New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Toys for Boys - Page 2

post #16 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TwoEars View Post
 

Fantastic little setup you've got there!

 

Great mix of old and new and every part picked with care! (...)

 

...you are very right about "picked with care". The hard-core of my set-up are mostly keepers now: Speakers, Phono-Pre, Preamp, Turntable a.s.o... at least until one nice day they refuse to do their job... I am simply so happy with that stuff, that I do not feel like changing anything...

 

So, since I still somehow want (and need) to play around with gear for fun, I mainly do so with the smaller stuff, meaning dacs, MC-pickups and of course headphones; whereas there are also some real keepers in between my little headphone collection: namely the LCD-X, K-1000 & AH-D7100...


Edited by musikaladin - 2/23/14 at 8:54am
post #17 of 25

Do you ever listen to the K-1000s with the sub at the same time?  Was something popular back in the day.

post #18 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bones13 View Post

Do you ever listen to the K-1000s with the sub at the same time?  Was something popular back in the day.


ohhhhh yes, I did! Quite a lot. With one of the best woofers ever made, the Backes Mueller U-Sub2, but also the Audio Pro B2-50, and the Velodyne Ultra 1000. They must be real SUB -Woofers because all you need is the lowest octave from 20 to 40 Hz (I will call it sub-bass in the following). And here is the problem: not with the woofer, but with the expectations.... Many thought by using a subwoofer, they could, in combination with a AKG-1000 give the music that "physical" feeling they are missing compared to their loudspeakers. But the frequencies that are providing this physical impression are much higher, I would say between around 60 to 120 Hz (I will call it upper bass in the following, knowing that this is not exactly how this term is commonly used, but it suits this context here better).

Now, there is a very different perception of sub- and upper- bass. You can test yourself with a pair of speakers that already provide sufficient "upper physical bass", but not the sub-region.. now you add a sub for the lowest octave. Most less-experienced audience would not even recognize that you added something. For them this upper bass is perceived being "physical" and sufficient; they kind of feel it as punch or power or whateveryoumightcallit, and this is most important to them when judging bass quality. This is also what is mostly expected when a sub is added to the K-1000...


 

Now, if you try to add the subwoofer in this upper bass range you would have the headphone and the sub playing parallel in that frequency range.


It is then

a) quite difficult to get it phase coherent (also refer to below comment about moving around with your headphones on) and

b) sounds unclean / undefined and over-emphasized or in other words too "fat" or kind of "wooly" in that frequency-range. Even if you turn the sub's volume very low. It is very hard to get the AKG-1000 just halfway harmonized with the sub.
 

Some were also blaming the sub's speed being not fast enough for the K-1000 to integrate, but I can not confirm this, because the U-Sub2 which I used is definitely one of the fastest if not the fastest of all subs.

 

Here the U-Sub2 between some of my speakers...

 

 


So, the expectations to get this physical bass feeling were mostly not fulfilled.


I even tried to use the K-1000 with a high pass filter to avoid the integration issues, but the music then sounded anaemic and artificial, even if the sub brought back the missing frequency range. Still not good.

But between 20 and 40 Hz the story is a totally different one. Here the K -1000 already is rather "laid back" and also the frequency's wave-length is much longer. Both factors support a easier integration of the sub: volume-wise and phase-wise.
And then the effect is great. Yes, surely more presence of the music, but rather in a better perception of space than physically feeling bass-vibrations. Of course you can feel something if the recording has it, but again, as explained above, that's not exactly what most people normally would associate with "physical bass".

I just do not use this configuration because a) it is not nice for the other family members always hearing just sub-bass without any relation to music, and b) I would have to re-adjust my sub every time I change from speaker to headphone and back, and also any time I change my listening position with the headphones... because my phase relation to the headphones is independent from my position in the room, whereas those of the sub isn't...


Edited by musikaladin - 2/28/14 at 7:29am
post #19 of 25
Thread Starter 

So finaly I got something new to play with....

 

Nothing major, just some new angled pads.... for the Denon AH-D7000, which I unfortunately do not even own. So what?

 

I actually bought them for my HE-400...

 

 

 

 

...and something rather weird happened because the effect is so unexpectedly strong:

 

I do not recognize the HE-400 anymore, positively.

 

The peak around 9kHz, as you can see it in the graph below (...and which disturbed me quite a bit), seems strongly reduced, at least I do not recognize it anymore as a disruptive factor...

 

 

...and the bass has much better punch!

 

About the reasons I can just speculate. I guess it is related to the facts that

 

a) the center of the membrane is not directly beaming into the earchannel anymore (the opening in the pad is a-centric), and

b) the volume (ccm) of the opening in the pad is significantly smaller.

 

So, it seems that this two facts coincidently change the sound in a way I much prefer.

 

Now the HE-400 gets much more attention than before...:gs1000smile:


Edited by musikaladin - 2/28/14 at 7:33am
post #20 of 25
Good to see the he400 benefits from the angled pads, I like it for the he4 as well. Although it takes some detail away from the treble vs stock velour, the gains make up for it.

I'd be willing to sell mine for $40 shipped with the hifiman rings already on if anyone is interested, it's in like new condition.






Edited by Soundsgoodtome - 2/28/14 at 3:54pm
post #21 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Soundsgoodtome View Post

Good to see the he400 benefits from the angled pads, I like it for the he4 as well. Although it takes some detail away from the treble vs stock velour, the gains make up for it.
(...)

...that's kind of confirming my imressions. And yes, the HE-400s with the mentioned peak around 9kHz strongly benefit from it!
Edited by musikaladin - 3/2/14 at 1:12am
post #22 of 25
Quote:
Originally Posted by musikaladin View Post
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Androb View Post
 

Amazing stuff! Loving the vinyl :D

 

Any short comparison of the LCD-X vs Akg k1000?


sure, here the two contenders...

 

 

...to the right the veteran AKG K-1000...

 

 

 

 

...and to the left the newcomer LCD-X...

 

 

 

Since both have been reviewed comprehensively I will just focus on the differences between the two cans, at some points referencing both of them back to my Focal Solo 6 active studio speakers with the support of a Velodyne subwoofer.

 

Transparency / Resolution: All over the audible bandwidth resolution is on a high level with both cans, whereas the LCD-X has a certain winning-margin to the K-1000. In detail, for low- mid- and high- range, this means:

 

Low-Range: The LCD-x has a far deeper bass compared to the K-1000. The reason seems mainly to be in the K-1000's open design (in this context I am not referring to the open back, but the open sides, where the LCD-X is well closed) Actually the K-1000 has to fight a acoustical short-circuit. The positive and negative pressure-fields created inside and outside of the driver are kind of eliminating each other. This cancellation-effect increases with lower frequencies and higher distance to the driver and is also depending on the size of the membrane.

So why can we here any deep bass at all? Simply because on it's way from inside to outside and vise-versa, the pressure field is passing by the ear and this is what you actually hear (similar to dipole subwoofers). Still, the mentioned relation to frequency and distance remains, and as such the driver of the K-100 would simply have to migrate far too much in order to produce the same sound-pressure as the LCD-X in the lowest frequencies. Also the resolution (the precision with which the membrane can follow the signal) seems slightly better with the LCD-X. I guess this is owed to it's orthodynamic driver and it's supposedly lower mass. As I wrote here to me the X's bass is rather like physically experienced alternating pressure-fields... amazing!

 

Mid-Range: This is the domain of the K-1000. Very much focused, very real-sounding and highly transparent. To me both are on par here concerning the resolution. But the K-1000 really focuses on the mid-range, whereas the LCD-X is rather "embedding" it between it's more pronounced low- and high-range.

 

High-Range: Here the LCD-X's resolution seems superior. But I have to notice, that I am not sure in how far this is owed to the fact that the K-1000's treble is rather recessed in comparison to the LCD-X what makes the LCD-X's high range better audible (what also could lead to the effect of supposed better resolution), or whether the LCD-X membrane really follows the signals more precisely.

 

This is leading us to the  Sound-Stage both cans create: This might be the biggest surprise when comparing them. When you just look at them, I guess you easily might come to the conclusion that the AKG, due to it's open design, also sounds much more open. Not at all. The opposite is the case. The AKG is much more focused and creates the sound-space rather inside your head whereas the LCD-X is projecting it more to the outside (as far as a headphone is able to). This effect is strongly audible when you close your eyes. To me this effect seems to be independent from the construction principles of those phones, but rather owed to their different frequency-responses. The K-1000's emphasis on the mid-range of the music is creating this focus-effect whereas the LCD-X's comparably pronounced and extended frequency extremes lead to this wide and open spaciousness. This effect with the LCD-X is similar to what I can experience with my Focal speakers and their Beryllium tweeters. They already create a dramatically open sound with a wide and deep stage, and when then turning on the subwoofer the space opens up even much further...

 

Whether all such effects described are owed to different basic-materials that material-science might have come up with along the recent years, or to the different driver technology (dynamic with voice-coil vs. ortho-dynamic) or to the totally different design approaches (sides open vs. closed).... I do not know. I guess it is a cumulation of all such factors.

 

Conclusion: If I had to decide between both (the old lonely island question) I would prefer the LCD-X. But as long as I can keep them both I will keep both.

And since I own the LCD-X there were still quite a number of occasions where I preferred using the K-1000. I could not even tell you whether I prefer the LCD-X or the K-1000 depending on the music genre. The decision to use the K-1000 is rather a question of mood. And then the K-1000 is still doing a great job.

 

Just one thing I really wonder: How would a new K-1000 version sound? ...if AKG had all the latest materials and computer simulation software to it's disposal....

 

Now, that could be a totally different story then....:wink_face: 

These K1000's are so sexy, damn I'm jealous..

Oh and great comparison!

post #23 of 25

Hi , musikaladin , what do you think about the Denon AH D7100 ?

post #24 of 25
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by ph58 View Post
 

Hi , musikaladin , what do you think about the Denon AH D7100 ?


Hi PH58,

 

sorry for the belated answer. You can find my impressions here. Let me add, that in between I like it even more. The D7100 goes so well with my all my ipods (especially my 64gigs touch with the Onkyo high res app) and FiiO X5 and also performs just fabulously with my Terreatec AureonXfire8.0HD.

 

 

Just now listening to https://archive.org/details/fr2005-11-23akg480ck63.flac24 via the D7100. Check out the first title "Orchard Lounge".  Killer!!!

 

I love this phone and also the addition of a Audeze LCD-X to my little collection couldn't change anything about that.

 

PS: Concerning the allegedly "imprecise & bloated" bass of the D7100... Besides a substantial burn-in you also should preferably use amps with very low output impendance, below 1 Ohm would be great. This increases the damping factor of the amp-phone combination. Like that to me the bass surely still has serious substance creating a very physical presence making it sound so amazingly realistic; but I wouldn't call it bloated or imprecise.... Combined with such low impendance amp it even sounds much better than with my HDVD800... and in comparison to my original review of the D7100 I also would call it an "allrounder" now...


Edited by musikaladin - 5/18/14 at 11:42am
post #25 of 25
Thread Starter 

Here my latest pocket-toy: The FiiO X5

 

 

 

As you can see my Krell KID is also back to the rig. Repaired and as good as ever.

 

Still, at the moment I prefer the FiiO X5 digitally connected to the HDVD800 playing 24/192 flac files. So cool how easy it is hardware-wise to integrate High Res Audio in a home or even portable set-up.

I have 2 x 64gig sd cards in the X5, one used for normal CD quality and the other one for High Res only.

 

Whether portable or in the stationary rig, the X5 sounds great. Still, if used without a dedicated headphone amp, I recommend that your cans are rather on the higher-efficiency side. In-ears obviously go very well, but also full-size cans like the AH-D7100.

 

My complaints would be rather on the firm- / soft- ware side:

 

1) The FiiO user interface: I find it a little uncomfortable to work with the "lockscreens". Especially concerning the volume adjustment.

After lockscreen is active, the volume buttons on the upper left will only adjust volume by clicking step by step, and the steps are small... so you have to click a lot to increase or lower the volume remarkably. If you remain longer on the button (what adjusts the volume just fine as long as the lockscreen isn't active), it then jumps to the previous / next song. For lockscreen 1 this makes sense since all other buttons are inactive. But this even remains the same when you use lockscreen 2, whereas now there should be the two dedicated buttons below the jog-wheel used for jumping titles back and forward. I really hope there will be another firmware update soon.

 

2) the other software issue still making it uncomfortable to use such players like the X5 has nothing to do with the players itself. It is is the annoying issue with tagging especially .wav files with any windows software and also the iTunes tagging mode. The industry as such should really be ashamed, to trouble their customers so badly with their nonsense war over standards. I tried a lot of different free software (I simply do not see why I should pay for a software just to tag files), but all of those had their serious limitations. Even the trial versions of programs which are payable didn't work as I would have expected. Actually it should be possible to tag any music-file just by using the windows explorer or any respective other file management software by "properties" > "edit"... as simple as renaming files... that's it!

Maybe somebody can recommend a way how this can be comfortably done with one (!) software for all (!) formats.


Edited by musikaladin - 5/18/14 at 11:31am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum