Topic: Sparrow vs Electrum for desktop (Read 1754 times)

Usually I take my  time to update and, thus ,missed 1.8.3  but  new release was not be long in coming. v. 1.8.4 is available on the official github

• "Fix Monocle build issue in Sparrow Terminal release"
• "Show PGP primary key fingerprint in Signed By field tooltip"

Sparrow morphs into king of the soft wallets.

This is not exactly true as Electrum wallet has a whole section for Lightning Network and Sparrow wallet have no such thing.
I like Sparrow design more especially with transaction graph, and they can support coinjoin third party wallet integration, while you can't find such thing in Electrum.
Sparrow has better support for hardware wallets and signing devices, so there are pros and cons for both wallets, and they can be both used at the same time.
I think Lightning is going to be more important in future, and Sparrow developers should consider adding it.

the Sparrow wallet version 1.8.3 was released today
numerous new things have been integrated as well as various bug fixes are available
you can find the whole changelog in the following link:
https://github.com/sparrowwallet/sparrow/releases/tag/1.8.3

and under this link you can download the latest version for your os:
https://sparrowwallet.com/download/

Because descriptors are more flexible than just private keys.

To import private key in Sparrow you may wrap that private key into the relevant descriptor and build a new wallet using that descriptor.

I have just did it using descriptor for xprv9s21ZrQH143K3QTDL4LXw2F7HEK3wJUD2nW2nRk4stbPy6cq3jPPqjiChkVvvNKmPGJxWUtg6Ln F5kejMRNNU3TGtRBeJgk33yuGBxrMPHi shown by achow101


Yeah, Electrum (default) and Sparrow differ in the ways they generate their SEED. There are pros and cons in both ways which were intensively discussed in this thread. and in comments on github. Concerning my personal view, I'm sympathiser of BIP 39, largely because it is standard for hardware wallets used by me for the stash  storing and management. Besides, I don't like Electrum's potential of  using the custom words list when creating the SEED. Weak SEED could result in the stash lost.

Yes in electrum you can import and export private keys. I have asked in Sparrow support chat for a relevant feature, but they don't consider it a feature and, honestly, I understand why.
In fact, I support cold storage options and airgapped devices, so I never needed to know the exact private keys for backup.
Of course I have used both for hot storage too, but even with Electrum, I never needed to export my private keys. Just the mnemonic can do the job.
What I like about electrum though, is that it allows you to import (not only to sweep) a private key, essentially creating a hot wallet out of a single private key and a single address.
This feature is good, but of course it has many flaws, unless you know what you are doing.
The flaws include:
1. backup difficulty - storing private keys in WIF is difficult and not encouraged.
2. address reuse - possible privacy issues
3. compatibility - I think only electrum and bitcoin core support it.

I've already used both wallets, what I can say is that everything Electrum offers, Sparrow also offers.

The only negative point is the issue of the sparrow UI, I think that these large bluish selections don't match the rest of the wallet's design, I found it very contrasty.

However, electrum lets users export private keys, whereas in sparrow you must depend on a third party (iancoleman etc) to see a private key if you need it.

Electrum has a more dated look, but I like minimalism and retro, Electrum's UI reminds me of those old password manager software.

Let me bring this topic up again. You have been very helpful so far and now I come with another question.
When you create a wallet with Sparrow, it allows you to import an Electrum keystore.
When you create a wallet with Electrum, it allows you to import a BIP39 seed phrase.
So essentially, if I get it correctly, both these wallets allow you to import a seed phrase, no matter if it's a BIP39 one, or an Electrum one, but they only generate one of the two.
Having said that, the creation of the seed phrase is by definition a difference between the two wallets.
Having read this topic on stacker.news and also having read this topic here on bitcointalk, I have come to a conclusion that BIP39 has some disadvantages that electrum seed phrases don't. Most importantly, the lack of versioning.
I know that the majority of people use BIP39 because most wallets are compatible with it. What are your thoughts?

Sparrow creates wallets in the new, descriptor-type format, which is extremely flexible for scripting and at the same time very handy at their transferal and/or backup/restoring.

Electrum (at the moment) uses the old, key-based wallet architecture, which seems will get oblivion as the time passes.

Besides, Sparrow's GUI is more straightforward and easy to use.

I didn't search a lot. I don't have access to my computer since the beginning of the year and I thought about asking it here.

I have never used this option with Sparrow.

Nevermind, I have found it thanks to the previous answer.

The problem with OP_RETURN still remains with Sparrow though.

Don't tell me that you figured out how to spend to multiple addresses in Electrum but you failed to do that in Sparrow wallet because I found it hard to do that in Electrum and also I remember that you liked the UI and UX of Sparrow.
P.S. Thanks to @satscraper for explanation but I'll leave the images down below for those who might have the same question and need a graphical guidance.

Yeah, Sparrow has such build-in feature. Tools --> Send To Many

You can fill up to 100 addresses in Send to Many subwindow, setting relevant  amounts to them  as well as assigning  labels to  those addresses according  your needs.

I'm using this feature, very handy at batch payments.

Has anyone ever paid multiple addresses at once using Sparrow? I know batch payments are a thing in electrum, but is there the same capability in Sparrow? Thanks

Sparrow is great wallet which I use in my daily routine to connect my Passport 2 to my Bicoin Core node.

The GUI is cool but what I really miss in it is the OP_RETURN field in the SEND tab.

I'm not alone who would appreciate such  field but craigraw is reluctant to add it saing he don't see good reasoning for adding it into GUI.

If that field was introduced I would pgp-encrypt my SEED, convert it into hex code and embedded it  into blockchain.

P.S. Electrum allows to add OP_RETURN output in transaction.

Yes, Sparrow does that very nicely while Electrum is confusing.

No, it's not only user friendly for those who use hardware wallets, it's user-friendly for everyone. Just take Electrum and Sparrow and put them next to each other. Sparrow outperforms Electrum in every possible way. Do you want to see a map of your transactions? Sparrow has a visually good map tree. It has many settings and features. I think that visually, aesthetically, Sparrow is superior. Electrum just reminds me very basic windows xp software.

Hi. Can you be more specific on where you get these permission issues?

Also, have you configured the "persistent storage"? Have you rebooted after enabling the persistent storage?

Has anyone installed the Sparrow wallet with the Tails operating system yet? I know Sparrow are working in other Linux distros like Redhat/Ubuntu/Debian and CentOS, so it should also work with Tails (Persistent volume enabled)

Tails does work on Electrum and even came with it as a default crypto wallet in some versions of it.

I get "permission" problems when I try to use Sparrow with Tails. 

That vulnerability was detected in that version but the current version Electrum-4.5.2 is secure and you can use it without any fear. Also, since the Electrum wallet is open source, if there were any "Surprises", they would have been known or "Discovered" by now. Electrum wallet is one of the most secure wallets out there.



Sparrow wallet may be user friendly for those who are using the hardware wallets, but how about people who only want to use it as a desktop wallet and do not connect it to the hardware wallet.
Electrum wallet desktop version provides all these features like RBF etc and if you have been using Electrum for a long time (like me) and are comfortable with it, it takes time to switch to Sparrow.

This is indeed a contributing factor to choose Sparrow. It has a simpler UX in my opinion. And I love how it explains the whole transaction process to the end user. As I said above, I have used both and I still use both. I can't really choose but if you put a gun to my head and ask me to choose only one, I would do a deep research to check the security features of both. If they proved to be equal, I would choose Sparrow for its UI and UX.

Hm, secure.

Do you know that up to 4.2.2 version Electrum had backdoor that allowed hackers  to penetrate into users wallets and make with them any things they want. And all of this was due to   to the  lack of integrity in wallets' code. No one knows how many similar "surprises"  are still lurking inside this wallet.

More on that:

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63228785

https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.63230916

I think that Sparrow's features matter for normal users because those who use hardware wallets, most likely have the idea about UTXOs, transaction fees, RBF, double spend and so on. So, Sparrow has just many features with a very good interface, it looks like an upgraded version of Electrum in every aspect. Overall, I would vouch for Sparrow but to be honest, I have no idea how secure it is. I only use Electrum because it's one of the oldest and secure wallet that also has android version.

Probably the issue is hidden in Krux camera and relevant software.

And what about pairing Krux with Electrum?

I tested both Specter and Sparrow to check their performance at being pairing with Passport 2 and Sparrow seemed to me runs on steroids. Thus, I have selected Sparrow.

Sparrow wallet is great alternative for Electrum wallet and it's even better for connecting with hardware wallets and signing devices.
However during my testing with Krux signing device had some issues with my camera that was not detected in wallet so it was not working with Sparrow QR codes, and I had to use Specter wallet instead.

Contrary to Electrum which is  based on the old key-centered architecture Sparrow has acquired  the new descriptor-centred-architectonics which gave him many advantages particularly in interacting with other descriptor-based-wallets to transfer seamlessly the most  types of addresses between them in both directions.

I get your point. To be honest I use both.

Sparrow connects straight to Bitcoin Core, whereas Electrum requires an Electrum Server. I run a full Bitcoin node and an Electrum Server, so to be honest, both wallets can work for me fine.

If I couldn't install an Electrum server then the only option I had would be Sparrow. Because for me, connecting to my own node is the only hard requirement I have. I would never connect to other nodes to use a desktop wallet.

Apart from that, I like Sparrow's UI and UX more than Electrum's but this is subjective and it only applies because both the wallets are top notch, so the determining factor is the UI and the UX. If there were security issues with one of them, then I would have stronger arguments  

Anyway, both wallets are great, now that I have used them for quite a while.

I have noticed more people are favoring Sparrow wallet here as compared to the Electrum wallet. The reason may be it offers better Advanced features but does the normal end user care about these features?

I guess, generally speaking, people are more aware of the Electrum wallet as compared to the Sparrow wallet. Also, if we survey the users or check the downloads of both wallets (If it is possible), I guess the Electrum wallet may lead in the more popular wallet used by the average Bitcoin users as compared to the Sparrow Wallet.

I am in no way denying some of the good features offered by the Sparrow wallet, but only comparing the popularity of both wallets and Electrum leads here.

Sparrow has been elevated to 1.8.2 version in today's release.

Among new features brought by this release Sparrow has acquired  three the most noticeable  (in my view) traits

• "Support creating wallets from descriptors containing master xprvs"
• "Support reading QRs containing revised BC-UR tags in the 40000 range, including v3 output descriptors"
• "Add the calculated master fingerprint to the passphrase entry dialog in Sparrow Terminal"

As always new release has fixed a few bugs that were inherent to previous versions.

Sparrow continues to  strengthen its wings.

I like the increase of subwindow for QR dialog implemented by Sparrow in the preceded 1.8.0.  I use QR to pair Sparrow with Passport 2 and should say that with such increased subwindow the code reading is much faster and less dependent on the ambient light illumination. Heretofore, the pairing was (sometimes) painful process and required much patience.

the new Sparrow wallet 1.8.1 update released today includes the following new functions, among others:

• fee rate estimation from http://oxt.me
• export transactions with historical values
• wider range in fee range slider

you can see the complete changelog as well as the two download and github links below:
https://sparrowwallet.com/download/
https://github.com/sparrowwallet/sparrow/releases/tag/1.8.1

Since I was the OP I want to add one more argument in favour of Sparrow. I have tried communicating with the Devs, just to see their reactions and how easy it is to approach them. With Sparrow it was incredibly easier. I count this as a very important factor.

Great to see support for more hardware wallets!
Sparrow is getting more serious with every new release, and in spme ways it is even getting better than Electrum wallet.

today the 1.8.0 version of the sparrow wallet was released. among other things, the following features were added:

• transaction diagram captions
• larger and denser qr display
• search all open wallets
• airgapped message signing
• Satochip and Krux support

the download and the complete changelog can be found under the following links:
https://sparrowwallet.com/download/
https://github.com/sparrowwallet/sparrow/releases/tag/1.8.0

Yep, now that the framework for BIP157/BIP158 is in Core, filters served by a coordinator would be better served by the Bitcoin network for availability and reliability.

Unfortunately the list of the light clients which have off-the-shelf wheels to  add relevant Bloom filters are very limited at the current moment, neither Sparrow nor Electrum are in that list. Besides improvements in privacy such filters help in reducing of wallet's loading  time which is not the  last thing especially when working via TOR. Wasabi, indeed, has  turbosynch mode that implements block filters according to  BIP 157&158 but as far as I know they are provided by coordinator which is controversial matter, at least for me.

Interesting and thank you for these details. More stuff to read, digest and hopefully understand. There is one thing with crypto that's for sure: there's always something new to learn and stuff you haven't heard of pops up almost daily or weekly. It dawns me, it's supposed to be that way, isn't it!

You can retain your privacy as a light client by using BIP157/BIP158 block filters instead.  Wasabi Wallet, Blixt, and Breez all use this technology: https://bips.xyz/157 , https://bips.xyz/158

a few hours ago a new version of the sparrow wallet was released. with the 1.7.9 version there are again numerous fixes as well as some new features/upgrades like e.g.

• wallet accounts summary dialog
• keystore labels in descriptor QRs
• rename labelled UTXOs by changing matching related transaction labels
• HWI v2.3.1

the complete changelog can be found in the github link below:


https://sparrowwallet.com/download/
https://github.com/sparrowwallet/sparrow/releases/tag/1.7.9

Correct. If you cannot run an Electrum server, or you don't want to, then you can connect Sparrow directly to Core, with the downside that you will need to perform a full rescan for any addresses you import as I explained above.

If you are already running your own Electrum server, then I would preferentially connect to that.

I am running a full node and electrum server upon it, so there is no difference as you said.

So the reason to connect sparrow to bitcoin core instead of electrum server is the simple fact that you don't have to run an electrum server. It only requires bitcoin core to run. Am I right?

If you connect directly to Bitcoin Core, Sparrow will create a wallet in Bitcoin Core for the relevant addresses, and then have to perform a full blockchain scan to get the history of those addresses (if there is any). Any time you create or import new addresses or wallets to Sparrow, then again, you'll have to perform a full scan to get any relevant history. This is just how it works for Bitcoin Core itself.

If you connect it to a full Electrum server such as Fulcrum or ElectrumX, then any addresses you add or wallets you import are updated almost instantly, just as they are when you connect your Electrum wallet to a third party server.

If you are connecting to your own full node, or you own Electrum server which is built upon your own full node, then no, there is no difference. If you start adding third party servers or nodes in to the mix, then it depends on what you are comparing.

Does anybody know what the difference is between connecting Sparrow straight to Bitcoin Core Vs connecting it to Electrum Server?

Is there any significant difference in terms of privacy etc?

I wonder if there are any other wallets that support BIP-322 and Taproot message signing or they plan to do it in near future... but this is certainly a nice update coming for Sparrow wallet.
With big jump in using Taproot addresses more and more people are going to need to sign and verify messages for them, just look at this stats chart:
https://transactionfee.info/charts/transactions-spending-taproot/

today also the new version of the sparrow wallet was released. with version 1.7.8 come the following changes:

• taproot message signing (bip322)
• improved qr scan performance
• rename wallet support
• rbf with initial minimum fee set

the complete changelog can be found in the github link below


https://github.com/sparrowwallet/sparrow/releases/tag/1.7.8
https://sparrowwallet.com/download/

It should be well known that any SPV light client wallet gives you no privacy for your wallet's addresses history. You only have privacy if you connect it to your own Electrum server which itself requires to connect to a full Bitcoin node.
I use both Electrum and Sparrow and have a RaspiBlitz node running a Bitcoin Core node, a Fulcrum Electron server, a LND lightning node and a few gadgets more. My SPV wallets don't need to talk to third party servers.

You are absolutely right, node must be in fully sync state but I think  @logfiles meant that Sparrow client, when first creating his wallet,  has an option to query node for  transactions of its interest  beginning from certain date rather to initiate the full scan of LevelDB  kept by node. In this respect he is correct.

That's not how it works. If you are not using your own node, then it connects to a third party server and queries it for transaction history of your addresses and wallets. The third party returns the necessary data, but you therefore have zero privacy from that third party.

If you want to use it in a privacy preserving way with your own node or Electrum server, then you will absolutely need your node to download and sync the full blockchain first.

It's a light wallet

And this is how much it takes up on my machine storage. I guess it also depends on how you set it up



It will scan the blockchain to load your wallet's transaction history, but won't download the entire blockchain like a full Bitcoin client does. There is also an option to set the date of the earliest transactions in your wallet if you don't want to scan the entire blockchain.

It seems I will be better using any of the wallet considering my recent break down with the Mycelium wallet for iOS. It was completely troubling to set up that wallet on iOS since it’s missing few pieces which help us import our back up and/or imported addresses. It’s far better I either keep using hardware wallet or simply get new one like electrum and sparrow.

I will see how it goes with the set up on laptop and doesn’t have lengthy process of set up. :-)

The only thing I need to know is how much space these guys will take up? Is it gonna be entire blockchain that will get synchronised taking up entire disk on my lappy?

I have been using Electrum wallet for sometime now, got accoustomed to it interface and it's benefits. I never thought about privacy in general as I thought it is cannot do anything like coinjoin featured wallets can do. Untill now! Time to play with sparrow wallet as the point you wrote is pretty interesting. I will download the wallet for the first time and most probably use it for a few weeks. Apart from the privacy part if it has an easy to understand & react interface, then I am going to use it permanently.

Yeah, in this regard I very like that Sparrow is automatically and constantly reverses the order of "change transactions" if you make several transactions in the row. This feature is  very important to discomfort  chain-analysis software in their work. Sure, one can do it the same thing in Electrum, but it requires  manual control from user's part.

I have no need to use coinb.in - I use an airgapped Electrum wallet for importing such raw private keys.

Then, coinb.in is right for you as it fits  both your  needs  and your qualification. It’s crucial to remember that  this software is better to run i on cold computer ( I recollect that you said somewhere that you have such one) and  create relevant  transaction being offline.    

Even so, they still exist. I still have a bunch of paper wallets which use single private keys which are many years old. I'm not going to move the coins from their perfectly safe location if I don't need to, so I still need software which supports importing raw private keys. I also need more than a simple sweep function since I usually want to direct the coins form such paper wallets to more than one location, which may or may not be addresses I control.

I thought single address wallets was a thing of the past, I see no reason for modern software to support this outdated technology since it directly affects the quality of wallet back ups as well as security of funds. As for Sparrow Wallet, it has an option of sweeping a single WIF private key into existing HD wallet:

These wallets can complement each other in certain circumstances, and they are definitely better and more secure than, for example, Atomic Wallet.

In my personal knowledge, They are both easy to use, they are also well-respected wallets when it comes to the number of features they have, especially in terms of security, which I think is what we users are always looking for, because we will put Bitcoin in it.

In addition to this, they also give us control over our so-called privacy, which is of course the most important thing to us. And maybe or maybe Electrum is better for others, but for others it's sparrow gaining more, meaning it depends on us which of the two is better.

That's true, thanks for the reminder. I forget such feature is exist since my system already have Tor service running. Although it seems it only use it's own Tor when you attempt connect to .onion server[1].


I see. But since you mention rescan, i just checked Sparrow source code and it looks like they create new wallet[2] rather than using getblockfilter RPC.

[1] https://sparrowwallet.com/docs/faq.html#how-does-the-proxy-support-work
[2] https://github.com/sparrowwallet/sparrow/blob/1.7.7/src/main/java/com/sparrowwallet/sparrow/net/cormorant/bitcoind/BitcoindClientService.java

I've only ever paired Sparrow with a node running on the same device, but in this set up anything I've done on Sparrow has been pretty much instant. The only downside is of course if you import a wallet with historical transactions in to Sparrow then you have to rescan, just as if you imported a wallet with historical transactions in to Core. This is obviously not the case if you were running a full Electrum server, but of course Sparrow can connect to those too.

Sparrow does have an advantage for new users in this regard.  Electrum needs a tor node running in the background to connect through tor, it doesn't have a built-in process to create one.  If the tor option is selected in Sparrow, it'll look for a background tor node but if it doesn't find one it'll start it's own, similar to how Bisq and Tor Browser work.

I don't disagree, and as I've said above there are still advanced features Sparrow doesn't offer that I use Electrum for (such as importing individual keys/addresses). But if you want to use Sparrow while connecting to a public server (as is the default in Electrum), again it is only three clicks (File -> Preferences -> Public Server). If you are a newbie looking to use a wallet privately, then Sparrow beats Electrum in terms of ease of use for not having to set up a server and just connecting directly to Core. I also can't think of any features that newbies would be interested in that Electrum has and Sparrow does not.

When it comes to features between the two, as far as I know, the features of sparrow wallet are better than Electrum, although they are both popular and good to use. And both also have a large number of users to be honest.

And some of those supported by sparrow are Paynyms, which is looking for the best payment for your transaction. Apart from this it also has built-in tor support. These are just a few that sparrow has more advantage in electrum.

source : https://sparrowwallet.com/

From an ease-of-use perspective, I totally agree.  Running a full node, an Electrum server, and a block explorer requires some strong computer-fu, not to mention a significant investment in time and computer resources.  Also, I didn't mean to imply that Sparrow is less private, just that Electrum can be used in ways that achieve at least an equal level of privacy.

Having an understanding of how to use a wallet with privacy in mind is a prerequisite for private use of Electrum, but Sparrow forces those methods onto it's users.  That's not a bad thing for new users (or experienced users 99% of the time,) but there might be a situation where a user wants more control.  In my opinion control vs. ease of use is a worthy exchange, despite the extra time, skill, and resources required.

Yes, Sparrow can be connected to bitcoin core in 3 clicks literally. I haven't been able to connect it over tor though. I think electrum is more table over tor, at least in my experience.

I'd contest that. Sparrow is even easier to use privately than Electrum is. There is no need to run additional server software for an Electrum server and go through the hassle of getting your server to talk to your node and your Electrum client to talk to your server, which from experience is rarely a completely straightforward task and usually throws up one or two issues. These issues are maybe easily solved for you or I, but for a newbie with no experience of such things they can completely derail the process and cause them to abandon it altogether.

With Sparrow, on the other hand, it's a simple as adding server=1 to your bitcoin.conf and then clicking the "Bitcoin Core" button in Sparrow. I was amazed the first time I used it at just how easy it was to set up.

Yeah, I know it's there, but there are still use-cases for importing single addresses.  For example; an old legacy or nested segwit HD wallet with one or two specific addresses that you want to monitor, but you don't need the whole list of addresses that wallet generated, and you don't have multiple hardware wallets to dedicate to each of those seeds.  

I've used a ton of different types of addresses for various services here on the forum (lending, escrow, signatures...) that I want available in one wallet that's convenient to access.  I've imported most of those into a single wallet on an airgapped machine, and have the public addresses in a watch only wallet on my main computer.  Otherwise I would have to restore the seed for each of those if a magic transaction appears or I want to sign a message from one of those addresses.  All of those seeds are archived, and by design, inconvenient to pull out of the archives.

Privacy isn't an issue in the scenario above, so there's no reason to not import those addresses into one wallet.  I don't intend on reusing them, but they are already out there and it doesn't hurt to to have convenient access to them.


I see it as the other way around.  I was in the habit of recommending Electrum to anyone who's starting their bitcoin journey, but recently I've been recommending Sparrow to newbies.  It's more user friendly, and has default features geared to keep new users' information private.  As people become more sophisticated and aware of how to use bitcoin privately, Electrum offers it's users a bit more control.   When coupled with a self-hosted SPV server, Electrum's privacy features are second to none.

I just downloaded Sparrow wallet, and I am quite impressed with it. Nice UI and a number of options and functionalities to play around with. I haven't explored a lot of its features, but will probably do in the coming days.
I liked the fact that they supported the taproot script type, which is still missing with electrum.

Electrum is really so cool, but sparrow going to be one of those wallets would be an excellent alternative over time.

I mainly use Electrum and Bitcoin Core for special purposes, pointing Electrum to my own Electrum server. I tested Sparrow and find it a very interesting wallet contender. It has features that set it apart from Electrum and some of them I find interesting and nice to have.

As Sparrow is rather new and I'm a bit conservative with wallets I monitor it closely and play around with it to see how it evolves. I can't judge it yet as it isn't as time-proven as Electrum is.

Under the hood of "Tools" Sparrow offers "Sweep Private Key"  which is much better option  than just  importing as it sends all funds controlled by that prv-key to new address from Sparrow's set. Sure, sweeping requires bitcoin transaction to be made, so Sparrow must be connected to do the action.

BTW, 1.7.7. version has been released 2 days ago.

If I'm importing single private keys, then I am pretty much exclusively doing it on an offline machine to sign a transaction created from a watch only wallet. The wallet on my airgapped machine will never connect to my node. It's simply easier to use a light wallet such as Electrum (or Sparrow, if it had this function) on your airgapped machine than it is to use Core.

I would say the built in coinjoin, stonewall, and stowaway transaction functionality is a significant feature that Electrum does not have, if this kind of thing interests you.

There are indeed plenty of use-cases where one would want to import a single key, but like you said, there are other wallets to use for that.  In fact, since it really does make a lot of sense to have your own node running for private use of Sparrow, one could use core to import single keys when the need arises.

As for a perfect wallet for power users, Electrum was that wallet in the past, and it'll likely be again once the developers implement Taproot.  At this point, that's really the only significant feature where Sparrow has a leg-up on Electrum.

Agreed. It's their world so to speak and we are just living in it, but there are a lot of reasons to want to import a single key.
OTOH, there are enough other ways to do it that it does not matter that much.

Makes you wonder if there really is a 'perfect' wallet out there for power users. Or all of us here going to be running multiple ones.

The 'normal' users probably don't care and the rest of us run all of them to get all the features we need / want.

-Dave

The reason I've seen given on their GitHub for this is to discourage address reuse. I can appreciate that, but conversely I occasionally have the need to import a single private key and I won't reuse the address, such as sweeping paper wallets. It would be nice to have this feature even if it was hidden behind "Advanced Options" or similar.

I started playing with Sparrow again last night, and I must say it is an impressive wallet.  Lots of great features, and a very user friendly UI.  Not to mention that it's among the few hierarchical deterministic wallets (other than core) that can generate taproot addresses.  As far as I know it might be the only taproot wallet with Bip39 seed phrase backups.

The only thing I can't get my head around is why they haven't implemented the ability to import single private keys.  You can import a master private key, but single private keys or single addresses for watching, can't be imported.  Maybe the development team is focusing on private use of bitcoin, and importing single keys isn't conducive to the preservation of privacy, but other than that I can't see why the feature isn't there.

For me the most noticeable advantage of Sparrow  is its ability to pair and subsequently work   with airgapped hardware wallets  via QR codes. (Sure not all  airgapped HW  are pliable to such   type of pairing and communication but my Passport 2  is capable to do these). Electrum does it exclusively via json file.

btw today also the new version of the sparrow wallet was released. with version 1.7.7 come the following changes:

• Improved mempool fee rates chart
• Multiple improvements for a high fee environment
• Performance optimizations for large wallets

in addition, with this release comes a border wallets integration & ux

https://github.com/sparrowwallet/sparrow/releases/tag/1.7.7
https://sparrowwallet.com/download/

I will save this answer on a notepad. Thanks

You can:

• Wait
• Create a new transaction with a higher fee
• Broadcast it anyway and hope for the best
• Broadcast it anyway and create a new transaction with a higher fee to replace the existing one should it not confirm in a reasonable time
• Direct the change to a single sig wallet you control so you can use CPFP

Excellent. But, the obvious question here is: what happens if I have signed a transaction with a fee of let's say 20sat/vB, but when I go to the other cosigner the fee is too low? Should I wait? Should I initiate another transaction and sign it with a higher fee using the cosigner where I am and then travel back to the other cosigner? This question also applies to timelocked transactions, and I think the answers are obvious, but somewhat inconvenient. Don't you think?

Not a hash of the transaction, but the transaction itself. But yes, you can do this.

You would simply create the transaction on the first wallet, and sign it with that wallet, before exporting the transaction (the specifics of this will depend on the wallet you are using). You can usually export it as some form of raw text, save it to a file, generate a QR code, etc. Then you can send that partially signed transaction to another destination electronically, or put it on a USB drive, SD card, your phone, etc., and carry it with you. Once you have access to the second wallet, you import it, sign it with this second wallet, and then you are ready to broadcast it.

Hi! Supposing I have set a 2-of-3 multisig vault, my question actually is whether I can sign a transaction in New York, then take a hash of a partially signed transaction and then go to San Diego in order to sign with my second cosigner.

The afforementioned cities are examples only.

When you set up a multisig wallet, you will need enough co-signers to sign your transactions. If you set up a 3/5 co-signer multisig, you will need 3 of 5 co-signers to sign your transactions.

Any of those 5 co-signers can sign it, no need to have any co-signer in order. When a transaction gets enough co-signers sign it, it will be executed.

One more question! For signing transactions, which one is more easy and convenient?

Let's say I want to sign a transactions using 2 cosigners from my 2-of-3 multisig, which one is easier to use?

How easy is it to use a signing device to sign a transaction?

How easy is it to sign with one cosigner and then wait till I get to where the other cosigner is in order to sign too?

Thanks! yeah I am in the middle of watching this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6TcUY2yU41w&t=1101s&ab_channel=BTCSessions to make it work.

Ahh, I see. I misunderstood your previous post - I thought you were saying you had already set up an Electrum server, when you were actually saying you already have Sparrow pointed at your own node. In that case, I would just use Sparrow for the use cases you described in your first post. It is more than capable of doing all of those, and you will maintain your privacy since it will only sync via your own node.

Whirlpool is a coinjoin implementation, run by Samourai, which is accessible via Sparrow. You can read more about it here: https://sparrowwallet.com/docs/mixing-whirlpool.html. Essentially, you pay a small fee and then coordinate with other users to create transactions which send the same amount of bitcoin you put in back to you, but in a way which obfuscates which bitcoin actually belong to you. If you are interested in anonymizing your bitcoin so entities such as centralized exchanges and blockchain analysis companies cannot trace it, then you could look in to this. If you do plan to use Whirlpool, make sure you also connect to the coordinator via Tor (explained in the link I just shared).

Ok, so now you got my attention with Whirlpool. I have Sparrow running over my Bitcoin Node. So I don't run an Electrum Server personally.

No, it's no better or worse. In both cases, all your data will come from your own node rather than that of a third party, and so your privacy will be maintained. If you already have an Electrum server set up, then no reason not to use it.

If you are already familiar with Electrum and already have a server set up, then I see no reason to change unless you wanted to use Whirlpool.

I have, actually! But I forgot to mention it. It was a 2-clicks process to do it. Provided that you already have a node of course.

Can you elaborate though? Is it better (and for what reason), to run Electrum Server upon your node, instead of connecting Sparrow to your node?


There are actually too many people that used to use Electrum since it was released and haven't switched to any other alternative. That's what made me curious.


Thanks! I have tried it and I can verify that.

Although Sparrow excels in terms of UI and UX, in addition to the ease of connecting your nodes, in addition to Taproot addresses and better performance of the Lightning Network, Electrum provides you with basic and good features for all these requirements, so if you are familiar with Electrum or have not used any of these wallets before it is a good choice.

I also think that the way Electrum deals with individual HW plugins is better. so I will vote for it.

I would say the main benefit that Sparrow has over Electrum for your use case is how easy it so connect to your own node and not rely on a third party. Electrum requires that you set up an Electrum server on top of your node first; Sparrow can just be pointed directly at your node. Sparrow also allows you to Whirlpool directly from your wallet, as well as supporting other privacy improvements such as PayNyms and Stonewall transactions, but this is probably irrelevant if you are just going to use it as a watch only wallet.

Electrum doesn't generate a BIP39 seed phrase and uses its own algorithm when generating a seed phrase.
Of course, you can import a BIP39 seed phrase in electrum. To do so, just click on "Options" when entering your seed phrase and check "BIP39 seed".

Hello people, I am interested in the significant differences that you have found between these two applications.

I have googled it, but the best audience to answer are the people in this forum.

1. I have a multisig vault, which I would like to be able to "monitor" using the cosigners xpubs.
2. I have a cold storage wallet, which I would also like to monitor as "watch-only"
3. I have a hot wallet, created using BlueWallet.

I know I can do all 3 in both of them. But are there differences in features etc, that you have spotted?

Example: I think, and I may be mistaken, that Electrum doesn't use BIP39 seed phrases, am I wrong?