Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Red Rose Headphone Amp
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Red Rose Headphone Amp - Page 2

post #16 of 54
Only two companies make headphone amps with crossfeed. I don't hear anyone complaining about the earmax pro not having crossfeed...

or maybe I haven't been paying enough attention?
post #17 of 54
I don't see the appeal of crossfeed at all, wouldn't that go against the whole point of wearing headphones in the 1st place? Also, it does screw up the sound, but I guess that some people like it anyway.

Anyway,
A Mark Levinson designed Headphone Amp sounds like a dream come true! Can't wait to read more details
post #18 of 54
Quote:
RA-1 (which happens to be an excellent value, IMO).
I duuno, its about as simple as a headphone amp can get, 2 9V batteries feeding a simple opamp circuit, all potted away so we don't know what parts they used. But even the most expensive opamp is like $15, and i doubt they used somthing that good.

I bet its basically an apheared 47 amp housed in a nice wooden box, selling for 10 times more than its worth...
post #19 of 54
Quote:
I don't see the appeal of crossfeed at all, wouldn't that go against the whole point of wearing headphones in the 1st place?
Not at all, at least not for me. The theory behind crossfeed is that in an open-air environment, each ear hears some amount of sound from the opposite side (whether it's the same signal just delayed, or reflections). In headphones, you lose all of this sound, making headphones sound very unrealistic. Crossfeed, if done well, makes headphones sound more like the real thing. (Yes, that's the very short version, I know.)

I believe in the theory, and I also believe how good the Max sounds with crossfeed vs. without
post #20 of 54
coolvij, have you even heard the RA-1? Or any competition?
post #21 of 54
Come on, who's going to be the first to perform surgery on their RA-1 and let us know just what is really in there? Surely there must be one among us willing to do it in the name of science. (Not me, however).
post #22 of 54
IMHO, the Headroom crossfeed knocks off a bit too much of the high end for comfort...and using the filter makes the treble sound unnatural. I personally opt for the straight and true sound that's coming out of CDP...or if I must go through modifiers, gotta be tubes.

Did anybody ever compare the Headroom Max with the Sugden Headmaster yet? Since you could count the number of high end solid state amps out there on one hand, I would think the Sugden could actually go up against the $1000+ solid state amps.
post #23 of 54
Seperate volume control for each headphone out? Now that's a good ergonomic design!

Generally speaking, it should be at least a very good product as I don't think Mr. Levinson will make his name suffer. $1500 puts it into the direct competition with RKV. Interesting.

As for the crossfeed, it's like an unpredicatible tone control, a no-no for hi-fidelity. Nevertheless, if you are not too picky about sound, it is a decent bridge between headphone listening and speaker listening.

Headphone listening w/o crossfeed does sounds weird. Ever spacial info is exaggerated. In addition, there is almost no music energy from bottom end. We trade those for other goodies like detail, dynamic, etc unmatchable by any speakers. My suggestion is if you really love headphone-listening, try to use cans for enjoyment only. This way, your brain will adapt to it gradually.
post #24 of 54
Vertigo-1,
I can tell you first hand that the Sugden Headmaster is a great amp! Anyone care to loan me a Headroom Max so I can do a detailed A/B comparison? I promise to write a detailed review.
post #25 of 54

:o

I'm just going by what other people have said.

(smacks himself on head; chides himself aloud for acting like gluegun )

But I guess I shouldn't have said "one of the best values" - just a good value......
post #26 of 54
Crossfeed can be worthwhile, in terms of making a highly separated recording more listenable. This is a fairly common occurence w/ pop, rock, and alternative CDs. And besides, since those genres use alot of synth sound anyway, does it really matter too much if the sound is altered a little?
post #27 of 54
Quote:
As for the crossfeed, it's like an unpredicatible tone control, a no-no for hi-fidelity. Nevertheless, if you are not too picky about sound, it is a decent bridge between headphone listening and speaker listening.
You guys sounding like the "purist" extremists here. I take a bit of offense at the idea that crossfeed is "decent" if "you are not too picky about sound."

Hell, if I wasn't picky about sound, I wouldn't be here

Temple, have you ever even heard the Max? There's little "unpredictable" about its crossfeed circuit. While the cheaper electronics in something like the TA make its crossfeed affect the sound noticeably, the Max is a whole 'nother ballgame. I would suggest that before people go bashing crossfeed, they actually try out one of the "reference" level amps that use it.

Vertigo, when you talk about the HeadRoom crossfeed circuit, to which amp are you referring? As I think Jude will agree, the Max knocks off far less of the high end than the Airhead does, and the filter sounds anything but unnatural. I've done lots of fiddling here trying to test out different combinations of crossfeed/no crossfeed and no/some/more high boosts, and I gotta say that crossfeed sounds more realistic and more accurate than no crossfeed on almost every recording I used.

And the whole notion that tone controls are a "no-no" for hi-fi is a total crock. Tone controls/equalizers that are used carefully can compensate for things like poor room acoustics. The problem with "audiophiles" is when they get so caught up in the lingo and the myths that they forget we're talking about audio waves and human hearing. I've been guilty of this myself many times, to be quite honest.
post #28 of 54
Quote:
As for the crossfeed, it's like an unpredicatible tone control, a no-no for hi-fidelity.
I think most audiophiles would consider the mere act of headphone listening a "no-no". I don't think those silly rules apply to headphones.Anything you can do to help make headphone listening sound more natural is a good thing, I think.

I am a VERY discriminating listener, and yeah I lean heavily toward the audiophile side of the fence.

I used to own a maxed out home and let me tell you, the effect of the cross-feed is SUBTLE at first. It took a bit of mental break-in to hear what it was doing.
But, once I could discern the difference, I liked it a lot better than without x-feed and better still with the dreaded filter switch engaged.

Don't knock it til you've tried it, I think an adjustable (and defeatable) x-feed should be mandatory on all serious headphone amps.

My current amp (ZOTL) does not have x-feed, but it turns out that having the tube sound (more distortion?) is preferable to ss with x-feed.

Now if someone would build a tube amp with X-feed-- sign me up!

markl
post #29 of 54
MacDEF, my results come in from using a Headroom Home. By default, I notice the Home has a bit of a treble rolloff in comparison to some of the other amps out there...turning on the crossfeed highlights it more by cutting off even more treble and increasing the bass (hence the necessity of the filter). I wasn't surprised about the treble rolloff either because I remember reading somewhere about how Tyll/Todd don't believe listeners should have to suffer through sibilance, hence a slightly rolled off treble. You do have the newer Max, so maybe they tweaked it to roll off highs less.
post #30 of 54
I started out with a Cosmic and base station. I loved the option of the image processor, so when I purchased the EarMax Pro, I called Todd and ordered a Static. I can switch on the processor if I choose, and use the filter if I decide to.

I really enjoy having these features available with my EarMax as well.

Rick
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphone Amps (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Red Rose Headphone Amp