Might be worth a google, there's normally some nerds somewhere that have discussed if theres differences in the masters between formats on an album.
-
Notice regarding image hosts and attachments. See here.
General Headphone Audio
- Thread starter garyfl
- Start date
Might be worth a google, there's normally some nerds somewhere that have discussed if theres differences in the masters between formats on an album.
Yea, I think the DAC differences potentially get further lost on the Amp. I remember trying both the K13 and K15 as DACs into the TA-66 and struggling to tell a difference. But it might be again that with different headphones that are more crisp it is more noticeable.
Nice. I do think the K13 might look better in silver like most of the Fiio stuff (I was boring and went for black). What was the DAC before and have you noticed much difference?
EDIT: Just read what you'd written. Ignore me!
True. I think the other reason people are going for these newer R2Rs is that they are versatile - they work with dynamics, IEMs, or planars etc. They can provide that warmth whatever. Although whether it's a DAC, or AMP (or combo) it's still another box/plug on your desk. Although my TA-66 can do pre-amp, but I just use it as a headphone amp only, but it cool it's there for people that want it as you say.
For me a tube setup was worth it becuase I just fell in-love with the HD 6x0 line. The classic DTs also love the high impedance output too. If I didn't have those I'm not sure I would have bothered with tubes.
Last edited:
Thats interesting, ive not heard the TA-66 but it makes sense that its having a larger impact on the signal and is masking the comparatively minor differences between the DACs. Not something that I would have thought about before.
Last edited:
Yeah with the DX1 II connected to my PA7, it was hard to tell a big difference as a DAC through the speakers without really concentrating hard on cherry picked songs that suited for critical listening. We discussed here a long while ago that cheaper DACs in isolation have reached a sound quality level only possible by expensive DACs a few years ago, the THD+N, crosstalk, SNR etc etc are all so good now that as long as a DAC chip isn't implemented like cheese, then it's going to sound mostly excellent. Stuff like channel separation plays a part with more exotic implementations or to mitigate historical issues that might come with some DAC chips etc. With the DX1 II again being 5.1Vrms out the back balanced ports, it can pre-amp nearly any power amp with headroom left to never reach the clipping limits, that's crazy to think about considering it's so tiny and only powered by a PC's USB port.
Aside from whatever difference a reconstruction filter applies to any given DAC type, for combo boxes the benefit is in the analogue stage whether rear outputs or headphones, that's where you'd hear the difference mostly.
It will def be interesting to see how the 490 Pro reacts to a tube amp, that's what I am curious about. Once Luxsin send the pre-release sample of the B9 at least I can hear it through a higher end R2R I guess, and if/when I get the MT-02 in the new year, scratch the tube amp itch too.
Aside from whatever difference a reconstruction filter applies to any given DAC type, for combo boxes the benefit is in the analogue stage whether rear outputs or headphones, that's where you'd hear the difference mostly.
It will def be interesting to see how the 490 Pro reacts to a tube amp, that's what I am curious about. Once Luxsin send the pre-release sample of the B9 at least I can hear it through a higher end R2R I guess, and if/when I get the MT-02 in the new year, scratch the tube amp itch too.
The K13 arrived earlier. I precisely volume-matched it with the K11 using my measuring rig, I don't think there's a difference between them if I'm honest. I did the same with the EF400, and the difference between them lessened slightly compared to earlier listening where I tried to match volume by ear, but there is still a noticeable difference.
Last edited:
Were only talking small differences, but even when volume matched the EF400 still sounds slightly different. It's as i was saying before, it's softer/fuzzier and feels more relaxed. Things like sharp s's for example are reduced. It's not a frequency response thing; I measured that, and it's the same.
Kind of marks back to earlier discussions in the thread about how measurements don't always dictate what you may or may not hear because topology/implementation varies between different brands, even same brands between models using the same DAC chip (DX1 II vs DX5 II is a prime example), so different flavours to suit taste, different scales of DAC filtering and so on..
Don't get me wrong, it will still be a measurable difference; I just meant that I had checked that it's not just a change in frequency response, i.e a rolling off of the treble that is making it sound softer. It will be related to distortion, which my rig won't do a good job of capturing.
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 79,658
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
I thought the point of getting the HD600 was because it is the watermark of the headphone reviewer community of which basically all headphones are set against? It's not that it is worth having as something you enjoy, it is just a reference pair for reviews.
That was the notion then yeah, though because the 490 Pro now matches or beats HD600 depending on the area being compared, for me the new recommendation and reference is the 490 Pro for the price. It still has some of the HD600 midrange capabilities without any of the things I felt were missing from it (detail, soundstage, bass especially). For the price it does a better job than the 660S2 as well in the main area Sennheiser marketed the more expensive 660S2 in (bass).
Plus I think enough time has passed to update the reference point, after 20+ years it's not an unreasonable point to come to I suppose, going by some other reviews it doesn't seem I am alone in this thinking either!
Plus I think enough time has passed to update the reference point, after 20+ years it's not an unreasonable point to come to I suppose, going by some other reviews it doesn't seem I am alone in this thinking either!
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 79,658
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
That's slightly different. The HD600 is a reference for many many people is because how long it has been out, still in production, and continues to be referred to by basically everyone when it comes to a review of an Open Back. There are others that has come "better", like the Hedd1 but the Hedd1 isn't going to be a reference standard like the HD600 is or will be.
Especially as the HD6xx has got into so many people's hands due to it's price point.
I am not saying you can't use the 490 as your reference, it is your reviews afterall but as something to have a "link" with others, the HD600 can do that. There will be FAR fewer people who has or tried the 490 than the HD600. Something that most people will go...oh yeah, "I know what the HD600 sounds like".
Especially as the HD6xx has got into so many people's hands due to it's price point.
I am not saying you can't use the 490 as your reference, it is your reviews afterall but as something to have a "link" with others, the HD600 can do that. There will be FAR fewer people who has or tried the 490 than the HD600. Something that most people will go...oh yeah, "I know what the HD600 sounds like".
Last edited:
Caporegime
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 79,658
- Location
- Wish i was in a Ramen Shop Counter
Side note, my Shangling has been delayed! Was meant to get it today.
B9 pre-production sample also delayed, material supply issues ongoing, I wonder if it has anything to do with the Ai chips being used and short supply.
On the HD600 front, yeah I get that, and maybe I will grab a open box pair again at some point if the need to recall the sound ever comes up, though at this point having owned 2x HD650, 6XX, 660S2 and 600 for lengths of time and finding the 600 the best between them, and now the 490 being nicer sounding still, think I am pretty cemented with the 490 as the new reference since it carries on as a successor to the 600, as in those familiar with 600 almost certainly will feel right at home with the 490 and benefit from the feature improvements like better comfort, better pads, better cable and connector.
On the HD600 front, yeah I get that, and maybe I will grab a open box pair again at some point if the need to recall the sound ever comes up, though at this point having owned 2x HD650, 6XX, 660S2 and 600 for lengths of time and finding the 600 the best between them, and now the 490 being nicer sounding still, think I am pretty cemented with the 490 as the new reference since it carries on as a successor to the 600, as in those familiar with 600 almost certainly will feel right at home with the 490 and benefit from the feature improvements like better comfort, better pads, better cable and connector.
Last edited:
If anyone wants the SMSL D100 DAC/amp then call dibs and it's yours. I have no use for keeping it gathering dust any more.
In other news I have been running my own local AI models for inferencing and thinking up ideas on how I can use it since my GPU is quite fast and I have essentially unlimited token usage due to that.
I want to build an app the can capture specifically soundstage, stereo imaging and maybe even things like instrument separation and layering in a 3D presentation during playback of whole songs used as reference audio. So this isn't just a 2D graph of frequency response but a tailored model. Currently this area of audio is mostly subjective interpretation, since soundstage cannot be directly measure traditionally, only inferred from measurements such as channel crosstalk etc, but even then what is heard may not be what is measured.
My idea uses these wireless stereo lav mics that are specced at 20Hz-20KHz and are capable of 360 degree binaural recording. These would allow the results to be mapped into a 3D map and demonstrate different soundstages of amps and/or headphones, something nobody else is doing in this way and would help bolster subjective observations I think.
I'll start work on it as soon as possible and see what can be created.
I guess the same app could be used with headphone rigs but the rigs cost a lot for decent ones and I already have mics that capture the human hearing range so costs nothing.
In other news I have been running my own local AI models for inferencing and thinking up ideas on how I can use it since my GPU is quite fast and I have essentially unlimited token usage due to that.
I want to build an app the can capture specifically soundstage, stereo imaging and maybe even things like instrument separation and layering in a 3D presentation during playback of whole songs used as reference audio. So this isn't just a 2D graph of frequency response but a tailored model. Currently this area of audio is mostly subjective interpretation, since soundstage cannot be directly measure traditionally, only inferred from measurements such as channel crosstalk etc, but even then what is heard may not be what is measured.
My idea uses these wireless stereo lav mics that are specced at 20Hz-20KHz and are capable of 360 degree binaural recording. These would allow the results to be mapped into a 3D map and demonstrate different soundstages of amps and/or headphones, something nobody else is doing in this way and would help bolster subjective observations I think.
I'll start work on it as soon as possible and see what can be created.
I guess the same app could be used with headphone rigs but the rigs cost a lot for decent ones and I already have mics that capture the human hearing range so costs nothing.
Last edited:
I want to capture frequencies being played in 360 degrees and the app then maps and presents them in 3D. This means it's not just capturing fixed FR but a full 360 degree view of what the mics picked up, a narrower soundstage would show up on the 3D view accordingly (not a FR graphm a visualised map of what's heard), a wider one covering more of the 3D axis with frequency breakdown on each recorded point.
The baseline would be the cherry picked songs used as the reference point, example an acoustic song with vocal and a few instruments only could be trained to the model accordingly so the model knows where each instrument should be and that is used to compare against another headphone or amp etc.
The difficult part will be the training, as there is currently no reference point to start with.
Edit* This won't and can't account for individual hearing variations or ear shapes, so some margin needs to also be applied.
The baseline would be the cherry picked songs used as the reference point, example an acoustic song with vocal and a few instruments only could be trained to the model accordingly so the model knows where each instrument should be and that is used to compare against another headphone or amp etc.
The difficult part will be the training, as there is currently no reference point to start with.
Edit* This won't and can't account for individual hearing variations or ear shapes, so some margin needs to also be applied.
Last edited: