Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › O2 vs TOTL
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

O2 vs TOTL - Page 20

post #286 of 582

 

Quote:
You wouldn't happen to know the author of that experience?

Professor Bavelas from Stanford University. Read the description of the study in Paul Watzlawicks "How Real is Real" (recommended read), so I can't give you an exact title.

post #287 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by morks View Post

 

Quote:
You wouldn't happen to know the author of that experience?

Professor Bavelas from Stanford University. Read the description of the study in Paul Watzlawicks "How Real is Real" (recommended read), so I can't give you an exact title.


That's a book from 1977?

I prefer not to use secondhand or thirdhand accounts of academic publications when possible, so I did a quick search looking for such a paper, but it didn't turn up anything. Records for papers that old can be kind of spotty.

Seems like the likely author is one Janet Beavin Bavelas (Ph.D. Stanford, 1970) at the University of Victoria:
http://web.uvic.ca/psyc/people/faculty/bavelas.php

So I assumed it'd be safe to search for papers between 1960-1980 for anything related.
post #288 of 582

I'll be picking up a JDS standalone ODAC.  I've really missed my DACPort LX but the size, price/performance wasn't acceptable so the UHA6S DAC was sufficient.  The Cirrus in the UHA6S via USB has been holding my portable chain back so hopefully the ODAC will come through.  Too bad it's not self powered which means I can't use my Nokia's USB on-the-go.  Oh well.


Edited by Anaxilus - 4/19/12 at 10:39pm
post #289 of 582
Thread Starter 
I think you mean JDS smily_headphones1.gif seems like it should work pretty well. I'm excited to hear it and compare to the gamma 2.
post #290 of 582

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrislangley4253 View Post

I think you mean JDS smily_headphones1.gif seems like it should work pretty well. I'm excited to hear it and compare to the gamma 2.

 

Oops. fixed.  Just bought some pre Harmon JBLs, heh.  redface.gif


Edited by Anaxilus - 4/19/12 at 10:39pm
post #291 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post

I'll be picking up a JDS standalone ODAC.  I've really missed my DACPort LX but the size, price/performance wasn't acceptable so the UHA6S DAC was sufficient.  The Cirrus in the UHA6S via USB has been holding my portable chain back so hopefully the ODAC will come through.  Too bad it's not self powered which means I can't use my Nokia's USB on-the-go.  Oh well.

 

I'm curious to try the combo unit when it comes in May.  (It'll be my third O2!  This time I will keep it around as an office rig and back up.)

 

Does anyone know if it will still have analog input and a switch for digial input/vs/analog input?

 

That would allow me to A/B vs. my Zodiac. 

post #292 of 582

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by sphinxvc View Post

I'm curious to try the combo unit when it comes in May.

 

Lol, I won't be using it w/ the O2.  Who knows, the ODAC might just sound the same as my Leckerton DAC if it's already good enough.  Maybe the ODAC improvements are beyond the audible range and all DACs really sound the same.  o2smile.gifwink_face.gif


Edited by Anaxilus - 4/21/12 at 10:04am
post #293 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by estreeter View Post

 It also makes sense that the wood veneer cabinets of traditional home audio speakers has been replaced by something considerably more durable but, IMO, less attractive, at least at the entry level. You end up with something on your desk that looks like it may have come from Sony or another volume operation out of China. Not being a snob here - just giving my initial impression.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Take a look at the Focal Solo6 Be, and get back to me.

post #294 of 582

I have a much better idea, Mauricio ! 

 

14.jpg

 

Yet again, I win  biggrin.gif

post #295 of 582
Thread Starter 
Can I get a link to those speaker stands?
post #296 of 582

Quick mention of Chris's test...

Just saw this thread and read through it entirely.  I was one of the people that Chris blind tested with the O2 and M-Stage.  First off, I wanted to make some remarks about that test that can be summed up in the following points.

  • Seeing the amps, I could tell a difference.
  • Not seeing the amps, I couldn't tell a difference as far as the results went.

Background...

Solid state vs solid state is insane 99% of the time IMO.  It is weird though.  When I first listened to the Audio-GD Sparrow, I thought it sounded awful, plasticky.  That was with Grado SR-225is I believe (Chris, correct me if I am wrong.)  I could have sworn though, it still sounded plasticky with my Sennheiser HD595s.  Next was the Matrix M-Stage (huge improvement in MY OPINION.)  It was pretty damn hot in the treble though.  I could have also sworn "microdetails" were being introduced that weren't in the original recording.  (Also, IMO, Grados have no more "detail" than most other headphones, they are just brighter.)  Now for my own SS amps.  All the ones that I actually use (I built a TERRIBLE one with TERRIBLE components I got from an electronics store for $8 and I never actually use it) are old integrated solid state amplifiers.  For most people here, I would imagine they would see them as bother powerful (electrically and authority wise) and dark.  One was a Sony TA-TX44.  This amp was a pretty decent integrated back in 1984 considering it was from Sony and not some boutique vendor.  Anyway, I liked it better than any other amp, but to Chris, it was overly bassy.  HERE is where both engineering and psychoacoustics gets REALLY ******* UP.

 

Engineering VS Psychoacoustics/Objective VS Subjective

This is where I think most of the hate and garbage come from honestly.  Problem is, from both an objective and subjective standpoint you need a little bit of the other for anything to make sense.  Now why do I say that?  Objectively, you would think what we should have coming into our ears is 100% ruler flat from the source.  Now, here is the problem with that approach...

While a machine might interpret a ruler flat line as a ruler flat line, your mind does not.  Your mind expects other cues than just what you hear from your ears, by this I mean vibrations in your chest for the most part. (I am sure there are others, but this is by far the biggest IMO)  This is where you would need a bit of a bass boost to fill in the cue that the audio needs to account for.  This is a place where you need to dip from both the objective and subjective jars.  All too often, I see people taking camps on one side or the other, when from a technical prospective, you really need both.

Effect on the Head-Fi community

Unfortunately, being human, we are very competitive and very opinionated.  Anyway, in my opinion, people are getting shot down left and right for not being in a certain camp (which camp, I won't say, but I think most here understand.)  I very much believe that there needs not only to be more objective views here to balance some of the subjective, but some more moderates.  It is like Republicans and Democrats.  They can't get along because they agree on nothing.  For both them and us, sometimes it is just a good idea to make some concessions (if you really believe what you are saying.)  Without both objectivists and subjectivists, we would have really bad audio today (not sure audiophiles would even exist.)  Anyway, what I am trying to say is that hopefully some day all views (on Head-Fi at least) will be accepted with dignity and respect.

post #297 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by chrislangley4253 View Post

Can I get a link to those speaker stands?

 

Good luck finding any reference to the origin of the stands - 

 

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/swans2/1.html

 

Dynamics & resolution: Mounted on speaker stands, the dynamic range of the M200 Mk III was good but not exemplary. It was bested by the Kanto loudspeaker and came off a little polite. This circumstance had the Swans operate outside its comfort zone. Dynamics improved when the speaker was pressed into desktop service. This took full advantage of the boundary effect and also smaller room dimensions. 

..

 the Swans were slightly disadvantaged when used as stand-mounted monitors. The results were pleasant but clearly handicapped by the larger room and loss of low-end boundary support. It was in the computer environment where they demonstrated their strengths.

 

13.jpg

post #298 of 582
Quote:
Originally Posted by linuxid10t View Post

While a machine might interpret a ruler flat line as a ruler flat line, your mind does not.  Your mind expects other cues than just what you hear from your ears, by this I mean vibrations in your chest for the most part. (I am sure there are others, but this is by far the biggest IMO)  This is where you would need a bit of a bass boost to fill in the cue that the audio needs to account for.  This is a place where you need to dip from both the objective and subjective jars.  All too often, I see people taking camps on one side or the other, when from a technical prospective, you really need both.

 

Have you been talking to Steve Guttenberg? I don't know where this idea started that objectivists strive for a ruler-flat frequency response up to the headphones. The only way that would make sense would be with speakers, I guess. I'm not saying some objectivists don't want flatness all over the chain, I'm saying that's a personal preference and has nothing to do with being an objectivist.

 

The main idea, at least my interpretation of it, of objectivism is to have a ruler-flat chain up to the amp. When you reach the transducer, the last link in the chain, feel free to get what best suits your needs, and then alter it a bit if you want with an EQ, crossfeed, whatever. This seems rational, at least much more than buying amps in the hopes that their flaws will cancel out the headphones' flaws. It's also much cheaper, obviously. Very often do I see things like "the K701 just needs an amp to drive it to it's full potential" which usually means huge output impedance. People don't want to accept that it's a bright pair of headphones, they believe it just takes an inversely-flawed amp to "get it to shine".

post #299 of 582
Thread Starter 
A bit of both sound good to me David. this thread in particular was supposed to be poised towards the mainly subjective owners of high end gear. But it branched out big time.

Distortion can be euphonic, its just that most objectivists would rather color their sound with their transducers or an eq instead of colored dacs and amps. Everyone has their preference :-) I need to hear that new tube amp of yours! I particularly liked the dark sound of the legato with the senns, for a lot of music. We shall hang out when I get my odac put in it's own box. Then we can blind test odac vs gamma 2 and o2 vs tube amp. I think we will be able to tell all four apart depending on the filter used on the gamma 2. (i can hear a difference on the one filter. It affects the highs)

FWIW, I could also blindly tell the gamma 2 from my mobo. It was slightly more visceral and detailed. Curious if I pick up on the difference between my mobo and DAC, but I don't have a switch anymore.. let's make one?

Also, I should mention I didn't volume match when I blind tested. It's possible a slight difference in volume gave me the perceived difference.
Edited by chrislangley4253 - 6/15/12 at 7:38am
post #300 of 582

I would definitely say the O2 and my tube amp have a very different sound.  Actually, the tube amp sounds a tiny bit like the Sony.  It is weird though.  I am not sure if it is just the euphoric second order distortion, or just how tubes sound, but it makes the music very "liquid" without loosing any detail.  The Sony I would definitely NOT describe as liquid.  Another big thing that I know someone here on Head-Fi is going to disagree with, but isn't it said under 1% THD you can't hear it anyway?  So, if a tube amp is under 1% THD, does that mean that the second order distortion just means essentially nothing?

Quote:
Originally Posted by chrislangley4253 View Post

A bit of both sound good to me David. this thread in particular was supposed to be poised towards the mainly subjective owners of high end gear. But it branched out big time.
Distortion can be euphonic, its just that most objectivists would rather color their sound with their transducers or an eq instead of colored dacs and amps. Everyone has their preference :-) I need to hear that new tube amp of yours! I particularly liked the dark sound of the legato with the senns, for a lot of music. We shall hang out when I get my odac put in it's own box. Then we can blind test odac vs gamma 2 and o2 vs tube amp. I think we will be able to tell all four apart depending on the filter used on the gamma 2. (i can hear a difference on the one filter. It affects the highs)
FWIW, I could also blindly tell the gamma 2 from my mobo. It was slightly more visceral and detailed. Curious if I pick up on the difference between my mobo and DAC, but I don't have a switch anymore.. let's make one?
Also, I should mention I didn't volume match when I blind tested. It's possible a slight difference in volume gave me the perceived difference.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › O2 vs TOTL