Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles
Stephen, then I believe what you are saying is that Shunyata engineering is significantly better than AQ in respect to USB cable design and manufacturing. I don't believe this to be the case. If you are not maintaining this then precisely what are you saying? Is Shunyata using some special formula or manufacturing process that elevates the bottom tier Venom above the Diamond? Or is the Diamond defective? I doubt this seriously. In addition, implementation of a design is as important as the design. A large company with a large budget that is as dedicated to cable design as is AQ has significant cost and engineering advantages over a smaller company like Shunyata that is trying to manufacture a similar product. Understand I could I am sure live and be very satisfied with a Sigma USB but you are, in a very sophisticated way, panning AQ. On the one hand you praise the Diamond. On the other it is inferior in your system and to your ears to a bottom tier Venom. Perhaps I am incorrect or have misunderstood.
I think the key here is the phrase "in my system" but I doubt that your preference of the Venom over the Diamond would be the case generally in most folks systems. Certainly I don't believe it would be in mine.
Respectfully,
Charles
|
Hi Charles, I'll answer your questions point-by-point below since you touch on many topics, and respectfully, I'm not sure we're aligned on the specific points I'm making.
1)
....I believe what you are saying is that Shunyata engineering is significantly better than AQ in respect to USB cable design and manufacturing.
I think very highly of both companies (I use products from both companies; see below). In my view, Shunyata has oustanding scientific and engineering core competencies and knows how to implement superior design embodiments when it comes to products that reduce all manner of noise components and concomitantly maximize signal and signal integrity. Do I think Shunyata Research does this better than anyone else? I haven't heard all other companies' comparable products, so I can't say, but with respect to the USB cable products I have heard, yes, I think Shunyata Research's USB cable products are superior to AQ's existing product portfolio.
Do I think the Shunyata Venom is significantly better than the AQ Diamond USB? No. But, in my system, I prefer it. That is not at all to say the AQ Diamond is not a good-sounding USB cable, its an excellent-sounding USB cable. I just happen to prefer the Venom.
Do I think the Shunyata Alpha USB is better than the AQ Diamond? Yes, and in my system and experience, significantly so.
2)
Or is the Diamond defective?
The Diamond is absolutely not defective, its a great-sounding cable. Its been my reference standard for the better part of 5 years.
3)
Is Shunyata using some special formula or manufacturing process that elevates the bottom tier Venom above the Diamond?
No, there's not special formula, or pixie dust or other frou-frou. Shunyata uses sound, scientifically-based engineering that is based on a deep understanding what is important at a
transfer function level as to what design, materials, construction topology and methodology results in a
fuctional response that results, in my experience, a more musical, transparent, spacious, quiet, accurate, and harmonious-sounding cable in the presence of noise factors than the AQ Diamond. They publish patents on their foundational core competencies that are used in their product development. I read and can understand their patents.
4)
In addition, implementation of a design is as important as the design.
Yes, I know. As a Design for Six Sigma Master Black Belt, I used to
teach this stuff to scientific and engineering teams that were transferring R&D designs into operations. This is one of the reasons that good design teams utilize techniques like Taguchi Robust Design in transferring development projects into Operations. With respect to manufacturing processes: No, there's no magic: Shunyata's products are based on implementing and ensuring good manufacturing operations that are based on process capability (Cp/Cpk), capability analysis, and putting manufacturing of products and processes into
statistical process control.
I am confident, given the consistency of quality I've experienced in their products, that Audioquest does the same thing, in one form or another. They couldn't make as many products as they do and remain profitable if they didn't.
5)
On the one hand you praise the Diamond. On the other it is inferior in your system and to your ears to a bottom tier Venom. Perhaps I am incorrect or have misunderstood.
I didn't say the Diamond was "inferior"; its a excellent-sounding cable and I have stated that several times. I said I prefer the Venom in my system; to my ears and with my components and configuration, it sounds better. You may not agree, and that's fine, too.
6)
....but you are, in a very sophisticated way, panning AQ.
That is absolutely not the case, whatsoever. Audioquest is an excellent company that makes fine products, is environmetally and socially-conscious and they have an excellent reputation for the values they hold for their employees. They provide excellent customer service and stand by their products. For example, I recently contacted AQ about some DBS units that had turned waxy and dirty from the type of plastic they used in molding them. They acknowledged a batch of these had this failure mode, and shipped out four replacement DBS units to me at no charge whatsoever. The manner in which they handled this customer quality problem was absolutely first-class.
That is excellent customer service.
Audioquest make an excellent range of products, from the "entry-level" all the way up to the "high-end". Virtually no one else makes such broad a range of products at the various price tiers to compare to with Audioquest's, and, in my experience, each step up in price class delivers a concomitant increase in performance, providing value for money.
I think Auqioquest is a great company that makes and most importantly stands by, their excellent products. This is why my
entire loom of interconnects in my main 2-channel stereo is Audioquest Columbia and Colorado RCA ICs. I also use an AQ Big Sur 3.5mm-3.5mm in my car to connect to my Astell & Kern and another Big Sur 3.5 to RCA to connect my Astell & Kern to my main stereo. I use an Audioquest Cinnamon Ethernet cable to connect my EoP Adapter to my upstream FMC. Lastly, I use an Audioquest Coffee USB to connect my Schiit Modi Uber to my Mac Mini for my headphone setup. So, respectfully, I think to infer that I'm panning AQ, however sophisticatedly, is inaccurate.
Lastly, I think folks here that have known me since 2012 will affirm that, as a scientist my entire life, I don't have an agenda. I am strictly data-driven and make my decisions objectively on everything I use based on empirical testing and evaluation, whether its cameras, cars, watches (for example, I happen to be of the view that the Swiss watch industry cannot match the German watch industry when it comes to providing functionality and quality at a given price point), DNA sequencers, or audio equipment. I use whatever works the best that fits within my budget for that class of product.
Cheers and regards,
Stephen aka PC