[ADUHF]

HEADPHONES:
I am considering purchasing some new headphones. I'm not sure which ones yet, but it could be either a high impedance headphone like the 250 ohm Beyerdynamic DT-990, or 80 ohm DT-770. Or a lower impedance headphone more in the 35 ohm range, such as the AKG K553 MkII or K371. I'm still looking at alot of different options though, so it could end up being none of the above, and something completely different. The point though is it could be either a heavy or light load for what's driving it.

CURRENT SOUND SOURCE:
My source for the headphones at the moment is a TV with either digital optical output (that I've never actually tried), or unbalanced -10 dBV consumer line level analog audio (via a stereo 3.5mm jack).

SOME DRIVER & EQ OPTIONS BEING CONSIDERED:
My budget is very limited. But I'd like a way to amp and EQ the new headphones. And will probably have to purchase all of the items (including headphones) from Best Buy and Guitar Center, because those are the places where I have the most credit at the moment. That unfortunately limits my options.

One possible solution would probably be an integrated DAC/Amp, with some built-in (parametric?) EQ functions, both analog and optical inputs, and a switchable hi/low impedance setting. Whether BB and GC would have anything like that in my price range is doubtful.

Another possible solution is to run all my source devices (computer, Blu-ray player, VCR, etc.) into a digital receiver, and use the EQ functions, and headphone output on that. That is something I could get fairly easily from Best Buy. But a decent digital receiver, like a Marantz, would probably run me in the neighborhood of $500 or more, which is really more than I can afford at the moment. A receiver would also allow me to drive a pair of unpowered speakers though (which I already have), in addition to the headphones. Which could be useful, since the SQ on my TV's built-in speakers is crap!

I already have the TV (a lower-end Samsung J5200 LED TV), and want to keep everything else, ie headphones, amp, etc. below $350, if possible.

I was using a cheap little $70 Mackie compact mixer to drive and EQ my headphones with the unbalanced analog output from the TV. That was actually a pretty nice compact arrangement. Though the SQ was probably not the best. But that is now broken, along with the headphones I was using (AKG K553). I tend to put alot of wear and tear on stuff. So I need hardware that's either inexpensive and easily replaceable, or very robust (preferably both).

A new mixer is another possible solution though, since it has a headphone amp and basic EQ functions for low, middle, and high frequencies built-in. The headphone amps on mixers are generally in the 25-50 ohm range. So they tend to be better for driving higher impedance headphones... except that they usually don't have much actual power. And are probably powered by just a chip on the mixer's circuit board, which may or may not have a flat output.

A mixer plus a separate headphone amp is another possible solution. Maybe using a separate 4-channel HP amp by Presonus, for example. The Presonus is probably also in the 25-50 ohm impedance range. So also better with a high impedance headphone.

If I had the $$, I might also consider trying to put together a stack of separate high quality components, like a DAC with optical in, a Schiit Loki 4-band EQ, and a dedicated headphone amp. I could also go directly into the Loki from the TV's analog out. Though the SQ would probably not be as good from the TV's low-cost built-in DAC. I don't think BB or GC sell the Loki though. And their selection of headphone amps is also somewhat limited. So I'm not sure about the practicality of this.

Another option is a lower cost headphone amp, like a Fiio, with some built-in EQ functions. And maybe a switch for high or low impedance HPs.

Anyway, those are some of the options I've been lookin at, and would welcome any input on the above, or other possible solutions to my current dilemma that you may have. Basically everything I've been using is broken at this point, and needs to be replaced with something new, and preferably better than what I was using before,... if my budget will allow it.

ABOUT ME:
I am fairly knowledgeable about the technical side of both pro and consumer audio. So I generally know what components will work with what, how to configure impedances, and how to chain different audio components together effectively to produce the best sound. I was even using a separate 31-band DBX graphic EQ with my headphones at one point. But that was quite cumbersome.

I am less knowledegable about the audiophile grade stuff for headphones though. So I could probably use a little brain-boosting there. I am a pretty fast learner though, when it comes to just about anything electronic.

I also prefer to use existing components, versus building them from scratch. I am less into the hobby side of audio gear right now. And more into the production side of things. (Though that may change in the future when I'm a little older and greyer, and have a little more spare time and money to throw around.)

Appreciate any advice you can give on any of the above. I'm open to suggestions on headphones as well, as long as they're available from either BB or GC, and less than ~$200.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

I can't answer all of this but I think it's easier to divide low and high impedance headphones differently. 600/300/100/70 and below

I don't know of any hardware option for parametric EQ in a dacamp under 1000 dollars. However, you might be able to find a used parametric EQ box. I have an SAE and they're quite amazing but have not been made for a long time. Good news is today you can probably find a free or cheap app to do it. Personally I think EQ should be avoided in favor of buying headphones you like. I don't have a large collection unlike a lot of people here but I have one headphone that needs EQ all the time (Fostex) and another one (Sennheiser 800) that needs it only for some specific musicians. Some people live for tweaking everything, I like listening to music.

For headphones in the low impedance category a cheap/good USB audio interface can be a good option. They come with built-in headamps, a DAC, and an ADC. Behringer, Roland, and Motu are some popular brands for this. I would recommend staying from portable gear unless your use is over 90% portable. Otherwise you will compromise on everything power, quality, etc. Part of the cost of portable gear is making it small.

 

[ADUHF]

Thank your for the reply, gimmeheadroom.

I can't answer all of this but I think it's easier to divide low and high impedance headphones differently. 600/300/100/70 and below

Makes sense.

I don't know of any hardware option for parametric EQ in a dacamp under 1000 dollars. However, you might be able to find a used parametric EQ box. I have an SAE and they're quite amazing but have not been made for a long time. Good news is today you can probably find a free or cheap app to do it. Personally I think EQ should be avoided in favor of buying headphones you like. I don't have a large collection unlike a lot of people here but I have one headphone that needs EQ all the time (Fostex) and another one (Sennheiser 800) that needs it only for some specific musicians. Some people live for tweaking everything, I like listening to music.

For headphones in the low impedance category a cheap/good USB audio interface can be a good option. They come with built-in headamps, a DAC, and an ADC. Behringer, Roland, and Motu are some popular brands for this. I would recommend staying from portable gear unless your use is over 90% portable. Otherwise you will compromise on everything power, quality, etc. Part of the cost of portable gear is making it small.

How would this work for the other video and audio sources I'm using with the TV? Would I run the TV's analog or optical output into the interface?

The device I'm trying to EQ is really the headphones, as opposed to one of the sources. In my current setup, all my video and audio sources go into the TV, including my PC which connects to the TV via HDMI. The analog audio output on the TV goes into one of the stereo inputs on the mixer, which then gives me basic low-mid-high EQ controls over the sound. And also left-right panning adjustments to better center poor recordings. And the headphones go into the mixer's headphone jack. So it's a pretty simple arrangement which provides alot of ability to tweak the sound going into the headphones (which is somethin my old AKG K553's definitely needed.)

The sound quality on the mixer is not the best though, which is why I'm looking at some other possible options, such as a receiver, or possibly an integrated headphone amp.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

How would this work for the other video and audio sources I'm using with the TV? Would I run the TV's analog or optical output into the interface?

The device I'm trying to EQ is really the headphones, as opposed to one of the sources. In my current setup, all my video and audio sources go into the TV, inlcuding my PC which connects to the TV via HDMI. The analog audio output on the TV goes into one of the stereo inputs on the mixer, which then gives me basic low-mid-high EQ controls over the sound. And also left-right panning adjustments to better center poor recordings. And the headphones go into the mixer's headphone jack. So it's a pretty simple arrangement which provides alot of ability to tweak the sound going into the headphones (which is somethin my old AKG K553's definitely needed.)

The sound quality on the mixer is not the best though, which is why I'm looking at some other possible options, such as a receiver, or an integrated headphone amp.

Well, I guess you want the same EQ setting for the headphones regardless of source. At some point it becomes painful to string together tons of sources and for most hifi headphones you need a good amp. There is not even a general solution since some devices have only analog out, or optical out, and USB out is only possible with a PC or tablet using OTG.

The audio interface suggestion was a cheap way to get a decent DAC and headamp in one box. It has the benefit of usually accepting either line-level or microphone level analog input.

Probably from a hifi standpoint the TV is a bottleneck Does it have HDMI out or optical or coax out? If so, maybe an AVR (audio-video receiver) would be a good option. They usually have tons of inputs including several HDMI and they often have amps plenty powerful enough to drive speakers for a multichannel setup including subwoofers or at least subwoofer line level output for powered subs.. The problem is the headphone out on most gear is not going to do the job for a lot of good headphones. So you run the record-out to a headphone amp.

 

[ADUHF]

Well, I guess you want the same EQ setting for the headphones regardless of source.

Correct.

At some point it becomes painful to string together tons of sources and for most hifi headphones you need a good amp. There is not even a general solution since some devices have only analog out, or optical out, and USB out is only possible with a PC or tablet using OTG.

Roger that. I need some simple way of switching between all the sound and video sources that are going to the HPs. Right now I'm using my TV for that. Which is fine. But a receiver could be another possible option for that. The TV connects to the mixer with just one unbalanced stereo audio cable. So I'm not using the mixer for multiple sources.

I do use the mixer for different headphones though!... Since each input on the mixer has it's own EQ controls, I can configure each one for a different set of headphones. And just switch my source (the TV in this case) into a different input configured for a different headphone. So it's like having multiple headphone EQ's in a single device!

The audio interface suggestion was a cheap way to get a decent DAC and headamp in one box. It has the benefit of usually accepting either line-level or microphone level analog input.

Roger that also. It's an interesting thought. And one I hadn't really considered before, for the reasons I stated above. I think it would only make sense though if it worked with the optical connection from my TV. Otherwise I'd loose the benefits of its (hopefully) better quality DAC.

Probably from a hifi standpoint the TV is a bottleneck Does it have HDMI out or optical or coax out?

As mentioned above, the TV has optical out (no coax or HDMI out), or -10 dBV unbalanced (consumer line level) analog audio out. I believe the analog output is the same as you'd get from a CD player or VCR on their RCA line outputs. Or something close to it.

If so, maybe an AVR (audio-video receiver) would be a good option. They usually have tons of inputs including several HDMI and they often have amps plenty powerful enough to drive speakers for a multichannel setup including subwoofers or at least subwoofer line level output for powered subs.. The problem is the headphone out on most gear is not going to do the job for a lot of good headphones. So you run the record-out to a headphone amp.

So digital receiver + a good headphone amp... And use the receiver's EQ functions. Alot of the receivers have pre-outs as well, in addition to the sub-outs. So that might be another option for connecting to a seperate headphone amp.

I would have to spend some dollars though to get a receiver with a really decent DAC. The Marantz are some of the cheapest, and they start somewhere around $500-600 new I think. (Used might be an option though.) Maybe I could find an ok integrated headphone DAC/amp, with optical in and some basic EQ controls for less than a receiver + HP amp though?

I suppose a receiver alone with a headphone that's fairly easy to drive might be a possible solution though. I wonder if that would actually give me better SQ than my current arrangement with a mixer?

I appreciate your input on this btw, gimmeheadroom, as it's helping me to think a little more outside of my previous box.

 

[ADUHF]

As mentioned above, the TV has optical out (no coax or HDMI), or -10 dBv unbalanced (consumer line level) analog audio out. I believe the analog output is the same as you'd get from a CD player or VCR on their RCA line outputs.

Another option I've considered btw is using the analog output of the TV with a simple 2-channel analog receiver. And using whatever tone or EQ controls are available on that. That would be a cheaper solution than a digital receiver. But it would not have the same benefits as a receiver with a good built-in DAC, and other digital functions, such as graphic EQ. And I'd still have to use the TV for source-switching with my digital devices.

An analog receiver would allow me to drive my unpowered speakers though, in addition to the headphones.

Here is a review of my TV btw, in case it may help. It is a "smart TV" and was one of the better low-end models for picture quality at the time I bought it, several years ago, and still works quite well. It is only 1080p though.

https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/samsung/j5200

 

[gimmeheadroom]

As mentioned above, the TV has optical out (no coax or HDMI out), or -10 dBv unbalanced (consumer line level) analog audio out. I believe the analog output is the same as you'd get from a CD player or VCR on their RCA line outputs.

Yeah I forgot that as I was responding. That's good since most reasonable desktop DACs and AVRs have at least one optical input. I'm not sure I can trust a TV to have a good analog audio section though. I would pass on that since you have a better option.

So digital receiver + a good headphone amp... And use the receiver's EQ functions. Alot of the receivers have pre-outs as well, in addition to the sub-outs. So that might be another option for connecting to a seperate headphone amp.

Well the "eq" you get with a modern receiver is probably not going to be more than bass and treble knobs. Depending how much control you want you might need a parametric EQ box in the tape loop (if indeed that still exists on new stuff like AVRs). But yeah I was saying you use the line out / record out whatever it is called to drive a headphone amp. The main thing is the output has to be the fixed-level output and not pre out. You want to drive the headphone amp fully and control the volume from it.

I would have to spend some dollars though to get a receiver with a really decent DAC. The Marantz are some of the cheapest, and they start somewhere around $500-600 new I think. (Used might be an option though.) Maybe I could find an ok integrated headphone DAC/amp, with optical in and some basic EQ controls for less than a receiver + HP amp though?

Since you mentioned Marantz I remembered this piece of gear https://www.head-fi.org/threads/marantz-hd-dac1-headphone-amplifier.735263/ which seems to have a lot of favorable comments here. Don't take my word for it but I don't remember seeing any negative discussion regarding it. It seems to click all the boxes, it has a nice DAC, a reasonable headamp for a lot but not all modern headphones, has fixed level output in case you want to buy additional headamps or record off the device and it has variable level output so you can run active monitors from it. Bad news is no HDMI in so it is what it says it as and not an AVR.

I suppose a receiver alone with a headphone that's fairly easy to drive might be a possible solution though. I wonder if that would actually give me better SQ than my current arrangement with a mixer?

It really depends but on most modern receivers the headphone out is not very good. If your cans are hard to drive or very resolving you will probably not like how they sound out of it. That might work until you hear them with a good amp.

Another option I've considered btw is using the analog output of the TV with a simple analog receiver. And using whatever tone or EQ controls are available on that. That would be a cheaper solution than a digital receiver. But it would not have the same benefits as a receiver with a good built-in DAC, and other digital functions, such as graphic EQ. And I'd still have to use the TV for source-switching with my digital devices.

Optical out is good because it is immune to electrical noise. Analog out from a TV is unlikely to be able to drive a serious amplifiier properly. For sound quality, keeping it digital until the bitter end is usually a much better idea.

An analog receiver would allow me to drive my unpowered speakers though, in addition to the headphones.

True and that kinda shoots the idea of the HD-DAC1 down... maybe an AVR and a separate headamp are going to be needed in the end.

Here is a review of my TV btw, in case it may help. It is a "smart TV" and was one of the better low-end models for picture quality at the time I bought it, several years ago, and still works quite well. It is only 1080p though.

https://www.rtings.com/tv/reviews/samsung/j5200

There is not sufficient info there on the audio for me to understand if it would be a good idea but analog audio out from TV in general is not a good idea.

 

[ADUHF]

Thank you again for your replies, gimmeheadroom.

Well the "eq" you get with a modern receiver is probably not going to be more than bass and treble knobs. Depending how much control you want you might need a parametric EQ box in the tape loop (if indeed that still exists on new stuff like AVRs). But yeah I was saying you use the line out / record out whatever it is called to drive a headphone amp. The main thing is the output has to be the fixed-level output and not pre out. You want to drive the headphone amp fully and control the volume from it.

Some AVRs include graphic EQs in their digital processing options. If I use the tape out though to drive a separate headphone amp, then the tone and EQ controls in the AVR would likely be bypassed along with the master volume. Which wouldn't really make much sense.

I think you're probably right though, that it would be better to used the fixed line level output of the tape out for an external HP amp, rather than the preouts. The preouts might also work. But might not deliver as good sound quality. Not entirely sure about that though.

The only way a digital AVR would make sense is if I used the built-in headphone amp. And it would probably be a stretch for me financially with just that.

Since you mentioned Marantz I remembered this piece of gear https://www.head-fi.org/threads/marantz-hd-dac1-headphone-amplifier.735263/ which seems to have a lot of favorable comments here. Don't take my word for it but I don't remember seeing any negative discussion regarding it. It seems to click all the boxes, it has a nice DAC, a reasonable headamp for a lot but not all modern headphones, has fixed level output in case you want to buy additional headamps or record off the device and it has variable level output so you can run active monitors from it. Bad news is no HDMI in so it is what it says it as and not an AVR.

That Marantz HD-DAC1 looks pretty cool! If it has some built-in EQ functions or tone controls, then that might be just the kind of thing I'd be lookin for in an integrated headphone amp. It is well out of my price range though. So I'd have to look around for a lower cost alternative.

I did a quick search on GC and B&H btw, and did find a few lower cost dac/amps with optical inputs. But I'm not sure which, if any of them, would have any tone or EQ controls. And whether they'd all work with the optical output on my TV, because some of the connectors look a little different.

Some examples are the FiiO K5 Pro and Audioengine D1, which are both around $170. And there are several others by FiiO (Q5s), Fostex (HP-A3 & A4) and Cambridge Audio (DACMagic/Plus) in the $300-400 range. I'm sure there are some good ones by other mfrs as well. But those appeared to be a few of the better ones on GC and B&H.

If I went with an integrated HP dac/amp though, it would need the EQ features built-in, because there'd probably be no easy way to insert an external EQ between the internal DAC and amp.

True and that kinda shoots the idea of the HD-DAC1 down...

Powering my passive speakers is not a huge priority at this point. It would just be an added convenience, and would offer some better in-room sound than the TV's crappy internal speakers. Most of my critical listening will be done though with the headphones.

There is not sufficient info there on the audio for me to understand if it would be a good idea but analog audio out from TV in general is not a good idea.

I looked around a bit, and could not find any further details on the audio processor in my TV. It is a pretty low-end TV though. So it's probably using something fairly basic for its D/A conversion. The internal speakers sound terrible. But the signal on the 3.5mm analog jack is reasonably clean and noise free (to my badly worn out ears) when it's properly connected to other gear. So if I had to, I could probably make due with that a bit longer.

I'd like to try a higher quality amp though than the ones I've been using. Just not sure yet if I can one find one with the features I need to fit my budget.

Using a separate standalone DAC with optical in to drive the analog gear (e.g. mixer, 2-ch analog receiver, or HP amp) is another possible option... if I could find one of reasonably high quality for a cheap price.

 

[ADUHF]

While I was browsing around looking at headphone amps, I ran across a couple of interesting new pieces of gear made by Rolls/Bellari. Not sure how good these are, but you can find them all here...

https://www.bellariaudio.com/index.php/products/

The PA550 can double as a phono preamp or a headphone amp. And the MA258 can be used as a headphone amp or to power passive speakers, with 20 Watts per channel. (The PA550 can be also be used with powered speakers via its RCA outs.) The MA258 also has phono ins as well. And both the PA550 and M258 have bass and treble tone controls.

If you need more discrete EQ features, there's also a standalone 4-band EQ similar to the Schiit Loki called the EQ570. Whether they are on par in terms of quality, I have no idea.

If you're lookin for something relatively compact though to use in an office or bedroom to drive or tweak the sound to some headphones or small speakers, perhaps these would be worth a look?

 

[gimmeheadroom]

I would steer clear of the FiiO semi-desktop stuff. I have the original K5 not the pro, but it's crap. The Rolls look interesting but I would stay away from almost everything with an A/C adapter and look for something with a built in PSU that plugs right into the wall. And I would guess the tone control would be more useful than their headamp. I don't believe the low-end Schiit gear is worth having and I'm not a fan of that company so just on the basis of name I wouldn't not look into Rolls. At least Rolls says "Made in USA" while the cheap Schiit now says "assembled in USA"

About the Rolls, if it's driving speakers than the headamp is probably just a voltage divider and won't be optimal. There are just too many good headamps to go with a compromise piece.

I'm sorry I can't offer specific recommendations for affordable gear. I did not have a digital setup for decades after CDs came out because I hated the sound and stayed with vinyl and tape. When I first got back into current stuff a few years ago I bought some low end products and was immediately unhappy with them. My friend remarked he wasn't rich enough to buy cheap tools and I think it applies to audio gear also. I'm buying the best stuff I can afford now and that way I won't have to buy it again soon.

 

[ADUHF]

I would steer clear of the FiiO semi-desktop stuff. I have the original K5 not the pro, but it's crap. The Rolls look interesting but I would stay away from almost everything with an A/C adapter and look for something with a built in PSU that plugs right into the wall. And I would guess the tone control would be more useful than their headamp. I don't believe the low-end Schiit gear is worth having and I'm not a fan of that company so just on the basis of name I wouldn't not look into Rolls. At least Rolls says "Made in USA" while the cheap Schiit now says "assembled in USA"

About the Rolls, if it's driving speakers than the headamp is probably just a voltage divider and won't be optimal. There are just too many good headamps to go with a compromise piece.

I am newbie to just about anything audiophile gear-related. So I appreciate the insights on this. I have some doubts about the quality of the Rolls/Bellari stuff as well. They make alot of interesting oddball pieces though, mostly for studio and live audio use.

I haven't run across many other headphone amps with tone controls so far though, and wired speaker outs. So I thought that was somewhat novel, and a bit old-school. A cheap analog receiver could probably do all of the above and more though at equal or even lesser cost. It would take up more space though.

I looked at the the Rolls MA258 "manual" btw, and you can use it with either headphones or passive speakers. Not both. Because it won't drive both simultaneously. It defaults to the speakers. And when you plug a pair of headphones in, the 20W speaker outputs are disabled. It may consume less energy that way.

I'm sorry I can't offer specific recommendations for affordable gear. I did not have a digital setup for decades after CDs came out because I hated the sound and stayed with vinyl and tape. When I first got back into current stuff a few years ago I bought some low end products and was immediately unhappy with them. My friend remarked he wasn't rich enough to buy cheap tools and I think it applies to audio gear also. I'm buying the best stuff I can afford now and that way I won't have to buy it again soon.

Understood. I was having a little chat today with one of the guys in the B&H pro audio department, and he pointed me to a couple other pieces of gear. A higher-end DAC with optical in, and headphone out, that has both a 5-band parametric EQ, and bass and treble tone controls (among other things) called the RME ADI-2. It appears to have everything I'd need hadphone-wise, and could be used to power active speakers as well via the XLR or RCA outs. But I'd need a separate amp to power passive speakers (if I still want to use those).

The RME ADI-2 is well out of my price-range though. And I don't know if they make audio equipment that's on par with other audiophile headphone gear. I'm thinkin that separates might deliver good enough quality for my needs at potentially much lower cost.

The B&H salesguy also pointed me to a USB interface with optical in for around $300 from Audient called the iD14. It uses a Burr-Brown 24-bit/96 kHz DAC. And the EQ functions would likely by handled in software. Whether the HP amp is any good, I dunno. TEAC/Tascam also makes a couple of similar USB/Midi interfaces with optical inputs in the $300-400 range. Whether the headamps would be good on those, I dunno. Found those on Sweetwater.

So USB interfaces with optical inputs exist (which is news to me). From what the guy at B&H told me, it sounds like the optical ins are used mainly for expansion purposes.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

I am newbie to just about anything audiophile gear-related. So I appreciate the insights on this. I have some doubts about the quality of the Rolls/Bellari stuff as well. They make alot of interesting oddball pieces though, mostly for studio and live audio use.

I haven't run across many other headphone amps with tone controls so far though, and wired speaker outs. So I thought that was somewhat novel, and a bit old-school. A cheap analog receiver could probably do all of the above and more though at equal or even lesser cost. It would take up more space though.

I looked at the the Rolls MA258 "manual" btw, and you can use it with either headphones or passive speakers. Not both. Because it won't drive both simultaneously. It defaults to the speakers. And when you plug a pair of headphones in, the 20W speaker outputs are disabled. It may consume less power that way.

I have not seen headamps with tone controls either. They are always run off some source and it is expected to amplify the input and that's all. As far as Rolls I do not know the brand but that does not mean anything. In general, pro audio gear is good stuff with features for stage or studio and is expected to just work. The tricky thing about pro gear is you need to pay attention to the connectivity because some of the jacks and plugs are less common in hifi.

There is a lot of el-cheapo gear sold under the pro banner but gear from any real pro audio company should be worth price paid. There is no financial incentive for American-made gear to be made from crap components or to low standards. I would expect something stamped Made in America / Made in USA would be worth buying. But you should check for opinions from owners.

There are some headamps that can function as preamps. They allow you to run active monitors. I do not know of any headamp that is a true speaker amp for passive speakers but again that does not mean they don't exist.

Understood. I was having a little chat today with one of the guys in the B&H pro audio department, and he pointed me to a couple other pieces of gear. A higher-end DAC with optical in, and headphone out, that has both a 5-band parametric EQ, and bass and treble tone controls (among other things) called the RME ADI-2. It appears to have have everything I'd need hadphone-wise, and could be used to power active speakers as well via the XLR or RCA outs. But I'd need a separate amp to power passive speakers (if I still want to use those).

This is a very popular DAC among headfi members. I have one, it is superb. The amp in it is not enough to drive my Sennheisers properly. It has a great feature set, it is from a pro audio company in Germany. Pro audio stuff should have a long service lifetime. If it breaks it is worth fixing. For me it was worth the price knowing there is hope of service (they have a forum) and repair if it's ever needed rather than buying disposable gear. The UI is complicated and it is bit fiddly to get set up. But it offers huge capability and a very musical sound. I don't like active monitors either and will not buy them. So I have divided my gear into pure headphone station and speaker rigs. The RME could serve in either role but it is one of my DACs I use for headphones only, either directly for some of them or into a hybrid tube amp for others.

The RME ADI-2 is well out of my price-range though. And I don't know if they make audio equipment that's on par with other audiophile headphone gear. I'm thinkin that separates might deliver good enough quality for my needs at potentially much lower cost.

It's absolutely hifi gear with the measurements, and most importantly the sound, to match. It made a lowly pair of HD 25s sing in a way I never dreamed possible. The only thing I want that it doesn't have is MQA, so I bought another DAC for that.

The B&H salesguy also pointed me to a USB interface with optical in for around $300 from Audient called the iD14. It uses a Burr-Brown 24-bit/96 kHz DAC. And the EQ functions would likely by handled in software. Whether the HP amp is any good, I dunno. TEAC/Tascam also makes a couple of similar USB/Midi interfaces with optical inputs in the $300-400 range. Whether the headamps would be good on those, I dunno. Found those on Sweetwater.

So interfaces with optical inputs exist (which is news to me). From what they guy at B&H told me, it sounds like the optical ins are used mainly for expansion purposes.

I would guess the headamps on audio interfaces are all between meh and ok. Clearly, they are used for driving low impedance DJ or studio headphones rather than hifi cans. I would advise avoiding 24/96 DACs, that's Y2K technology. Even my cheap Behringer is 24/192. The headamp is fine with HD 25s and probably 80 ohm Beyers. It does not do well with 300 ohm Sennheisers.

The DACs in audio interfaces will play MP3 and FLAC but they will not play DSD. If you have any SACD rips or DSD albums audio interfaces won't work. Really, USB audio interfaces are for live recording and then with the ability to monitor or playback. They can work in a hifi setup but they are a lot less useful and measure much less well than a good DAC.

 

[ADUHF]

This is a very popular DAC among headfi members. I have one, it is superb. The amp in it is not enough to drive my Sennheisers properly. It has a great feature set, it is from a pro audio company in Germany. Pro audio stuff should have a long service lifetime. If it breaks it is worth fixing. For me it was worth the price knowing there is hope of service (they have a forum) and repair if it's ever needed rather than buying disposable gear. The UI is complicated and it is bit fiddly to get set up. But it offers huge capability and a very musical sound. I don't like active monitors either and will not buy them. So I have divided my gear into pure headphone station and speaker rigs. The RME could serve in either role but it is one of my DACs I use for headphones only, either directly for some of them or into a hybrid tube amp for others.

It's absolutely hifi gear with the measurements, and most importantly the sound, to match. It made a lowly pair of HD 25s sing in a way I never dreamed possible. The only thing I want that it doesn't have is MQA, so I bought another DAC for that.

Interesting.

I would guess the headamps on audio interfaces are all between meh and ok. Clearly, they are used for driving low impedance DJ or studio headphones rather than hifi cans. I would advise avoiding 24/96 DACs, that's Y2K technology. Even my cheap Behringer is 24/192.

That's what I was thinkin as well. I think even some of the cheapie $15-20 DACs support 24/192 kHz.

The DACs in audio interfaces will play MP3 and FLAC but they will not play DSD. If you have any SACD rips or DSD albums audio interfaces won't work. Really, USB audio interfaces are for live recording and then with the ability to monitor or playback. They can work in a hifi setup but they are a lot less useful and measure much less well than a good DAC.

I appreciate the advice on this.

Still not sure which direction I'm goin on all this. But I will keep researching until I figure it out. Chances are, it'll be whatever I can pick up from BB or GC that will do the least damage to the SQ, but still enable me to do some basic EQ-ing. I would luv it if I could get a decent DAC and an amp with good SQ, and some basic EQ functionality. But I'm not sure if that's in the cards yet. I may have to try out a couple different approaches discussed above before I figure out what will work the best.

 

[ThanatosVI]

The 350$ for everything makes it really tough.
There is only one thing that comes to my mind and that would be something like a FiiO E17 or similar.

If you would need the EQ only for music, then you could get the USB Audio Player Pro on an android Device as source. The parametric EQ costs like 5$ and is really good from what I've heard. However then you still wouldn't have EQ for the other sources.

Honestly the cheapest solution I could imagine which I'd still call "audiophile" would be the entry Schiit Stack Magni + Modi + Loki. However that stack alone costs 350$ and you don't have anything left for a headphone.

 

[gimmeheadroom]

I really advise against FiiO-anything and against the low-end schiit, it really is.

Buy the best you can afford, you will never regret it. Cheap gear often winds up being expensive since it breaks or you dump it quickly when you listen to something good.