Support Head-Fi.org by
starting all of your
Amazon.com shopping by
clicking here.
____________________________________________________________________
Today's Featured Head-Fi Blog: Jude's Blog
____________________________________________________________________
Please help
support Head-Fi by becoming a Contributing Member
CLICK
HERE -- Contributing Members, thank you
for your generous support! --
I think the marketing of the amp companies also have something to do with it as well. Example: Ray Samuels says right in his Hornet ads that the amp can be used with HD650. The Hornet uses a nine volt battery and has, say, maximum 250mA current output (though we don't know what opamp he uses, lets assume the upperbound is an AD8397).
But this leads to another question. How far can portable audiophilia go? Take the Senn line: Is the HD-25-II the best that can be had in a portable setup? The HD595? The HD600? The HD650? How do we determine how much a portable amp limits the extent to which a portable setup can approach Hi-Fi?
Honestly, the main reason for having a larger desktop headphone amp is the volume control. The crappy little pots in portables simply do not hold a candle to stepped attenuators.
Other than that, most headphone amps sound almost identical, the difference is within 5% for most, and even smaller for higher end amps. The night and day differences most people hear at meets are simply the fact that they are listening louder. I don't typically trust meet impressions of amps, even my own. A long period of quiet time at home is really needed.
If you hear a big difference in sound quality between headphone amps, there is something wrong with one of them.
IMHO everyone has to start out somewhere, and budgetary limitations vary greatly across the population.
Common sense trumps hype everytime (eventually). The limitations of portable design makes it hard to compete with home amps at the same price level. That's why the LDII-series was so popular.
__________________ I know I ask perfection of a quite imperfect world, and fool enough to think thats what Ill find. The Carpenters
Honestly, the main reason for having a larger desktop headphone amp is the volume control. The crappy little pots in portables simply do not hold a candle to stepped attenuators.
Other than that, most headphone amps sound almost identical, the difference is within 5% for most, and even smaller for higher end amps. The night and day differences most people hear at meets are simply the fact that they are listening louder. I don't typically trust meet impressions of amps, even my own. A long period of quiet time at home is really needed.
If you hear a big difference in sound quality between headphone amps, there is something wrong with one of them.
IMO, of course.
-Ed "standing by with a headphone amp switch box"
This post makes no sense to me at all as it flies in the face of everything I've experienced. I own six amps right now. Only two sound similar, and those are both portables. To put the mini^3 within a 5% range of my home amp, however much I like the mini, is ridiculous.
And that's basically a crappy amp. I've changed my sig to reflect my sentiments. I'm all for getting the best you can on a budget, but when it comes to certain headphones, they simply require better.
Boomana- I agree with you wholeheartedly. The portable amp trend parallels another trend: People using computer-based rigs versus a high-end dedicated CDP(with or w/o DAC) based rig. I started with a computer-based home rig with an outboard DAC myself, and when I made the jump a while back to a dedicated CDP it made me almost cry at the difference in sound quality. While a computer based home rig is very convenient, I believe a lot of Head-Fier's are shortchanging themselves, thinking "it's just as good."
I'm also curious.
Can someone in this thread link me a scientific article that proves this assumption?
Or at the least a comparison using the minimal factoids to even consider this topic serious such as:
1) A control (was there a control factor used for a comparison)
2) A large sample size of participants
3) Blind testing (to eliminate placebo, etc...)
4) Environmental control
5) Data of the participant's hearing capability, age, music preference, etc...
This post makes no sense to me at all as it flies in the face of everything I've experienced. I own six amps right now. Only two sound similar, and those are both portables. To put the mini^3 within a 5% range of my home amp, however much I like the mini, is ridiculous.
Linear Mode
