[jamato8]

Oh I don't think that balanced is the only "future" but I do think it is a very viable option and it works.

 

[jamato8]

Quote:

Originally Posted by qusp /img/forum/go_quote.gif I keep on saying, there are better options than those mentioned above if people would just listen. it would be VERY annoying for an inferior balanced connector to be integrated as the new standard (remember beta vs VHS). check out the ODU minisnap and neutrik mincon connectors. far superior to 4 pin XLR, mini 4 pin XLR or 2 x mono. also for sure balanced sources are important for a truly balanced signal path, but it is actually not such a difficult circuit to convert a single ended signal to balanced

I agree. A standard really needs to be addressed but it may not happen.

 

[itsborken]

Those ODU and Neutrik connectors are pretty fancy; just can't see where they are easily sourced and I reckon are more expensive than the xlrs which would be pretty robust.

It's good to know if we had to sterilize connections the ODU can take it if an amp winds up on a space probe

 

[aegid]

Going to be interesting in just how they sound being sourced from a PMP.

 

[itsborken]

My interest stems from reports of the IEMs performing well balanced and vendors jumping on the bandwagon to cash in on the interest. Whether it trickles down to the rank and file audiophiles and general public is another matter; I guess we'll see in a year's time if it is FOTW or a trend.

 

[ClieOS]

For the custom IEM and the shrinking number of universal IEM with user replaceable cable, the portable balanced amp (PBA) might be a good idea. The is a few problems though:

1) Most universal IEM with no replaceable cable can't benefit from PBA easily, since recabling is a hassle and comparatively more costly.

2) There is no standardized miniature balanced connector , recable/reterminate will mean very limited compatibility, and user will need to keep swapping cable (from balanced to single-end) when (s)he want to go 3.5mm / unamped.

3) Upgrading (for both amp and IEM) will be a hassle as well, due to (1) and (2).

I would imagine PBA might get support in Head-Fi from the more dedicated few, but it will have very limited impact on the IEM market as a whole. Instead, I am more interested in Dr. Meier's active balanced ground implementation on a portable amp.

 

[dongringo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by qusp /img/forum/go_quote.gif I keep on saying, there are better options than those mentioned above if people would just listen. it would be VERY annoying for an inferior balanced connector to be integrated as the new standard (remember beta vs VHS). check out the ODU minisnap and neutrik mincon connectors. far superior to 4 pin XLR, mini 4 pin XLR or 2 x mono. also for sure balanced sources are important for a truly balanced signal path, but it is actually not such a difficult circuit to convert a single ended signal to balanced

From ibasso:

"We welcome suggestions, and will adopt good suggestions on the final production."

 

[sxr71]

There is no way this will trickle below audiophiles. Most people I know get those iPhone/Mic UE/ETY/Shure what have you. Very few of us even will sacrifice a mic for a higher quality headphone leave alone carry an amp.

For us this is a step in the right direction. It seems that with these new amps the PCBs take about a third of the room in the case with the battery taking 2 thirds. It seems miniaturization has enabled us to easily and cheaply double the number of channels. I'm all for it.

 

[TzeYang]

"The world's first" theme is quite immature and seems overly desperate. There are balanced portable amps at least 10 years ago (stax anyone?)

 

[charlie0904]

ibasso could make it a "mini/portable" desktop amp/dac unit.

 

[kostalex]

Why do not one use 4-pole 3.5 mm plugs for PBA?

 

[jamato8]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kostalex /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why do not one use 4-pole 3.5 mm plugs for PBA?

It is a thought. The close proximity of the signal though within the 4 pole mini could add to some crosstalk.

 

[frozenice]

What is the benefit of doing what Ray Samuels is doing (balanced) with the Protector that couldn't be done with a dual mono design other than a separate ground for each earpiece? Does having a separate ground make a noticeable (or worthwhile) difference?

 

[Duggeh]

Multiple connection TRS is the best solution as it allows for the smallest limits on makin the amps thin as possible.


2XTRS 3 is just as stupid as 2x3Pin XLR for home amps and PLEASE LEARN FROM THAT HEADROOM FOUL-UP.

Rays 4 pin connection choice (whatever that thing is) is also awful because it's fixed orientation ( no flexability for layouts) and also the connector alone is thicker than the Headamp Pico Slim.


Various posts were deleted from Rays thread pointing this out (and the thread title altered after the fact).


But neither Ray Samuels Nor Ibasso have the first portable balanced headphone amp. It's been more than 30 years since Stax made that development in 1979 with the SRD-X. A portable balanced headphone amplifier that pre-dates even the original Sony Walkman cassette deck!

Most Head-Fi members weren't even sperm when the first balanced portable amp was made!

As far the the "Ultra-Portable" (Because that is the semantic alteration which has been chosen) goes. The Stax SRM-001 from 1995, fits thats bill easily.


Again. This is semantics as a point because of language choice. I just dont like to see claims being made which rope in when they are, frankly, not true.






This is sayign nothing about the fact that per form factor size, a more powerful single ended amplifer is a better option than a balanced amplifer of the size size but of lesser power. Balanced in and of itself in those and these terms is not an inherant advantage without the weight behind its drive. Its like (to draw a very crude analogy) 30 horsepower 4x4 drive or 120 horsepower 2 wheel drive.

 

[qusp]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jamato8 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I agree. A standard really needs to be addressed but it may not happen.

indeed, otherwise we will end up with a total mess, each manufacturer choosing their own system to achieve it and the consumer will lose out badly. you will end up having to have multiple cables for everything. the connectors I mention are smaller, more robust, have better dielectrics and will also allow both balanced AND single ended operation. you could ue the same female chassis mount connector on either amp, it just needs to be wired differently to achieve balanced or SE operation.

Quote:

Originally Posted by itsborken /img/forum/go_quote.gif Those ODU and Neutrik connectors are pretty fancy; just can't see where they are easily sourced and I reckon are more expensive than the xlrs which would be pretty robust. It's good to know if we had to sterilize connections the ODU can take it if an amp winds up on a space probe

not that easy to come by, agreed, but thats only in our circles. after some searching I have sourced both lines in both male/female inline and female chassis mount (everything needed) with more demand our regular parts suppliers will stock them. at the moment I can get them direct and through a distributor in europe. the ODU connectors are actually part of the same line as the connectors used on the HD800, so that gives you an idea of their size and robustness.

I see you went and checked out the medisnap connections too

IMO the mninisnap are definitely at least as robust as mini 4 pin

Quote:

Originally Posted by itsborken /img/forum/go_quote.gif My interest stems from reports of the IEMs performing well balanced and vendors jumping on the bandwagon to cash in on the interest. Whether it trickles down to the rank and file audiophiles and general public is another matter; I guess we'll see in a year's time if it is FOTW or a trend.

yes and if its done, some real thought should be put into it, not just take the easy way out to cash in. i'm sure ibasso will be open to suggestions, so I have started to put together a proposal to them

Quote:

Originally Posted by ClieOS /img/forum/go_quote.gif For the custom IEM and the shrinking number of universal IEM with user replaceable cable, the portable balanced amp (PBA) might be a good idea. The is a few problems though: 1) Most universal IEM with no replaceable cable can't benefit from PBA easily, since recabling is a hassle and comparatively more costly.

so what? these advances arent really aimed at the general public are they??

Quote:

2) There is no standardized miniature balanced connector , recable/reterminate will mean very limited compatibility, and user will need to keep swapping cable (from balanced to single-end) when (s)he want to go 3.5mm / unamped.

of course there isnt a standard, this is the beginning of something, but one should be introduced; unfortunately we dont have a head-fi regulatory body to enforce it. hehe I just got an image of a mobster in a cheap suit with headphones and a tommy gun

Quote:

3) Upgrading (for both amp and IEM) will be a hassle as well, due to (1) and (2).

this isnt meant to be backwards compatible and this point is irrelevant, you need to do more than put a new connector on an amp to make it balanced. this will be something to possibly be integrated into new products, not old ones

Quote:

I would imagine PBA might get support in Head-Fi from the more dedicated few, but it will have very limited impact on the IEM market as a whole. Instead, I am more interested in Dr. Meier's active balanced ground implementation on a portable amp.

sure it will probably sound good, but active ground does NOT provide the benefits of balanced. it goes some way towards it, but not that far

Quote:

Originally Posted by dongringo /img/forum/go_quote.gif From ibasso: "We welcome suggestions, and will adopt good suggestions on the final production."

indeed; already spotted that and i'll be sending the guys at ibasso an email about it later. I have always found them to be quite amiable in the past and ready to listen to suggestions. thats part of what makes them a good supplier
Quote:

Originally Posted by kostalex /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why do not one use 4-pole 3.5 mm plugs for PBA?

because we have an opportunity to do something better than that and most 4 terminal minis are pretty dodgy IMO, since they are only designed for phones really. plus what Jamato8 mentions below is a valid point, the ODU are set up fairly well to avoid this
Quote:

Originally Posted by jamato8 /img/forum/go_quote.gif It is a thought. The close proximity of the signal though within the 4 pole mini could add to some crosstalk.

yes, but no, whatever crosstalk is evident will be pretty well taken care of by the common mode, if we were talking a regular SE signal maybe this would be more of an issue, but with balanced the effect would be so low as to be largely irrelevant

edit: actually with the mini it may not be so effective since the way they are set up means it may effect one terminal more than another, but I doubt it

Quote:

Originally Posted by Duggeh /img/forum/go_quote.gif Multiple connection TRS is the best solution as it allows for the smallest limits on makin the amps thin as possible.

incorrect, its the smallest that you are aware of. most accessible too, but with some effort this can change. i'm happy to devote some more time to the research, but i'm pretty sure i've found the best solutions already


Quote:

2XTRS 3 is just as stupid as 2x3Pin XLR for home amps and PLEASE LEARN FROM THAT HEADROOM FOUL-UP.

agreed, but still noone has come up with a really fantastic 4 pin XLR either. rthe XX series are good, but they arent all that IMO

Quote:

Rays 4 pin connection choice (whatever that thing is) is also awful because it's fixed orientation ( no flexability for layouts) and also the connector alone is thicker than the Headamp Pico Slim.

no comment


Quote:

But neither Ray Samuels Nor Ibasso have the first portable balanced headphone amp. It's been more than 30 years since Stax made that development in 1979 with the SRD-X. A portable balanced headphone amplifier that pre-dates even the original Sony Walkman cassette deck!

yep, marketing spin

Most Head-Fi members weren't even sperm when the first balanced portable amp was made!

Quote:

As far the the "Ultra-Portable" (Because that is the semantic alteration which has been chosen) goes. The Stax SRM-001 from 1995, fits thats bill easily.

hmm I dont know about that, the battery supply made it a bit of a PITA, not really small enough to be called ultra-portable either; but I take you point


Quote:

Again. This is semantics as a point because of language choice. I just dont like to see claims being made which rope in when they are, frankly, not true. This is sayign nothing about the fact that per form factor size, a more powerful single ended amplifer is a better option than a balanced amplifer of the size size but of lesser power. Balanced in and of itself in those and these terms is not an inherant advantage without the weight behind its drive. Its like (to draw a very crude analogy) 30 horsepower 4x4 drive or 120 horsepower 2 wheel drive.

for sure, without a power supply that supplies the same power to a negative polarity there is no increase in swing, the only benefit with the same power supply would be the common mode noise rejection