Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › 3 different headphone types, 3 amps, 1 song (that does not remain the same). Impressions to guide what differences to expect and bang vs buck.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

3 different headphone types, 3 amps, 1 song (that does not remain the same). Impressions to guide... - Page 2

post #16 of 18

OK. I'd really like to know what the difference was between the three amps if you ever get around to doing a controlled test of that.

post #17 of 18
Thread Starter 

Dood (Bigshot) you missed pressing the little button marked PM.

Bigshot; if you PM me, it frees up the timeframe in terms of when I can reply. By having the freedom to wait till my little one is asleep, or possibly at school, and giving myself the time to fire up a laptop with an actual keyboard (otherwise my posts are done from a little winphone, which has a poor web browser experience for this site, no store applet to make browsing/viewing this site easier, and a really dodgy onscreen keyboard (comma where the space bar should extend on the screen etc).. any how if you understand why I wish you to PM me I feel we might get there in the end... I would be happy to take the time to answer your questions with the attention they require.

 

Now I hope I am not just opening a can of worms here, because I have already explained elsewhere on this site about my understanding and beliefs on amplifiers (in the society for the the world being flat thread) that when built correctly that should be about as much as we need, with the exception of whether they deliver enough power to meet required listening level ideally with headroom etc..

 

So I don't want a whole slew of questions to follow requiring further clarification (and if so PM me please!), as for my initial writing, it reasoned based on my presented conclusions as to how important all pieces are to the playback chain. 

What did I experience between the three headphone amplifiers (six including a brief test using a voodoo modded galaxy S, ipod touch and laptop out)

was that:

 

The DAP presented clumped sound, and had a 'greyer' sense of background silence, and was missing the 'air' around the instruments and sounds.

The Modern home theatre receiver added air, had better positioning but instruments were noticably thin 

VS

Two Channel Esoteric piece of kit (flat frequency responce from DC to 500,000 khz with minimal deviation, slew rate of 500 "mu' seconds etc etc) had the tightest sound positioning, most extended soundfield, distinct edges to the sounds, no treble harshness and a very 'black' silence.

Going by my straight numbers as recoreded the other night, the bass dropped, for example, on the MDR-1RBT by two points, from an 8/10 rating to a 6/10 rating, the treble down one point to a 5/10 rating,..

I noted things like the amp improvement on the bass for the 1Rs was good, but there was a more obvious improvement in bass quality for the P5s by going to better amplification.

There was a lot of implications here that could then be interpreted, but due to not wanting to get too convoluted, I simply wrote what I was hoping was a succinct blurb, to say that 

 

" I found from some brief testing, that amps matter, better amps matter more to some equipment, but that sources matter more than getting vastly better amps, but the most important decision is the type of headphone as it is likely to affect the sound the most "

 

admittedly I didn't write overtly that better amps matter more to some equipment, but as a sentence that is hard to read. So I spaced it out a little, added in the names of a few of the bits of kit, tried to preempt that people would criticise my testing methods, so kept it simple in my presentation and argue the findings that were so obvious that any slight variance/failure in my test setup wouldn't skew the meaningfulness of the results.

 

I agree with most posts on this thread about exactness of scientific method and how important it is. Please, trust that I did what I would hope others would do in such a test and gave up a little extra of my time on the night to ensure a consistency and a fairness to my findings,.. remember this was half a song, and never meant to be a be all take. I did suggest that these finding with regards to headphone size might matter more to this style of music, that actually has very little physical instrument placement in a real world sense and is arguably a soundscape. So, I guess when weighing my result I did put a heavier worth to soundfield and soundstage.

 

I hope this helps (if it hinders PM me until we get this sorted out, if we figure out something that all forum goers NEED to hear, then we can cut n paste appropriately back to this thread!)

post #18 of 18
Quote:
Originally Posted by whitedragem View Post
 

The DAP presented clumped sound, and had a 'greyer' sense of background silence, and was missing the 'air' around the instruments and sounds.

The Modern home theatre receiver added air, had better positioning but instruments were noticably thin 

VS

Two Channel Esoteric piece of kit (flat frequency responce from DC to 500,000 khz with minimal deviation, slew rate of 500 "mu' seconds etc etc) had the tightest sound positioning, most extended soundfield, distinct edges to the sounds, no treble harshness and a very 'black' silence.

 

Amazing! I have no more questions!

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Sound Science
  • 3 different headphone types, 3 amps, 1 song (that does not remain the same). Impressions to guide what differences to expect and bang vs buck.
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Sound Science › 3 different headphone types, 3 amps, 1 song (that does not remain the same). Impressions to guide what differences to expect and bang vs buck.