or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Project Ember Review
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Project Ember Review - Page 49

post #721 of 728

I don't think I am being harsh at all.  You can make all the claims you want as to how you preceive something, but leave out the technical details that are incorrect.  If he thinks running the signal path the way he is, is the best, more power to him, just don't equate the results with some technical jargon just to impress or make your perception seem more valid, and yes I do have a fair amount of electronic background.  I don't make claims to things I don't understand just to have something to say.  If you think that this is still harsh, well, that is your opinion and you are welcome to it

post #722 of 728

So perhaps all amps do add some distortion. But in my case, it wasn't audible and in fact my ears were telling me the opposite. This hobby is not all about science, but about what sounds good to you personally. There are many elements of the hobby that are in the 'grey' scientific realm where science may not explain it, but your ears are happy. For example some people may like stock cables better than the more electrically efficient ones - according to science it should be the opposite, but our ears tell us otherwise - and that's all that's important; unless this is a debate in  from the sound science forums on Head-Fi (check it out). Likewise it's compulsory to try something yourself before discounting it, otherwise you are only spreading heresay. Sometimes I may explain things the wrong way with science, but it's just human nature to put hypotheses out there. And I thank you for pointing errors out that I may make sometimes, which made it more mysterious how my ears would like it although it may not have scientific backing.

 

I was only trying to 'spread the good news' of a recent rig setup I recently discovered, so that maybe some of you can also be wowed that your system can perform even better than it is. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to cause a 'rift' between us. I value the diversity of opinions and look forward to learning from each other in the future, because actually, all of us are still learning, myself included. I will take my Ember 2.0 to the SF HeadFi meet on Saturday and see how it stacks up against other amps. :) 


Edited by DecentLevi - 7/16/15 at 7:16pm
post #723 of 728
Quote:
Originally Posted by DecentLevi View Post
 

So perhaps all amps do add some distortion. But in my case, it wasn't audible and in fact my ears were telling me the opposite. This hobby is not all about science, but about what sounds good to you personally. There are many elements of the hobby that are in the 'grey' scientific realm where science may not explain it, but your ears are happy. For example some people may like stock cables better than the more electrically efficient ones - according to science it should be the opposite, but our ears tell us otherwise - and that's all that's important; unless this is a debate in  from the sound science forums on Head-Fi (check it out). Likewise it's compulsory to try something yourself before discounting it, otherwise you are only spreading heresay. Sometimes I may explain things the wrong way with science, but it's just human nature to put hypotheses out there. And I thank you for pointing errors out that I may make sometimes, which made it more mysterious how my ears would like it although it may not have scientific backing.

 

I was only trying to 'spread the good news' of a recent rig setup I recently discovered, so that maybe some of you can also be wowed that your system can perform even better than it is. Please don't get me wrong, I'm not trying to cause a 'rift' between us. I value the diversity of opinions and look forward to learning from each other in the future, because actually, all of us are still learning, myself included. I will take my Ember 2.0 to the SF HeadFi meet on Saturday and see how it stacks up against other amps. :) 

+1 DecentLevi

 

Yep... I think this discussion is for what someones ear hears.

post #724 of 728

If it were all about science then none of us would be using a valve amp in the first place. The problem is that you said you heard more detail. That is a quantifiable thing and it simply cannot be achieved by making the signal path longer. Detail comes from the quality of the source & the directness of the path to your ears and brain.

 

You perceive a preferable sound as more detail but it's simply a sound that you prefer, nothing more & nothing less.

 

My first amp was an O2 & I chose it for two virtues. The first was that it was cheap. The second and more significant reason was that I did the research and completely bought into the straight wire with gain philosophy. I got on great with it. Right up until I got a trial of the Project Ember at home. It was nothing less than a revelation! It really flew in the face of logic & I struggled with why it could be better. I also struggled with how I was going to afford it because, make no mistake, I had to have it.

 

I tried to explain the difference I heard at the time and the best I could come up with was to suggest that all the same information was there as it was in the O2 but the Ember took all that information and threw it in the air. The Ember - or more accurately - the valve in the Ember - allows that information to fall in a different way. A more pleasurable way to me and, I suspect, the HD 650's in particular.

 

If I listen to a really complex mix like Röyksopp on both the O2 & the Ember I find that different parts of the music are brought to the fore when a valve is in the mix. Similarly some parts of the music recede into the background. It's all still there, but presented in a different way.

 

Anyway, I hope that lets you see where I'm coming from.

post #725 of 728

I Love Ember.

 

 


Edited by Amish - 7/16/15 at 8:45pm
post #726 of 728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amish View Post
 

I Love Ember.

 

 

 

+1

post #727 of 728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Solrighal View Post
 

 

+1

I've just ordered Ember :gs1000smile:

post #728 of 728
Quote:
Originally Posted by Demo3 View Post
 

+1 DecentLevi

 

Yep... I think this discussion is for what someones ear hears.

Agree.

The difference is between electronic detail enhancement and aural detail perception. Adding such components can't increase electronic detail. However, if the added audio components relatively enhance certain audible frequencies the ear may perceive this as added detail. For instance, if I am listening to a flute concerto I will hear the flute's higher frequencies more clearly with a K701 than an X1, even though the source and amp are identical for both cans. Presumably the Capella, working as a pre-amp in the situations sited, is just altering certain audible frequencies in a way which enhances the sound of certain key instruments making them sound clearer and more detailed.

Distortion is more difficult for me because some sounds awful, some sounds euphonic and some is inaudible. The Capella as a preamp appears to produce only the last two of these in the set ups mentioned, which is fortunate.


Edited by HOWIE13 - 7/18/15 at 3:11am
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) › Project Ember Review