Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › The Astell & Kern AK240
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Astell & Kern AK240 - Page 281

post #4201 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by kh600rr View Post



Doesn't get much better then this..

Oh yes it does but let's not start a flame war!!!! :)

post #4202 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by designmaniac View Post

Oh yes it does but let's not start a flame war!!!! smily_headphones1.gif

For what it's supposed to do, it doesn't.
post #4203 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimouille View Post

I have had 5mn in the subway...so not really deep impressions. My first feeling is that it does exactly what Vinnie says on his site. Improve little aspects of the sound, most obvious being giving more body and weight to the bass. But that is from memory, could be full placebo. When I have more than 2 mn to myself, i.e. next week, I will compare it with 901 with all my iems.

congrats,Mim!
Believe it needs burn in.
Can u compare to Hugo sq also?
Thanks
post #4204 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by flymetothemoon View Post
 

846 a BA based IEM?

Yes, Multi-BA iems will have crossovers that will cause impedance peaks and etc..  Not to mention, phase non-linearity, since it is multiple drivers pumping out the sound and all the drivers will not be totally in sync, and single driver doesn't run into that problem.  Take a look at the IE800's impedance graph.  It's flat which means there will be no skew caused from output impedance being close to iem's impedance at certain frequencies.  Power will be distributed evenly throughout the spectrum like orthos.

 


Edited by SilverEars - 7/11/14 at 5:33pm
post #4205 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverEars View Post
 

Yes, Multi-BA iems will have crossovers that will cause impedance peaks and etc..  Not to mention, phase non-linearity, since it is multiple drivers pumping out the sound and all the drivers will not be totally in sync, and single driver doesn't run into that problem.  Take a look at the IE800's impedance graph.  It's flat which means there will be no skew caused from output impedance being close to iem's impedance at certain frequencies.  Power will be distributed evenly throughout the spectrum like orthos.

 

Not just multiple-driver setups with cross overs; earphones like ortofon's newest e-Q8 is a single armature earphone that is very very difficult to drive for systems without really good current output at low Ω levels. I actually was about to condemn it until I heard it with the Mezzo modded system. Wow, there is bass! And, it's lovely! But I didn't hear it out of the systems I was borrowing at the time.

post #4206 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverEars View Post

Yes, Multi-BA iems will have crossovers that will cause impedance peaks and etc..  Not to mention, phase non-linearity, since it is multiple drivers pumping out the sound and all the drivers will not be totally in sync, and single driver doesn't run into that problem.  Take a look at the IE800's impedance graph.  It's flat which means there will be no skew caused from output impedance being close to iem's impedance at certain frequencies.  Power will be distributed evenly throughout the spectrum like orthos.



Thanks for the explanation
post #4207 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by shigzeo View Post
 

Not just multiple-driver setups with cross overs; earphones like ortofon's newest e-Q8 is a single armature earphone that is very very difficult to drive for systems without really good current output at low Ω levels. I actually was about to condemn it until I heard it with the Mezzo modded system. Wow, there is bass! And, it's lovely! But I didn't hear it out of the systems I was borrowing at the time.

I looked at the impedance graphs of couple single BA drivers(ER4(black graph below) and UM1).  Atleast for both of them, the impedance characteristics are similar with one's response shift higher in impedance.  Looking at EQ-8's spec of 12ohm impedance most likely at 1k, I would say it's more shifted down than the UM1, and that means the bass region will be much lower probably dips down to 5ohm or so is my guess. If this is the case, the bass will suffer more relative to the treble as these graphs show drastic impedance  rise in the treble region. If it was the AK240 or the iphone 5 with 3.5 ohms, there will be a huge contrast of treble to bass.  Treble will be very strong, so end result will be thin sound.  Power is not really the problem with the sensitivity of 120(not sure if this is right).  Is it really hard to drive?  I would think it would be easy given it's sensitivity.  I'd like to see the EQ-8 FR to really have a better idea, but as I said, it wouldn't be surprising for bass to dip.  Look at the red graph, it's the TF10 impedance characteristic, different from ER4's impedance characteristic, it's the opposite.  In the TF10's case, the treble will either suffer with increased output impedance.  Notice that TF10 is Mult-BA, and multi-BA dips the impedance at the treble like the SE846, my NT6, and so on.  So any BA, no matter single or multi, the sound will change depending on the output impedance of the DAP.  Thanks for pointing that out, it makes perfect sense.  Higher bass impedance will be more stable which EQ8 isn't.

 

 

 

03_Impedance.png 


Edited by SilverEars - 7/11/14 at 9:04pm
post #4208 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by flymetothemoon View Post
 

Sorry to see this brings you so much trouble.

 

Please keep us posted on how you get over this as we will sooner or later encounter the same when getting the 128GB cards.

 

Good luck.

Here is the promised update on the SDXC cards. 

 

I have informed SanDisk support about the issue, they have been quite responsive and helpful to this point. 

 

The situation is as follows:  I bought 2 Micro SDXC 128 GB cards directly from amazon (Germany); the  price point was 99 Euro per piece, so I guess the units are not faked. 

I tried to format the first card with fat32formatter - The program didn't offer any choice on the size of the card but showed 480 kByte. Win 7 and MacOS 10.6 both recognize the card - but it has only 480 kB. I didn't format or alter the second card, both WIN 7 and MacOS do not allow access to the card but offer to format it. 

 

At this point I contacted Sandisk support. I have provided SanDisk Support with full information regarding the cards and the purchase - so they can check further. 

 

The recommended to only use SD Formatter (from SD Association) to format memory cards. (The program is available for MAC and WIN)

Using this program resulted in nothing else than what I encountered before - the card size that is showed is 480 kB (See Pic)

 

 

SD Formatter basically shows the same size for the other - not altered - card. I did't format it of course and won't do so. (I am basically pretty glad that I had ordered 2 cards and didn't do anything to one of it) 

I also tried the recommended test tools H2TESTW - which showed the same results. 

 

 

So - still no information why the cards do not offer 128 GB - I will have to wait till monday for the next discussion with SD support.

 

I'll keep You updated. 

post #4209 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlterSack View Post

Here is the promised update on the SDXC cards. 

I have informed SanDisk support about the issue, they have been quite responsive and helpful to this point. 

The situation is as follows:  I bought 2 Micro SDXC 128 GB cards directly from amazon (Germany); the  price point was 99 Euro per piece, so I guess the units are not faked. 
I tried to format the first card with fat32formatter - The program didn't offer any choice on the size of the card but showed 480 kByte. Win 7 and MacOS 10.6 both recognize the card - but it has only 480 kB. I didn't format or alter the second card, both WIN 7 and MacOS do not allow access to the card but offer to format it. 

At this point I contacted Sandisk support. I have provided SanDisk Support with full information regarding the cards and the purchase - so they can check further. 

The recommended to only use SD Formatter (from SD Association) to format memory cards. (The program is available for MAC and WIN)
Using this program resulted in nothing else than what I encountered before - the card size that is showed is 480 kB (See Pic)




SD Formatter basically shows the same size for the other - not altered - card. I did't format it of course and won't do so. (I am basically pretty glad that I had ordered 2 cards and didn't do anything to one of it) 
I also tried the recommended test tools H2TESTW - which showed the same results. 


So - still no information why the cards do not offer 128 GB - I will have to wait till monday for the next discussion with SD support.

I'll keep You updated. 

Thanks and good luck
Edited by flymetothemoon - 7/12/14 at 9:54am
post #4210 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by AlterSack View Post
 

Here is the promised update on the SDXC cards. 

 

I have informed SanDisk support about the issue, they have been quite responsive and helpful to this point. 

 

The situation is as follows:  I bought 2 Micro SDXC 128 GB cards directly from amazon (Germany); the  price point was 99 Euro per piece, so I guess the units are not faked. 

I tried to format the first card with fat32formatter - The program didn't offer any choice on the size of the card but showed 480 kByte. Win 7 and MacOS 10.6 both recognize the card - but it has only 480 kB. I didn't format or alter the second card, both WIN 7 and MacOS do not allow access to the card but offer to format it. 

 

At this point I contacted Sandisk support. I have provided SanDisk Support with full information regarding the cards and the purchase - so they can check further. 

 

The recommended to only use SD Formatter (from SD Association) to format memory cards. (The program is available for MAC and WIN)

Using this program resulted in nothing else than what I encountered before - the card size that is showed is 480 kB (See Pic)

 

 

SD Formatter basically shows the same size for the other - not altered - card. I did't format it of course and won't do so. (I am basically pretty glad that I had ordered 2 cards and didn't do anything to one of it) 

I also tried the recommended test tools H2TESTW - which showed the same results. 

 

 

So - still no information why the cards do not offer 128 GB - I will have to wait till monday for the next discussion with SD support.

 

I'll keep You updated. 

The fact that it's Amazon, they will replace free of charge with a phone call to them. Perhaps the cards are defective? 

post #4211 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Saraguie View Post
 

The fact that it's Amazon, they will replace free of charge with a phone call to them. Perhaps the cards are defective? 

Hopeful he will get over this problem soon.

post #4212 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mimouille View Post

Just got this baby. On the price of the mod, please take into account that Vinnie takes a risk premium for opening a 2.5k device and risking messing it up.

Any update on your impressions so far?

post #4213 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by flymetothemoon View Post

Any update on your impressions so far?
Nope, all around China for work, no time to listen.
post #4214 of 5700

The yearly cycle is nearly up. Waiting to get the AK240 II .... then another RWA mod? LOL

post #4215 of 5700
Quote:
Originally Posted by wshinji View Post
 

The yearly cycle is nearly up. Waiting to get the AK240 II .... then another RWA mod? LOL

It will come soon, I bet.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › The Astell & Kern AK240