamond in the end.

 

The Diamond just improves on the Vodka with a little larger soundstage and a bit more clarity.

 

As I listen to these Ethernet cables with different components, I can see that results may vary for listeners with different components. For example, with the microRendu, the Wireworld Starlight might be preferred since the mR is a bit warm and full sounding in the bass. With my Ayre QX-5 Tweny, I preferred the Diamond.

 

Wireworld is coming out with a Platinum Ethernet cable soon that will be interesting to listen to.

[Samuel T Cogley]

This thread is not for you obviously. What are you trying to get in the end? The declaration that Ethernet cables can't sound dufferent? Ok, they can't but they do for us, so can we please continue the conversation with the rest of the believers?

 

For me, unwavering certainty that an expensive Ethernet cable performs better than a mass market example (when both meet the applicable CAT specification) is a proclamation of immunity from expectation bias and nothing more.

 

The predictable retort when this assertion is challenged is almost always something like, "...but have you 'listened' to the cable?".

 

[Fitzcaraldo215]

If ethernet cables sound different it is likely the noise delivered is different. Noise delivery over wire is why fibre media converters are being used. I expect the next step in SQ will be optical ethernet into the DAC.

 

 

If true and with the proper equipment, it would then be straightforward for any cable maker or qualified engineer to measure the reduction in noise at the DAC analog output. Why do some speculate or offer only uncontrolled and biased subjective listening assessments when the phenomenon you describe is measurable?

 

I continue to look for such measured proof. That no such proof has been published, even with all the inflated wonder wire claims over many years, speaks quite loudly and clearly.

[plissken]

The Diamond just improves on the Vodka with a little larger soundstage and a bit more clarity.

 

As I listen to these Ethernet cables with different components, I can see that results may vary for listeners with different components. For example, with the microRendu, the Wireworld Starlight might be preferred since the mR is a bit warm and full sounding in the bass. With my Ayre QX-5 Tweny, I preferred the Diamond.

 

Wireworld is coming out with a Platinum Ethernet cable soon that will be interesting to listen to.

 

I have a Plasma display that has a bit of Blue push to it. What Ethernet cable should I get to fix that?

[plissken]

 

The predictable retort when this assertion is challenged is almost always something like, "...but have you 'listened' to the cable?".

 

My response is "Have you listened to yours blinded?"

 

We are talking about maybe a 4 foot cable in a spec that says you can have a 328 foot run. That's 1.2% of the spec for run length.

 

Do these same phenomenon happen if the cable is 1 foot? 6 inches? If not then what is the magic length? WW sells un-terminated cable. They actually promote their product to installers:

 

[kennyb123]

Yesterday a friend was over and we compared an 8m run of WW Starlight to equivalent lengths of generic CAT5e and of optical fiber.

 

My friend sat in the listening chair in the sweet spot and I sat just off to his left. He selected a song that featured a female singer accompanied by a keyboard and then later a chorus.

 

What I heard surprised me. Her voice could be easily localized with the WW cable as emanating from a point between the speakers.

With the CAT5e her voice got smeared and lost focus. It was no longer emanating from a single point. I wondered if my friend had heard from the center seat, but I kept my mouth shut.

 

We did a few swaps, returning back to the beginning of the song each time. Finally I said: "ok what did you hear?". First words out of his mouth were something like: "with the CAT5e her voice got flattened and smeared, with WW brought it into greater focus". He shared a few more observations. None came as a surprise to me - I heard the same things.

 

With fiber, her voice again returned to the center, matching what we heard with the WW. The differences between the two became more difficult to sort out, but were interesting nonetheless. There was a blacker background with the fiber but maybe also a slight loss of.... well something. It was tough to wrap our heads around it. Was it an added resonance or was just more of something (bloom?) being passed properly? On a Peter Gabriel track, the difference amounted to changing the sense of size of the venue. I could not pick a winner as I wished instead that I could have a solution that combines the best qualities of both. The takeaway for me though was that a fiber solution costing me about $150 was much better than generic CAT5e and pretty much on par with an audiophile cable costing I think around $700 in this length (8m).

 

My goal in sharing all this isn't to convince the naysayers. While many of them have very sound reasons for being skeptical, there are also others who seem to get too much enjoyment from mocking those who report hearing differences in cables. I suspect expensive audiophile cables may be more important to the mockers than to those of us who actually spend large amounts of money on them. LOL

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

[Thinman72]

Yesterday a friend was over and we compared an 8m run of WW Starlight to equivalent lengths of generic CAT5e and of optical fiber.

 

My friend sat in the listening chair in the sweet spot and I sat just off to his left. He selected a song that featured a female singer accompanied by a keyboard and then later a chorus.

 

What I heard surprised me. Her voice could be easily localized with the WW cable as emanating from a point between the speakers.

With the CAT5e her voice got smeared and lost focus. It was no longer emanating from a single point. I wondered if my friend had heard from the center seat, but I kept my mouth shut.

 

We did a few swaps, returning back to the beginning of the song each time. Finally I said: "ok what did you hear?". First words out of his mouth were something like: "with the CAT5e her voice got flattened and smeared, with WW brought it into greater focus". He shared a few more observations. None came as a surprise to me - I heard the same things.

 

With fiber, her voice again returned to the center, matching what we heard with the WW. The differences between the two became more difficult to sort out, but were interesting nonetheless. There was a blacker background with the fiber but maybe also a slight loss of.... well something. It was tough to wrap our heads around it. Was it an added resonance or was just more of something (bloom?) being passed properly? On a Peter Gabriel track, the difference amounted to changing the sense of size of the venue. I could not pick a winner as I wished instead that I could have a solution that combines the best qualities of both. The takeaway for me though was that a fiber solution costing me about $150 was much better than generic CAT5e and pretty much on par with an audiophile cable costing I think around $700 in this length (8m).

 

My goal in sharing all this isn't to convince the naysayers. While many of them have very sound reasons for being skeptical, there are also others who seem to get too much enjoyment from mocking those who report hearing differences in cables. I suspect expensive audiophile cables may be more important to the mockers than to those of us who actually spend large amounts of money on them. LOL

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

Thank you for your balanced reply. My own experience with generic vs audiophile ethernet cable are on par with your findings.

[wgscott]

I think people believe stuff all the time. Doesn't make it so.

 

These are now called "alternative facts." Do try to keep up.

[plissken]

 

With fiber, her voice again returned to the center,

 

Those are real time descriptions but the Ethernet side of it isn't. So here is the question: If you start playback and the vocals are not centered, does removing the cable while the vocals are sung instantly return them to the center? Because it certainly should due to your argument being tantamount to it being an issue of the cable connected regardless if data is flowing on the wire of if the OS has the NIC powered down for 5,6,7 seconds and then back up to fill the buffer.

 

I'm assuming you have a decent playback system or device that has a good 7-20 seconds of buffer.

[NOMBEDES]

These are now called "alternative facts." Do try to keep up.

 

 

 

+1.

 

 

PS: What do you use an ETHERNET cable for? Is it for a home theater system? I only have a 2ch rig no home theater.

[kennyb123]

Those are real time descriptions but the Ethernet side of it isn't. So here is the question: If you start playback and the vocals are not centered, does removing the cable while the vocals are sung instantly return them to the center? Because it certainly should due to your argument being tantamount to it being an issue of the cable connected regardless if data is flowing on the wire of if the OS has the NIC powered down for 5,6,7 seconds and then back up to fill the buffer.

 

I'm assuming you have a decent playback system or device that has a good 7-20 seconds of buffer.

 

I don't understand. If there is a buffer, it should be cleared each time to remove the buffer as a variable. Also, I try to keep test conditions the same by starting the song at the same point each time a swap is made.

 

Also afterwards, when finally sharing findings, it can sometimes be helpful to go back to the same section of the song to see if the findings hold up to greater scrutiny. They usually do, but often additional insight can be gained. Everyone listens for different things. It's fun to compare and contrast findings.

 

You should grab a friend and try some comparisons yourself.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Computer Audiophile

[plissken]

I don't understand. If there is a buffer, it should be cleared each time to remove the buffer as a variable. Also, I try to keep test conditions the same by starting the song at the same point each time a swap is made.

 

If that's the case then you should then remove the sticks of RAM as a variable also. The only variable IS the cable. Everything else is the control.

 

So can you try it? Can you queue up the song, start playback, and have someone remove the inferior cable during playback and see if the vocals come back to center.

 

I can certainly order a WW cable. But I have done so with other cables in the past.