Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Hifiman HM-801 RMAA Tests
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Hifiman HM-801 RMAA Tests - Page 8  

post #106 of 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by WalkGood View Post





And just think how many ipod's you could get for $790.00 :D


Just think, you could have 10 Honda Civics instead of 1 Ferrari F430. 


Edited by Edwood - 5/8/10 at 9:46pm
post #107 of 795

ive bought bad products before, i wouldnt go this far to defend any of them, a sunk cost is a sunk cost. however NEXT time i would be more careful about where i placed my money and whom i trusted with it. this product isnt one of them. if fang did in fact show off the AA test results and people still bought into it, then thats on them.

 

to my man el_doug: http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/Comparisons/Hifiman%20Line-Out%2C%20USB%2C%20SPDIF.htm more results for your tastes. ill give it to dfkt for being thorough with his tests, if you ask him hell try to post the results but it looks like hes got the bases covered. all in all the 801 doesnt test horribly, but its not $800usd good ... an iphone 3GS (i HATE apple, im not sure why theyve earned my endorsement here ...) costs less and performs better, which to me equals value.

 

deflecting the argument to cross-feed and semantics, distracts from the true discussion here, which is the AA results for the 801.

post #108 of 795

LOL, the current Corvette ZR-1 has a faster 0-60 time than the Ferarri F430.  So naturally I think the Corvetter ZR1 is a far superior car than the F430 since I read that single spec.  

 

I've never driven either car, but the truth is the truth.  The ZR1 is flat out faster 0-60 in tests.  Because that's all that matters.

 

Well, except for those really curvy roads, interior and exterior build quality, road handling.........but I digress.

 

Single benchmark results are all that matter right?

 

Guess I'm selling my HifiMan HM-801 and getting an iPhone! 

post #109 of 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwood View Post


Just think, you could have 10 Honda Civics instead of 1 Ferrari F430. 


Wow ignorance is bliss isn’t it, how in the world can you compare that POS to a Ferrari o_O BTW I too saw the internal pictures of the poor soldering, outdated parts and the internals, you need a reality check.
 

post #110 of 795


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwood View Post

LOL, the current Corvette ZR-1 has a faster 0-60 time than the Ferarri F430.  So naturally I think the Corvetter ZR1 is a far superior car than the F430 since I read that single spec.  

 

I've never driven either car, but the truth is the truth.  The ZR1 is flat out faster 0-60 in tests.  Because that's all that matters.

 

Well, except for those really curvy roads, interior and exterior build quality, road handling.........but I digress.

 

Single benchmark results are all that matter right?

 

Guess I'm selling my HifiMan HM-801 and getting an iPhone! 

 

Did you read this threads title before posting genius?
 

post #111 of 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rockford View Post


 

 

Did you read this threads title before posting genius?
 


Yes, thank you, I are a posting genius.

post #112 of 795

 

Originally Posted by MrGreen View Post

Actually, you are the one who seems to have problems understanding the concept of crossfeed. Channel separation has everything to do with it.

 

And what was I stating instead?

 

There is no possible way to crossfeed and have 100% of the "soundstage" intact. Can it be improved for headphone listening? Certainly it can, but you are reducing it by decreasing stereo bias.


Your problem is that for some reason you think that soundstage is identical with channel separation. Allow yourself some more fantasy!  Soundstage is a term used for describing the 3-dimensionality and spatial realism of a sonic presentation. Note that I say 3-dimensionality, not 2-dimensionality! And yes: a good crossfeed leaves the soundstage intact or even improves it in some aspects, like my own implementation. The latter implies that I know what I'm talking about.

 

You can use crossfeed all you like, but a device that has it without the ability to turn it off is inherently flawed. Ideally we should be aiming for channel separation that is of the same dynamic range as cds or higher, and crossfeeds should be left optional (as I think meier audio does on their amps if I recall correctly. The hifiman is -45dB crosstalk, so it doesnt reach your magic number.

 

I would say it's still enough, since even vinyl records (with their 15-30 dB) usually provide a realistic soundstage. The number of 50 dB was just an arbitrary value known to be easily surpassed by dedicated amps. For a DAP, thus a drive+DAC+headphone amp, it's still a decent and uncritical value. 

 

I don't have HiFiMan shares and no interest to defend a device with some questionable measuring specs, but other than you I don't see reason enough to conclude a heavily compromised sound quality from them. The treble roll-off would be a deal-breaker for me, but certainly not the channel separation, which is o.k.

.

post #113 of 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by WalkGood View Post




Wow ignorance is bliss isn’t it, how in the world can you compare that POS to a Ferrari o_O BTW I too saw the internal pictures of the poor soldering, outdated parts and the internals, you need a reality check.
 

 

Got links?

 

post #114 of 795

You will have to wait for dfkt to post those if he is going to, or you can find yourself a screwdriver and open yours up.

post #115 of 795
Originally Posted by Edwood View Post

Personally, I prefer not to use artificial Crossfeed software-wise or in amps.  The only natural crossfeed I liked was in the K1000, which operate more like speakers.


The K 1000's crossfeed is very different from the «artificial» crossfeed (à la Meier-Audio's «Natural Crossfeed»). The latter serves for reducing channel separation at lower frequencies to make listening to extremely panned recordings (speak early Beatles and the like) more bearable. A one-sided bass is anything but natural, since such an experience isn't possible in reality. Now the K 1000 doesn't fulfill this requirement at all. At best it makes for some minute midrange crosstalk, but that doesn't help with the Beatles recordings. Not to my ears.
.

post #116 of 795

Interesting measurements. I haven't read the rest of this thread, but it seems the digital filter has a very slow roll-off on the Hifiman (high-end DACs have a slow roll-off filter) and a sharp cut-off on the others (which isn't the most ideal, but looks more impressive on a graph). That roll-off in the Hifiman is only -1dB at 10k, above which it doesn't matter so much, so it'd be mostly if not entirely inaudible.  The rest of the measurements, if my understanding is correct, aren't as bad as they are making it out to be. I disagree with the conclusions about crosstalk, as the Hifiman's is at least flat, and the ones that supposedly best it have wildly varying graphs that will distort the music, such as the Cowan which I'll bet gives the music more bass. I wonder if the bass roll-offs were a result of the load of the computer being different to what  the DAPs would have to deal with when driving headphones? Also, the forum does seem to be very anti-head-fi, which is more likely why the OP in that thread made the comments he did, rather than because he understands what the graphs say.

post #117 of 795
Quote:
Originally Posted by JaZZ View Post

 

 

And what was I stating instead?

 


Your problem is that for some reason you think that soundstage is identical with channel separation. Allow yourself some more fantasy!  Soundstage is a term used for describing the 3-dimensionality and spatial realism of a sonic presentation. Note that I say 3-dimensionality, not 2-dimensionality! And yes: a good crossfeed leaves the soundstage intact or even improves it in some aspects, like my own implementation. The latter implies that I know what I'm talking about.

 

 

I would say it's still enough, since even vinyl records (with their 15-30 dB) usually provide a realistic soundstage. The number of 50 dB was just an arbitrary value known to be easily surpassed by dedicated amps. For a DAP, thus a drive+DAC+headphone amp, it's still a decent and uncritical value. 

 

I don't have HiFiMan shares and no interest to defend a device with some questionable measuring specs, but other than you I don't see reason enough to conclude a heavily compromised sound quality from them. The treble roll-off would be a deal-breaker for me, but certainly not the channel separation, which is o.k.

.

 

 

Right.

 

So how exactly does x (soundstage size) become larger when the determining factor is reduced? 0dbfs crosstalk (that is 100% crosstalk) is mono. You can't honestly believe mono has a "brilliant soundstage".

 

Electronics dont have the benefits of mechanical parts where acoustic design, offset etc affects the perception of soundstage, they only present raw data (in essence), which is relied on by the quality of their parts.

 

If I was to present you with a perfect device, only it output data in mono, you could not sit there and tell me it had soundstage through headphones, simply because of the way the audition works: it would perceive the sounds coming from the centre of your head (in ideal circumstances). I feel awkward arguing about this, because I think soundstage is probably up there with the least important qualities for headphones. Still I cannot sit there while you are being wrong.

 

 

 

In other news. What are some things that RMAA do not test? Does it adequately test "quality of sound"? Or are we to believe the STX is the greatest thing since sliced bread? Mind you, I've seen results that put the STX at way lower than the advertised maximum of the dac chips it uses....


Edited by MrGreen - 5/8/10 at 10:32pm
post #118 of 795

 





Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwood View Post

 

Got links?

I can not share what is not mine to share or I would, I would recommend since you have one look closely for yourself. Look at the solder joints, the old burr pcm1704 DAC used from 1998 which has been discontinued … the design flaws in the hifiman are clear and obvious, I didn’t need to look at graphs to determine my opinion, but it certainly helps.

 

post #119 of 795

PCM1704 is still available from Ti now. Do you really think PCM1794 or WM8742 is better than PCM1704?

 

http://focus.ti.com/docs/prod/folders/print/pcm1704.html#inventory


Edited by Nankai - 5/8/10 at 10:53pm
post #120 of 795

Just out of curiosity, some pepple can notice -1db over 10k but unable to hear the difference between 801 and clip?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
This thread is locked  
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › Hifiman HM-801 RMAA Tests