Any of you guys into headphones?

[WmAx]

If Ray Samuels shows up at a head-fi meet, Try an A/B comparator yourself.
You don't need to wait for a credible report. If you can identify the amp in a statistically significant fashion, then that's all the proof you need. You can do whatever it takes to make it fair and objective test.

Yet, no one has observed an unknown factor that affects sound, in any fair and objective test. The known factors are trivial to retain under human audible thresholds, in even low cost headphone amplification stages. BTW, it's not as simple to conduct a valid DBT in such conditions as a meet or any other casual circumstance, as you seem to believe. It takes significant effort and knowledge to carry out a test that will withstand objective scrutiny in peer review.

-Chris

 

[Sleestack]

I have an Airhead, and tried the Go-Vibe. Was pretty happy with the improvement those made compared to my computer and iPod output.

I want to try something that is considered good like the VCAN, and see how much of an improvement it makes, if any. I have Grado's so a mellower warmer sound isn't a bad thing.

The X-can will kill those 2 pieces. I had a Toal Bithead for a day and it didn't compare to the X-can.

I would recommend thte SR-71, but it only runs off batteries and is fairly bright. The X-can might be the right choice for you.

 

[WmAx]

I see that you qualified your statement by essentially saying that certain high-end gear purposely introduce specific sound signatures, so I am assuming that you are referring to things such as tube amps that use different tubes. If so, I apologize for not reading more carefully.

Thank you for reading the post. That is correct.

I definitely don't think price always correlates to better sound. I'm not saying my $2500 MPX3 sounds 5 times better than my X-can, but IMO, the improvement it offers was worth paying $2100 more.

And I am not saying the improvement was not worth $2100[to you], if it is looked at within a rational perspective. For example: it's not shown by any credible source, or by known science, that the sound would be better due to any factor that is exclusive to such a high cost device. Therefor, there is not rational basis to argue on that position. However, look at it in the grand scheme: the total package(cosmetics, build quality, possible non-linear response purposefly induced in order to introduce a sound signature, psychological satisfaction, etc.) is another thing, entirely, and may be worth the price. I have, myself, purchased audio equipment for the total package, that cost considerably more than what would have been technically perfect for the application(s).

-Chris

 

[Sleestack]

Yet, no one has observed an unknown factor that affects sound, in any fair and objective test. The known factors are trivial to retain under human audible thresholds, in even low cost headphone amplification stages. BTW, it's not as simple to conduct a valid DBT in such conditions as a meet or any other casual circumstance, as you seem to believe. It takes significant effort and knowledge to carry out a test that will withstand objective scrutiny in peer review.

-Chris

Can I ask what equipment you use at home? Have you ever heard any of the gear we are talking about or know anything about them? It does not take a DBT to hear the difference between a Ray Samuels piece and a Singlepower piece. They have distinct sound signatures. Seems to me that you prefer to have your gear look good on paper than sound good in real life. No offense. You can say that I am the one who simply has a preference for distorted sound, but as someone who has been a musician for most of my life, I feel confident in relying on my ears to determine what sounds good.

There is no objective way to measure what sounds better. You can measure linearity, freq. resp, etc., but if you figure out how to objectively measure a "good sound", which by its nature is dependent on human perception, please enlighten us.

 

[WmAx]

Can I ask what equipment you use at home?

As a policy, I do not answer such questions when asked(since they are irrelevant to the merit of the discussion) in the course of a debate.

ave you ever heard any of the gear we are talking about or know anything about them?

Yes, I am familiar with the brands and people of which you refer to.

It does not take a DBT to hear the difference between a Ray Samuel piece and a Singlewpower piece. They have distinct sound signatures.

Well, I don't know if they have a real difference in sound signature(response irregularties) or not, since no one has measured these two devices or performed a valid DBT and published such.

Seems to me that you prefer to have your gear look good on paper than sound good in real life.

This would be an inaccurate assumption. Nothing is more important to me than sound quality. I[actually] care little if the hardware, for example, is worse measuring than an opposing example, so long as the measurement difference is not audible[as can be coorelated with perceptual research], and thus can not be successfully identified in a blind test.

-Chris

 

[warpdrive]

The X-can will kill those 2 pieces. I had a Toal Bithead for a day and it didn't compare to the X-can.

I would recommend thte SR-71, but it only runs off batteries and is fairly bright. The X-can might be the right choice for you.

Thanks for the feedback.

Budget is an issue....so I'm trying to upgrade carefully where it makes sense. Have to try out the X-Can for myself at my local dealer.

With my Grado's changing pads had a noticeable difference, it's those kind of small but meaningful tweaks that makes this hobby fun.

 

[WmAx]

There is no objective way to measure what sounds better. You can measure linearity, freq. resp, etc., but if you figure out how to objectively measure a "good sound", which by its nature is dependent on human perception, please enlighten us.

The job of an amplifier, for example, is to linearly amplify the signal. This is easily accomplished. No coloration(s) induced by the amplifier. Perceptual reasearch exists for every parameter of performance(harmonic distortion audiblity, signal to noise ratio, frequency response, etc.) that will cause audible difference(s). The amplifier should not, at any time, rise above the known audible thresholds during normal operation/use. For sound signature modification, it is most beneficial to use auxillary devices that can modify the factors in a controlled manner. You can then tune the sound to exactly what you prefer, instead of relying on the random changes that are introduced by non-linear amplification devices, that can not be controlled. I believe I have recommended such products to you in the past, in different threads.

-Chris

 

[Sleestack]

As a policy, I do not answer such questions when asked(since they are irrelevant to the merit of the discussion) in the course of a debate.



Yes, I am familiar with the brands and people of which you refer to.


Well, I don't know if they have a real difference in sound signature(response irregularties) or not, since no one has measured these two devices or performed a valid DBT and published such.



This would be an inaccurate assumption. Nothing is more important to me than sound quality. I[actually] care little if the hardware, for example, is worse measuring than an opposing example, so long as the measurement difference is not audible[as can be coorelated with perceptual research], and thus can not be successfully identified in a blind test.

-Chris

I can respect your position. It is obvious we sit on opposite sides of the fence on certain issues. You would probably think I'm a bit retarded for spending the $35K I just spent on my 2 channel front end. It even has a tube preamp (EAR 864) and a high priced vinyl rig. I would say that buying equipment would be impossible and completely unenjoyable if I had to DBT every piece of gear I bought. You are coerrect in assuming that I do care about other factors when I buy equipment, but I can also assure you that even with all of the tube distortion, my rigs sound quite excellent.

 

[warpdrive]

It takes significant effort and knowledge to carry out a test that will withstand objective scrutiny in peer review.

We're not out to win Nobel prizes nor achieve Scientist of the Year, I'm just asking you to conduct some simple tests for yourself. Even if the test is flawed, you can gain some valuable insight for yourself. Have them adjust the gain for equal balance. Simple, it doesn't have to turn into a scientific journal. A casual test sometimes can yield usable results if done relatively carefully.

 

[Sleestack]

The job of an amplifier, for example, is to linearly amplify the signal. This is easily accomplished. No coloration(s) induced by the amplifier. Perceptual reasearch exists for every parameter of performance(harmonic distortion audiblity, signal to noise ratio, frequency response, etc.) that will cause audible difference(s). The amplifier should not, at any time, rise above the known audible thresholds during normal operation/use. For sound signature modification, it is most beneficial to use auxillary devices that can modify the factors in a controlled manner. You can then tune the sound to exactly what you prefer, instead of relying on the random changes that are introduced by non-linear amplification devices, that can not be controlled. I believe I have recommended such products to you in the past, in different threads.

-Chris

Your defintion of the job of an amplifier may be completely correct, however it in no way defines what "sounds good." Again, if you can show me an objective way of measuring "good sound," you understand an area of human perception that nobody else does.

Why use a solid state and an EQ when a particular tube amp sounds beautiful to my ears? Again, this is about music, so isn't what you hear and what you like the most important thing?

 

[sts9fan]

What you have to understand is that this site has a lot of back and white thinkers. WmAx being one of them. Not all claims are snake oil. Also listening to audio equiptment is a function of the brain which would be described by any researcher in the field as vastly unknown territory. You can not state as fact what is possible to hear on ALL levels.
Anyway its useless to argue about it because in a thread I started on DIY amps he stated that there was no finacial advantage to DIYing(not that thats the point) and when someone posted hard numbers and proved him wrong he stuck by his guns. Black and White

We live in a gray world people deal with it

 

[WmAx]

We're not out to win Nobel prizes nor achieve Scientist of the Year, I'm just asking you to conduct some simple tests for yourself. Even if the test is flawed, you can gain some valuable insight for yourself. Have them adjust the gain for equal balance. Simple, it doesn't have to turn into a scientific journal. A casual test sometimes can yield usable results if done relatively carefully.

It is no interest to me, to do A/B in the method you suggested. Let's assume that I did just as you suggested, and I percieve a difference. In the specific scenario: I will not know if this is a psychological difference, or if it is a difference caused by purposeful induced non-linear of one or both of the devices. I use[and only care to use] amplifiers that are linear, thus do not introduce audible coloration(s) of their own.

-Chris

 

[Privateer]

Anyway its useless to argue about it because in a thread I started on DIY amps he stated that there was no finacial advantage to DIYing(not that thats the point) and when someone posted hard numbers and proved him wrong he stuck by his guns. Black and White

I never knew this WmAx, log off and listen to your AM/FM radio so we can get some work done.

 

[WmAx]

You can not state as fact what is possible to hear on ALL levels.

But you can state as what is probable, which is exactly what I do.

Anyway its useless to argue about it because in a thread I started on DIY amps he stated that there was no finacial advantage to DIYing(not that thats the point) and when someone posted hard numbers and proved him wrong he stuck by his guns. Black and White

If this is your interpretation, then I suspect that you did not pay very close attention to what I wrote within that thread. I suggest you go back and read it again.

-Chris

 

[Sheep]

not again

here we go again.

aynwho, about headphones....

I use them at night and on computer for games, can't piss people off.

I use the HD500 fusions, they are alright, bit stronge in the bass deparment, but great everywhere else.

sheep

 

[WmAx]

Your defintion of the job of an amplifier may be completely correct, however it in no way defines what "sounds good." Again, if you can show me an objective way of measuring "good sound," you understand an area of human perception that nobody else does.

This is a different issue than what I was discussing. I am discussing amplification that behaves linearly. Your reference to good sound, can be compared to someone's preference for the position of a treble knob. It's an entirely different issue.

Why use a solid state and an EQ when a particular tube amp sounds beautiful to my ears? Again, this is about music, so isn't what you hear and what you like the most important thing?

If it is perfect for your preferences, then there is no reason to use said equipment. However, the reason[why], as I carefully stated in the prior post was so that one can precisely control the colorations. Obviously, if you already have what you consider to be perfect sound, then there is no such reason to use such controls.

 

[warpdrive]

In the specific scenario: I will not know if this is a psychological difference, or if it is a difference caused by purposeful induced non-linear of one or both of the devices. I use[and only care to use] amplifiers that are linear, thus do not introduce audible coloration(s) of their own.

This is headphone listening we are talking about.

How do you know your amps are linear? Except for a few very rare cases, I've never seen any meaningful measurements on the headphone outputs.

After all, the headphone output of your own receiver may be correspondly bad in terms of know quantifiable criteria. It may have high distortion, rolled off bass response under 40Hz feeding your 300 ohm Sennheisers

 

[sts9fan]

So

"But you can state as what is probable, which is exactly what I do."


So you just admitted that you cannot prove your point. You cannot scientificlly prove anything you are saying(I did not say they could)

Also all this talk of "flawed experiments" is completly bunk. There is no perfect experiment. If its blind and you do enough random points then it is as good as you will get. I have run many blind studies (nothing to do with audio) and i deal with placebo effect everyday. If you want to debate DOE(design of experiment) I'm your huckleberry.

 

[Sleestack]

This is a different issue than what I was discussing. I am discussing amplification that behaves linearly. Your reference to good sound, can be compared to someone's preference for the position of a treble knob. It's an entirely different issue.

My point exactly. All I am saying is that whether or not an amp behaves linearly says little about whether or not that amp may or may not sound good to a particular person. I buy gear that sounds good to me. An amp could be linear but, sound bad to me, in which case it would have no value to me. Your defintion of the purpose of an amplifier forces you to judge them based on objective criteria. That's great if you are deaf and you don't trust your judgment, but perhaps some might feel that they actually want to use their ears to decide what sounds good to them.

 

[WmAx]

How do you know your amps are linear?

I have measured the headphone amplifiers which I use, under realistic termination loads and input/output voltages, in order to confirm that they are linear[within known audible thresholds].

-Chris

After all, the headphone output of your own receiver may be correspondly bad in terms of know quantifiable criteria. It may have high distortion, rolled off bass response under 40Hz feeding your 300 ohm Sennheisers

A typical headphone output is largely linear, across the impedance range of most headphones. Actually, a 300 ohm headphone would be easier than most[which are in the 30-60 ohm range] to drive, as the raised impedance reduces the effect of [possibly insufficient]coupling capacitors and reduces the distortion of the circuit, since the current draw is smaller.

-Chris