JPS Superconductor V USB Cable Review

[ROOSKIE]

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.

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."

I think folks here grasp what you are laying down my freind.
with that said @Extreme_Boky welcome to the matrix.

It is a pickle, no doubt about it. Bad news is there's no way you can really know if I'm here to help you or not, so it's really up to you. Just have to make up your own damn mind to either accept what I'm going to tell you, or reject it. Candy?

 

[pkane]

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.

What you seem to be missing is the simple explanation that's been repeated thousands of times here on ASR and elsewhere for why we hear differences where there aren't any. Occam's razor says there's no need to invent something new to explain that which has already been demonstrated countless number of times and explains perfectly the faulty perception when proper controls are not used.

 

[Extreme_Boky]

Uninitiated can choose to continue with their sarcasm... it is serving as entertainment.

Remember this paragraph fellas... should read first.

"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."

 

[pkane]

Uninitiated can choose to continue with their sarcasm... it is serving as entertainment.

Remember this paragraph fellas... should read first.

"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."

You're making no sense here. Why would galvanic isolation make one USB cable sound different than another?

 

[Extreme_Boky]

I am waiting now for others to contribute here... all those bullies, full of sarcasm, waiting with their finger on the trigger to cut and chop posts, extract bits and pieces to suit their small miserable egos.

 

[amirm]

"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.

You are saying if you pay more and get galvanic isolation, you are more susceptible to cable differences?

 

[JSmith]

I actually think they are trying not to outright lie, pretty impressive.

Yep, basically my point... some facts interspersed with FUD and misdirection to boot.


JSmith

 

[Extreme_Boky]

You are saying if you pay more and get galvanic isolation, you are more susceptible to cable differences?

Well, not exactly...

Galvanic isolation is great. Otherwise, DAC manufacturers wouldn't be using it... right?

 

[solderdude]

Funnily enough the AP555X input is galvanical isolated.
Galvanic isolation can be handy when ground loops are present. In this case you can hear weird sounds, hum, mouse movements etc.
This can be added to any USB connection with an external device for not too much money anyway.

Why would galvanic isolation 'help' here when there is no groundloop anyway ?

 

[RF Air]

I am waiting now for others to contribute here... all those bullies, full of sarcasm, waiting with their finger on the trigger to cut and chop posts, extract bits and pieces to suit their small miserable egos.

A Polemic Debate has one purpose, and I cede.

 

[voodooless]

Well, not exactly…

Then what? Exactly? And why would DSD matter? And why would the rate matter? What physical mechanism makes them sound differently?

 

[theREALdotnet]

Uninitiated can choose to continue with their sarcasm... it is serving as entertainment.

Hehe, there we go. It’s usually just a matter of time until the cultists slip up and drop their masks.

The “uninitiated” are people like us, who are woefully incapable of hearing the inaudible, with our cloth ears, low resolution systems and closed minds. We’re simply not worthy.

 

[Robbo99999]

All this science and measurement stuff is a passing fad. In time we'll go back to golden ears and expert reviewers for the real story.

Ha, don't say that, but I know you were joking! Don't worry, I'd just had a few drinks last night and was in a contemplative mood!

 

[Robbo99999]

As I noted, there is not time. No mid to high-end DAC uses USB as a power source anyway so I don't think it matters what it does.

Hello,

Okay due to the time crunch it was a data test only.

Sometimes (often) USB cables are used for both power and data at the same time.

Back when I bought a QA401 audio analyzer that was not supplied with a USB cable, so I test drove a couple that were handy. The first one was the USB that came with my APx555 and the other was a USB that came from the surplus store.

See the attached test plots:

Thanks DTView attachment 270310View attachment 270311

Not sure how relevant my following comment is going to be in relation to the little exchange you two are having, but with my current PC I'm using a SoundblasterX G6 DAC (which Amir measured back end of 2019) and that's USB powered - I've also found I need to be careful about which USB port to use on the motherboard in order to avoid what I'd call a constant low level static crackle (a bit like vinyl) - I managed to find a USB port that produced a dead black background (no static crackle).

 

[KSTR]

I am waiting now for others to contribute here... all those bullies, full of sarcasm, waiting with their finger on the trigger to cut and chop posts, extract bits and pieces to suit their small miserable egos.

Just wanted to let you know there are members on this board which, while sharing the same objectivist and measurement-centric views and beliefs, are quite appalled by the discussion style of some. Its a shame.

 

[Purité Audio]

I believe ’we’ are quite restrained in the face of the torrent of uninformed tripe.
Cable manufacturers are either charlatans or at best incompetent.
Keith

 

[DSJR]

I believe ’we’ are quite restrained in the face of the torrent of uninformed tripe.
Cable manufacturers are either charlatans or at best incompetent.
Keith

Keith, did you ever compare the Linn 'Black' and 'Silver' RCA interconnects? I've 'done it' so many times and 'heard' an appreciable difference and others claim to have 'heard' exactly the same... Too much money to buy even used and to ship to Amir but I'd love to see the results, especially if a 'null' test could be done between them

 

[Triliza]

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."

We tend to think audio is special and full of mysteries, have a look at hdmi cables, more bandwidth and they either work or not, regardless of if you spend $10 or $1000. I haven't read any story about deeper contrast and all other stuff you read about audio. It's just damn cables, not a sophisticated EQ device.

Yes people get a tad sarcastic in these reviews, but it would be better if you bothered to examine what the companies that sell all these stuff are offering to back up all their claims, beside meaningless PR talk. Can you post any of their measurements, data, even some documented blind test with two or three of their employees, anything at all. People around here don't take kindly to snake oil, you (the companies) reap what you sow.

 

[dananski]

I am wondering if the usage of the name "Superconductor" implies a product property which is not fulfilled?

Even if it is a superconductor it's about to become obsolete:

Evidence for 'near-ambient' superconductivity found in lutetium hydride – Physics World

Superconductivity has been observed at temperatures up to 20 °C in a nitrogen-doped material

physicsworld.com

 

[caught gesture]

Keith, did you ever compare the Linn 'Black' and 'Silver' RCA interconnects? I've 'done it' so many times and 'heard' an appreciable difference and others claim to have 'heard' exactly the same... Too much money to buy even used and to ship to Amir but I'd love to see the results, especially if a 'null' test could be done between them

For “boutique” cables, the Linn interconnects are cheap. Still more than I would pay. People claim to hear things that don’t exist quite often. Some people hear voices in their head telling them to do despicable things. Almost always their defence in court is some form of insanity.