So is an "Audiophile" USB cable a thing or not?
Yes they are a thing but this one doesn't qualify; cool but not that fancy, expensive but not ridiculously, not a single magical property.
The Supra Excalibur line gets more close to it but still doesn't have any magical property and it's not expensive enough.
Jokes aside, here's another interesting USB Audio cable from QED:
New for 2020 comes an improved and updated QED Reference High Resolution USB cable with a slimmer more flexible profile and enhanced performance.
www.qed.co.uk
I wouldn't buy this one either of course, it's double or so the price of the Supra.
But it does have what I was looking for and more:
Ferrite Insulation™ Technology
QED Reference High Resolution USB features a unique integral Zn/Mn floating, ferrite jacket. Using a proprietary process, QED has been able to distribute this radio frequency absorbent material evenly throughout the cable by means of a specially impregnated inner jacket. It is included to absorb high frequency noise signals generated both internally and externally. It works to create a much quieter electrical environment in and around the cable so that jitter within the audio data stream is minimized.
This means no need for the beads.
Super cool but my PC is one of the noisiest source I've ever seen, probably the worst on earth; if a 25€ cable with beads can get along with it, paying 5 times the price for this seems overkill.
This is a similar solution as Supra:
Clean Path Audio™ Technology
Many audio enthusiasts feel that running USB power cables carrying charging currents and PC power supply noise alongside the isochronous audio data stream can have an adverse affect on sound quality. One answer is to remove the power cables altogether but this deviates from the USB specification and can cause inconvenience, especially if the DAC electronics require USB power. Instead, QED Reference data lanes are uniquely electrically isolated by using a double layer shield comprising a 100% aluminium/mylar wrap and shield braid connected to ground.
But if you look at the section of the cable the Supra has a double shielding while this one only shields the power pairs.
Using the words "many audio enthusiasts feels" instead of "our testing confirmed that" makes me feel maybe there's more magic than else.
Anyway Supra wins at half the price.
Same obsession for impendace:
Impedance Controlled Data Lane
QED Reference High Resolution USB uses a tightly controlled, 24 AWG, 99.999% oxygen-free copper twisted-pair featuring low-permittivity, foamed-polyethylene dielectrics, which is uniformly bound by an aluminium/mylar wrap. This arrangement is similar to that used in our high performance HDMI cables and is not usually found in a USB cable. Because the impedance of the data lane is kept strictly within defined limits of 90 Ω +/- 5% with a rise time of just 100 ps for a 3 m cable, it exceeds the specification given in the USB 2.0 standard by more than half; therefore the timing error or jitter added to the isochronous data stream is kept to a minimum. This has the effect of increasing the enjoyment of actually listening to music being conveyed by the cable to an extent large enough for it to be statistically significant in listening tests conducted in our bespoke listening facilities.
Here as well they seems to loose against Supra as they declare a 5% tolerance which is half the required one.
Can't judge how important it is but from my understanding the capacitance is compensated by the protocol.
For sure doesn't hurt but I feel it may be not a critical issue to resolve.
Again same obsession for jitter:
Ultra-low Jitter Geometry
When measured using an eye pattern analyser at the correct data rate for high bandwidth USB 2.0, the cable exhibits 50% less jitter than a comparable cable without the ferrite jacket. This shows conclusively that the combined technologies of impedance controlled data lanes, electrically isolated power conductors and floating ferrite jacket have the effect of halving the cable induced jitter present in the digital transfer layer between source (digital music server) and sink (DAC or other digital music interface). Because USB audio is delivered in an isochronous data stream in real time, it is thought that ultra-low jitter components distributed throughout the digital data pathway will result in an audible improvement in sound quality. Certainly, in listening tests, QED Reference High Resolution USB cable with the ferrite jacket and other technology was preferred to samples without the jacket
At least they mention an eye pattern, which would have been nice if published, and a 50% improvement due to the ferrite jacket.
I didn't see any jitter improvement using the beads but maybe either their solution is superior or I can't measure it.
Could be the effect of less noise coming in the data pathway.
If jitter is a worry for you could be a thing; if that's the case I would anyway first buy a DAC with asynchronous transfer.
Wouldn't say there's a winner here.
There's also a funny "High Resolution Audio" chapter which, due to the language used, doesn't seem appropriate for this audience.
. I've scrapped some and AFAIK, they are correcly executed/shilelded as per USB standards (tinned copper, connected double shielding etc.) Also their Toslink cables are pretty flexible.
