[pbirkett]

I myself use a Behringer SX3040 Sonic Exciter, its basically a similar unit to the Aphex 204 that I know a few forum members on here use, and I have come to the conclusion that it is by far the best bang for buck device I have ever had for my headphone system.

I've had a major problem with headphones since I started in this hobby several years ago now. My problem is that any one pair of headphones always fails to live up to expectations somehow, and I ended up selling them.

Fairly recently I added this to my system. It was pretty cheap. Its a pity I had not discovered this device originally as I feel it would have saved me a lot of money.

Headphones appear to fall into two main camps for me. Either they have lots of bass, but sound rather dull or dark (step forward Sennheiser HD6x0, Ultrasone Proline 2500, Beyerdynamic DT770) or sound nice and bright and clear and detailed, but seriously lack bass (step forward the Grados, Beyerdynamic DT880s and DT931s of this world).

With this device I can tweak any headphone to boost what I perceive to be "shortcomings", and to be honest, I have NEVER had a headphone yet that I perceive to have no shortcomings.

I appreciate that this is not usually the way it is done in audiophile circles, and ironically, I am not even sure I like the effect with my speakers, they sound fine as they are, but with headphones this is becoming invaluable, and I am now prepared to brush aside any feeling that I am somehow "faking it" or "cheating" to get the sound I want. Why should I spend money on expensive cables to try and improve (and not neccesarily succeed) the sound to my tastes, when I can have this device which is cheaper and I can tailor exactly to my needs, at ANY time I choose. Not only that, but try as I might, but I fail to hear any degradation of sound quality with the sound either.

Now, I'm not going to try and say that everyone should run out and buy one, because I am perfectly able to accept that some people have achieved their goals without the need for such a device, but for me, I've felt like I was getting nowhere, and I am not prepared to spend 5x as much on headphones to get a sound I enjoy equally as much on my speakers, it just seems ludicrous to me.

 

[upstateguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pbirkett /img/forum/go_quote.gif I myself use a Behringer SX3040 Sonic Exciter, its basically a similar unit to the Aphex 204 that I know a few forum members on here use, and I have come to the conclusion that it is by far the best bang for buck device I have ever had for my headphone system. I've had a major problem with headphones since I started in this hobby several years ago now. My problem is that any one pair of headphones always fails to live up to expectations somehow, and I ended up selling them. Fairly recently I added this to my system. It was pretty cheap. Its a pity I had not discovered this device originally as I feel it would have saved me a lot of money. Headphones appear to fall into two main camps for me. Either they have lots of bass, but sound rather dull or dark (step forward Sennheiser HD6x0, Ultrasone Proline 2500, Beyerdynamic DT770) or sound nice and bright and clear and detailed, but seriously lack bass (step forward the Grados, Beyerdynamic DT880s and DT931s of this world). With this device I can tweak any headphone to boost what I perceive to be "shortcomings", and to be honest, I have NEVER had a headphone yet that I perceive to have no shortcomings. I appreciate that this is not usually the way it is done in audiophile circles, and ironically, I am not even sure I like the effect with my speakers, they sound fine as they are, but with headphones this is becoming invaluable, and I am now prepared to brush aside any feeling that I am somehow "faking it" or "cheating" to get the sound I want. Why should I spend money on expensive cables to try and improve (and not neccesarily succeed) the sound to my tastes, when I can have this device which is cheaper and I can tailor exactly to my needs, at ANY time I choose. Not only that, but try as I might, but I fail to hear any degradation of sound quality with the sound either. Now, I'm not going to try and say that everyone should run out and buy one, because I am perfectly able to accept that some people have achieved their goals without the need for such a device, but for me, I've felt like I was getting nowhere, and I am not prepared to spend 5x as much on headphones to get a sound I enjoy equally as much on my speakers, it just seems ludicrous to me.

You bring up an interesting point. We use equalizers and all kinds of Acoustic Room Treatments stuck to the walls and ceiling to tune the speaker-room sound space don't we? Well, everyone's ears are shaped and sized differently, so why not a device that helps tune headphone-ear sound space? After all, your ears are the final judge of how good the sound is.... if it sounds better to you, it is better.....

USG

d-_-b

 

[GreatDane]

I love her Big Bottom

 

[noseallinit]

I forget which head-fi members recommended that I get something like this.

I have some radio stations that I like to listen to that come in clear as a bell. one night I heard a song on the radio that I wanted to listen to again and it just happened to be on me hard drive. what I heard off the radio had much more life to it over how sterile it sounded off me hard drive.

 

[upstateguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by noseallinit /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have some radio stations that I like to listen to that come in clear as a bell. one night I heard a song on the radio that I wanted to listen to again and it just happened to be on me hard drive. what I heard off the radio had much more life to it over how sterile it sounded off me hard drive.

Hey nose

I've noticed the same thing. I always attributed it to the processing and compression radio stations give the music. Dug out my old DBX 118 to see if compression could make some of the music sound more like the radio.... (and this goes for internet radio as well) and the answer was, yes it does.... so go figure.....

Note compression set to 2.0

USG

d-_-b

 

[noseallinit]

Quote:

Originally Posted by upstateguy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hey nose I've noticed the same thing. I always attributed it to the processing and compression radio stations give the music. Dug out my old DBX 118 to see if compression could make some of the music sound more like the radio.... (and this goes for internet radio as well) and the answer was, yes it does.... so go figure..... Note compression set to 2.0 USG d-_-b

compressor it is. that DBX is a beauty! what did you have this for originally?

I know nothing about them. can you tell me what the 2.0 setting means?

how small of a unit can you get one of these?

 

[edstrelow]

I used equalizers for years mainly to tweak the treble on electrostatic phones. After a while, I found that other tweaks such as better ic's took care of most treble harshness.

Still you get a lot of flexbility with such gadgets and maybe that's the only way you will get the tonal characteristics you want. However, every such gadget, as well as its ic's adds it's own bit of degredation to the sound. This week I returned a cheap equalizer to Radio Shack because while it did flatten out the frequency response giving a nice sonic balance to a set of speakers it sucked some of the life out of the sound. The system sounded better on balance as it was without equalization. (BTW the frequenccy repsonse was measured with an alternate RTA system.) I still use a old and expensive dBx 10/20 equalizer in my main system however.

 

[bigshot]

Pro grade equalizers are inexpensive enough to not even bother with cheap equalizers.

See ya
Steve

 

[Budgie]

Been thinking about this myself, after seeing an Aphex Aural Exciter processor for sale (used) at a pro audio shop. I have noticed that phones always seem to be lacking a certain "something" compared to my speaker rig. (my opinion) This may be the tweek I am looking for. Thanks Paul.

 

[breakfastchef]

Can the Behringer SX3040 Sonic Exciter be used as an unbalanced unit? If so, how? I am not clear on how to interface this device between a DAC and my tube amp with phono inputs.

 

[Budgie]

Breakfastchef, It's all here-

Sound System Interconnection

 

[upstateguy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by noseallinit /img/forum/go_quote.gif compressor it is. that DBX is a beauty! what did you have this for originally? I know nothing about them. can you tell me what the 2.0 setting means? how small of a unit can you get one of these?

The DBX 118 was originally used to restore the dynamic range and to reduce the surface/carrier noise on records and FM radio. What it did was to make the soft sounds softer and the loud sounds louder(but scaled proportionally greater to making the soft sounds softer), thus increasing the dynamic range. The effect was unnoticeable as long as you kept the expansion settings small. At higher settings you could hear it "pumping" the loud sounds up and soft sounds down.

On the other side of the dial was a dynamic range compressor. I didn't use the compressor back then. Years latter, I found compression could tame some of the early rock and roll CDs where I felt the drum was too loud and sharp.

Recently, I used it to restore the dynamic range to internet radio, but like you, and apparently many in the music business, I ultimately found that a little compression was not such a bad thing. It would allow me to listen at a low level and still hear the subtle details that would otherwise be lost at that volume.

Currently, it is removed from the loop, because I am evaluating a Stello DA100 and some new K701s.

I'm not completely sure, any longer, what the calibration is, but my recollection is that it is in decibels.



USG

d-_-b