Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphone Amps › iBasso T3D is available!?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

iBasso T3D is available!? - Page 2

post #16 of 30
The volume default would seem like a good thing.
post #17 of 30
Hey guys, I can't understand the main difference between an analog pot and a digital. Can anyone explain it to me, please?

Do you that a T3 or T3D are a good match for the sennheiser hd555 and a Cowon D2?
post #18 of 30
Interested for someone to post how this sounds...
post #19 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by acvtre View Post
Hey guys, I can't understand the main difference between an analog pot and a digital. Can anyone explain it to me, please?

Do you that a T3 or T3D are a good match for the sennheiser hd555 and a Cowon D2?
Think of it this way. An analog pot has physical steps, while a digital pot the steps are programmed in. So a digital pot could have an infinite amount of steps.
post #20 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scott_Tarlow View Post
Think of it this way. An analog pot has physical steps, while a digital pot the steps are programmed in. So a digital pot could have an infinite amount of steps.
This means it's more precise, isn't it? and you can find your favourite volume easier, right?
But someone posted that the T3 SQ is better than th T3D. So actually, how the T3D could be better?

Do you think the T3 it's enough tough to power the sennheiser hd555 or hd595?
post #21 of 30
HD555 don't need much to power. Has anyone heard the T3D
post #22 of 30
Quote:
it may simply be that the digital control fits better in the slimline casing for the T3
The Headstage Arrow uses an excellent (but expensive) Alps analog volume control and is one of the slimmest amps I've ever seen at just over 1/4" thick.
post #23 of 30
The T3D is very good - mine just arrived today. It is quite bright, but definitely worth the 135$. Great resolution and the digital metre is very good. Well recommended.
post #24 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by shigzeo View Post
The T3D is very good - mine just arrived today. It is quite bright, but definitely worth the 135$. Great resolution and the digital metre is very good. Well recommended.

For $135 I'd like to hear it. I hope you (or anyone with good ears) gets a chance to do an in depth comparison with the Arrow.
post #25 of 30
I think that will happen. The T3D could be killer if its treble was a bit more... refined. It is TINY (those should be in smaller text), has great resolution, and is very impressive otherwise.

My initial impressions of the T3D are here
post #26 of 30
I read your first impressions and although it does sound like a decent performer for such a small amp at it's cost, the word bright appeared too often for my liking. It seems (from what I have heard myself and been reading) that IEMs are some of the hardest headphones to get good solid bass from. Brightness doesn't seem to be what really needs to be accentuated with most of them, especially if it is not very...refined. Of course I would need to hear it for myself, or wait for a more in depth impression to get a better perspective on it's sound.
post #27 of 30
Well, I can concur that it has a solid bass. There is no bass roll off that I can see with the FE333; I will check with my other balanced armature earphones and report back, but it is very good.

Bright doesn't depend on a lack of bass; it is another realm. This amp is impressive to be able to hold such a great FR and pretty low noise floor. I will admit to preferring the P3+ with OPA 2111 in L/R, BUF 634K in Buffers and the V/G dummied, but that is another experience. For the price and size, the T3D is quite amazing. If anything changes to make it better, I'll be sure to cram that in.
post #28 of 30
Quote:
Bright doesn't depend on a lack of bass;
I'm aware of that; the (excessive?) brightness just seemed to be the thing you tended to focus on in the review while making no mention of the bass response (that I recall). I simply meant that in my experience, smaller amps don't usually have to struggle as hard to present a decent top end as they do to produce well defined bass/volume without distortion (granted I use higher ohm cans).
post #29 of 30
I have and love the T3. Skylab and others have discussed these forever on the main T3 thread...

but to recap: T3 has a tiny bit better overall sound quality, but the T3D has the digital volume control which is mainly important for very high efficiency IEMs because even good amps rarely keep left/right channel balance at very low volumes, whereas digitals do.

Someone said the T3's digital volume control was better than the filo e5, but it was also 3x the price. I had the RSA Shadow, which has an even better digital volume control than the T3D, and costs 3x the price of THAT.

But for what it's worth, I've used both digital and the non-digital T3 with IEMS and actually found that I never listened low enough for it to make a difference, even when I was listening quietly. So the consensus has generally been to get the T3 over the T3D, for the better SQ and slightly lower cost (also for resale value, since non-IEM users won't care about the digital volume control, and want the better SQ). That said, I'm sure the SQ differences - like most of the differences we discuss on this forum - are incredibly minor, and you'd be perfectly happy with either one. It's a fantastic little amp. Probably best price/performance ratio out there, for my 2 cents.
post #30 of 30
Quote:
Originally Posted by AVU View Post
I have and love the T3. Skylab and others have discussed these forever on the main T3 thread...

but to recap: T3 has a tiny bit better overall sound quality, but the T3D has the digital volume control which is mainly important for very high efficiency IEMs because even good amps rarely keep left/right channel balance at very low volumes, whereas digitals do.

Someone said the T3's digital volume control was better than the filo e5, but it was also 3x the price. I had the RSA Shadow, which has an even better digital volume control than the T3D, and costs 3x the price of THAT.

But for what it's worth, I've used both digital and the non-digital T3 with IEMS and actually found that I never listened low enough for it to make a difference, even when I was listening quietly. So the consensus has generally been to get the T3 over the T3D, for the better SQ and slightly lower cost (also for resale value, since non-IEM users won't care about the digital volume control, and want the better SQ). That said, I'm sure the SQ differences - like most of the differences we discuss on this forum - are incredibly minor, and you'd be perfectly happy with either one. It's a fantastic little amp. Probably best price/performance ratio out there, for my 2 cents.
Thank you for what seems an honest assessment. I must admit to having neglected reading many of Skylab's reviews recently. I used to read them religiously and have used them as a guide for past purchases without being disappointed. I began reading other view points (which have turned out to often concur with his) and had forgotten how thorough and informative his reviews are. I will be keeping more up to date with his reviews again thanks to your comment.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Headphone Amps
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphone Amps › iBasso T3D is available!?