Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Anyone using the Burson Audio Headphone Amp 160?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Anyone using the Burson Audio Headphone Amp 160? - Page 3

post #31 of 40
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by matthewh133 View Post

 

Interesting that the steps are apparently all the same. As far as the customization goes for your headphones, it's a kool idea, but it would be hard to put across exactly what volume you want the step to be at wouldn't it? As in, unless you both manage to use the exact same method for measuring the dB coming from them on the same song, it could be off. It will be interesting to find out some more information.

matthewh133........I think if I were to specifiy a customized volume control it would strictly be to request smaller decibel increases for the first 10 steps.

 

I didn't hear back from John Delmo today.  Still curious what the decible differences there are between each step.

 

 

post #32 of 40
Thread Starter 



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by khatch View Post

I'd be fine with it if they just converted to a 48 step attenuator, reduced the gain spectrum 50%, and took the lower end of that range and spread it evenly across the full 48 steps.  LOL - yeah, like that's going to happen.  atsmile.gif

khatch.......Yeah, I agree.  Like you said........."like that's going to happen".

 

Building a 48 step discrete volume control into the HA160 would certainly drive the cost up, too.

 

 

post #33 of 40

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdandy View Post



matthewh133........I think if I were to specifiy a customized volume control it would strictly be to request smaller decibel increases for the first 10 steps.

 

I didn't hear back from John Delmo today.  Still curious what the decible differences there are between each step.

 

 

 

I imagine the decibel differences would be dependent upon the headphone used (someone please correct me if I'm wrong).

post #34 of 40
Thread Starter 



 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Permagrin View Post

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdandy View Post



matthewh133........I think if I were to specifiy a customized volume control it would strictly be to request smaller decibel increases for the first 10 steps.

 

I didn't hear back from John Delmo today.  Still curious what the decible differences there are between each step.

 

 

 

I imagine the decibel differences would be dependent upon the headphone used (someone please correct me if I'm wrong).

Permagrin.......You are correct.  The headphones impedance will affect the volume level at any give step setting on the HA160, as will the efficiency of the drivers.

 

 

post #35 of 40

 

Originally Posted by khatch View Post

I'd be fine with it if they just converted to a 48 step attenuator, reduced the gain spectrum 50%, and took the lower end of that range and spread it evenly across the full 48 steps.  LOL - yeah, like that's going to happen.  atsmile.gif


I'm quite sure you could get a lower gain on either or both jacks if you asked nicely. OTOH, yeah....the 24 stepped attenuation isn't ideal, but still a very cost effective solution to volume control...a high end ALPS like this costs more than the HA-160 itself: http://cgi.ebay.com/ALPS-Potentiometer-RK50112-10K-50K-100K-250K-RK50-pot-/350338636424

 

Why is stepped better?

http://diyaudio.co.kr/wwwboard1/data/board1/compare.pdf

 http://www.dact.com/html/attenuator_data_sheet.html

http://www.bursonaudio.com/hp_volume_control.htm

 

I personally use a Griffin PowerMate w/ 64bit float volume attenuation, in order to finetune what the Burson pot doesn't allow me to....gets the job done nicely.

 

Besides in those loudness war days, bit-perfect can easily clip: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/542358/im-new#post_7315509


Edited by leeperry - 3/3/11 at 12:51pm
post #36 of 40
Thread Starter 

leeperry.......I assume that since you use the Griffin PowerMate w/ 64bit float volume attenuation, your source is predominately computer files.  Does the Griffin PowerMate drop bits to control volume?


Edited by jdandy - 3/3/11 at 5:21pm
post #37 of 40

Well, the only way to attenuate in the digital domain is to lower the bit depth...but 16bit equal 96dB, do you need them all? Besides if you check the link I just posted, many "hot" CD's can easily clip by +3dB, and even +6dB in  a worst case scenario. 1bit equals 6dB....so to be on the safe side you'd attenuate by -6dB...that's still 90dB of headroom. More than enough IMHO.

 

And the beauty of doing 64bit float attenuation(with dithering to 24bit integer) is that the volume attenuation is as accurate as can be. And anyway, the Burson pot clearly isn't accurate enough...so it allows me to kill two birds w/ one stone(avoiding intersample clipping and having the output volume exactly how I want it).


Edited by leeperry - 3/3/11 at 4:39pm
post #38 of 40
Thread Starter 

leeperry.......Thanks for the explanation.  I learned something.  I did not know what the decibel difference was from a single bit dropped.

post #39 of 40

I run the HA160D with Sennheiser HD650 headphones (and as a dac/pre-amp for my Dynaudio nearfield monitors) and am well pleased with its duties at both.

It really seems to make the Sennheisers sound so much more authoritive and a much bigger soundstage.  

The low level detail retrieval is there in spades - but (thankfully) not from any treble boost.

The sound seems somewhat effortless and it is not fatiguing in the slightest.

I am enjoying listening to my headphones more than ever before (and have been a headphoner for 25 years now) AND I can listen longer with my HA160D causing more hours than ever and a bigger grin on my face whilst doing so.

 

I listen to everything from Jazz and classical, to hip hop, rock and world music.

 

cheers.

post #40 of 40

I have tried a pangea ac14 power cord i purchased from audio advisor for about 30 dolllars I heard a useful improvement from the ha-160.But i replaced the stock fuse with a HiFi tuning silver star fuse i believe it was small 5amp fast blowfuse and i realized a substantial improvement in the sound of the amp.The sound of the amp tightened up considerably with better imaging and tighter bass.The sound of the amp is now more neutral and the resolution of the amp was also improved.I am able to hear more low level information and the noise floor level of the amp dropped.This is a very effective tweak considering the fuse costs about 50 dollars.The change is very noticeable.I must add that i had some kubala sosna emotion power cords in my speaker setup and tried one on the burson and the result was much better than the pangea.The bass was a lot fuller and the soundstage had much more depth.The amp also had a lot more information than with the pangea cord.But to be fair the pangea only costs 30 dollars and the kubala emotion cord costs 750 dollars.I know that the fact that the power cord costs more than the amp is absurd.But since i had a couple of them in my speaker system i thought i would try one on the burson.If you get the burson I would suggest you upgrade the stock fuse with at least a silver star hifi tuning fuse or maybe the hifi tunig supreme fuse.I recently upgraded the hifi tuning gold fuse in my denon 3931 universal player with the hifi tuning supreme fuse and realized a huge improvement in the players sonics.The player now sounds much more open with an even lower noise floor.The player has much tighter bass ,better dynamics and just plain sounds more real.

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) › Anyone using the Burson Audio Headphone Amp 160?