[saint.panda]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kuma A bass lite with Aria? Not with any of my sources. Even the 271s outputs respectable bass with great articulation and defnition. If you have a bass problem, I suspect it's the source. Its tonal balance is leaner than my Headline, but it can produce an appropriate bass if the source is up to it.

My memory might be wrong but compared to the Earmax Pro and balanced Dynamight, the Aria had a bit less bass presence on all three sources (McCormack UDP-1, Dodson DA-217 MKII and a high end custom cdp). While the Aria's bass was more refined, better textured and tighter, the EMP had a stronger bass presence. This is not to say the EMP is more accurate, on the contrary, but I merely wanted to stress that depending on the headphones and especially personal preference, one might tend towards a more emphasised bass presentation. With the AKG K701 for example, which I heard on two auditions, I prefer the EMP's slightly stronger but also "wider" bass. The Dynamight on the other hand takes the Aria's bass definition and adds more punch. Again, I can only say this from memory and at that time I didn't specifically listen for bass differences but I think it was quite apparent nonetheless.

I think a source can only do so much with regards to frequency response and if you compare two upper end cd players, both with an even-handed frequency response, I doubt there will significant differences in the bass output for given frequencies. However, if somebody were to prefer his bass a tad stronger, the Aria might not be first choice. Certainly, it's also headphone-specific.

 

[Comfy]

Hi,

I've got a cople of questions:

- Is Corda Aria's dac better than an E-MU 0404?
- Is the Corda Aria a much better amp than Lavry Black's built in amp?

Thanks.

 

[Skylab]

Quote:

While the Aria's bass was more refined, better textured and tighter, the EMP had a stronger bass presence. This is not to say the EMP is more accurate, on the contrary, but I merely wanted to stress that depending on the headphones and especially personal preference, one might tend towards a more emphasised bass presentation.

This is it in a nutshell, I believe. The Aria has tight, controlled, very realistic bass. It is NOT emphasized at all. That made it, for me, a better match for the Beyer DT770 than the DT880 for example, since the DT880 leans toward the light side on the bass, and the DT770 of course does not.

But the Aria is a FANTASTIC sounding amp IMO.

 

[Andrea]

JaZZ,


I continue to find this ease of use of the word "accuracy" rather insidious.


Music listening is nothing like a scientific discipline. Just a reminder

 

[JaZZ]

Tao...

...the EMP will have stronger bass than most solid-state amps with most headphones, especially such with low impedance, because -- as a consequence of its OTL design -- it has a relatively high output impedance which will interact with the headphone's impedance curve, thus produce a slight bass hump at the resonance frequency. I guess it's around 45 ohm. The stronger bass you heard from the K 701 is clearly attributable to this. To my ears the Aria prototype has a very flat (bass) response.


Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrea I continue to find this ease of use of the word "accuracy" rather insidious. Music listening is nothing like a scientific discipline. Just a reminder

Music listening isn't, but music reproduction is. It's all about accuracy if you have high demands on high fidelity... and want to listen to music, not technics. To me the soul of the music is best conveyed by maximal accuracy (as opposed to «musical» colorations). But don't think this has anything to do with analyticalness!

.

 

[BradH]

What's wrong with describing amplification in terms of accuracy? What term should we be using for an amplifier that produces a crystal clear, uncolored sound?

 

[Andrea]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ Music listening isn't, but music reproduction is. It's all about accuracy if you have high demands on high fidelity... and want to listen to music, not technics. To me the soul of the music is best conveyed by maximal accuracy (as opposed to «musical» colorations). But don't think this has anything to do with analyticalness! .

In fact I'd agree with you here, individually speaking. But I feel it's no more that simple when you open the scope to the rest of humankind

I mean, it is apparent by now, to me, that we as individuals all have a variously partial perception of such a complex substance as is sound, and thus a subjective, reductive judgment of sonic fidelity, ultimately corresponding to the inherent partiality of our nature of "particuliers".

Taking account of this principle of individual partiality, my belief is that there actually exist just as many variations on the "accuracy" theme as the number of individuals walking this planet.

That's what I mean when suggesting that "accuracy" is one of the more insidious words of the audiophile jargon.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrea ...it is apparent by now, to me, that we as individuals all have a variously partial perception of such a complex substance as is sound, and thus a subjective, reductive judgment of sonic fidelity, ultimately corresponding to the inherent partiality of our nature of "particuliers".

Subjectivity is in the nature of perception and reports to someone else. You can't trust my reviews 100%, no matter if I talk about beautiful rendering of sexy voices or accuracy. Anyway, you may have missed that I was trying to introduce a reference for accuracy: the original signal -- and that's what I was referring to.
.

 

[saint.panda]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ Tao... ...the EMP will have stronger bass than most solid-state amps with most headphones, especially such with low impedance, because -- as a consequence of its OTL design -- it has a relatively high output impedance which will interact with the headphone's impedance curve, thus produce a slight bass hump at the resonance frequency. I guess it's around 45 ohm. The stronger bass you heard from the K 701 is clearly attributable to this. To my ears the Aria prototype has a very flat (bass) response.

Thanks for the info Marcel. But didn't you also hear a stronger and perhaps better deep bass on the Dynamight than the Aria? I thought the Dynamight's bass was really quite astounding. Not sure how flat that was but it sounded very good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Skylab But the Aria is a FANTASTIC sounding amp IMO.

Oh, I never doubted that.

It's a fantastic amp for the money. Otherwise I wouldn't have reported so positively about the prototype. But I think there always remain issues that require closer scrutiny.

 

[Andrea]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ Subjectivity is in the nature of perception and reports to someone else. You can't trust my reviews 100%, no matter if I talk about beautiful rendering of sexy voices or accuracy.

Yup, and obviously the vice versa as well, that is, if it were me talking to you about the beauties of my headphones.

Quote:

Anyway, you may have missed that I was trying to introduce a reference for accuracy: the original signal -- and that's what I was referring to. .

True, but even that ostensibly straightforward comparison is dependent on the same basic principle of partiality of perception. The diverse focus on different aspects of the original signal among different people will inevitably affect the evaluation of the correspondence to the amplified one.

And this without taking all the "benign coloration" matter into account, but perhaps it is subtly implicit somehow.


Just my opinion.

 

[BradH]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrea Yup, and obviously the vice versa as well, that is, if it were me talking to you about the beauties of my headphones. True, but even that ostensibly straightforward comparison is dependent on the same basic principle of partiality of perception. The diverse focus on different aspects of the original signal among different people will inevitably affect the evaluation of the correspondence to the amplified one. And this without taking all the "benign coloration" matter into account, but perhaps it is subtly implicit somehow. Just my opinion.

Since we're all inherently biased and perceive things differently, there's no point in communicating? LOL - what exactly do you recommend we do?

 

[Andrea]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BradH Since we're all inherently biased and perceive things differently, there's no point in communicating? LOL - what exactly do you recommend we do?

Seek affinities (which requires communicating).

That was easy.

 

[BradH]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrea Seek affinities (which requires communicating). That was easy.

Anyone with an affinity for accuracy should check out the Aria!

Indeed, that was easy!

 

[Andrea]

I'm sure about that

My reasoning was general, and really not intended to say anything against the Aria.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by saint.panda ...didn't you also hear a stronger and perhaps better deep bass on the Dynamight than the Aria? I thought the Dynamight's bass was really quite astounding. Not sure how flat that was but it sounded very good.

Actually I can't remember that I was enthusiastic about anything on the DynaMight, but the bass was hard to criticise nonetheless. It may have been better indeed, but I can't recall exactly. Although I remember to have found it quite lean... really! And most important: I didn't have the Aria then -- we were comparing the DynaMight with the HA-2 (MkII). -- (BTW, was I saying anywhere the Aria be perfect?)


Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrea True, but even that ostensibly straightforward comparison is dependent on the same basic principle of partiality of perception. The diverse focus on different aspects of the original signal among different people will inevitably affect the evaluation of the correspondence to the amplified one.

Sure... but what's your point of criticism on my way of describing gear, actually?
.