or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Does a good stereo receiver count as a "headphone amp"?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Does a good stereo receiver count as a "headphone amp"? - Page 3

post #31 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by TheWuss View Post
i rate this thread "very entertaining" and "mildly contentious."
i'd give it a B+.

i'd rate the headphone out on my yamaha receiver a D+ or C-.

even my portable headphone amp is louder, cleaner, provides better separation, etc. etc. etc.

now... if i paid 2 or 3 grand for a home theatre receiver, you bet your sweet arse it had better have a pretty decent headphone out.

but, i paid nothing near that. so it's not surprising it won't power my k702s.
Unfortunately this post also clouds the issue. To introduce HT equipment into the equation is to make it a whole new ball game. HT equipment often needs to produce 6 or 7 channels of high output, which on a budget can often only be accomplished through poor quality components and cheap ICs. If you're comparing speaker amps and dedicated amps you must stick with good brand (Marantz, Rotel, NAD, Yamaha) stereo amps; otherwise you're just muddying the waters.

On a personal note, I've owned any number of qood stereo amps and quite a few dedicated amps up to the LD MkV. Using my HD650, I can detect no significant difference between any of them. I can detect differences between amps, not because they're dedicated or integrated but more because they suit the 650 better or worse; or maybe they're just better designed, period. I say don't worry about whether the amp is dedicated or integrated; just find the best sounding one you can. If a speaker amp sounds great through speakers, chances are it will sound great through your headphones as well.
post #32 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bilavideo View Post
Ah yes, the "crap" refutation. Thanks. I stand corrected.

I take it then that you've sought out those threads I suggested.
post #33 of 88
OK... here's what you might looking for...

Leben CS-300 Integrated Amplifier

This is a fantastic product...it's a bit pricey but you'd be in the major leagues. I suggest it, not knowing what is your budget...

Denys
post #34 of 88
Any opinions which contemporary mid priced ($300 - $1000) home theater receiver is best with headphones?

Even though I am a fan of headphone amps, I often use the headphone output from my home theater for convenience when I am watching TV. My home theater has 5 Polk Audio speakers driven by an old Technics receiver. It is time to upgrade my receiver. Any suggestions of the best midpriced receiver/home theater for headphones? I am leaning toward Yahama, but also considering Marantz and Denon.
post #35 of 88
My 1971 vintage Marantz 2270 reciever has an excellent headphone jack with great clarity and tone. My other stereo recievers from the 1980s sound muddy and veiled and I don't like it. It's a safe bet to get a reputable dedicated headphone amp with a big sized power supply. You won't be sorry. Plus you'll sleep better at night with better confidence.
post #36 of 88
I tried the small Marantz NR1501 "slimline" receiver at a friend's house recently, with some K601 and it sounded pretty good through the HP jack. I've owned several mid to high end Marantz AVRs over the years that have also sounded nice. I don't know if that is enough info to say ALL Marantz receivers sound good..... but I've noticed they claim to use quality parts on even their lowest end current CD player the 5003, which features some kind of opamp and build in level controls for headphones.

I think I agree with the person/people above who mentioned that some receivers will pair well with some headphones and not as well with others. I don't know if I'd really base my AVR purchase strictly on the headphone out though. Usually you have to trade off features for sound. Even "budget" HiFi like NAD and Cambridge usually sacrifice features for sound and build quality, as compared to the big guys like Onkyo and Yamaha. Many AVRs will still have a stereo output that you could always use to add a decent HP amp to later. That's what I do in my bedroom with a mid range AVR.
post #37 of 88
I'm also looking for a new HT receiver (I like the Denons) in the same price range $600 to $900. But since I have a spare headphone amp (Starving Student) is there a way to connect this amp to the receiver? That way I won't have to be concerned with the headphone jack. I would try with my present Sony HT receiver but I don't want to damage the SS if there is to much input. Would tape loop out be the right place to connect or are there other outs. I would like to use the receivers remote to control volume.
post #38 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by pp312 View Post
Absolutely, definitely, once-and-for-all NOT!!!! This has come up so many times that in one thread a poster went to the trouble of emailing many of the major manufacturers to find out if they used dedicated circuits for the headphone out or just took a signal from the main amp through resistors. The answer was invariably the latter. Plus, I have personally examined dozens of popular amps and I can tell you that virtually none of them uses dedicated circuits, whether discrete or op amp based; almost without exception (the very few exceptions being in the higher priced bracket) they take a signal from the speaker outs.

Sorry to be over-emphatic but every so often someone posts something like this without the slightest proof as if it were a fact and confuses the whole issue. I wish I could make this a sticky.
There are a number of urban legends that float around on this site. I've seen threads in which the operative assumption was that all amps/receivers use cheap opamps to provide a "convenience" headphone jack. I've also read threads where the operative assumption was that most, if not all, amps/receivers use the speaker amp, stepped-down by resisters, to power the headphone jack. The latter sounds credible to me, but I frankly have not cracked the cases on any amps/receivers to actually take a look.

You make a very good point; there are a lot of broad statements made around here by people who are convinced of their technical correctness. Whether they are correct...or not. This is one issue that I would like to be definitively settled; this is a matter of fact, not opinion. Reasonable people can certainly disagree about fuzzy concepts like jitter or speaker cables, but an opamp is an opamp, and a resistor is a resistor. It would be great if this argument could be ended, once and for all.
post #39 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by Oberst Oswald View Post
I'm also looking for a new HT receiver (I like the Denons) in the same price range $600 to $900. But since I have a spare headphone amp (Starving Student) is there a way to connect this amp to the receiver? That way I won't have to be concerned with the headphone jack. I would try with my present Sony HT receiver but I don't want to damage the SS if there is to much input. Would tape loop out be the right place to connect or are there other outs. I would like to use the receivers remote to control volume.
Yes, tape loop is what you should use. I've never had a problem with too much power.

The only potential problem is how the unit downconverts surround audio. I've dealt with some AVRs that would not downmix the 5.1 DD or DTS signal to the tape loop. So instead of giving you a stereo mix, some would only give the front right and left channels which of course is missing all the center channel dialog. It seems they all handle this differently. For example: I've heard an AVR that would properly downmix everything, even DTS-HD and True-HD tracks, when they were bitstreamed from the Blu-Ray player. But if the player decoded them to LPCM and sent them to the AVR, then the downmix didn't work. So the answer really is to just try the tape loop and see.

Also it is a line level output, so the volume control will always be done on the connected HP amp rather than controlled via the remote. Sorry that's just the price you pay for better SQ.
post #40 of 88
"It would be great if this argument could be ended, once and for all."

The argument has been settled once and for all, Dr.; it's just that people haven't read all the previous threads on the subject. As I say, the myth that most receivers use 50c op amps was so pervasive that a poster decided to email the major manufacturers to find out once and for all. He needn't have bothered for my sake, however, as I'd already looked inside enough integrateds/receivers to know that virtually without exception they use resistors off the output amps. In any case it stands to reason. Why would a manufacturer anxious to keep down costs include a separate circuit for headphones when he only has to step down the main output? It's also more honest, since it's giving the headphone user the same sound as the speaker user.

I know that tomorrow someone will again inform us with the utmost confidence that all receivers use 50c op amps. I wish I had a magic wand to kill this myth stone dead, but I fear it's with us forever.

"a resister is a resister". Not when it's a "resistor", no.
post #41 of 88
I think these surround receivers are the perfect devices for people getting into this hobby - cheap with excellent sound. I find them mandatory for watching movies for their Dolby Headphone, Silent Cinema or whatever headphone surround processing they may have. I will never sell my Yamaha receiver, ever.

On the other hand when I hear people suggesting that dedicated headphone amplifiers are a con and a waste of money - I get really irritated.
post #42 of 88
Thanks project86 for your reply. When I find the time I'll hook up the wires (a real pain) and see if I'm lucky and get the 5 channel sound through the headphones.
post #43 of 88
Quote:
Originally Posted by pp312 View Post
"It would be great if this argument could be ended, once and for all."

The argument has been settled once and for all, Dr.; it's just that people haven't read all the previous threads on the subject. As I say, the myth that most receivers use 50c op amps was so pervasive that a poster decided to email the major manufacturers to find out once and for all. He needn't have bothered for my sake, however, as I'd already looked inside enough integrateds/receivers to know that virtually without exception they use resistors off the output amps. In any case it stands to reason. Why would a manufacturer anxious to keep down costs include a separate circuit for headphones when he only has to step down the main output? It's also more honest, since it's giving the headphone user the same sound as the speaker user.

I know that tomorrow someone will again inform us with the utmost confidence that all receivers use 50c op amps. I wish I had a magic wand to kill this myth stone dead, but I fear it's with us forever.

"a resister is a resister". Not when it's a "resistor", no.
O.K., I'm wincing over the spelling error. Limited as my knowledge is, I should nevertheless not make mistakes like that.

I definitely take your word for the truth of the matter, both because of your observations of actual equipment and because of the basic logic of your arguments. I think it's interesting, though, that arguments like this go on seemingly forever, with people on both sides expressing serene confidence (O.K., maybe not so serene sometimes) in their positions.

This may seem like a leap, but I consider ongoing issues like this to be fundamental flaw of user-generated content. Apart from basic terms and conditions of posting here -- no profanity, no religion, etc.-- it's a free-for-all. In traditional media like magazines and newspapers, a technical editor would be the arbiter of issues like this, and the newspaper or magazine would adopt and maintain a consistent position. Without traditional oversight, it seems to me, it's inevitable that disagreements like this will go on and on.
post #44 of 88
Thoughtful post, Dr, and not merely because you accept my argument.

Stickies are the only way of keeping accepted knowledge before posters' eyes, but I've never been able to gain one for this particular bit of knowledge; the best I can do is keep lookout and step on the first person to re-raise the old myth. Doesn't help much; it comes back up as persistently as mown grass.

As for serene confidence, I fear my serenity is too easily disturbed. I feel like the schoolteacher who keeps repeating through gritted teeth, "How many times!"
post #45 of 88
Well, either way, we have all heard the truth by now. You have the option of believing 1 of 2 random strangers off the internet, who each assure you that they are correct.
Do you pick the theory you like the most just because it's your favorite, or seems likely to you?


This site has schematics of many receiver examples available, or use some Google magic:

Free Manuals User / Service / Schematics for Download | HiFi Engine
Service manual repair download schematic diagram instruction manuals pdf free : GiveMeFile.Net


The truth is out there. If you really want to know, it's easy to find out even for a layman. If you want to be spoonfed, how do you know that anything you accept from Random Internet Guy #47436 really has any basis in reality?
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) › Does a good stereo receiver count as a "headphone amp"?