Mr. Audio Bacon himself. An open-minded electrical engineer and software developer by trade. I have an obsession with the enjoyment of all things media - specifically in the realm of music and film. So much heart and soul (and money) go into the creation of this artistry. My aim is to find out which products get me closer to what the musicians and directors intended.
Awesome comparison! Thank you very much. Just like to know your thoughts on the Supra usb cable
Cheers
I haven't heard the Supra USB cable in quite some time but I preferred the Chord SilverPlus over it.
I own the Curious, Chord and Supra. I prefer by far Chord cheaper C-Line, even the Supra.
Curious is a little more detailed but an unnatural sound. I don't know why i still belive in professional reviews, just my fault.
Wasted money.
The Curious surely doesn't have a natural tone. Only resolution. I'll have to listen to the C-Line.
Nice review, and maybe I will get it but there is one cable I don't know if you ever saw it, its QED Reference USB they promote it with very low jitters 12 ps rms.
Cheers
I'll take a look. Thanks, Muataz :)
Very well written review, as someone whom uses the Audience AU 24 SE | Cabledyne Reference Silver | Neutral Reference I [ improved ] Silver USB cables, and was seriously thinking about adding the Lush......, your review has in fact made me realize I've seriously been overlooking the Curious USB cable for far to long. And it's nice to know that its constructed from silver, as most reviews never hinted at what the actual conductor was.
Thanks for being so insightful on all of your reviews, it makes getting through this whole concept behind CA, all that more entertaining.
Regards,
O_o scar Johnson
The great thing about the Lush cable is its ability to layer the sound well, without sacrificing warmth or demolishing your wallet.
Thanks for the review! I'm wondering if you have any thoughts on the Curious cable versus the Nordost Blue Heaven USB cable or even the Audiowuest Carbon?
I have not heard those cables but feel free to send them in :)
Good review, but your breakdown of how USB works is incorrect, pretty much all USB transmission is asynchronous now not isochronous, unless the DAC is really old. Also no need to worry about timing errors or any the waveform problems you wrote about that only applies to spdif not USB. USB is all packets and frames, all are CRC checked and packets discarded if there is an error. The good thing is that rarely happens even with the most grossly noisy and poorly made cables. I'm glad you liked the curious cable, others seem to as well.
Your knowledge of the USB protocol is obviously perfunctory but that's OK, some of the terms are confusing. Isochronous refers to the transfer type and the asynchronous approach essentially refers to the location of the master clock (who controls the clock). Isochronous and asynchronous are mutually exclusive notions.
USB initiates a transfer with a specific device with of one of four types: bulk, control, interrupt, and isochronous. Bulk transfers are not time-critical (USB hard drives) and frames will be retransmitted when an error is detected.
With isochronous transfers, a certain amount of bandwidth is allocated on the host to accommodate the frames/bits required per second by the audio stream. DACs could detect errors but frames will not be retransmitted. But what defines the notion of a "second"? With synchronous USB, the clock resides on the host. With asynchronous USB, the master clock typically resides on the DAC. The DAC tells the host when to send the packets which essentially defines what a "second" means. This way audio data is "packaged" and streamed properly and the DAC never misses a sample. This does not ensure the integrity of those incoming bits, however, it just guarantees a specific rate using the presumably more accurate/consistent master clock on the DAC. There are reasons why external master clocks exist (timing errors) and many have shown these malformed waveforms while measuring these USB cables.
But the malformed waveforms that so many people reviewing cables like to point out rarely the cause of problems in USB communications. In almost all cases the voltages is enough to be distinguished as a 0 or 1 and assembled into the packet. If there was a problem with even one of the bits being flipped the packet would fail the CRC check and be discarded, but that almost never happens. My real point is just pointing out that when you explain to people the idea that a 0 or 1 could be slightly malformed and cause little errors due to the USB cable you are misleading them, because I am sure you are aware that via asynchronous USB the data is not sent as a bitstream, rather as chucks of data or packets. The only thing that matters is that the packet arrives to the DAC fast enough to fill the input buffer. The whole idea of using packets is so that things like time intervals in communication don't matter anymore, the protocol just needs to ensure the packets are delivered with perfect integrity (CRC check) and get there quick enough to fill the buffer. This idea of malformed waveforms has little to no place in USB discussions.
This eye pattern depicts a signal which is not terribly degraded, so that the difference between a "one" and a "zero" is still easy to read if your clock samples the bit at the right point in time -- but the values shown vary enormously for both ones and zeros,and as the effects of return loss and crosstalk and attenuation pile up (by making the cable longer, or of lower quality) this becomes more difficult, and eventually impossible, to do. As you can see, even in this very clean "eye," the value representing a "one" or a "zero" is quite variable, and the transition between them is not sharp and clean, but has a considerable (and variable) slope time.
The clocks also have to sample at the "right" time but this is timing is difficult to achieve.
VERY NICE REVIEW. I HAVE OWNED AND TRIED SEVERAL CABLES- CURIOUS, NORDOST, WIREWORLD
AUDIENCE AND THE LATEST CARDAS CLEAR (CLEAR HS USB)
MY FAVORITE IS THE CARDAS IT HAS GOOD RYTHYM AND TIMING, SOUNDSTAGING, DEPTH AND HEIGHT AND A VERY NEUTRAL TONE
WOULD SUGGEST YOU TRY TO REVIEW
I tried the Cardas vs Audioquest Carbon, Neutral Audio of Italy, and LAT international. The Cardas is easy to listen to. Audioquest definitely more dynamic and vivid, but a little hard on the ears. The LAT is about right between those two, more vivid than Cardas, easier to listen to than the Audioquest.
Based on this review, I would like to try the Lush USB cable. I'm pretty sure the "winners" in these tests will vary somewhat with equipment, but not by much.
Thanks for the review. I have both the Lush and Curious USB and prefer the Lush. I found the Lush to be more detailed than the Curious but in a more even manner. The Curious is indeed more exciting and a bit lean.
Thanks for the revieuw.
Please, could you tell me the difference between the TruStream and the Lush?
Does these 2 cables compare to the Puist 30th ann?
Thank you.
Lush has a richer and denser tone than the TruStream. TruStream is more dimensional and more tonally accurate IMO. Purist 30th doesn't have a deep or full low-end but is silky smooth with proper timbre.The Purist is more detailed and resolving than both the Lush and TruStream, but less warm sounding.
Ok thanks!
Would you describe the Lush as a bit to much dense sounding (for a natural sound)?
Both the TruStream & Lush will add body/weight to the sound, right?
And the Lush would be superior to the Vovox?
Both Lush and Vovox have more body than both the Curious and TruStream trading off depth and resolution. There's a naturalness to the Vovox and most of their stuff just sounds "right" as in what the artist intended (as far as tone and timbre). I feel the Lush is the warmest cable I've ever tested and it colors the sound a bit more with a richer midrange. However, it does have better depth, separation, and layering than the Vovox.
My at home set up has included an iMac with Pure Music, an old but fine Kimber silver USB cable, Chord Hugo TT, Danacable Reference cable, Focal Utopias. I was totally happy then read your review. I auditioned the Curious Cable USB after about 150 hours of break in and am so pleased by the music transformation. All the adjectives other reviewers have used are seconded here. I've not heard the other high end cables you've mentioned but you have opened my ears about the role of the USB cable. Thank you.
View Comments
Nice comparison review!
Hi
Awesome comparison! Thank you very much. Just like to know your thoughts on the Supra usb cable
Cheers
I haven't heard the Supra USB cable in quite some time but I preferred the Chord SilverPlus over it.
I own the Curious, Chord and Supra. I prefer by far Chord cheaper C-Line, even the Supra.
Curious is a little more detailed but an unnatural sound. I don't know why i still belive in professional reviews, just my fault.
Wasted money.
The Curious surely doesn't have a natural tone. Only resolution. I'll have to listen to the C-Line.
Nice review, and maybe I will get it but there is one cable I don't know if you ever saw it, its QED Reference USB they promote it with very low jitters 12 ps rms.
Cheers
I'll take a look. Thanks, Muataz :)
Very well written review, as someone whom uses the Audience AU 24 SE | Cabledyne Reference Silver | Neutral Reference I [ improved ] Silver USB cables, and was seriously thinking about adding the Lush......, your review has in fact made me realize I've seriously been overlooking the Curious USB cable for far to long. And it's nice to know that its constructed from silver, as most reviews never hinted at what the actual conductor was.
Thanks for being so insightful on all of your reviews, it makes getting through this whole concept behind CA, all that more entertaining.
Regards,
O_o scar Johnson
The great thing about the Lush cable is its ability to layer the sound well, without sacrificing warmth or demolishing your wallet.
Thanks for the review! I'm wondering if you have any thoughts on the Curious cable versus the Nordost Blue Heaven USB cable or even the Audiowuest Carbon?
I have not heard those cables but feel free to send them in :)
Good review, but your breakdown of how USB works is incorrect, pretty much all USB transmission is asynchronous now not isochronous, unless the DAC is really old. Also no need to worry about timing errors or any the waveform problems you wrote about that only applies to spdif not USB. USB is all packets and frames, all are CRC checked and packets discarded if there is an error. The good thing is that rarely happens even with the most grossly noisy and poorly made cables. I'm glad you liked the curious cable, others seem to as well.
Your knowledge of the USB protocol is obviously perfunctory but that's OK, some of the terms are confusing. Isochronous refers to the transfer type and the asynchronous approach essentially refers to the location of the master clock (who controls the clock). Isochronous and asynchronous are mutually exclusive notions.
USB initiates a transfer with a specific device with of one of four types: bulk, control, interrupt, and isochronous. Bulk transfers are not time-critical (USB hard drives) and frames will be retransmitted when an error is detected.
With isochronous transfers, a certain amount of bandwidth is allocated on the host to accommodate the frames/bits required per second by the audio stream. DACs could detect errors but frames will not be retransmitted. But what defines the notion of a "second"? With synchronous USB, the clock resides on the host. With asynchronous USB, the master clock typically resides on the DAC. The DAC tells the host when to send the packets which essentially defines what a "second" means. This way audio data is "packaged" and streamed properly and the DAC never misses a sample. This does not ensure the integrity of those incoming bits, however, it just guarantees a specific rate using the presumably more accurate/consistent master clock on the DAC. There are reasons why external master clocks exist (timing errors) and many have shown these malformed waveforms while measuring these USB cables.
But the malformed waveforms that so many people reviewing cables like to point out rarely the cause of problems in USB communications. In almost all cases the voltages is enough to be distinguished as a 0 or 1 and assembled into the packet. If there was a problem with even one of the bits being flipped the packet would fail the CRC check and be discarded, but that almost never happens. My real point is just pointing out that when you explain to people the idea that a 0 or 1 could be slightly malformed and cause little errors due to the USB cable you are misleading them, because I am sure you are aware that via asynchronous USB the data is not sent as a bitstream, rather as chucks of data or packets. The only thing that matters is that the packet arrives to the DAC fast enough to fill the input buffer. The whole idea of using packets is so that things like time intervals in communication don't matter anymore, the protocol just needs to ensure the packets are delivered with perfect integrity (CRC check) and get there quick enough to fill the buffer. This idea of malformed waveforms has little to no place in USB discussions.
My point is that the transition between a zero and a one isn't clean due to the design of the cable. The digital signal has to be treated as more of an analog waveform. https://www.bluejeanscable.com/articles/all-ones-and-zeros.htm
The clocks also have to sample at the "right" time but this is timing is difficult to achieve.
VERY NICE REVIEW. I HAVE OWNED AND TRIED SEVERAL CABLES- CURIOUS, NORDOST, WIREWORLD
AUDIENCE AND THE LATEST CARDAS CLEAR (CLEAR HS USB)
MY FAVORITE IS THE CARDAS IT HAS GOOD RYTHYM AND TIMING, SOUNDSTAGING, DEPTH AND HEIGHT AND A VERY NEUTRAL TONE
WOULD SUGGEST YOU TRY TO REVIEW
I tried the Cardas vs Audioquest Carbon, Neutral Audio of Italy, and LAT international. The Cardas is easy to listen to. Audioquest definitely more dynamic and vivid, but a little hard on the ears. The LAT is about right between those two, more vivid than Cardas, easier to listen to than the Audioquest.
Based on this review, I would like to try the Lush USB cable. I'm pretty sure the "winners" in these tests will vary somewhat with equipment, but not by much.
Thanks for the review. I have both the Lush and Curious USB and prefer the Lush. I found the Lush to be more detailed than the Curious but in a more even manner. The Curious is indeed more exciting and a bit lean.
Thanks for the revieuw.
Please, could you tell me the difference between the TruStream and the Lush?
Does these 2 cables compare to the Puist 30th ann?
Thank you.
Lush has a richer and denser tone than the TruStream. TruStream is more dimensional and more tonally accurate IMO. Purist 30th doesn't have a deep or full low-end but is silky smooth with proper timbre.The Purist is more detailed and resolving than both the Lush and TruStream, but less warm sounding.
Ok thanks!
Would you describe the Lush as a bit to much dense sounding (for a natural sound)?
Both the TruStream & Lush will add body/weight to the sound, right?
And the Lush would be superior to the Vovox?
Both Lush and Vovox have more body than both the Curious and TruStream trading off depth and resolution. There's a naturalness to the Vovox and most of their stuff just sounds "right" as in what the artist intended (as far as tone and timbre). I feel the Lush is the warmest cable I've ever tested and it colors the sound a bit more with a richer midrange. However, it does have better depth, separation, and layering than the Vovox.
My at home set up has included an iMac with Pure Music, an old but fine Kimber silver USB cable, Chord Hugo TT, Danacable Reference cable, Focal Utopias. I was totally happy then read your review. I auditioned the Curious Cable USB after about 150 hours of break in and am so pleased by the music transformation. All the adjectives other reviewers have used are seconded here. I've not heard the other high end cables you've mentioned but you have opened my ears about the role of the USB cable. Thank you.