Got $200 Asus xonar essence or dac/amp??

The output impedance of the Essence STX (~10 ohms) isn't ideal for the Denons. The audible effects are questionable, since the Denons have a fairly flat impedance curve, but that low a damping factor might cause distortion and ringing.

You really don't need a powerful amp at all. Just something with a clean signal. The Fiio E10 is pretty good in that respect, and you'd save quite a bit as well. Or you can get a Creative card that will work with gaming, or one of the cheaper ASUS cards like the DG and save a lot of money (I don't know what its output impedance is, though I know some people have complained about it with the HD595/598 which suggests it might be high as well).

Don't waste time/money on a sound card.

A 144$ O2 and 35$ Behinger UCA202 would be alot better then the essense stx.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeW 

Don't waste time/money on a sound card.

 

A 144$ O2 and 35$ Behinger UCA202 would be alot better then the essense stx.

"A lot" is pretty strong. The O2 is the better amp, but mostly in ways that would be inconsequential. It has the clear advantage with low impedance headphones like the OP's, though. The UCA202 isn't as good a DAC as the Essence STX, but again in mostly inconsequential ways. Its noise would be a weakness, as would its lack of 24-bit support in some cases. Really only if you expect to do a lot of digital attenuation.

The Essence STX also has the obvious advantage of Dolby Headphone, not for music but for gaming and (sometimes) movies.
 

Quote:

Originally Posted by MattTCG 

I don't know much about amp/dacs. Could you suggest a place to purchase or provide a link?

 

thanks...

http://www.jdslabs.com/item.php?fetchitem=O2Full

Definitely overkill for the D2000, but it will future-proof you for sure. Find the UCA202 on Amazon if you're interested.

You don't need a headphone amp for the D2000s, and in fact you'd be throwing your money away to consider anything more than a basic DAC for them. The Essence ST/STX will improve its sound quality marginally and should be considered only if you eventually plan on upgrading your headphones to something more expensive (and thus more demanding of an amp to begin with).

Consider an Asus Xonar DG, which is around $35 and will be much better than onboard audio.

Also, an Essence ST will benefit you much more than the aforementioned O2 + UCA202:

1) Supports virtual 7.1 surround for various applications and movies/media

2) Easily changed opamps allow anyone with a screwdriver to upgrade the sound quality (or change the sound signature) of the Essence ST/STX

3) Continual improvements via driver updates, should there be any HUGE problems with the device and major computer software releases (at least as long as Asus continues to sell the Essence ST/STX)

4) Support. You actually get some should something go wrong. I see nothing to this effect on O2's website (and if you DO get support, they do a horrible job of mentioning it).

I'm not saying support is 100% necessary for something as simple as a DAC or AMP, but the peace of mind you get in being able to blame a manufacturer (or contact them, even if Asus takes more than 24 hours to get back to people) is worth it for those who are not DIYers. Also, the Xonar ST can be had used for less than the O2 + UCA202, so I don't see many advantages for the O2 other than that it will give you less problems with extremely low impedance headphones. I currently use an opamp upgraded Essence ST with my Grado SR225i though (32ohms vs your 25ohms), and I experience no problems or sound quality issues whatsoever.

EDIT: Also, I'd love to see some controlled tests proving that the O2 (or any headphone amp for less than $400, for that matter) is better than the Asus Xonar ST. I'm by no means an Asus fanboy -- I'm an IT and dread the thought of ever, EVER having to contact them for more than an RMA (which in itself is a pain in the ass) -- but statements like the one above which contradict every golden review and award the Essence ST/STX has received just makes me wonder if the guy has ever even used an Essence ST/STX, much less compared it in a blind test.

Short Version:

The Essence STX will sound the same, based on my research of the two cards before buying the ST.

Also, Essence STX has exactly the same specs as Essence ST, minus jitter control improvement and 7.1 analog option.

Long Version:

Through my extensive research on both cards and according to Asus themselves, the ST is a revision to the STX which offers better jitter control and features expansion to 7.1 analog surround via the Xonar H6 expansion card. However, many people (from their comments in various forums) cannot hear an audible difference between either card, and they are both rated for the same exact specs except for that jitter control improvement on the ST. Perhaps the improvement is only audible on very expensive ($2500/electrostatic/balanced) setups?

As for why I picked the ST instead of the STX, I need the ability for future expansion to 7.1 analog in case I ever get rich and kick out my roommate, and I'm on a Mini ATX motherboard which has no extra PCIe slots. Also, if ever I choose to use multiple video cards in a later system, I don't want to have to worry about anything pressing up against one of the GPUs. Heat = expensively bad for expensive shiznit.

@ Wage 

1. 7.1 virtual sound.. well if you like that kind of thing. I don't, I want bit-perfect, stereo. I don't much care for the effect in games either. If this is important to the OP maybe he should consider a sound card. (also, most games now do surround processing in software and this works on anything, as does most decent DVD/Blu-Ray playback software, Windvd, cyberlink etc) 

2. Op-amps, it does not matter what op-amp you put in the STX, it's not going to equal the O2. This is moot 

3. Driver Updates, the O2 requires no drivers, the Behringer is USB Audio 1.0 compliant. 

4. This whole point is nigh moot. If the O2 works out of the box, it will likely work for years. I'd imagine Behringers support is about as good as Asus. 

There are most definatly better options then the Behringer dac, I was just trying to stay below 200$. If you want a "General soundcard" go for it. It really depends what you want to do. If your trying to go down the audiophile road, and plan to sample other headphones/sources etc down the road, my setup is far more flexible. If your going to "Set it and forget it" then the soundcard might be the simplier solution. But I find once you start going down the hi-fi road, you will likely want more. 

Also, as a Denon D2000 owner, i've amped them out of an ipod, Mini3, EF5, O2, HT Reciever. They most certainly improve with better amping. In no way does the sound out of the ipod compare to the O2, and the Mini3 is somewhat lacking as well. 

If you had a bigger budget, i'd recomend a USB Async device /w Dac and Amp. Something like a V-Link, Gamma, O2 would be great. But it comes in over budget. I agree with everything Head Injury said, good advice. If you really want to get a soundcard, the ST or STX would be my recomendation as well. There's nothing better right now. 

Edit: JDS Labs Warranty Policy:

Warranty
Pre-assembled amplifiers are fully guaranteed against parts and manufacturing defects for 1 year from purchase date. Warranty does not cover cosmetic imperfection or defects due to mishandling, abuse, or neglect. Accidental damages and out-of-warranty amplifiers can be repaired for the cost of replacement parts plus return shipping.

Virtual surround in games is a gimmick for the most part you get better directional queues with stereo. My next purchase will be an iBasso d7 for amp/dac. With that being said my Xonar DX is a nice card for the money, once you get the low dpc latency driver.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danthrax 

Virtual surround in games is a gimmick for the most part you get better directional queues with stereo.

I don't 

I have three ways to use the card, depending on the game:

• When the game supports multiple channels and EAX (like most FPS games) I can switch to 5.1 or 7.1 speakers, enable Dolby Headphone and GX, and get directional audio accurate enough for me to pinpoint enemies behind walls, above or below me
• When the game doesn't support multiple channels (like Skyrim), I can still enable Dolby Headphone and GX and get directional audio accurate enough to gauge distance and direction, not always height and not quite as accurately
• When the game doesn't support EAX or crashes when I use GX (like Fallout 3) I can use DH get direction but not distance very well

All three are better than just two channels without DH, which sounds less like a sphere around me and more like a line through my head.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MikeW 

1. 7.1 virtual sound.. well if you like that kind of thing. I don't, I want bit-perfect, stereo. I don't much care for the effect in games either. If this is important to the OP maybe he should consider a sound card. (also, most games now do surround processing in software and this works on anything, as does most decent DVD/Blu-Ray playback software, Windvd, cyberlink etc) 

That is not my experience. Whenever I play FPS/TPS games, pure stereo congests the sounds directly off the left and right of my head, sounding very artificial and not really giving me a sense of immersion or a competitive edge. CMSS-3D Headphone (and Dolby Headphone) provides a sense of directionality and distance that borders on being an aural wallhack, though it does interfere with clarity somewhat...but are you concerned about the fidelity of the game's gunshot/explosion/footstep sounds, or where they're coming from so you can use that bit of situational awareness to your advantage?

Also, games with software audio engines do not mix binaurally, for the most part. They only provide hard-panning, one-dimensional left-to-right sound for headphone users, hence why such technologies on sound cards are demanded in the first place.

(Of course, they do rely on generic/average HRTFs most of the time, and every listener has a unique HRTF. Mine must fall within the average enough to work well, but yours may not.)

Movie playback doesn't suffer from that drawback, though. Both WinDVD and PowerDVD have a software Dolby Headphone implementation.

I disagree I find that with my q701s dolby sounds extremely processed and adds too much garbage to the sound. It is much clearer in stereo and I can tell where enemies are as well. And like I said the stock drivers are pretty terrible so I use the low dpc latency ones and the sound is a lot better out of the card. http://brainbit.wordpress.com/category/uni-xonar/ by default they have full support for the asus utility and still provide a lower dpc so they are all around better. I would give them a try.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Danthrax 

I disagree I find that with my q701s dolby sounds extremely processed and adds too much garbage to the sound. It is much clearer in stereo and I can tell where enemies are as well. And like I said the stock drivers are pretty terrible so I use the low dpc latency ones and the sound is a lot better out of the card. http://brainbit.wordpress.com/category/uni-xonar/ by default they have full support for the asus utility and still provide a lower dpc so they are all around better. I would give them a try.

Latency has nothing to do with sound quality. The purpose of low latency is for recording, to reduce delay of input from things like MIDI keyboards.

Very high latency can cause skipping, but that's not something a low latency driver will fix. It would be the result of a problem elsewhere in your system, like the CPU or sometimes a wireless internet connection.