Originally Posted by AnakChan
For those of you who moved from the 1.69Vrms to 2.0Vrms, aside from a volume increase (and the clean up of noise), do you feel the an improvement in mid-bass filling in and overall soundstage/imaging (giving a fuller sound)?
I have all 3x -dBs (1.2Vrms, 1.69Vrms, 2.0Vrms) side-by-side and it seems the latest seems to improve in sound quality too. I talked to David @ Cypherlabs and he mentioned that he did improve the sonics too (as opposed of 1.2Vrms -> 1.69Vrms, it was more just volume increase).
Like I have already mentioned from my previous post in thus thread .
Source : iPhone 4S
Dac : cyberlabs 1,69 Vrms and 2,00 Vrms
Amp : alo Rx 3 B I have use MID GAIN
Headphone : ultrasone sig DJ
Cable : balance RSA to RSA
The result as follow :
1,69 Vrms vs 2,00 Vrms
1,69 Vrns : slightly more extended than 2,00Vrms
Has better detail compare 1,69 Vrms
2,00 Vrms : is more forward than 1,69 Vrms
1,69 Vrms : is sweeter mid and clearer than 2,00 Vrms
2,00 Vrms : has more bass volume and has better bass impact than 1,69 Vrms
Like you hear the bass from subwoofer .
1,69 Vrms : has more detail but less bass impact compare 2,00 Vrms
1,69 Vrms has better music separation than 2,00 Vrms
1,69 Vrms has wider soundstage than 2,00 Vrms
2,00 Vrms has narrower soundstage than 1,69 Vrms , remain me like my class solo old version
My IMO is :
For pair with high impendance Headphones and Orthos , the new version 2,00 Vrms is better
Sound fuller than 1,69 Vrms
For pair with low impendance Headphones and iems , the 1,69 Vrms is better
Like with ultrasone Sig DJ is low impedance headphone ,1,69 Vrms has better synergy
if I use 2,00 Vrms to much and Faster fatigue to my ears .
My 2,00 Vrms haven't burn in properly just run 30 hours .
That's why I keep my 1,69 Vrms and bought 2,00 Vrms
Now my feeling is proved to own these two cyberlabs class - dB for various use of my iems and headphones collection .Edited by rudi0504 - 5/6/13 at 7:24am