# JPS Superconductor V USB Cable Review

## Rate this USB Cable

• ### 4. Great (golfing panther)

• Total voters
286

##### Active Member
Forum Donor
Musicality is determined by a very simple simple formula:

M = log (DUT price) + P

where:
DUT price is how much you paid, and
P is prestigiousness, measured by referring to YouTube videos and Fremer recommendations
hmm are you sure about the formula?, it means that the difference between a \$10 cable and a \$1000 cable is only 3 points in musicality, may not represent the audiophile expectation. just saying

#### mhardy6647

##### Master Contributor
You can even buy fake Nordost >https://www.aliexpress.com/w/wholesale-nordost.html> I wonder if any of it measures any different to the real thing?
Applying logic to this, the fake Nordosts, if anything, should be better.

There's one born every minute,"
Oh, that should be testable!
It's a Fermi problem. Estimate how many of them are sold per unit time (say, a month), and calculate or estimate the number of minutes in a month.

#### AudioSceptic

##### Major Contributor
Applying logic to this, the fake Nordosts, if anything, should be better.

Oh, that should be testable!
It's a Fermi problem. Estimate how many of them are sold per unit time (say, a month), and calculate or estimate the number of minutes in a month.
Why would we estimate the number of minutes in a month?

#### mhardy6647

##### Master Contributor
Why would we estimate the number of minutes in a month?
If we didn't feel like doing the arithmetic.
Fermi would have been proud of us.

#### RF Air

##### Active Member
Forum Donor
The "listening test" (in particular when it comes to cables that show no or miniscule measured difference) is just to appease the people that ask... "did you listen to it", nothing more really.

It surely is an interesting progression to this new question though.

JSmith
It takes only "one person" to make the case for a response to action. I feel this way every time I am "required" to take my shoes off at the Airport.

#### DonR

##### Major Contributor
It takes only "one person" to make the case for a response to action. I feel this way every time I am "required" to take my shoes off at the Airport.
Just be glad he wasn't called The Underwear Bomber.

#### GPJ

##### Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Screw it for audio use. It's best when used as a printer cable.

The toner or ink drops hit the paper effortlessly, not too hard and edgy, but airy and perfect. It will bring much excitement to your printing experience and make sure you are getting the best out of your precious investment.

This will work for laser as well as inkjet, correct?

Last edited:

#### fpitas

##### Master Contributor
Forum Donor
hmm are you sure about the formula?, it means that the difference between a \$10 cable and a \$1000 cable is only 3 points in musicality, may not represent the audiophile expectation. just saying
Of course. A cable isn't worth owning if it's not \$50k or more.

There's a separate adjustment for cable risers. For technical reasons they really only work with massively expensive cables.

#### audiotron

##### Member
Their Alumiloy Proprietary Conductor High Performance Wire has no datasheet. The wire according to the trademark is ALUMINUM ALLOY how can aluminum alloy be called a Superconductor V wire? Here is the link https://uspto.report/TM/76258715
Low temp superconductor wires are made with niobium-tin and niobium-titanium.

#### theREALdotnet

##### Addicted to Fun and Learning
Of course. A cable isn't worth owning if it's not \$50k or more.

Quite right. If your audio cables didn’t come in a velvet-lined wooden box then that’s a red flag right there.

#### Extreme_Boky

##### Member
JPS Superconductor V USB Cable Listening Tests
I connected the output of the Topping D70s to Topping A90 which in turn drove my Dan Clark Stealth headphones (\$4000). I used the high gain on the A90 to make sure I could hear any difference in background noise. I started with the JPS cable and the sound was as wonderful as I remembered on my standard reference tracks (which I have listened to hundreds of times). I then switched to the generic USB cable. Surprising (not), it sounded louder and more dynamic! I switched back to the JDS USB cable and difference vanished, leaving me with less perceived fidelity. Of course, this not a valid test as the switching time is way too long to allow proper comparison for small differences. But if folks want to run by "what I heard," I heard the generic USB cable sounding "better."

Fellas, Mr Measueremnt himself stated that he could hear the difference, quite easily, repetitively... That simply could not be right!!! Is he saying that despite Mr AP telling us clearly the cables are identical in every regard, he was still able to clearly tell the difference, repetitively?

OMG....

Why? How? The measurements state otherwise. Does that mean that the measurements/measurement environment is not good... and might not be capable of capturing what he clearly heard??

Please, help me understand. It seems, from your sarcastic responses, that you are definitely capable of shedding some light.

#### GPJ

##### Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
Thanks to the member that sent this in and for your testing... but gosh, \$1000 for a USB cable is nothing but highway robbery! I wonder how the owners of JPS sleep at night, really.

JSmith

The shipping insurance both ways would probably cover the cost of 10 of the better generic cables? ... I can't believe I even typed that .....

OP

#### amirm

Staff Member
CFO (Chief Fun Officer)
Why? How? The measurements state otherwise. Does that mean that the measurements/measurement environment is not good... and might not be capable of capturing what he clearly heard??

Please, help me understand. It seems, from your sarcastic responses, that you are definitely capable of shedding some light.
There is nothing sarcastic in my subjective remarks. I routinely perceive differences that would not be real in any kind of controlled test. Such differences for example occur because you forget how the first sample really sounded like. And once bias sets in, the first sample continues to sound worse. Track content also changes over time. As does your listening acuity. Importantly, such tests need to be repeated many times to rule out variations.

Bottom line, just like any subjective reviewer/tester, I perceived differences. My brain concluded things that are not possible based on measurements and what we know about the science and engineering of said cable(s). I truthfully reported those so that people who are in the other camp don't think we deny what they think they "hear." We hear it as well as they do. Difference is that we know the difference is not durable, or reliable.

#### diddley

##### Addicted to Fun and Learning
Forum Donor
thank you Amir keep their heads ringing!

#### PeteL

##### Major Contributor
Come to think of it, I don't ever remember windows shutting down a USB port for overcurrent, ever. Even back in the P4 laptop days running XP.
It would tough, you just happened to hook up device that were designed according to standards, of the era. Windows did shut down USB for overcurrent numerous time on me, but I admit it was a product in dev. Not sure neither if it happened to me with a finished USB product.

#### pseudoid

##### Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Thank you for the review @amirm,
Would you kindly test this cable out to 10Gb/s?
If your test results show minimal insertion loss, I'd be willing to adopt this JPS USB cable.
My latest Z790 PC build has a few USB3.2/Gen2 ports that are probably the only I/F for that cable.
... although I have no other hardware that operates at those data-rates yet!

#### nyxnyxnyx

##### Senior Member
I have a bit of personal story about cables:

There was a time I was a little close with this one guy making relatively fancy/boutique audio cables in my country (I won't name-call for obvious reasons).

He had a background in engineering or something like that and his family has background in traditional music as performers and musicians, he was also a quite active member in the local community and was rumored to have great hearing & some actual trainings. So needless to say that's a convincing background for local audiophiles to trust him greatly, especially when consider that he rarely made any faulty cables.

I visited his lab a few times, he has many different materials to create cables at different price ranges, from "normal" copper to gold-infused OCC coppers and whatever (too many variants I can't recall). The thing is on the forefront he would market his products with many features or characteristics, but they are mostly unproven claims because he does not even have sufficient equipment to test for himself. I didn't want to come off as a more objective audio guy so I asked him questions from both the subjective and objective camps, like how does he verify his claims, how does he know when he finally created a polished product, etc...

The guy answered he used high quality components (like pure silver stuff, mundorf solder....) as the foundation for his product line, but ultimately verify the completeness of his product by listening sessions. It's not volume-matched or blind at all. And all the fancy audio buzzwords he use for his products are merely stuff he read from other (bigger) cable brands but he never got a chance to replicate. I mean, he was talking about cryogenic treatments, active quantum EMI isolation and whatever 2000 IQ techniques to make ultimate HiFi cables like they were government's top secrets.

The funniest thing is he was talking about all that saucy stuff, but he didn't even have a qualifiable rig, let alone an APX555, to actually run tests, and of course, his customers didn't care about that at all. Most of them trusted his expertise.

#### Extreme_Boky

##### Member
There is nothing sarcastic in my subjective remarks. I routinely perceive differences that would not be real in any kind of controlled test. Such differences for example occur because you forget how the first sample really sounded like. And once bias sets in, the first sample continues to sound worse. Track content also changes over time. As does your listening acuity. Importantly, such tests need to be repeated many times to rule out variations.

Bottom line, just like any subjective reviewer/tester, I perceived differences. My brain concluded things that are not possible based on measurements and what we know about the science and engineering of said cable(s). I truthfully reported those so that people who are in the other camp don't think we deny what they think they "hear." We hear it as well as they do. Difference is that we know the difference is not durable, or reliable.

The sarcasm remark was not intended for you, but for many members here who must have sucked all the knowledge and wisdom of this world.... based on the sheer volume and severity of their comments here on these forums, making the environment unpleasant, which is a real shame because I do appreciate the overall content a lot. Not only from you, but from other members who share their tests so willingly, asking for nothing in return.

In the case of USB cables, you performed the tests that quickly have shown there's no difference. The fuel for those who thrive on sarcasm and bullying was provided at next to nothing of a cost.

At the same time, you were able (despite what you are now saying) to clearly hear the difference, which was obvious after performing the listening tests repeatedly.

The bottom line is that you are given the opportunity to create the test environment and create & perform the appropriate set of tests, which will clearly explain what hearing/listening subjective tests are showing, repeatedly.

Re: USB cables, you performed the test that is applicable to... maybe 10% of actual applications. You used a DAC with a galvanically embedded USB card. E.g. the USB card ground fill and the DAC ground fill are sitting on the same potential.

The USB cable will play an infinitely more important task, if you choose a DAC with its USB card (module) that is galvanically isolated from the DAC These DACs are usually much more expensive than the one you used for testing, and the USB cables in question would sound vastly different. Would they measure differently? They SHOULD, in this case... ESPECIALLY at 1024DSD / 1.536MHz rates.

If they don't (measure differently) => the measuring equipment test jig is not used in the appropriate user case/scenario, AND the test-sets are of insufficient ability to capture what we humans can hear.

Last edited:

#### DonR

##### Major Contributor
If they don't (measure differently) => the measuring equipment AND test-sets are of insufficient ability to capture what we humans can hear.
... or the differences heard are imagined.

#### Extreme_Boky

##### Member
Unbelievable, do you even grasp a 1% of what I said:

"The USB cable will play an infinitely more important task, if you choose a DAC with its USB card (module) that is galvanically isolated from the DAC These DACs are usually much more expensive than the one you used for testing, and the USB cables in question would sound vastly different. Would they measure differently? They SHOULD, in this case... ESPECIALLY at 1024DSD / 1.536MHz rates.

If they don't (measure differently) => the measuring equipment test jig is not used in the appropriate user case/scenario, AND the test-sets are of insufficient ability to capture what we humans can hear."

Replies
75
Views
14K
Replies
81
Views
14K
Replies
269
Views
33K
Replies
237
Views
23K
Replies
337
Views
36K