Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Final Audio Design Appreciation/Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Final Audio Design Appreciation/Discussion Thread - Page 166

post #2476 of 3941
Will do!
post #2477 of 3941
A few impressions on my portable setups and synergy issues.

I now have the Heaven V Aging along with my Heaven IV in this series. I feel both the Heaven IV and V both scale well with my main DAC/Amp system, but with relatively short cables, and no portability, this is not a practical setup for me most of the time. I have full sized headphones for this purpose.

I ordered a Pico Power amp. partially to give me portability with my full sized headphones, but also to use with my IEMs. I was surprised that it doesn't work as well for me with my FADs, when compared to my Total BitHead. I have compared both out of my iPod Classic (160 GB) using a Whiplash LOD to the amplifiers. I realize that I am using the iPod's internal DAC in this setup which may be playing a major role in the sound.

With my FAD earphones, the first word that comes to mind to describe the Pico's presentation is 'punchy'. It has a strong bass presence to my ears and a fairly small but well defined soundstage. To describe its sound signature in visual terms, I would characterize its sound as an oil painting compared to the BitHead's watercolor, or using bold font in a document. This does not play well, IMO, with my FADs, but I understand from reading the Pico thread, that others are very happy with the Pico Power with their IEMs. Maybe it is just a matter of personal taste and not synergy issues necessarily.

As the Pico was advertised as a portable amp. for hard to drive headphones, with its two 9 volt batteries, it definitely plays well and differently to my ears with full sized headphones, as one might expect. I have only tried it so far with my Shure 1840s, which were easy to drive even on the Pico's low gain setting ( it has 3 settings!), and I felt this combination seemed to retain the Shures' fairly neutral sound, very well, with some additional bass emphasis. The soundstage, while not up to that of my main system, did not seem to contract as it seemed to do with the FADs, when compared to the BitHead.

As I would still like to improve my portable system, I am now considering buying an Algorythm Solo R or a Fostex HP-P1, and I wanted to see if anyone has tried their FADs with these products with an iPod as the source. Soundstage dimensions are a very important characteristic to me to give me that ' Live' experience, and as I find all of the FADs to have a very good soundstage, this is a characteristic I would like to experience in my portable setups. Not IE8 size soundstage by any means, but one that is very natural, fairly large, and well defined.
Edited by Ridleyguy - 6/21/13 at 12:51pm
post #2478 of 3941
How do the two Heavens compare?
post #2479 of 3941

I feel like a lot of people here define soundstage size by forward projection, like the IE8/80. Personally, I didn't think the IE8 soundstage was as big as everyone said. Sure it was very forward projected but total depth was nothing crazier than I've heard with other IEMs. Neither was width. It did sound cavernous though which gives the appearance of a great space, similar to the ASG-1.

 

Almost forgot: Thanks for the impressions Inks and Ridleyguy.


Edited by vwinter - 6/21/13 at 1:01pm
post #2480 of 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwinter View Post

I feel like a lot of people here define soundstage size by forward projection, like the IE8/80. Personally, I didn't think the IE8 soundstage was as big as everyone said. Sure it was very forward projected but total depth was nothing crazier than I've heard with other IEMs. Neither was width. It did sound cavernous though which gives the appearance of a great space, similar to the ASG-1.

Almost forgot: Thanks for the impressions Inks and Ridleyguy.

You're welcome, and I think you hit the nail on the head with your description of the IE8s' soundstage!

As to comparing the Heaven V Aging to the Heaven IV, I haven't spent a lot of time yet with the V, so please consider these early impressions accordingly, but at least in my modest portable setup, my very early impressions are that the IV seems to have a slightly more neutral and 'leaner' sound signature to me than the V. And although FAD prices the two quite differently, I don't necessarily think that in a blind listening test, once again out of a modest portable system, that a majority of people would automatically pick the V over the IV. Musical preferences would likely also play a significant role in determining this, as in my case, I listen primarily to classical music, and so the relative neutrality of the IV is attractive to me, with other characteristics being less important, such as bass, for example.
Edited by Ridleyguy - 6/21/13 at 1:31pm
post #2481 of 3941

Heaven VI vs PF-IX comparison.

 

Tonight I used my TP - > Corda Quickstep combo to compare the HVI and PFIX. I used a blu ray rip of one of my favorite classic rock band's concert recordings. 24-48, but the TP only plays at 16 bits.

 

Notes:

 

HVI: Deeper bass, for sure. Vocals and guitar much more recessed/in the background.

 

PFIX: Definitely less bass, no 'near-visceral' impact like with the HVI. Vocals and guitar sound sublime, almost realistic. Much more detailed and textured.

 

Crowd noise: In the far background with HVI. With the PFIX, sounds like I am surrounded by the crowd.

 

Once I get used to the less bass/lack of low bass impact with the PFIX's, once again, I feel (almost) like I'm at the show.

 

After several listens, I hate to use the 'C' word, but I think it may come down to it. The PF-IXs are more coherent, live sounding, and overall more convincing when presenting a live show. With the caveat that they aren't as capable with low bass, or upper treble. 

 

 

post #2482 of 3941

Red neon...

 

 

 

post #2483 of 3941
What is that behind them? I must know your secrets!

I've never heard anyone use the word coherency in reference to two single drivers so thats kind of intriguing. Thanks for the compro and the eye candy (in a non cheap way, unless that was your intention lol). smile.gif
Edited by vwinter - 6/22/13 at 4:05pm
post #2484 of 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by vwinter View Post

What is that behind them? I must know your secrets!
 

 

very_evil_smiley.gifvery_evil_smiley.gif

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by vwinter View Post

I've never heard anyone use the word coherency in reference to two single drivers so thats kind of intriguing. 


That could've been the whiskey talking typing.

post #2485 of 3941

Ian, your great tube-glowing photos inspired me on this one. The orange is less subtle than I was aiming for, but this one turned out the best. And james, thank you very much for the kind words.

 

post #2486 of 3941
Oh man, I love it!
post #2487 of 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by ianmedium View Post

Oh man, I love it!

Oh yeah!
post #2488 of 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by woodcans View Post

 

That is masterful bokeh, woodcans.

post #2489 of 3941

damn, nearly shade my tears on one Chinese song by Tsai Chin. The emotional impact is so engraving just now.

I think the "hall-like" effect creates magic which is not supposed to be known to mankind LOL.

post #2490 of 3941
Quote:
Originally Posted by autumnholy View Post damn, nearly shade my tears on one Chinese song by Tsai Chin. The emotional impact is so engraving just now. I think the "hall-like" effect creates magic which is not supposed to be known to mankind LOL.

 

She's an amazing vocalist. Which song?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Final Audio Design Appreciation/Discussion Thread