Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Akg K-702 - Amped vs Unamped : Can't hear much of a difference?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Akg K-702 - Amped vs Unamped : Can't hear much of a difference? - Page 5

post #61 of 86
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Somebody007 View Post

Amazing video



Yes it is...yes it is. I think it's wonderful how nowadays engineers have this amazingly generous mindset, they don't mind giving away their own research or revealing to us the issues that they discuss between themselves, in comparison to the old days when everything was hush hush trade secrets inner circle my camp vs your camp n all.


Edited by senjy - 11/3/11 at 9:39pm
post #62 of 86

95% of the posts here about not driving their K70X to their full potential, are in response to people driving them from a mobile device, or laptop, or cheap-ass (under $100) amp. 

 

I don't think anyone here would say your profire isn't capable, or the $230 m-stage, or other similar ones are not. 

 

As for your conclusions... show me measurements, data, or something other than your opinion and subjective experiences, and we'll talk. 

 

 

As far as not liking amps that color the sound, or any eq - well - I'm here to enjoy my music - not replicate an engineer's original intent. *shrug*

 

to each their own (with the caveat, that we should know the difference, and make decisions understanding them) 

 

Thanks for the video link. Good stuff. 


Edited by liamstrain - 11/3/11 at 10:35pm
post #63 of 86

Some tasks are better suited for software than hardware in my opinion.  EQ, crossfeed, coloration, etc. I'd rather have as software options (including the "not used at all" option for most things).

 

For portable use, sometimes satisfactory software solutions for those things are not available.  But even if for home use, I wouldn't say people are doing it wrong if taking another approach.  It just seems odd to me, to spend money on expensive colored gear.

post #64 of 86
Thread Starter 

 

Quote:

95% of the posts here about not driving their K70X to their full potential, are in response to people driving them from a mobile device, or laptop, or cheap-ass (under $100) amp. 

 

I don't think anyone here would say your profire isn't capable, or the $230 m-stage, or other similar ones are not. 

 

As for your conclusions... show me measurements, data, or something other than your opinion and subjective experiences, and we'll talk. 

 

 

As far as not liking amps that color the sound, or any eq - well - I'm here to enjoy my music - not replicate an engineer's original intent. *shrug*

 

to each their own (with the caveat, that we should know the difference, and make decisions understanding them) 

 

Thanks for the video link. Good stuff.

 

 

Forgive me, but I see the word 'potential' in every thread regarding the AKG K702 with amp. Have yet to read one that doesn't (would be hard pressed to find such a thread). Even if I am wrong about that, it is still a widespread opinion regarding the K70X, am I wrong?

 

Measurements, data, tech sheets, etc. are great - but they are only figures in a vast sea of factor contributing to sound. Double blind testing is an 100% certain test, I know no one else who would refute this matter but you.

 

Yes, I am pushing a bit too much my opinion about transparency and amps, but I believe in its value strongly (or at least in comparison to.. colorful amps confused_face.gif). You are quite right though, to each their own (own foolishness..there are far better options than buying an expensive amp to improve your sound quality, and those amps don't even improve, they distort).

 

You're welcome :) !! (regarding the vid) It's not mine, but good knowledge should be shared.

 

     Quote:

It just seems odd to me, to spend money on expensive colored gear.

 

Another smart lover of music who actually knows the difference.

 

 

smily_headphones1.gif

 

 


Edited by senjy - 11/3/11 at 11:05pm
post #65 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by senjy View Post

Double blind testing is an 100% certain test, I know no one else who would refute this matter but you.

 



What you described (or at least as you described it) was not double blind testing... and certainly not with a very large sample (just you and your brother). All it showed was under those conditions, on that day, you two couldn't tell the difference. Not that there was no difference... you dig? 

 

Further, 1 double blind test does not proof make. It is evidence, certainly. But you need lots and lots of experiments - repeatable and objective, to have proof. You may well be right - but to claim so based on what you stated you did so far, is premature.

 

But I do thank you for sharing your opinion. And I agree - especially about way overpriced, distortion induced coloration. If you want that, you can do it on the cheap. ;)


Edited by liamstrain - 11/3/11 at 11:08pm
post #66 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by Head Injury View Post

Fine detail extraction is affected by what in an amp? The only thing I can think of is distortion. How else will an amp be more detailed?


I would like to know this as well.  I cannot accept it is simply lower THD as these levels are so low as to make any differences inaudible.  Lower noise floor is not it.  All decent amps are quiet.

 

Whatever the reason, some preamps, amplfiers, mic preamps offer more clarity/transparency.  It's not necessarily a function of cost. 

 

There is a gorgeous clean ribbon mic pre available with nearly 90 dB of gain (typical mic pre offers up to 60dB) that's only around $800.  Incredible detail and delicacy. I do not know what makes it sound so good.  I expect it is something readily measurable.  It's probably a result of careful attention to gain structure, excellent bandwidth (ribbon mics are very quick and responsive to leading edge transients), good volume controls operating in the most linear part of their range, solid RF rejection, power supply chokes, etc., together which handle itty-bitty fragile ribbon microphone signals with respect.

 

No magic or special sauce, just solid engineering.

 

As always, if you don't hear differences - don't spend your money.

 

post #67 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikeaj View Post
  It just seems odd to me, to spend money on expensive colored gear.


You mean like headphones? biggrin.gif

post #68 of 86
Thread Starter 

Yes I did not perform a double blind, only a blind, stupid Senjy bandying words around. I miswrote. That happens. I'm sorry. I will not edit it away so you can all laugh at me.

 

However Liamstrain, you're missing the point..........

 

If you do not trust your own ears, whose are you going to trust? Other people's ears? Or perhaps the marketing department of 'such and such headphone amps'?

 

Should you not be listening to your own judgement, since it is going to be you that is listening to the end result, and not listening to an illusion based off other people's opinions and reviews

 

(which, many of them, come from people like you who don't believe in trusting your own ears, and instead other people's off the net and around forums...vicous cycle anybody?)

 

 

Quote:
You may well be right - but to claim so based on what you stated you did so far, is probably premature.

 

Of course I'm right goddamit, I heard it !

 

Obviously you and me are different Liamstrai, and that is why we have a difference in opinion - I judge equipment based on what I hear coming out of it, you judge gear based on what other people say they hear coming out of it.


Edited by senjy - 11/3/11 at 11:20pm
post #69 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by senjy View Post

Should you not be listening to your own judgement, since it is going to be you that is listening to the end result . . .


Yep. 

 

post #70 of 86

You're asking us to trust your ears tho, neh? 

 

I do trust my own. I also trust instrument measurements (when I can review the methodology, or control the experiment myself). 

 

If you see some of my posts in the sound science forum, you'll see I REALLY do not trust subjective opinions (or marketing hype) given without good supporting evidences. :) I'm only picking on you because what you presented - while ostensible on the good side of this argument - was really the same thing... your subjective opinion given without robust evidence and asking us to take it at something higher than face value. This sword cuts both ways. 

 

 

For what it is worth... I am quite happy with the sound I currently get - having rejected the sound I got from other rigs. I did not spend crazy money (and won't) to get there. 

post #71 of 86
Thread Starter 

Dear Liamstrain,

Quote:
If you see some of my posts in the sound science forum, you'll see I REALLY do not trust subjective opinions (or marketing hype) given without good supporting evidences.

 

Don't be ridiculous, do you really think I crawled through your past posts to see what your opinions are and what your favourite icecream is??? I only see what you present to me, here.

 

But that is good to know you are now doing a 180 degrees turnaround, you didn't sound like this a few posts back.

 

I would again like to point out that no matter how many measurements and graphs of data you place up to me, the conclusions you draw out of there are always theoretical, and non-encompassing. Like buying a transparent amp in order to amplify instead of a an expensive colored amp to distort, using your ears to judge is clearly the smartest and most efficient choice.

 

 

I think we can choose to stop this (I will at least), and that we disagree, and also perhaps misunderstood each other (eg. I now know you trust your own ears!) :) Thank you for your opinions and corrections towards my errors Liam, be well!

 

smily_headphones1.gif


Edited by senjy - 11/3/11 at 11:34pm
post #72 of 86

:D aye. If I didn't sound like this a few posts back, I must not have been clear in my writing. Apologies.

 

Devlesa!

post #73 of 86
Thread Starter 

Devlesa!

 

(I hope that is some sort of hooray or something :L)

(sounds like you're swearing at me etysmile.gif)

post #74 of 86
Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post

You're asking us to trust your ears tho, neh? 


Nope.

 

Trust yours.  If you hear no difference there is no difference.  Music recording and reproduction is ultimately entirely subjective.  Science pressed into service to capture and elicit emotion.  No wonder it makes nerds squeamish.  tongue.gif

 

I hear differences in some amp topologies.  I'd love to know why they are different.  I'm comfortable it can be quantified.  Testing gear is a lot more resolving than my ears.

 

I'm not advising anyone to follow my choices.  I am simply providing an example of how it is not necessary to spend oodles of green energy for competent engineering. 

post #75 of 86

I think that perhaps my experiences are irrelevant here as all of the headphone amps I was comparing are under $100 and that doesn't seam to be what the op is comparing.  I was under the impression that this was about under amped vs properly amped, and it's not.  It's about properly amped vs properly amped with special magic snake oil sauce.  In which case I agree with the op for the most part, but also choose to believe that distortion can be pleasant so long as it's accepted, acknowledged and desired, that is after all why I have a scph-1001 Playstation, for it's pleasant distortion that makes some harsh tracks easier to enjoy.

 

For the record I've not heard ANY change in soundstage width or depth at comparable volume levels, I won't be arguing if that is possible or not.

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) › Akg K-702 - Amped vs Unamped : Can't hear much of a difference?