W and M Interconnects

I find it hard to believe that you have an EE degree and you are designing software protocols for computer chips. It does not make since to me. Seems to me you would have more of a degree in computer science, programming or CIS. I'll have to check with some of my colleagues to see when programming started being taught in any major University Engineering degree program. The simple fact that you cannot speak intelligently of USB cables shows me that you had no business countering my comments as you did. Who gives a crap of whether it is a high speed packetized protocol. The simple fact that a USB was originally designed to and to this day conducts enough current to power a device connected to it makes it a horrible connection for any audiophile device. Heck, lets just design a new digital or analogue interface that will allow us to power our equipment through powered interconnect cables. Then we won't even have to worry about buying good power cables. Would you power your LCD TV with a HDMI Cable that also transmits your audio and video signal? I think not. Heck, you guys might!!! Who knows….

There have been plenty of people who have agreed with me but rather argue on here with people who seem to lack the appropriate credentials trying to back it up with a bunch of B.S. and actually read my rebuttal post, they have instead sent me emails asking me about the cables in person.

Sherod, if you would have taken the time to actually read my rebuttal to the original post Herman made you would seen that I plainly state that if I don't like the cables after I hear them I will plainly say so. I hate people like you who think they can be part of the crowd by posting in the middle of a heated thread without actually reading previous threads. Go read a book or something and educate yourself rather than doing something to make yourself sound stupid.

I have wasted way too much time on this post and I refuse to argue with people like you. No one likes a flamer and all you guys have done is ruin your credibility on Audiogon. Now, excuse me while I "LISTEN" to my extremely nice new cables which sounded "EXTREMELY" transparent and warm directly out of the box. This is the “BEST SOUNDING” cable, out of the box, under $1000 dollars I have ever heard. Happy now you flamers! I can't wait until I am actually used to them. I can't believe I paid so little for such a “FINE SOUNDING" cable. I will be buying from W&M again very soon. I can’t wait until their power cables are ready!!!

Oh no....You know, no one agrees with you Bryan…no one likes you Bryan….My dad can beat up your dad Bryan… You guys are indeed pathetic… Find something else constructive to do with your lives. I am done with this thread period!!!!!!!! Cheers

Forgive me, my intrusion Bryandaws, on your heated debate with Herman. I had thought that these threads were for all members to share their input. Weren't you directing this thread to "all" Audiogon members? Actually, I was kind of making a joke about your initial "review" based on how good they look when you hadn't even listened to them. I totally agree with Herman that this approach was a waste of thread space, but it did build into an interesting debate which I felt compelled to throw in a little joke. Didn't you laugh just a bit? You really do need to take a chill pill and relax. Now that you've supposedly listened to these interconnects and like them, I am happy for you. Would I buy them based on your recommendations,er,"review"? Nope! Not a chance. I get a little queazy anyway when I see cables with ferrite cores built into them. IMHO

Bryan, since credentials seem to be so important may I be so bold as to inquire about yours? Since I know you will ask, I have been involved in electronics at the component level for almost 30 years after working on a wide variety of communication equipment in the military, taught electronics at an associate level for 10 years, and have been repairing medical lasers for the past 15 years. I spend a fair amount of time reading about this topic and discussing it with fellow hobbyists and friends I have in the industry, and then applying what I have learned by building and modifying my own equipment. That doesn’t mean I know everything but I do know you can’t judge a cable by how it looks.

Also, please elaborate on your statement “The simple fact that a USB was originally designed to and to this day conducts enough current to power a device connected to it makes it a horrible connection for any audiophile device.” Since the function of the interface is to transfer digital data to a receiver chip I fail to see any correlation between the amount of current it carries and the sound quality, but I am eager to be enlightened. It seems to me that if the data arrives intact it doesn’t matter if the cable is carrying a micro amp or a mega amp.

"I find it hard to believe that you have an EE degree and you are designing software protocols for computer chips. It does not make since to me."

Then you obviously have no experience in embedded software. Embedded software engineers tend to come from either an EE background or computer science. Embedded software is actually a mix of EE and computer science. The best embedded software team will comprise members with EE degrees and members with computer science degrees.

The power transfer of USB is, as Herman points out, irrelevant. The USB power is transferred on a separate pin, carrying 5vDC. I would not expect any quality USB dac to use this power supply, partly because it is polluted with noise, and partly because it can only supply a couple of watts, which is insufficient. I suspect that it is left open circuit (not connected) on most all USB DACs, and that the DAC has its own separate power supply.

The high speed packetized nature is COMPLETELY RELEVANT, because it means that a USB DAC MUST buffer and reclock the data stream to the DAC, unlike an SPDIF based DAC which can attempt to regenerate its DAC clock from the SPDIF datastream. We all know that using SPDIF for the DAC master clock makes the DAC subject to the jitter in the transport, and is generally regarded as an outdated design. Since USB must reclock this weakness is removed.

So the computer can read data with zero errors, USB will transfer with zero errors, and the data is buffered and reclocked before being presented to the DAC chips ... it sounds like a formula for excellent digital sound. Of course it can be ruined in the execution, but then so can any one box or two box CD player.

We are holding off for a short while on the CD player. We stepped sideways, and slightly up, in "convenient listening" instead. We purchased a "Polk XRt12" XM Radio receiver. We both like it quite a bit, but I can't in "true conscience" call it a "higher end" device. I do not believe that it is a suitable unit for "sorting out" the smaller differences between cables and other gear (at least for the benefit of helping "others" decide on their values, pro and con).
I do notice, however, that the "W and M" cables have a "easy" and "relaxed" presence to them. I have switched back and forth, between some of my other cables, trying to actually "shed" some of that.

Other cables at hand:
* AudioQuest (older, unreadable model)
* MIT 330
* DH Labs BH 2 (Liar's Silver)
* Monster 950 and 1000
* Tranaparent Interlink
The cable listed should not even be in the same league as the W and M. However, "all" have their "individual" positive and negative qualiies.

It is in the "midrange" that they are fairly laid back (not at all "veiled", because the "nuances" are there). They seem very polite and nonirritating. With the new "Onix SP-3" (that is metric TON of "Bloom" and comfortable "tube" sound) coupled with the notoriously "laid back" Genesis 400's, I'm drowning in audio "Whipped Cream".

So far:

* Strong and Heavy low end.
* Reticent, very "polite" midrange
* Very extended, "silky" top end.
* Transparent

The W and M cables are open and extended, allowing the bloom and ease of the "Tubes" (5881/6L6GC X4 .... 12AX7WB x2 .... 6922/6DJ8 x2 .... 12AU7 x2) to show through. They seem to allow the sound qualities of the equipment (that I have now) to show though very well. Images are placed just about where they should be (by past recollection of my older gear and what I can obtain from the existing system). There is a bunch of smearing due to the lack of good input (kinda goes without saying, I quess). Definition and resolution are lacking as well (ditto).

* Note:
I had a bit of a problem w/ imaging earier. It is somewhat resolved. With some different placement of the speakers and the realization that my "front end" sucks, I must live with this little delema for a while.

Positives that stand out:

A Wonderful "top to bottom" response and transparency (yes, I know, "How can YA tell.. Well, there are some notes, at some times that "do" happen and the cable doesn't stop it).

Negatives that stand out:

A bit "too" laid back" for my system (as it stands). "Nothing" that I throw at it (short of FM static) is irritating. Perhaps a "plus" to some" but it tells me that "something, somewhere" is missing (where's my old Klipsch and Sure V15x3 when I need them)

We have Half Asked decided on a new "Onix XCD-99" (for next months CD expenditure). Nothing but good has been said about it (so far) and I just love the Onix SP-3 Integrated amp (maybe just a bit more power would be nice).

I am anxious to get on with more info (to myself, and all A'goners) about what these W and M cables are capable of.

Moron all this later :-)

Tubby