Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › JH Audio JH-13 PRO impressions thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

JH Audio JH-13 PRO impressions thread - Page 591

post #8851 of 10666
Quote:
Originally Posted by melkenshawn View Post


Wow, does it sound better out of the colorfly or the ipod+ amp setup?

Quote:
Originally Posted by nc8000 View Post


IPod -> SR71-B -> balanced TWag V2 cable or Colorfly C4 with balanced to single ended converter


 


About equally good but different. SR71-B is probably the better amp but C4 clearly has a better dac than the iPod and plays hires. Since C4 does not have a line out I can't try C4 as a source feeding SR71-B
post #8852 of 10666
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverlight View Post

Eric - thanks for the quick response.  I'm not sure I'd characterize the SQ I'm hearing here as a difference in preference, but I could be wrong.  I'm wondering if it's my ears... or the IEM's, don't know.  My reference headphone gear is a electrostatic system (SR009, SR007mk1, HE90) and I have a couple dynamic setups (LiquidFire -> LCD3, etc.).  On IEM's, my daily is a NuForce $70 headphone with iPhone mic (which is sounding more transparent than the JH13's on the upper mids and highs, which is why I think there must be an issue).


Well, I love my JH13pro as well and despite how great they can be they won't touch your reference system though.  Still, they should walk all over your Nuforce $70 headphones in terms of transparency.  I would call JHaudio and ask to see what's going on with the upper mids & high.  For reference, I find the JH13pro treble to be more subdued next to my Shure SE535.

 

post #8853 of 10666
Quote:
Originally Posted by dallan View Post

Well finally caught up with the thread.  Sounds like the sound science type guys are over here espousing that the cheapest is perfect and we can't trust our ears again.confused.gif

 

I had a Sansa Fuze for a while, wanted to use it because it played my flac files.  The sound was totally flat with the JH13s, anyone who use that is really missing out.  I suspect the Sansa sound ie the Clip, which is lower end still, would carry that sound.  What a waste of money spent on a pair of 13's.  The 13's really show the source like HD800s, up the chain counts.


Well, the beauty of hi-fi upstream gear is that they're rated on their ability to make the signal sound artificially delicious. So to an extent, you are getting something for your money -- but again, this is much more efficiently achieved (in both performance and dollar terms) by means of software (or hardware) equalization.

 

Of course the Clip+ isn't a holy grail and not reference in the grand scheme of things -- I should have specified that it is more-or-less as reference as a portable device can get. But the notion that one has to spend more than $100-150 on a discrete upstream desktop component (DAC or amplifier) is pretty absurd and uncorroborated. In fact there's a wealth of information affirming the converse; i.e. that modern upstream components sound the same.*

 

*The caveat is the hi-fi theory I opened up with, whereby some manufacturers will play with filtration and impedance (among other decisions of questionable fidelity) to reap "euphonic" results that are actually flavors and distortion of the original signal.

 

It's curious that hi-fi doesn't really mean "high fidelity" anymore. I'd suppose it started when some brilliant marketer decided that playback should be an art rather than a science -- but in fact all playback can be dictated in scientific terms and measurements.


Edited by 3X0 - 4/11/12 at 10:26am
post #8854 of 10666

iPod Classic (lossless) > CLAS Solo > Pico Slim > 13s

post #8855 of 10666
To me the difference was apparent even when going from the fuse to an ipod classic with lod. My daughter swearas by her ipod and skullcandy iems so if you are used to your setup and you like it go for it. For me the sound of the sansa is flat and in no way nuetral . But it is cheap, that's why many people get them. I am considered out of my mind to have a pair of thousand dollar iem and there are many that claim they aren't nuetrald either. I k.ow what I like though and haven't changed my portable set up in a few years.
Sorry about disjointed post, pecking on cellphone smily_headphones1.gif
post #8856 of 10666
When you guys refer to the iPod classic is it the imod version or just the default one?
post #8857 of 10666
The iMod is always before Classic
post #8858 of 10666

So, many of you guys are just using the default ipod classic 5.5 gen?

post #8859 of 10666
5.5 was before the Classic (Classic is 6th and 7th gen). I'm using a Classic (7th gen) and a Touch (2nd gen). Years ago I had the original iMod (the one where the caps were internal and the headphone out got converted to a line out).
post #8860 of 10666
Yeah, if we meant iMod we would have said iMod; I've never seen someone say "iPod classic" when they actually meant an iMod.

Also curious that you assume 5.5 gen is the "default". I think we're up to 7th gen now? Mine is 6th, fwiw.
post #8861 of 10666

When i mean default, i am referring to the normal version without any form of upgrades or improvements whatsoever(eg rockbox or iMod). Usage of default would be in the context of default password, default gateway ip etc.

post #8862 of 10666

Yes, well, you're also assigning a particular generation in the Classic line-up to "default" status, which is an odd use of the term. Anyway, round these parts people are more likely to say "unmodded" instead of "default".

post #8863 of 10666
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3X0 View Post


Well, the beauty of hi-fi upstream gear is that they're rated on their ability to make the signal sound artificially delicious. So to an extent, you are getting something for your money -- but again, this is much more efficiently achieved (in both performance and dollar terms) by means of software (or hardware) equalization.

 

Of course the Clip+ isn't a holy grail and not reference in the grand scheme of things -- I should have specified that it is more-or-less as reference as a portable device can get. But the notion that one has to spend more than $100-150 on a discrete upstream desktop component (DAC or amplifier) is pretty absurd and uncorroborated. In fact there's a wealth of information affirming the converse; i.e. that modern upstream components sound the same.*

 

 

 

As reference as a portable device can get.....the Clip??  Guess alot of folks out here waist their money on the external devices for the ipods now by fostex or the solo trying to get reference that they could have for under $50.  All modern upsteam components sound the same???  What information, I have heard tons of different upstream combo, they all sound different!  Where are you hearing this stuff?

 

Okay, well i see you don't believe in dac's either, okay-per your profile.   Artificially delicious..... Many people who I trust and the best setups that i have heard have dac's or extremely high end cd players. Like i said to each his own, but a couple of meets sure did open my eyes throughout the years and the claim of a "euphoric sound" and not a reference sound is like whistling in the dark.

 

I am not on here too much lately and after already trying that route before finding out for my self, i now see why.  Sure I'll get an ear full but hey, your justifications for settling on where you are are just that.  Sometimes these statements just blow me off my chair, that is why so many of the audiophiles don't even bother posting out here anymore, just don't want to have to argue for something that they have already figured out.

post #8864 of 10666

^ Um, but you'd only be able to tell whether a piece of gear is not euphonic at all if you can tell whether it's free from colouration. And the only reliable way to check that is with measurements.

Outside of measurements, we're all very susceptible to being tricked or tricking ourselves. So...it's not a knock against whether a "more high end" setup sounds better--that's just up to the individual, and that's completely ok. What's there to get upset about?

post #8865 of 10666

I do have on euphonic piece of gear that i actually like a lot, it sounds good, but most of my gear is neutral.  Not upset just plain baffled.  Either there are those who haven't listened to other systems of they just are justifying that they are not willing to spend the money, and some of the stuff is expensive and not worth the cost to all.  But i can tell when i put on the O2's out of a blue hawaiian and a fifteen thousand dollar cd player, even though i don't know the cost or the name at the time, that it is clear with no noise level and incredibly dynamic.  That's other peoples stuff that i can not afford and don't know what it costs till later.  It is not just preference, although some things are, others are just obvious.  Upsteam components make all the difference in the world,   I had to change stuff like crazy to deal with fatigue at one point and getting rid of the digital etch i got from computer generated audio.  

 

Well good luck with your journey, Eric_C mine finally ended a year or two back on all of this, got it right and knew the next step was to pricey, so just enjoying the music....right now.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › JH Audio JH-13 PRO impressions thread