Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › New Teac HA-P50-B Portable DAC Amp
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

New Teac HA-P50-B Portable DAC Amp - Page 3

post #31 of 81
I tried the Teac again today (in store).
I was surprised at the price, quite resonable. Comparable to the Sony from memory.

I used Touch 5G, venturecraft lightning cable, flacplayer app (FLAC) an DITA The Truth in ears.

The sound was quite clear.
A warmth to it.
The bass seemed too much to my ears.
I used high gain by accident by the looks of the photo(have to return).

I also tried the JVC su-ax7. Quite nice.

ybabahuh.jpgave9abu9.jpg
Edited by ExpatinJapan - 6/28/14 at 3:58am
post #32 of 81

Christ! JVC are on this as well?!

 

The portable audio game really has changed a lot since i joined Head-Fi some years ago! :)

 

Looks pretty nice too.

post #33 of 81
Yep, every man and his dog are jumping on the idevice wagon it seems.
post #34 of 81

Being an iBasso fan, I wish they would get the handshake sorted with iDevices!

 

A DB2 & PB2 in one box like the RSA Intruder with iDevice compatibility would be a GOOD thing! 

Anyway Ill stop threadjacking as this is a TEAC thread, Not iBasso lol....

post #35 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExpatinJapan View Post

I tried the Teac again today (in store).
I was surprised at the price, quite resonable. Comparable to the Sony from memory.

I used Touch 5G, venturecraft lightning cable, flacplayer app (FLAC) an DITA The Truth in ears.

The sound was quite clear.
A warmth to it.
The bass seemed too much to my ears.
I used high gain by accident by the looks of the photo(have to return).

I also tried the JVC su-ax7. Quite nice.

 

The SU-AX7 seems a bit too pricey for what it delivers. It uses the TPA6120 for the headamp section, which is a nice part, but it might be a little tricky to work with, and if they follow the reference design, it'll have 10 ohms of OI, just like the PHA-1/2, and most other TPA6120 devices. It's also using, surprisingly, an older AKM chip for the DAC section. I wonder what their rationale is. It's not like the AK4399 is that much more expensive than the AK4390. Then again, it's not a big deal. (Unless they're actually using the brand new AK4490 and the press is mis-reporting it as the AK4390).

 

Comparatively, the TEAC is surprisingly affordable. TEAC isn't allowing much in markups for its international distributors, so prices should be stable around the globe. Subjectively, it sounds better to me than the ADL X1 and the HP-P1. It's also better built, IMHO. Some people might think it's a little too warm if they use warm headphones, but it possesses great midrange transparency, so if you use relatively neutral headphones/IEMs, I think people will find it a good experience. It's basically hiss-free even with sensitive IEMs. If used solely as an amp via its analog input, it's not great and sounds a bit too warm, but I doubt most people will be using it that way. Its only drawback is that it doesn't do anything higher than 24/96, so no 24/192 or 32/384 or DSD, but that also means that it's driver-less even with Windows devices.

 

For the price, I can't really think of any other all-in-one device that can top it at the moment. The Geek Stream might, but it only does Apple devices via CCK and isn't due out until 2015 anyway.

post #36 of 81

If anyone has, Can or does use the TEAC with a pair of T70p's Please post up an impression.

post #37 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by ExpatinJapan View Post


I also tried the JVC su-ax7. Quite nice.
 

 

 

How did it compare to the TEAC in terms of SQ and build?

post #38 of 81
They both have a solid well made build.

Sound quality is better/ more transparent on the JVC. The teac still sounds great at its price point.

Tomscy2000 wrote a nice piece two posts up.

I think i will go back soon for a more extended and critical listen to both, an the sony pha-2.
post #39 of 81

Time to give this a bump.

post #40 of 81
I've just ordered one,
I'll get some photos and my impressions up once it's here smily_headphones1.gif
post #41 of 81

Just reposting a couple of my posts from the Onkyo thread that people here might find interesting:

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post  Well, considering that the TEAC is really good, the Onkyo should also be really good. It's difficult to predict how changing out the OPA1652 to the MUSES8920 will change the sound; both are FET input opamps, so they have similar performance characteristics (8920 looks slightly prettier on paper). Both are well-regarded opamps and are preferred units by modern designers.

 

TEAC actually likes using the 8920 a lot, but they tend to use it for I/V LPF conversion in their DACs. Since that step is done in the charge pump of the PCM5102A here, the only thing these opamps are doing is voltage gain, and I don't know how that will impact sound.

 

The designer of both units has mentioned in a press conference that the two are voiced differently, however, owing to a different sound philosophy between the two firms (TEAC and Onkyo). Interestingly, the Onkyo spec sheet quotes its analog input performance (0.003% THD+N into 32 ohms), while the TEAC quotes its digital performance (0.001% into 32 ohms). Personally, I thought the TEAC's weak link was its analog input performance (even though it supposedly uses a discrete analog stage for the amplifier portion), but I doubt most people would be using it as an amplifier. As a DAC/amp, the TEAC is absolutely excellent, especially for its price. FYI, the HA-P50B is driven to ~2.25 Vrms, while the DAC-HA200 is driven to ~2.15 Vrms, at max. power into 32 ohms.

 

Overall, I'd say the better buy is the TEAC (slightly cheaper, slightly more powerful, slightly better performance numbers, a pleasant, well-rounded overall sound), but the differences should be minor. I assume that if someone prefers the Onkyo signature over the TEAC's, then it wouldn't be a performance penalty to go with the Onkyo.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post  Okay, so I heard the Onkyo. It... sounds similar to the TEAC. Of course, it's practically impossible to pinpoint the difference from sonic memory. I last heard the TEAC weeks ago, and the two aren't available to be listened to side by side (one store carries the TEAC, one carries the Onkyo). But I can say this --- it sounds pretty nice. I doubt anyone would be disappointed with one and exulted with the other. More likely, anyone would enjoy both.

 


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul Graham View Post  I've just ordered one,
I'll get some photos and my impressions up once it's here smily_headphones1.gif

 

I think you'll be pleased with what you hear!

post #42 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by tomscy2000 View Post
 

Just reposting a couple of my posts from the Onkyo thread that people here might find interesting:

 

 


 

 

I think you'll be pleased with what you hear!

 

How does the TEAC compares to the Sony PHA-2?  Build and sound.

Reply
post #43 of 81
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFiGuy528 View Post  How does the TEAC compares to the Sony PHA-2?  Build and sound.

 

Push comes to shove, I give the (very) tiny edge to the Sony for build, but the two are absolutely on the same level for build quality; I find the TEAC much more aesthetically appealing. The Onkyo version is a sexy matte black, too.

 

Sound-wise, the TPA6120A2 with 10 ohm output resistors in the Sony is hampering its performance with IEMs. With full-sized headphones, the difference is not so clear. I haven't directly compared the two, so it's hard to say subjectively.

 

The PHA-2 supports DSD2.8/5.6, so that's an advantage. The PCM1795 technically has a higher performance ceiling than the PCM5102A, and the I/V conversion stage seems like a pair of OPA1662 feeding into the LME49860 for voltage gain before feeding into the TPA6120A2 as a buffer. The PCM5102A's performance ceiling is capped by the noise floor modulation caused by the charge pump (for the line driver) built into the chip; the PCM1795 isn't limited by that, but requires separate I/V conversion.

 

Keep in mind that the PHA-2 is differential output all the way until headamp IC, whilst the HA-P50-B is the traditional ground-centered voltage output.

 

If I had to predict, under an ideal headphone load, the Sony would probably sound more wide-open with better instrumental separation than the TEAC --- how much more, don't know.

 

The Sony probably provides better absolute performance. Its line-output is almost surely superior to that of the TEAC. But on a practical level, when used as a single DAC/amp unit with IEMs and low-impedance (portable-ish) headphones, my tingling spidey sense tells me the TEAC is a better buy at 60% the price.

 

ADDENDUM:

 

  • AP SYS data from GoldenEars shows us that PHA-2 performance is invariably superior from the line-out --- it's physically impossible for the PCM5102 to get above 112 dB DNR, whilst the PHA-2 gets a real-world 115 dB DNR from its line out.
  • For headphone out, the 16 ohm load test on the PHA-2 gets nice performance, with 112 dB of dynamic range. The THD+N is only 0.005% and at a weak 1 Vrms, which is a sore thumb, but that's with a challenging 16 ohm load (~60 mW power dissipation). I'll bet that with a 32 ohm load, that distortion goes down to 0.003% (a guess) or so.
  • Then again, the HA-P50-B gets 0.001% THD+N with a 32 ohm load and 100 mW power dissipation, which should end up superior to 32 ohm performance on the PHA-2, but whether anyone can hear the difference between 0.001% and 0.003% is debatable. At the same time, <0.001% THD+N is a bit of a holy grail for audio designers and is something they all target.
  • With IEMs like the Nuforce Primo 8 or UERM, these multi-BA IEMs get progressively darker with increasing output impedance because their varying input impedance drops to <10 ohms in the treble region. The 10 ohm OI of the PHA-2 is a poor fit with these types of IEMs.
  • There's no OI data for the HA-P50-B, but from what I'm hearing, it should be no more than 5 ohms, but more than 1 ohms. Probably around 2-3 ohms, which is acceptable for me, personally. (Take this with a grain of salt; I'm no SYS2722 --- just judging from the level of brightness I hear with my UERM)

 

Bottom Line:

 

  • From a measurements-only standpoint, the Sony gets more format support and better line-out performance, but the headphone-out is better and more versatile on the TEAC.
  • Subjectively, it's anyone's guess. One man's trash is...

Edited by tomscy2000 - 7/16/14 at 1:14am
post #44 of 81

This thread is begging for a HA-P50, PHA-1, HP-P1, DAC-HA200 shootout.

 

Where's Rudi when you need him?

post #45 of 81

I don't see where TEAC makes any claims in their literature about iPhone 4S compatibility. The Onkyo model does however say it is compatible with iPhone 4S with IOS 7+ and the CCK.  Anyone have a reason to think the TEAC model wouldn't also support the iPhone 4S despite the lack of compatibility claim from TEAC?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Portable Source Gear
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Source Gear › New Teac HA-P50-B Portable DAC Amp