The Best of Head-Fi
Oct 15, 2015 at 2:21 AM Post #46 of 63
  I think that every review, impression, or de facto "this product sounds better than that" statement would be made immeasurably better if it was required to have these three disclaimers:
 
1. This is only my opinion.
2. I am biased, like everyone else.
3. I have not heard everything in the world.
 
I am personally amused by DACs that cost like cars. There's no problem comparing them to Yggy, but personally I'd rather travel to some spectacular locations in the world, learn something completely new, take a breather and not worry about money for a while, or, hell, spend the money on a car.
 
But...this is only my opinion, I am biased like everyone else, and I have not heard everything in the world.
 

 
Nov 5, 2015 at 8:35 PM Post #47 of 63
A good comment about replying to negativity: 
 
 
  Icebear,
The frequency response graph is from a Neuman KU100 head measured at ERP (Ear reference point). There are several ways to measure headphones and other measurements system use DRP (drum reference point) or EEP. These graphs will look different. For an ERP measurement, the LCD4 is pretty much close to ideal. It should have a slow roll-off. Tyll from Innerfidelity has explanation on how to interpret these graphs. There is nothing wrong with these measurements.


I often browse videos on youtube and see the channel owners reply to comments made by viewers. More often than not it is in response to the negative comments and rarely the positive ones. Sometimes even innocuous questions get ignored completely, because the channel owner is too fixated on proving somebody wrong, or lashing out because they have said something negative.
 
I've followed this thread (and other Audeze threads) for a while now, and 9/10 times this is the type of response I see. Rare posts that are often made simply to prove somebody wrong - very few have contained reassurance or positivity. 
 
I had an issue with an LCD 3 recently, and instead of help I got a response from (I assume yourself) that sounded more like an argument than guidance.
 
Just a quick private message would have made the world of difference.
 
If you are happy to jump on comments from users that have no intention of purchasing Audeze products - it might be wise to channel the same amount of attention to those that care about the company and have genuine concerns and queries. Because (to me, at least) you are being perceived as somebody that has the social skills of a hornet.
 
Regards,
 
Lee.

 
Feb 5, 2016 at 3:08 AM Post #48 of 63
On vinyl mastering: 
 
WARNING OFF TOPIC THREAD HIJACK please ignore if uninterested:

I deal with mastering and mix engineers everyday. It's true that modern music is definitely more compressed, but you cannot compare compression, especially when its part of the mixing process and production itself, with sound quality. An over compressed master will indeed change the quality of the mix, but in many cases, mixes coming into mastering these days are already heavily compressed. This gives the engineers and production crew more of an artistic choice as to how the music hits and is presented.

Now for that bit on vinyl below: (a summary) : vinyl needs to be taken down in overall VU and treble energy needs to be brought down, mostly so the record can play stably. This actually results in less compression on the master, and a sound that comes closer to the original MIX. However, it is wrong to say that vinyl ACTUALLY has more dynamic range. They are just mastered that way since they need it to play with most modern styli. CD and Digital in general can get away with a lot more compression. This is why the numbers on those measurement sites look the way they do.
The 'guy behind the counter' is a nut bar and doesn't know s***. Vinyl is almost always better for dynamic range. I agree, a lot of modern mixes are terrible and it's getting worse. Adele, Bowie, many remasters, it's sad.


So if your thinking sound quality is opposite of compression - you'll think the new Bowie sounds bad. Because it is very compressed. But I actually think it sounds Amazing. It's very modern, but has great vibrancy and impact - which is what any good mix needs for starters. It's not meant to sound live, its meant to be an artistic statement in the studio.

I submit the following: (not my words) - but from below, it's not a simple straight ahead story when it comes to vinyl being better.
================
Myth: Vinyl requires a better-sounding master because it is physically incapable of reproducing the hypercompressed sound mastered to CD

Different masters can substantially improve or reduce sound quality. Some have less background noise. Some alter the dynamic range. There are other mastering techniques that can also affect the sound.

There are documented instances of different masters being used on vinyl releases compared to CD releases. A bass note which is panned hard to the left or right will cause the needle on an LP record to jump out of the groove, an early example of this is the song Crazy by Seal which had to be remastered for vinyl with the bass repositioned in the centre stage. Another notable example is The White Stripes' Icky Thump. However, there are also instances of the same masters being used on vinyl releases compared to CD releases. In fact, if you purchase an album produced in the last two decades on vinyl, it is likely that the master will be no different than the one used on CD. Alternative masters for vinyl cost money, and mastering is a significant cost of producing a record. The reason for different masters is that producers possibly view digital media (like CD) and analog media (like Vinyl) to be different in nature, so they might produce a different master for each medium. Some even believe that Vinyl will automatically yield a superior sound, despite the well known technical limitations and disadvantages compared to the CD.
The technical details behind this myth are as follows. The cutting heads used for creating the vinyl lacquer (or metal mother) are speaker-like electromechanical devices driven by an extremely powerful amplifier (several hundred watts). At extremely large/fast cutting head excursions, the cutting head coils may physically burn up, much like how a speaker's voice coils may be destroyed by an excessive current. Also, the diamond cutting head stylus may prematurely wear or break. This places important constraints on the maximum levels that can be recorded to a record.

A very high power output is required to cut grooves with a high acceleration. Acceleration at the same signal amplitude is higher for higher-frequency signals. Heavily clipped and limited CDs in the modern mastering style have more high-frequency content than earlier masters. In general, increasing the perceived volume of a record - whether by increasing the recording level or by limiting/clipping/compression - raises the cutting head average power.

Additionally, during playback, the turntable's stylus has limits on what grooves it can successfully track. Cartridges can only track grooves of a finite modulation width (measured in microns) that decreases in frequency. For instance, a cartridge may only be able to track a 300 µm-wide groove at 300 Hz, and yet only 50 µm at 20 kHz. This also places limits on the acceleration and velocity limits the record master can take.

The most obvious way to work around these issues is simply to reduce the recording level of the vinyl master. That's exactly what vinyl mastering houses do, using multiband limiters that dynamically reduce the treble content of the master, to limit the cutting head power usage.

Effect of vinyl mastering on dynamic range
===================================

A related myth is that when vinyl has a higher dynamic range than CD, it means the audio was sourced from a different, more dynamic master, and that the difference in dynamics will be audible.

It is true that recordings on vinyl sometimes have a spikier waveform and a measurably higher dynamic range than their counterparts on CD, at least when the dynamic range is reported by crude "DR meter" tools that compare peak and RMS levels. The higher "DR value" could indeed be a result of entirely different master recordings being provided to the mastering engineers for each format, or different choices made by the engineers, as happens every time old music is remastered for a new release.
But even when the same source master is used, the audio is normally further processed when mastering for the target format (be it CD or vinyl), and this often results in vinyl having a spikier waveform and higher DR measurement. There are two types of processing during vinyl mastering that can increase the DR measurements and waveform spikiness, thus reducing the RMS and increasing the basic DR measurement by perhaps several dB:

The audio is subjected to low-pass or all-pass filtering, which can result in broad peaks becoming slanted ramps.
The amount and stereo separation of deep bass content is reduced for vinyl, to keep the stylus from being thrown out of the groove.
It is quite possible that these changes are entirely inaudible, despite their effect on the waveform shape and DR measurement.
The dynamic range of the waveform is also affected by the vinyl playback system; different systems provide different frequency responses. Factors include cartridge, tonearm, preamp, and even the connecting cables. A vinyl rip with weak bass may well have a higher reported DR value than a rip of the same vinyl on equipment with a stronger bass response.
 

 
Feb 5, 2016 at 10:47 AM Post #49 of 63
.... and here, I thought vinyl was something to make cheap tablecloths and shower curtains out of...........      
wink_face.gif
   Live and learn....   
L3000.gif

 
Feb 8, 2016 at 11:59 PM Post #50 of 63
I think I should clarify my initial vinyl comment as I believe I've grossly generalized and I was not clear with my intention. Btw, the context of my quoted reply was an employee screaming at a customer, which I took issue with.

Now, what I meant to say is that the very nature of the vinyl medium does not allow for clamped music which is more often found in CD than vinyl. On these mixes that are over driven and clamped from the studio (because they can with digital) a different level output needs to be done specifically for the vinyl pressing or else the stylus will skip out of the groove. In this case a vinyl version will be better dynamically than a clamped CD version of a particular mix. The dynamic range of the formats themselves is not in question, just that the tendency to create mixes too hot and that clip on CD will sound better on the vinyl version. With the headroom in the studio mix the tracks often don't need new masters, just to reduce the intensity in the mix for the vinyl press.

On a side note I am increasingly frustrated with studios creating 'hot' mixes to sound better with mediocre gear with less and less regard for audio fidelity. Just because 'you can' doesn't mean 'you should'. In the end I agree with the great info from @neilvg
 
Apr 23, 2016 at 12:23 PM Post #52 of 63
It's a pity there isn't more action in this thread - it'd be a nice way of catching-up on some good content.
 
I'll add anything worthwhile, as and when it happens to cross my path
beerchug.gif

 
Aug 13, 2016 at 3:58 AM Post #53 of 63
When you simply can't wait for the company to make an accessory:
 
  Here is my latest (and most likely final) all-in-one portable transport enclosure for the Mojo: the "MojoPi".

 


Size comparison with iPhone 6s
 
It consists of:
 
Raspberry Pi 3 Mainboard with built-in WiFi, but with the LAN, USB, HDMI, and audio ports removed.
Waveshare Spotpear 3.5" Resistive Touch Screen or equivalent (see http://www.ebay.com/itm/291722114342?_trksid=p2057872.m2749.l2649&ssPageName=STRK%3AMEBIDX%3AIT)
Adafruit 2500 mAh Lithium battery to power the RPi3 (at least 3hrs play time)
Adafruit Powerboost 1000c (to convert the 2500 mAh 3.7 volt battery to 5 volts and to charge the battery)
Anker USB Dual SD/MicroSD reader removed from shell
SD to Micro SD FPC Extender
2 PNY 512GB SD cards
200GB Sandisk MicroSD card (OS + Music) inserted in RPi3 microSD card slot
Adafruit Switch
Chord Mojo
3D Print Enclosure
 
Its dimensions are 125mm long x 98.2mm wide x 26mm high and it weighs 358g. The Mojo is connected to the RPi3 via a DIY microUSB cable soldered directly to the RPi3. The dual USB SD/MicroSD card reader is also soldered directly to the RPi3. The MojoPi can hold up to 1.2 TB of music on 2 full-size SD cards and a 200 GB microSD card. The interface is Rune Audio (based on Arch Linux). I can access Rune Audio through the screen or remotely via WiFi on a web browser using the IP address of the MojoPi.
 
The touchscreen is resistive, not capacitive, and so requires a fingernail or a stylus; it is not very easy to scroll. There doesn't seem to be a readily-available 3.5" or smaller capacitive touch screen that works with both the RPi3 and Rune Audio.
 
I need to insert a USB 2.0 Micro-B Male to Micro-AB Female Adapter into a slot on the side to charge the Mojo.
 
I think this is as small an enclosure as possible that contains both a 3.5" screen and a Mojo without removing the Mojo board from its case and connecting the Mojo directly to the RPi instead of using the Mojo's microUSB port. That would potentially narrow the unit by about 10 mm. A smaller board (One example is the Odroid C0), containing just a SOC for the operating system, an on-board battery booster/charger, and USB connections to SD cards, could provide for either more storage or a larger battery, but wouldn't change the overall size very much, since the Mojo and the screen pretty much determine the minimum dimensions of the enclosure. The plastic enclosure is fairly sturdy, but a harder plastic or metal enclosure would clearly be preferable.
 
I haven't done any kind of real comparison between the MojoPi and a more traditional phone/Mojo or PC/Mojo setup, but to me it sounds great. Despite the slapdash internal wiring, I haven't had any noticeable clicks or interference. I've played 44.1/16 up to 192/24 PCM without any problem. DSD64 seems to work well enough, although I have had the occasional drop-out.
 
Is it just me or does anyone else think it would be cool if Chord came out with something like this?
 
Cheers,
Rod

 
  Chord Mojo docking station with a extra:
 

 

 
I made a docking station for the Mojo with a Raspberry Pi Zero in it, i stream music via wifi from my nas via tablet and
bubble upnp as controller - and of course the Mojo get charged.
 
Now the Mojo is a dnla renderer. Endless opptions depending on the linux version, use it as a dlna renderer, create a
media server etc. You find all the infos and 3d files here:
 
http://www.thingiverse.com/thing:1716990
 
have fun :)
 

 
Aug 13, 2016 at 1:28 PM Post #54 of 63
Aye, you can't fault their creativity in devising those solutions. I have been quietly admiring both those designs, in the Mojo thread.
 
What it is they say necessity is the mother of?
regular_smile .gif

 
Nov 15, 2016 at 7:12 PM Post #55 of 63
  As a thank you to the Head-Fi community, we're pleased to share a modified version of the Alpha Dog 3D printed headphone for the community to build DIY projects and perhaps improve on the tuning and performance of the headphone.  We are posting this fully unlicensed, though we hope people will use this for personal, not commercial purposes.  
 
Note: Headphone modifications are not without risk to the headphones and their parts.  MrSpeakers takes no responsibility for any damage caused to your Fostex headphones by following the steps outlined in this guide, either as a result of errors in our documentation or execution errors on your end.  
 
In addition, this will not be a “supported” thread, we’ll help a early users with any questions or issues and then hope the community is self-sustaining.  We’ll check in time to time to see how it’s going.  We will not answer questions for you via telephone or email. We’ll think about answering your question if you send a telegram, candy-gram, wire, bat signal, smoke signal, carrier pigeon, or a package with treats for the staff.  Most importantly have fun doing this and don’t be afraid to ask the community for help. 
 
 
Open Source Alpha Preliminary Directions (if something is unclear or incorrect please post or PM me so we may revise)
 
Step 1: Remove Drivers
  • Start with a Fostex T50RPx, T40RPx, or T20RPx.
  • Remove ear pads
  • Unscrew baffle.  NOTE: the internal leads to the driver are short, when the baffle detaches open it carefully.  If you pull a lead hard it will tear the solder pad off the driver and your driver is bricked. 
  • Desolder the driver leads.  Work fast, you do not want to overheat the pad.  Blow on the solder pad cool it as soon as the leads are removed to reduce risk of delamination.
  • This step is optional but recommended.  The Fostex driver has two layers of protection over it, a fine screen and a thin black felt. Using a very sharp exacto knife, cut through the black felt and follow the obvious square seam that surrounds the driver, then peal the felt back.  Try to leave the mesh in place.  If the mesh comes away you can tack it down with cement around he periphery, or leave it off completely if you are using Alpha Pads, as the pads have a dust screen built in.  See Fig XX to visualize what the driver looks like with the felt removed.
  • Repeat for the other driver
  • Unscrew the three screws on the ear-side of the baffle to detach drivers from the baffle.  Store the baffle screws in your zip lock bag for later use.
  • Set drivers to side, and put baffles in your “discard” pile
 
Step 2: Detach Fostex Baffles
  • Using wire snippers, cut the small wire where it enters both sides of th headband, cutting as close as you can to the plastic the wire feeds into.
  • At the interior center of each cup is a raised post.  Using a thin, flat blade, gently pry the plastic cover off the post.
  • Unscrew the large silver Phillips screw.
  • Detach the cup from the headband and shake out the screw AND the ball socket it holds in place. 
  • Collect the plastic end caps from the slider, the screws and the plastic ball join and store them in your zip lock bag.  DO NOT LOOSE THESE PLASTIC PARTS unless you wish to buy another T50. 
 
Step 3:  Cup Preparation
  • Refer to the Open Source Alpha, Exlpoded View PDF
  • Solder wire leads to the HiRose jack, a 1.5” 28AWG multi-stranded wire is fine.  Heavier gauge is not recommended as stiff wire may stress on the driver pads (pinout is in the Open Source Alpha, Exploded View PDF
  • Before assembly, line the cup with acoustic foam, such as Akasa Paxmate.
  • Install the HiRose jack and secure it in place with the nut.  Depending on the printer some material may need to be removed from the cup inner wall to allow the nut to rotate.  We recommend use of Loctite 243 to ensure the part stays put
  • Fill the cup with your choice of damping material.  Alpha dogs used cotton, Alpha Prime switched to wool.  Experiment and have fun.
 


Fig1 :  Detail of acoustic foam lining cup
 

 
Fig 2: Cup with acoustic foam and cotton fill
 
Step 4: Baffle Preparation
  • Refer to the file Open Source Alpha, Baffle Assembly PDF
  • Glue the two pieces of the baffle together, making sure the glue provides a continuous 360-degree seal.  Apply weight (e.g. a book with a 10 lb weight on it) until the parts are thoroughly bonded
  • Install the driver to the baffle using the Fostex screws you stored in the zip lock bag.  Be certain the foam gasket is in place; a poor fit here may reduce bass output. 
    • If your baffle surface is rough (depends on the printer) you may wish to prep it by washing quickly with acetone to fuse the ABS material, or by using silicone glue in place of the foam gasket.
    • DO NOT OVERTIGHTEN THE BAFFLE SCREWS.  The Fostex driver is made of a plastic that can easily be stripped or even cracked by excessive force.  Use a gentle touch.  A stripped screw can be rethreaded with a larger screw but the risk of cracking the plastic is high.
 

Fig 3:  Fostex driver installed in baffle assembly (note: felt cut away from driver per Step 1 line 5)
 
 
Step 5: Cup and Baffle Assembly
  • Put the plastic cap pieces on the T50RP arm
  • Place the cup over the plastic cap, insert the Arm Pivot Ball into the well in the cup and screw the assembly together with a #2 Phillips.   Check that the cup rotates smoothly.  Some printers may undersize the hole or leave residue that must be cleared before the joint moves smoothly.  Your results may vary based on the printer.
  • Carefully solder the positive lead to the + pad on the driver and negative lead to the – pad.  As before, working quickly is essential lest you damage the driver.  Do not add solder, use the material on the pad and heat it only until the solder wicks into the wire, then remove the heat, keep the wire in contact with the pad and blow to cool and set the solder as fast as possible.
    • Check across the driver to ensure the resistance is between 45 and 55 ohms (Fostex drivers vary), if it’s higher you may have a damaged trace on your driver, if it’s lower you may have a solder bridge or short)
  • Per the exploded view drawing, apply a thin bead of silicone glue to the baffle where it lays on the rim of the cup.  Failure to seal this seam will result in unbalanced bass response.  Alternatively, you may use a thin, very soft closed cell foam tape (must compress to less than 1mm thick).  Foam tape allows easier opening and closing of the cup for tuning.
  • Attach the baffle to the cup using the #2-28 screws.  Tighten enough to ensure a snug fit from the baffle to the cup.  Do not over tighten, if you strip the screws you’ve probably lost the cup.
  • Apply foam or felt around the driver (ear side of the baffle).  Wool felt has the most absorption across a broad range; if your headphone sounds hot, consider felt.  Foams generally do a bit less.
  • Attach your cable to the headphone and check the impedance across each channel one last time to verify it’s between 45 and 55 ohms.
 

Fig 4: Baffle ready to attach to cup
 
At this point, you are essentially done.  Tuning the headphone is easy enough, just remove the baffle to change internal damping materials, or cover the bass vents/insert small screws to tune and balance bass.  IMPORTANT NOTE:  3D printed plastic is quite tough, however screw holes can vary in strength depending on your printer.  Tuning requires repetitive opening and closing of the parts, and care is required to ensure screw holes do not strip.
 
Tuning tips:
 
  • The paper on the back of the Fostex driver has a significant effect on 1KHz and up.  We have found significant variation in driver frequency response on the T50RP driver modules.  These variations may often be addressed by manipulating the back of the driver in the following ways:
    • If you have too much midrange in the 1-3K range, placing an “air tight” object on the back of the driver reduces airflow and increases damping.  Any solid adhesive material will do, you can use a tape with a good adhesive or even felt anti-skip bumpers from an Ace hardware.  The more blocking material you apply to the driver the lower the upper midrange outputs (you may see an increase in high frequency output as well).  Note some adhesives may clog the paper and continue to affect performance even if you remove the blocking part.
    • If you are not getting enough bass or mid-bass output, you may consider making a small perforation (e.g. a 3mmx3mmx3mm triangle) in the exposed paper.  This is obviously a non-reversible action and should you not like it, may require additional modifications to the driver to re-balance it. 
 
Assembly Diagrams
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
STL Printer Files
 
ALPHA, BAFFLE.STL
 
ALPHA, PAD RING.STL.zip
 
OPEN ALPHA, LEFT CUP.STL.zip
 
OPEN ALPHA, RIGHT CUP.STL.zip
 
 
Image Grabs of Printer Parts Orientation on Printer for Best Print Results 
 
     

 
Jan 25, 2018 at 1:39 AM Post #56 of 63
Perhaps. But there was a time when people didn't know what caused overshoot and ringing in digital and it turned out that it was the clock. As you know, Steve mentions how the signal from the source can arrive too soon and somewhat "jumbled" and the DAC reads all that "jumble" as part of the signal.
I'm no technician - not in the slightest - but nonetheless, my cable will be arriving. As well, I spoke to Transparent Audio today (since it is one of their models) and they said they never heard that in their listening. I respect their ears, but I will still try it for myself. Karen Sumner, the owner of Transparent, once told me that "some people like that bright sound, I don't know..." (She was speaking of Nordost). I had always found Transparent to be a little closed in at the top (this was decades ago, when I was a reviewer). I have heard so much, "it can't possibly be" about digital, about speakers, about cables - even about the Yggy itself! - that I have stopped listening to others, and listened for myself. I'll listen to what people have to say (and consider it), but I trust my ears, too. I will be very happy if my basic Transparent S/PDIF cable is the right length, yet I can hear something missing in the sound that I do NOT hear when the Arcam FMJ 23 is hooked up directly to my setup, and I find it better to let my mind be open to things. (I can hardly believe the Arcam is better than the Yggy.)

After all, John Atkinson reviewed the Yggy and found the measurements odd (what is extremely odd to me is that he never mentioned listening to the converter). People ignore "skin effect" and other things that, as an experienced listener, I KNOW to be true. For example, if I say, "leaving your cables on the floor makes the sound worse, " there'll be an avalanche of responses saying, "You're crazy." But I've heard this for myself in a state-of-the-art system (several, in fact). I tell people, "turn off your microwave," even though they have their audio system on dedicated lines (so did I, yet back in San Francisco, a bell went off in my head when I found the highs constantly grainy, and I remembered Enid Lumley, TAS' resident "Alternate Universe" reviewer, telling me - and others - to turn off the microwave. So I did it. And the grain vanished. And I demonstrated that having your ac cord lying on top of your speaker cable was detrimental to the sound, in front of Dick Brown, the designer of the Bel Amp, Larry Kay, the publisher of Fi, Tom Miller, my fellow reviewer at TAS, TAS' Executive Editor, Sally Reynolds and several other "luminaries," who were astonished at the loss of upper midrange glare, once I took a book from Larry's shelf, Placed the speaker cable on top of it (so it wasn't touching the ac cord) and Larry's system, at the time, was: Wilson Grand Slamms, The Rockport Sirius turntable, equipped with a Van den Jul Grasshopper , the Jadis JP-80 preamp, Transparent's Reference XL interconnects and speaker cable, the Bel amp, and Jadis' 800 watt amps. This was a $120k system - in 1994 dollars which, in 2017 dollars, translates into $210,410.70, (according to the inflation calculator) - and yet, things that shouldn't have been affecting the system, WERE. After that, I read Enid a lot more closely and learned not to listen to the "it can't be" crowd. Until I'd (not) heard it with my own ears.
So, I will continue to do the same, because I also (for years) had a state of the art system (also in the 80s-90s), and I learned not to be close-minded. I no longer have such a system (nor do I want it: the anxiety when it didn't sound 'magical'. The 'what's-out-of-place-here-that-this-sounds-so-mediocre' craziness. The MONEY I spent chasing sound (not music. Just sound.) I, however, did not have a $120k system...mine was only $90k. But I have one thing I have ALWAYS had: an open mind.

Anything that can be repeated over and over, qualifies for Sherlock Holmes famous statement ''Once you eliminate the impossible, whatever remains, no matter how improbable, must be the truth." (and there are even holes in that statement.) Besides, what's the danger? The cable's coming, and I can listen to both. It's a no-brainer. The Yggy will tell me the "truth." I'll hear (or not hear) whether this assertion is true inside of a week - after the cable "settles." What? You didn't know that all cables need a "settling time" before you listen to them again, and if you move them around and listen immediately afterwards, you're shooting yourself in the foot if you're going for a serious evaluation? Gosh. The things people don't 'know,' eh?). Probably why that snake oil company, Nordost, finally invented cable holders for their speaker cables. Couldn't be that they heard something that some people believe is nonsense, now can it? My train of thought is: what took them so long?
The Yggdrasil will let me know easily enough.
 
Jul 22, 2019 at 7:14 AM Post #57 of 63
Measurements are a big problem; most test gear is incapable of measuring my DACs. Then you have the issue of how the test gear and device under test (DUT) is set-up - this can have a huge difference to your recorded results. In the same way that setting up your audio system can have a major impact in SQ, so the same is true with measurements. It is not an objective reality as people make out.

Then there is the issue of what measurements you are actually doing and why; I am the only designer that talks about noise floor modulation and publishes plots showing it, because I have done the listening tests and know how important it is subjectively. But noise floor modulation tests must be done in a particular way, otherwise you get inaccurate results, and the APX555 is the only test gear that can accurately do this measurement. This is because ADCs within the test gear has large noise floor modulation themselves, but the APX555 uniquely uses 4 ADCs to overcome this limitation.

So measurements, like listening tests, must be done very carefully, and conclusions reached must be tentative and subject to constant reappraisal. We can be never sure that what we are measuring is the set-up, the test gear or the DUT or a combination of all three.

There are far too many mickey mouse websites using false data (they have agendas) or simply rushed measurements using inadequate test gear and this explains the huge variations one can see. But if you want to see measurements done carefully then just look at my published results; each product will have my measurements in each thread.
 
Dec 1, 2020 at 8:34 PM Post #58 of 63
Dec 26, 2020 at 7:41 PM Post #59 of 63
Saving this for future reference.

Some incredibly deep analysis has been done with MQA, so I can say definitively that it's worse than a waste of time. I see now MQA has finally admitted that there isn't anything more than one unfold, and are now marketing the unfolding as "MQA 16x" or similar, which is basically up-sampling. I guess this came with Warner releasing a huge bunch of 16/44.1 MQA albums, which doesn't have the high-res portion (and MQA CD, if it does, is really only 13 bit!). The labels seem to be batch processing albums with some kind of DSP to try and make them sound different, usually with more bass, though sometimes with the smaller sounds emphasised (eg: The Beatles, which admittedly is one of the very few artists I felt benefitted from it). It wrecks classical music and jazz, as you lose the more nuanced details that give you the actual soundstage depth -- ironic considering that they talk about correcting the timing issues that are supposed to fix that very thing. After the MQA has the first actual unfold done (in TIDAL or the device) all the MQA device does is upsample it with an MQA selected short filter (which physically screws up the timing information anyway!) 8x or 16x as required.
 
Jan 27, 2021 at 6:39 PM Post #60 of 63
Saving my own post again.

First, I wouldn't class anything as "older gen" or "newer gen" -- that has nothing to do with it. The reason the Pico Power is better is that it only has one function, literally. It doesn't even have a charging circuit and you have to manually change the batteries when they get low. In any DAP, there's always a trade-off between power, size, battery life and features and sound quality, and at any price point there's going to be limit how far the available electronics can take one.

Want more power? You either have shorter battery life, or a bigger device.
What more battery life? You either have less power or a bigger device.
Want a smaller device? You lose screen size, battery life and/or output power.
Want more sound quality? You buy a Mojo/Poly, because you don't have to pay for the phone parts and Android development, but you'll need a smart phone to control it and the inconvenience of hooking up to it as a wireless hotspot every time you want to listen to music outside of home.

Get the idea?

IEMs aren't hard to drive. They only require a few mA to get loud -- less than 100, and even the relatively weaker (compared to desktop gear) amps inside a DAP will have no trouble driving them. The limitations of a DAP are going to usually be across the board -- the DAC and amp in the R6 wont be as good as in the R8 or other, $1000+ DAPs, so even if you improve the amplification, you're still limited by the DAC quality. If you're going to try and upgrade the sound with IEMs, the best thing to do is buy a better DAP, as the whole thing will be better.

Here's the whole portable music playback world in a nutshell: The Hugo2/2go is, sonically, the king, and it can drive full-sized headphones. But... size and battery life, and if you're only using IEMs, unless you're listening with top-of-the-line models, you may not really notice the difference between it and a $1000+ DAP anyway and, not to mention, for portable use the question is pointless, unless you only listen in cafes*.

From what I've experienced so far, you can get IEM listening almost to perfection under $2k in the DAP world. I thought that the M11 Pro was about as good as the old AK380, which just goes to show how far costs have dropped, and quality improved. Above $2k is for people in HK and SG and the like who live in tiny apartments, are rich students or have good-paying jobs, and the DAP is their entire system, bling and all (eg: N8, A&Ultima).

*Or your name is Rob Watts and you intentionally only fly on 787s and A350s in business or first, carry an MScaler and battery pack, and are basically crazy (in a good way). I think Rob wins for having the craziest portable rig of all time.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top