M³ Project Announcement
Feb 23, 2005 at 7:56 PM Post #466 of 565
say what ? did somebody say anything ?
wink.gif


hm, with a 30V psu you'll never get 30Vpp, you loose Volts with the reverse protection diode, isolation jfets, output capability of the opamp, buffers, ...

anyway, I'm curious how loud I let the music play usually, I should find out
rolleyes.gif
 
Feb 23, 2005 at 8:10 PM Post #467 of 565
I'll continue this slightly off-topic jaunt, the K1000 are not that hard to drive. My dynahi and melos drive them to louder levels than my ears can take. Even my old ppa w/ diamond buffers drives them pretty decently.

I just thought of this but I also remember someone I think it might have been hirsch was able to drive the K1000s to listenable levels using one of xin's supermacro or supermini amps.
 
Feb 23, 2005 at 8:15 PM Post #468 of 565
Quote:

Originally Posted by n_maher
Not saying you're wrong or that I necessarily know anything but do you have any reason why Headroom makes the claim that they require at least 7 watss of power?

Just trying to figure out what's going on here...

N


Although I wouldn't necessarily expect the guys at headroom to fall into that trap, I believe many of the claims about the power levels required for the K1000 result from people using loudspeaker amps with these headphones. These will of course produce a lot less power into the 130 Ohm AKG than into a speaker load for which they're rated. FWIW, headroom also reports they were "pleased—no, AMAZED—at how good the Grace Model 901 sounds with the K 1000!", which IIRC is capable of a little less than 1W into a K1000 (someone correct me if I'm wrong, but in any case it's well below 7W).
 
Feb 23, 2005 at 8:29 PM Post #469 of 565
Quote:

do you have any reason why Headroom makes the claim that they require at least 7 watts of power?


I am merely quoting specifications for the K1000 from the AKG website:

Max. input power 1000mW (measured with test noise to DIN 45582), equivalent to approx. 100dB

According to the Grace 901 manual, maximum output level is 10.9Vrms, 30.8Vpp.

I have no idea how accurate the specs from AKG are or how HeadRoom arrived at their conclusion. We are getting off topic, perhaps this should be taken to a K1000 thread so we can get back to M³ issues.
 
Feb 24, 2005 at 12:03 AM Post #473 of 565
[pumps fist in air] NICE!

Again, thanks to the team for putting together this project for those of us to unedjumakated to figure stuff like this out.

N
600smile.gif
 
Feb 24, 2005 at 3:57 AM Post #475 of 565
Quote:

Originally Posted by amb
600smile.gif


I am happy to announce my new M³ web site. Check it out:

http://www.amb.org/audio/mmm/

Boards are not yet ready, but I am letting this cat out of the bag a few days ahead of time to give propective builders some time to read and digest the information. Have fun!


The site looks good. It's well documented and thurough. Nice job team M³
280smile.gif


One of the stated project goals was to attain a "better price/performance ratio than the PPA." Could you elaborate a bit on this please. Does this mean
1) same price (roughly) with better performance?
2) cheaper than PPA with equivalent performance?
3) much cheaper with almost as good performance?
4) more expensive with even better performance?
5)something else?
I realize that this is a subjective assesment, opinions vary and that few have heard an M³, let alone AB'd one with a PPA. If it's premature to answer that now, what was the design object in this regard?

Speaking of money, what is the projected cost to build the project? This information would be nice to see on the website for 3 cases:
1) barebone
2) typical
3) true audiophile $$$

your (team M³) effort is appreciated
 
Feb 24, 2005 at 4:55 AM Post #476 of 565
I hope you don't mind if I call you Snoop, do you?

I went back and checked another post, and found the cost per channel for the M³ will probably be about $10.00 compared to ~$25.00 a channel for a maxed out PPA V1.X. I don't know about the V2.0 though. With the board purchase and various other components I would hazard a guess of $150.00 less a power supply and using a case of your own construction. With the M³ website now in operation and the list of components just available, I'm sure someone will generate BOM's from the least expensive to the most extravagant of configurations.

In this thread I have read favorable reviews concerning the M³ in comparison to a PPA, although I cannot remember if the exact configuration of the PPA was given.

Somewhere around post #350, probably later.

[size=medium]Kudos to Team M³[/size] and to those who helped in any small way. amb, the website looks good and is much appreciated.

Later,
 
Feb 24, 2005 at 5:14 AM Post #477 of 565
Hi SnoopyRocks and Todd, thanks for your kind words. I'm not sure that M³ will be much cheaper than PPA v2, and may even be more expensive depending upon your choice of case, but a basic M³ should be comparable in price. The jury is out until people build them and report back.

As far as I know, the only people to have A-B compared the M³ and PPA v1.1 are Raif, NeilPeart, amb, and me. None of us could hear a significant difference. amb and I will be at the Head-Fi Meet in San Mateo this Saturday with both M³ and PPA v1.1 for folks to listen to. Sorry, only Tangent and PPL have a PPA v2 at this time.
 
Feb 24, 2005 at 7:21 AM Post #478 of 565
send me an email

Quote:

Originally Posted by stadams
I hope you don't mind if I call you Snoop, do you?

I went back and checked another post, and found the cost per channel for the M³ will probably be about $10.00 compared to ~$25.00 a channel for a maxed out PPA V1.X. I don't know about the V2.0 though. With the board purchase and various other components I would hazard a guess of $150.00 less a power supply and using a case of your own construction. With the M³ website now in operation and the list of components just available, I'm sure someone will generate BOM's from the least expensive to the most extravagant of configurations.

In this thread I have read favorable reviews concerning the M³ in comparison to a PPA, although I cannot remember if the exact configuration of the PPA was given.

Somewhere around post #350, probably later.

[size=medium]Kudos to Team M³[/size] and to those who helped in any small way. amb, the website looks good and is much appreciated.

Later,


Thanks. I didn't want to dig through the entire thread for this information. $10 vs $25 refers to the output buffers right? $150 seems reasonable. I'm too lazy to try and source all the parts to verify it myself. Maybe later...
 
Feb 24, 2005 at 9:49 AM Post #479 of 565
Wow that has taken some effort!
600smile.gif


A job well done Amb/Morsel, hopefully it should make the whole process of building the M³ nice and easy.

Thanks!
 
Feb 24, 2005 at 11:33 AM Post #480 of 565
excellent site

can't wait to get the pcb (got all parts allready at home :X )

just found one little thing: in the parts list, the qty for Cbb, shouldn't it be 2 instead of 9 ? typo or did I overlook something ?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top