[Armaegis]

The E9 is cheap enough I could buy two of them with spare adapter/wire bits to make an ad hoc balanced amp...

 

[kite7]

I see what you mean but what amps have you tried or currently own to know that the E9 is neutral? A lot of things in audio is relative to one another. I owned a few amps but none of them really color the sound in terms of adding something to the frequency response. I find that the biggest differences between cheap and expensive amps is the soundstage, layering and separation, imaging etc the attributes that make a recording sound more life like. I guess I need a E7/E9 combo to compare against my M^3 with Sigma11 PSU. I really do like to save money if possible but so far, even with that mindset I find that I'm never quite satisfied with the sound I got with cheaper combos.

 

[scottiebabie]

only just caught this thread & wow...just wow! great job Milosz, U DA MAN! im betting a whole lotta gurus are spendin sleepness nights tossin & turnin now that their mega $$$$$ amps arent the panacea they thought. im more inclined myself to think that system synergy plays a much more important role than just mechanical/electrical/financial specs. thxs for reinforcing some of my beliefs. 
 
cant wait to hear moar so keep it up!
 
ps:FWIW i power my cans thru my vintage Sansui AU-517 integrated amp & i think its da bees knees . $50 gets da job done!

 

[moonboy403]

To me, the M^3 with Sigma11 PSU (with the OP627s) is colored. It's bass heavy and a bit bloated and slow. Finer details also tend to be covered up by how warm it sounds in contrasts to other more neutral sounding amps.

 

[Currawong]

Quote:

I have no doubt that the more expensive ones are overall better. What I'm saying is that the E9 puts up a good fight, as well as having enough power for many headphones, including flagships. The rest is subjective opinion and preference of overall sound signature.
 
The hate was most people saying it couldn't compete. I'm pretty sure that can be put to rest. People swear price = performance moreso than not, and Fiio has been consistently proving this way of thinking wrong.
 
I'm inclined to believe you're paying more for versatility (more inputs and compatability) with the higher end neutral amps, and not a sound upgrade, but more of a sidegrade.
 
But of course, haters gonna hate. You're getting an amp that stays relatively true to the source and feeds your headphones enough power to shine. The Fiio E9 as a neutral amp with ample power does this, does it not? The marked improvements over the E9 is slight sound signature differences, more neutrality, from what we can see. I for one am not gonna pay $1000 more for slight improvements, when the E9 already does things quite well.
 
I'm willing to bet a pretty penny the truly better improvements are with whatever DAC it's paired with. That will be my next logical choice to upgrading my sound.
 
I can rest easy knowing that I bought an amp that feeds my headphones with plenty of power without coloring the sound, which was what I wanted. The bells and whistles is of no importance to me.

The only thing is the level of distortion in the Beta 22 (2-channel) is 10x lower than the E9 according to the stated measurements of both.  There is both a misunderstanding by some people that one requires  a crazy amp simply to drive some headphones, as well as by people that a cheap amp will provide most of the experience of a very high grade one. Though if you only listen to crappy, highly-compressed pop, there's much truth in the latter.
 
Something worth noting is that in most cases these comparisons were made using a DAC of (IMO) a lower grade than the amp being tested, especially going by the specifications which show it as having more distortion. With a better DAC, the differences between the cheap and expensive amps would be more noticeable.
 


Quote:

only just caught this thread & wow...just wow! great job Milosz, U DA MAN! im betting a whole lotta gurus are spendin sleepness nights tossin & turnin now that their mega $$$$$ amps arent the panacea they thought. im more inclined myself to think that system synergy plays a much more important role than just mechanical/electrical/financial specs. thxs for reinforcing some of my beliefs. 
 
cant wait to hear moar so keep it up!
 
ps:FWIW i power my cans thru my vintage Sansui AU-517 integrated amp & i think its da bees knees . $50 gets da job done!

My own comparison as an example: I have both the cheapest and most expensive Audio-gd amps here, the Sparrow and Phoenix. The former sounds great with most headphones. The designer really nailed it with the sound.  I can happily sit and listen with LCD-2s plugged into it.  However, jumping to my main rig, which is, overall, 10x the price, there is a huge difference. Probably the easiest way to describe it is if the music had moved from a toilet cubical into a concert hall. As well, when playing complex music, with the Sparrow (and Fun) the soundstage starts to compress as they struggle to keep up. With the Ref 1/Phoenix this doesn't happen in the slighest due to the far more extensive power supplies feeding both of them.  I wont go into describing the far greater detail that can be heard.  Looking at the measurements, the difference between them is something like 1/3rd of the level of distortion with the more expensive rig. This before we even consider crosstalk and other measurements, which reflect in what one hears.
 
So, overall, no, you don't need a bazillion dollar system to enjoy music with headphones, but if you're like me, listen to a lot of classical and jazz and want to hear even the last detail, then, if you're willing to pay money, the potential is there, but it has to be the potential of the whole system, not just the amp.

 

[BobSaysHi]

Wow, way to sum that up, Currawong. That's the impression I got from listening to another member's high end rig versus my own.

 

[Avi]

Quote:

Here's a modest proposal with ambitious intentions. Would fellow Chicagoans milosz and Skylab consider getting together to share equipment and opinions using milosz's A | B switch? I think the results of that conversation would be fascinating and essential reading for head-fiers.

To lapse into a few-decades old sprach; that would be epic, nay totally righteous! (OK, may I re-enter the 21st century now, please?) We can only wish

 

[scottiebabie]

i have no doubt that a Zana Deux or a Phoenix or aforementioned Beta 22 are very good headamps but at what cost & with respect to what & driving what & so on. & more importantly, how much better. not everyone has golden ears & most importantly, deep pockets. alls i knows is my vintage amp (Sansui AU-517) costs me next to nothing, is built like the Krells of yesteryears, drives my home speakers sweetly & sounds awesome with most of my cans too - to my ears ofcos.
 
alls im saying is tryout whats available at home or something gotton inexpensively before jumping on the "golden" wagon. we mite be happily surprised. afterall isnt it all about the music & not the equipment? jus sayin as all.

 

[upstateguy]

 
Quote:

To me, the M^3 with Sigma11 PSU (with the OP627s) is colored. It's bass heavy and a bit bloated and slow. Finer details also tend to be covered up by how warm it sounds in contrasts to other more neutral sounding amps.

I have the same 637/627 M^3/Sigma and GS-1 as you do.  Unless the 637s are so much better than the 627s I can't agree with your evaluation of the M^3 as bass heavy, bloated and slow.  I won't argue that the GS-1 has greater resolution.  But it's just as easy to say that the GS-1's wire with gain sound is bass light, bright, analytical, and lacking the organic 'body' the M^3 has? 
 
Did you build your M^3 or get it new?  If not, how old is it and how many owners did it have?  The reason I ask is that not all M^3s sound the same.  I have 2. The older one (8065) was set up to swing as much current as possible for low impedance headphones like the AKG 340s and has a brighter sound signature than the newer one (637/627) which sounds remarkably like my Cetron tubed Woo3.... and if you know Woo amps, they don't sound tuby, bassy, bloated or slow, but more like good solid states.
 
Now what headphones are you using to make this statement?  I see you and I have had 650s, 701s and 880s in common.  If I were to use each one of those headphones to describe my M^3, I would come up with 3 different descriptions.  There's no way I could call either M^3 bass heavy, bloated and slow with the 701s.  I find both M^3s lean toward the brighter side of neutral with the 880s, and the 650s have the warmest, but most accurate tone with either my M^3 or my GS-1..... 
 
Now I see that you have transitioned to expensive ear buds. I had the UM3X but sold them.  If you had to say which of your universals was the best, which would you pick?
 

 
Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
<snip>
 
So, overall, no, you don't need a bazillion dollar system to enjoy music with headphones...
 
<snip>

Yes you do. 

 
 
USG
 


 

 

[moonboy403]

Quote:

 

I have the same 637/627 M^3/Sigma and GS-1 as you do.  Unless the 637s are so much better than the 627s I can't agree with your evaluation of the M^3 as bass heavy, bloated and slow.  I won't argue that the GS-1 has greater resolution.  But it's just as easy to say that the GS-1's wire with gain sound is bass light, bright, analytical, and lacking the organic 'body' the M^3 has? 
 
Did you build your M^3 or get it new?  If not, how old is it and how many owners did it have?  The reason I ask is that not all M^3s sound the same.  I have 2. The older one (8065) was set up to swing as much current as possible for low impedance headphones like the AKG 340s and has a brighter sound signature than the newer one (637/627) which sounds remarkably like my Cetron tubed Woo3.... and if you know Woo amps, they don't sound tuby, bassy, bloated or slow, but more like good solid states.
 
Now what headphones are you using to make this statement?  I see you and I have had 650s, 701s and 880s in common.  If I were to use each one of those headphones to describe my M^3, I would come up with 3 different descriptions.  There's no way I could call either M^3 bass heavy, bloated and slow with the 701s.  I find both M^3s lean toward the brighter side of neutral with the 880s, and the 650s have the warmest, but most accurate tone with either my M^3 or my GS-1..... 
 
Now I see that you have transitioned to expensive ear buds. I had the UM3X but sold them.  If you had to say which of your universals was the best, which would you pick?
 

 

Yes you do. 

 
 
USG
 


 

I tested them with my JH13s. Out of all the amps (Millet MiniMax, Pico Slim, Blue Circle SBH, Peachtree Audio Nova, DNA Sonnett, Onkyo flagship receiver) that I've tested with it, the M^3 (bought used with gain switch of either 2 or 6) disappoints me the most in terms of bass. Simple as that. 
 
As for universal IEMs, I prefer the UM3X over the SM3 because the SM3 has an exaggerated lower midrange that I simply couldn't get over. 
 

 

[milosz]

Quote:

did you ever post a pic of the device you are using to compare amps. it's still unlcear to me what you are doing.
 
is it:
 
                              >> RCA 1 >> amp 1 >> hp out >> input 1 switch box
source >> RCA splitter                                                                     >> headphone
                              >> RCA 2 >> amp 2 >> hp out >> input 2 switch box
 
 
i wonder if one of these could be built for balanced use.

You could build one for balanced use, you'd need a 4PDT switch.  They do exist, but they tend to be kind of big, sturdy industrial things.  A switch with an easier action is nicer.  It is also be possible to use relays.  I am building an A/B box using relays for use with an automated A/B/X setup I am putting together, to readily allow double-blind tests.  It will run the test then produce a report with appropriate simple statistical analysis.
 
Here's the single-ended version that I am using.  It's very simple.
 
 

 

[milosz]

Quote:

The only thing is the level of distortion in the Beta 22 (2-channel) is 10x lower than the E9 according to the stated measurements of both.  There is both a misunderstanding by some people that one requires  a crazy amp simply to drive some headphones, as well as by people that a cheap amp will provide most of the experience of a very high grade one. Though if you only listen to crappy, highly-compressed pop, there's much truth in the latter.
 
Something worth noting is that in most cases these comparisons were made using a DAC of (IMO) a lower grade than the amp being tested, especially going by the specifications which show it as having more distortion. With a better DAC, the differences between the cheap and expensive amps would be more noticeable.
 



My own comparison as an example: I have both the cheapest and most expensive Audio-gd amps here, the Sparrow and Phoenix. The former sounds great with most headphones. The designer really nailed it with the sound.  I can happily sit and listen with LCD-2s plugged into it.  However, jumping to my main rig, which is, overall, 10x the price, there is a huge difference. Probably the easiest way to describe it is if the music had moved from a toilet cubical into a concert hall. As well, when playing complex music, with the Sparrow (and Fun) the soundstage starts to compress as they struggle to keep up. With the Ref 1/Phoenix this doesn't happen in the slighest due to the far more extensive power supplies feeding both of them.  I wont go into describing the far greater detail that can be heard.  Looking at the measurements, the difference between them is something like 1/3rd of the level of distortion with the more expensive rig. This before we even consider crosstalk and other measurements, which reflect in what one hears.
 
So, overall, no, you don't need a bazillion dollar system to enjoy music with headphones, but if you're like me, listen to a lot of classical and jazz and want to hear even the last detail, then, if you're willing to pay money, the potential is there, but it has to be the potential of the whole system, not just the amp.

I have an Audio-Gd NFB10-ES now, so I will be repeating some tests with this as a DAC to see if a better DAC indeed does somehow point up differences in amplifiers not audible using the DAC Magic as a source.  My contention is that the amp doesn't know which DAC is being used as a source; if an amp is changing the sound, it will change the sound from a low-fi DAC to exactly the same degree as it changes the sound form an uber-reference  DAC.  The differences between two amps, if such differences are real, should be audible no matter what the source used, as long as sources are fairly low noise and wideband - as any DAC would be.  
 
I haven't compared the sound of the NFB-10ES to the DAC Magic yet, but I will soon.  I also want to compare the Audio-Gd FUN ("A" version) DAC output to the DAC Magic. I am interested to learn how much difference there is between these DACs. The DAC Magic uses dual Wolfson 8740 DACs and the Adaptive Time Filtering  scheme used on some well regarded Nagra DACs; I really wonder if it's the sound of this unit that some listeners object to, or it's low price.  After all, it simply CAN'T be as good as a $2000 DAC, can it....?  I'm just sayin'.
 

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

I have an Audio-Gd NFB10-ES now, so I will be repeating some tests with this as a DAC to see if a better DAC indeed does somehow point up differences in amplifiers not audible using the DAC Magic as a source.  My contention is that the amp doesn't know which DAC is being used as a source; if an amp is changing the sound, it will change the sound from a low-fi DAC to exactly the same degree as it changes the sound form an uber-reference  DAC.  The differences between two amps, if such differences are real, should be audible no matter what the source used, as long as sources are fairly low noise and wideband - as any DAC would be.  
 
I haven't compared the sound of the NFB-10ES to the DAC Magic yet, but I will soon.  I also want to compare the Audio-Gd FUN ("A" version) DAC output to the DAC Magic. I am interested to learn how much difference there is between these DACs. The DAC Magic uses dual Wolfson 8740 DACs and the Adaptive Time Filtering  scheme used on some well regarded Nagra DACs; I really wonder if it's the sound of this unit that some listeners object to, or it's low price.  After all, it simply CAN'T be as good as a $2000 DAC, can it....?  I'm just sayin'.

The amp may not know which DAC you're using, but your ears should! 

 

[Dibster]

Inspired by this thread, I set up my PC and other gear so that I could switch between my Asus Xonar Essence STX's headphone out and Musical Fidelity V-DAC + Heed Canamp combo with only a ~2sec break in the music. I volume matched them with an SPL meter using a 1khz test tone. Listening was done with Sennheiser HD-800. Material was lossless FLAC files of several music genres.
 
After two nights of rigid testing, as far as I can tell, they sound identical. I can't point my finger at any real difference whatsoever. Before, I was under the impression that the V-DAC and Canamp was a warmer, smoother combo than the card's HP-out, but in light of this test I'd have to consider myself proven wrong. This is a 200€ soundcard with a 2$ IC ( I hear ) as an amplifier vs a 250€ DAC and 400€ discrete amp. I feel like I have now lost faith in Hifi, other than the differences between different pairs of speakers or headphones. I feel somewhat angry and disappointed at myself, firstly for having "conjured up" differences where there were none, and on the other hand at having bought almost 1000€ worth of stuff including interconnects that can't outperform a 200€ card. On the other hand, I feel relieved that I'm wearing the best headphones I've heard and I'm apparently getting all out of them. I can sell my stuff without regrets and spend that money on something altogether else.
 
Thanks, OP, for making this thread. For making me doubt myself and for making me test in as objective a manner as I could. You've saved me from a lot of future spending and from spouting a bunch of false BS on the forums.

 

[Oddworld]

This thread is fantastic!
Thanks OP for showing that there is some truth to inexpensive amps!