Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › 'End-game' headphone rigs, unicorns and other myths
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'End-game' headphone rigs, unicorns and other myths - Page 4

post #46 of 286
Man, I love this thread. There are too little metaphysical intellectual discussions on audio. Most end up as heated arguments on Subjective vs. Objective and the degrees of significance thereof.
post #47 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by arnaud View Post

In regards to the 009 being fatiguing with classical, could it be listening volume maybe?


Nope, it's amp/source.

 

post #48 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post

Entirely agreed. Of the six sets of cans I currently own, I don't feel like any of them is more "absolutely accurate" - the point of getting "the most detail" or "most fidelity" out of music was passed long ago, instead, it's different coloration/presentations that they produce...

 

Since it's brought up quite often as a goal or target of the end game, what exactly is that?  Is it accurate to what is on the medium or accurate to how a recording was intended to sound like?  I think they are completely different things- kind of like a barrel tasting of a wine, and the finished product- with food.  Assuming it's something like a symphony in a particular venue that we are familiar with (ie, have been there to hear a performance), what row are you supposed to be in?  Orchestra?  Loge?  Mezzanine?  The only material that I can use to gage neutrality or accuracy are some recordings where I was there.  And even that is open to interpretation of the guy who recorded and mixed it.  I'm thinking if you want to hear something as it was meant to be heard, wouldn't a good place to start be to duplicate the sound of the mastering studio?

 

I guess my point is why bother chasing what you don't know?

post #49 of 286

Very valid. 

 

What I meant for the purpose of my post though was, I don't feel like of my small stable that any of them have any edge in terms of "detail" - it's not like I put on one pair and magically "a veil is lifted, and I'm closer to the music" - all of them get that "good quality" sound going on. They all just do it differently. Compared to having something like iPod Earbuds, and going to anything from my collection you can suddenly understand the lyrics, hear background noises in the recording, etc. 

 

From a more technical perspective, absolutely accurate would mean flat to some reference, either a pre-defined transfer function or ruler flat. But that is not what I meant, and I do not think any headphone is ruler flat (according to InnerFidelity, my 'stats are supposed to be fairly close to ruler flat below 1k (as are many 'stats and some/many orthos), and they don't sound magically better because of it - in fact, sometimes I prefer something else to them (gasp!) even for bass reproduction). Again, technically correct is not always what people want. Sometimes we like swilling our Coke while chomping down a double bacon cheeseburger, or making an entire meal out of some cheap caviar and vodka, or having nothing but sparkling water. None of that is the most technically healthy or balanced, but sometimes it really just hits the spot.
 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mkubota1 View Post

I guess my point is why bother chasing what you don't know?



 

post #50 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by obobskivich View Post

Very valid. 

 

What I meant for the purpose of my post though was, I don't feel like of my small stable that any of them have any edge in terms of "detail" - it's not like I put on one pair and magically "a veil is lifted, and I'm closer to the music" - all of them get that "good quality" sound going on. They all just do it differently. Compared to having something like iPod Earbuds, and going to anything from my collection you can suddenly understand the lyrics, hear background noises in the recording, etc. 

 

From a more technical perspective, absolutely accurate would mean flat to some reference, either a pre-defined transfer function or ruler flat. But that is not what I meant, and I do not think any headphone is ruler flat (according to InnerFidelity, my 'stats are supposed to be fairly close to ruler flat below 1k (as are many 'stats and some/many orthos), and they don't sound magically better because of it - in fact, sometimes I prefer something else to them (gasp!) even for bass reproduction). Again, technically correct is not always what people want. Sometimes we like swilling our Coke while chomping down a double bacon cheeseburger, or making an entire meal out of some cheap caviar and vodka, or having nothing but sparkling water. None of that is the most technically healthy or balanced, but sometimes it really just hits the spot.
 



Oh sure- I get that.  Of course we want detail and the ability to convey as much as we can from a recording.  It just seems like a lot of the things that are tossed around here (and everywhere for that matter) are more lateral moves.  Measurements are 'easy' because if done right they can be irrefutable and provide black and white answers- but only if you rely on them 100%.

 

The funny thing about accuracy is sometimes after (or during) a live performance, my ears will feel fatigued.  And I have a feeling that if it weren't for all of the other distracting stimuli (visual, visceral, social, etc.), my ears would tire even sooner.  But I can't blame it on the sound.  biggrin.gif

post #51 of 286

yeah ruler flat hmmm you mean 'ear flat' completely different things and the second is different for everyone due to the shape, similar to speakers in different rooms. just ask the good men at headroom

 

Get into DIY high end and even for speakers and power amps and you get into messing with them; building new designs simply because its interesting to pursue what best suits you. The battle to not let this become the fight for what best suits the scope is one that faces many including myself.

 

I stopped messing with different headphones a while ago for now to work on my speaker rig, but i'm still playing with the amps, sources and yes cables for headphones. i'll be checking out the latest and greatest headphones at the next meet to see if there is anything worth pursuing, but i'm not willing to go the stax route as i simply dont have enough time for stationary headphone listening these days to make it worthwhile. i'll see where the wallet is at once i'm done with the speakers


Edited by qusp - 4/7/12 at 10:21pm
post #52 of 286

It sounds like we're all kind of on the same page here.  What I would really like to hear is from someone who is pursuing their end-game... what is your goal (specifically), and what is your measuring stick?  

post #53 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mkubota1 View Post

 

I guess my point is why bother chasing what you don't know?


Lol!  Meno's Paradox!!  Plato had an answer for you 2,500 years ago.  

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meno

 

http://www.amazon.com/Protagoras-Meno-Penguin-Classics-Plato/dp/0140449035/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1333865155&sr=8-2

 

 


Edited by Anaxilus - 4/7/12 at 11:44pm
post #54 of 286

I love this conversation. It reminds me of the conversation I had with my room mate when I received my Q701.

 

She point at the Q701 and then at my SRH440. "Is this better than that?"

 

"Well it's 4 times the price. Some people would say it's 4 times better, but in my opinion it's just different."

post #55 of 286
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sil3nce View Post

Man, I love this thread. There are too little metaphysical intellectual discussions on audio. Most end up as heated arguments on Subjective vs. Objective and the degrees of significance thereof.


Fair enough, but as the OP I didnt intend for it to be either metaphysical or intellectual - simply an acknowledgement that the goalposts keep moving every 6 months or so. Said 'goalposts', of course, only exist because we log into Head-Fi and similar sites and read threads about the latest and greatest or see new kit at meets.  Its a hobby, and I get that, but how many of us own 5 or 6 A/V receivers and trawl A/V boards constantly looking for new receivers/speakers etc ? If you have a receiver, chances are that you found one you liked, installed it and now its part of the other electronics in your home which perform a function until either they malfunction or you decide you need an upgrade for something like 3D. Its a big world, and I suspect that there are people out there who do collect A/V receivers, but the majority of us do not. I enjoy movies, and I enjoy thumping soundtracks, but I dont spend every waking hour ruminating over my next HT purchase. 2-channel, somehow, seems to bring out the obsessive in many of us. 

 

A work colleague once asked me why I had so many headphones - at the time, I think I had a grand total of 7 or 8 phones. I told him that some on Head-Fi have dozens of phones, many costing an arm and a leg, and he just couldn't understand why anyone would do that. Everyone here understands exactly why someone would want a hundred or so different headphones - a hundred different experiences - but the notion that we can somehow roll all of those experiences into a single end-game rig, then walking away, is a tough one. Its akin to saving for ten years, buying the latest Corvette and never looking at another motoring magazine ......

post #56 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anaxilus View Post



Lol!  Meno's Paradox!!  Plato had an answer for you 2,500 years ago.  

http://www.amazon.com/Protagoras-Meno-Penguin-Classics-Plato/dp/0140449035/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1333865155&sr=8-2



Amazon prime compatible.
post #57 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mkubota1 View Post

What I would really like to hear is from someone who is pursuing their end-game... what is your goal (specifically), and what is your measuring stick?  


1-Maximum detail extraction.   

2-Natural tonality and timbre that mimicks what I hear w/ my naked ears.

3-Musical involvement.  Likely a combination of the two above.

 

 IME only three production phones are remotely close when synergized, modded and driven well.  Stax 009, HD800 and a perfect, cherry picked LCD3.  After that only the Orpheus would be my unicorn.  LCD3 is out due to consistency issues, etc.  The only amp that brings out the magic of the 009 for me is a T2.  So that's a $10K DIY proposition.  Orpheus would be $15-$30K.  Next best for me is the HD800 (modded) and the BA for $5K.  The Super7 was super close to the BA and went for $1300 along with the HD800 which cost me less than a grand.  So about $2.2K for my current phone/amp combo.  Compared w/ the $10K-$30K alternatives I'm quite happy and actually have better genre bandwidth using the 800 compared the more expensive alternatives I feel.  I still have one or two more tweaks to dial in my system though.  A stat rig of some sort is in my future either as a slight upgrade and/or sidegrade at that point.

post #58 of 286
If I'm reading Anaxilus correctly, I agree that a single rig end-game is totally possible.
post #59 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by estreeter View Post



Fair enough, but as the OP I didnt intend for it to be either metaphysical or intellectual - simply an acknowledgement that the goalposts keep moving every 6 months or so. Said 'goalposts', of course, only exist because we log into Head-Fi and similar sites and read threads about the latest and greatest or see new kit at meets.  Its a hobby, and I get that, but how many of us own 5 or 6 A/V receivers and trawl A/V boards constantly looking for new receivers/speakers etc ? If you have a receiver, chances are that you found one you liked, installed it and now its part of the other electronics in your home which perform a function until either they malfunction or you decide you need an upgrade for something like 3D. Its a big world, and I suspect that there are people out there who do collect A/V receivers, but the majority of us do not. I enjoy movies, and I enjoy thumping soundtracks, but I dont spend every waking hour ruminating over my next HT purchase. 2-channel, somehow, seems to bring out the obsessive in many of us. 

A work colleague once asked me why I had so many headphones - at the time, I think I had a grand total of 7 or 8 phones. I told him that some on Head-Fi have dozens of phones, many costing an arm and a leg, and he just couldn't understand why anyone would do that. Everyone here understands exactly why someone would want a hundred or so different headphones - a hundred different experiences - but the notion that we can somehow roll all of those experiences into a single end-game rig, then walking away, is a tough one. Its akin to saving for ten years, buying the latest Corvette and never looking at another motoring magazine ......

I can't tell if you're disagreeing with me here lol.

As the Op, you have the rights to start a topic, expecting the discussion to ensue in proper manner. Now I don't know what other magical powers are bestowed upon the OP, but isn't a intellectual discussion a good thing? It's not as if we're pulling esoteric gibberish out of our behinds.
You posed a topic. We responded in kind. And you know what? I find it absolutely refreshing from the mass of normal threads. It is both intellectual and metaphysical.

However, I don't particular agree with your statement that everyone understands "why someone would want a hundred are so different headphones".
That might be a tad of a hyperbole.

But it's true. It would be great if there was absolute audio system both affordable and unparalleled/ unprecedented. However, this is a world of no absolutes. If you ever dabbled in quantum mechanics or cryptography, you would know objective measurements show that uncertainty is inescapable. From continued pursuit of an universal model of modern physics to the theory of existence, we strive for what cannot be.

There are simply too many factors beyond our human understanding, yet engineers and researchers still strive to further advance our society.
So no. There is no end-game rig, nor will there ever be such a convenience.

Call me a skeptic, but I prefer my women spicy and my music colored.
post #60 of 286
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxvla View Post

If I'm reading Anaxilus correctly, I agree that a single rig end-game is totally possible.


Yes, caveated for me personally by my tastes and criteria.  It's not so much attaining an absolute perfection but my definition of 'good enough'.

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › 'End-game' headphone rigs, unicorns and other myths