Wireworld Starlight USB vs. Nordost Blue Heaven USB

[barrows]

"Why can't DACs be designed with a big buffer that can be always kept full and that buffered data is fed to a dac at the precise rate with zero jitter, problem solved."

 

Dave: your above description describes exactly how asynchronous USB DACs operate. The problem is, they are still not "perfect" and the USB cable does make a difference.

 

I am not sure where you are coming from with your posts at Comuter Audiophile? This is a generally friendly and open minded forum: on the one hand, I get the feeling from you that you think you know something that everyone else here does not? On the other hand, most of your statements which refer to anything in particular seem to indicate a general lack of understanding of many of the princibles of high end computer audio playback. If you have some knowledge which you would like to share, based on some real experiences, please be transparent with that knowledge in the hope that we can all learn from you, if not, please choose to be open minded, and consider the actual real listening experiences of others.

It is a widely accepted point of view that USB cables make a significant difference in sonic performance, even with asynchronous USB DACs (even the designers of such DACs accept this reality, like Gordon Rankin of Wavelength Audio, and Charlie Hansen of Ayre). Additionally, most designers and audiophiles accept that they do not know why (for certain) these cables make a difference, but the differences are significant enough that they cannot be ignored.

If you have some relevant experience with which you can enlighten us, please share it-but understand that there are some very experienced folks here and ignoring the validity of their experiences is rather insulting, and will degrade the value of any real world experience that you might care to share.

 

[barrows]

"BTW, I am not picking a fight. I just get upset when people are made to believe they need to buy very expensive stuff that makes no difference. I do not doubt that the writer of this review believes every word he writes. He is simply wrong / influenced / misinformed, and because of that, NOT a liar!!!"

 

Please see the above post. I have not been made to believe anything. I come to my own conclusions based strictly on the performance of the cables in my system. If you have some real world experience to share with the community, please do so. Otherwise, please refrain from disrespecting the experiences of others, who do take the time to test, listen, and post their point of view.

 

 

 

[thesurfingalien]

I apologize for the "made to believe" remark. As I wrote to Chris, I should have written "led to believe".

 

I state there is nothing to test. If a cable introduces any defect in the stream of data, it will be dealt with by means of either error rejection (the 1 ms. silence) or error correction (no audible effect). The differences in sound you experienced simply can not be caused by cables.

 

Regards,

Peter

 

 

 

[thesurfingalien]

Hi Chris,

 

Sorry for my late response.

 

First of all, I see your point about the "made to believe" statement. I should have written "led to believe". My apologies for that.

 

Second, I am not starting a flame war, and I do have solid reasoning behind what I write, not just opinions.

 

About the interference part. I mean basically anything shielding of a cable can take care of and might(!) influence the analogue part of the DAC. I probably should not have mentioned this in the first place as it is a non-issue.

 

Chris, I am not completely sure what you mean by "time-sensitive", but in effect all digital information that needs to be sent from A to B is time sensitive. In that respect digital audio is no different from any other type of data. In fact, there are no differences as long as it stays in the digital domain.

 

Regardless of the specific protocol used (for USB-capable DAC's it usually is Isochronous Transfer Mode, but there are some DAC's that use others), every packet is accompanied by CRC data that allows the receiving end to check if the packet contains errors. In Isochronous mode, a packet that has an error will be dropped, resulting in a 1 millisecond silence. If another protocol is used, the receiving end will ask the sending end to re-transmit the packet.

 

If I am unclear or in error, please let me know.

 

Regards,

Peter

 

[thesurfingalien]

I fail to see your point about the receiver chip needing to work harder (or less hard for that matter depending on the cable used), and how that will result in power supply fluctuations.

 

And about me thinking... I think I do, therefore I think :-)

 

BTW, you did not mistaken "think" with "drink", did you :-)

 

Regards,

Peter

 

 

 

[wgscott]

Any relation to TheSurfingAlien?

 

[thesurfingalien]

Hi wgscott,

 

Yep, same one :-)

 

 

 

[barrows]

"First of all, I see your point about the "made to believe" statement. I should have written "led to believe". My apologies for that.

 

Second, I am not starting a flame war, and I do have solid reasoning behind what I write, not just opinions."

 

Neither have I been "led to believe", my findings are based on actual differences in these cables in my system.

"Solid reasoning" is no substitute for actual real world observations of the cables in question. "Solid reasoning" also allowed people to believe that the world was flat.

 

Some very experienced engineers have speculated about the possible reasons for the differences in performance of USB cables on other threads at this site. If you would like to become educated, I suggest that you do some searches and read up a little.

 

 

 

[thesurfingalien]

Hi!

 

Just for my understanding... Do you think the DAC receives other data than the computer sent to it?

 

Regards,

Peter

 

[barrows]

clearly you have not taken my suggestion to educate yourself, additionally, you apparently have no real world experience with this topic. Hence I will no longer respond to any of your posts until such time as you appear to have learned something.

 

As the OP of this thread, I suggest that we get back on topic at this point.

 

[elcorso]

More aliens? I think I was the only one (at least in Computer Audiophile)!

 

Regarding manufacturer markup: I was, and still am, in some land developing, I can buy some large piece of land to partitions and sell by lots. Imagine, I can buy the land at $5/meter, and resell it at $500 e.o. Somebody could think I'm making 'golden nails' But, I spend 2 to 3 years in research finding the right land: correct location, water & power supply, soil type, allowed uses from the county, marketing, etc. Then, since this is a big land I need financing from the local banks, if they want to finance me. I have also to build the streets, parks for recreation, water (source & drains), power, telephone and cable/internet distribution. Then It comes the advertising (very expensive by the way), and finally to pay commission for the intermediary. Need also a risk policy, if something goes wrong two years after the sale.

 

What will be my markup? Go to figure, I had good look with the sale (they don't take too long time), maybe a 20%, if there is recession (like those crazy days), if I get 5% I'll be happy (or I could broke, if I don't pay the banks dept).

 

Hi End music industry is very small (with a lot of small companies), if your DAC (in the example) has a $5,000 retail price, what many DAC's you will sell? No to much, but you have to put in a very nice case (for this price), and case factories will charge too much for an small production, or build your own. Then the case will cost you much more than $100. Then comes the time you spent in research and design, and, when you finally think your have a great product, the competence announce a better (and maybe cheaper) one, because of new chip was developed.

 

Most of the Hi End music manufacturers has in common one thing: Passion for music. And this is a hard to find in the whole world industry!

 

Right now this alien has to go to K-Pax and leave this thread also.

 

Regards,

 

Roch

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

"Chris, I am not completely sure what you mean by "time-sensitive", but in effect all digital information that needs to be sent from A to B is time sensitive."

 

 

Hi Peter - What I mean is two-fold. Time sensitive audio data is not identical to time sensitive file copies. Retries aren't an issue when copying files and as you suggest it's possible to have a 1ms dropout with audio. That's where I was coming from with the time sensitive comment. Also, when audio data includes a clock signal issues are much larger. Async USB is a great step forward with clocking taking place at the DAC. Adaptive has to adjust to the incoming clock signal. My hard drive doesn't have to adjust to a 12MHz USB bus clock and synthesize a new clock from that.

 

That's all I was getting at.

 

 

 

[thesurfingalien]

Hi Chris,

 

Thanks for our explanation. However, I am not sure if I should continue this discussion as it seems I have aggravated / upset the OP enough to trigger the response he gave me.

 

Kind regards,

Peter

 

[thesurfingalien]

After reading your post again I have just one question. And this time I insist on an answer from you:

 

Who decides weather or not I appear to have learned something?

 

Kind regards,

Peter

 

[The Computer Audiophile]

Hi Guys - The following isn't directed at anyone specifically.

 

This thread isn't what Computer Audiophile is all about. Good spirited banter and professionalism from both sides of an issue, without headache causing comments, is always welcome. This one, and the current thread about 24/96 or 24/192 have gone off the rails.

 

It's time to put these threads to rest. Everyone relax a bit and turn up the volume to your favorite tunes.