[milosz]

Having a selection of differently "voiced" amplifiers on hand to get desired sonic results is a very expensive way to make a TONE CONTROL, no doubt about that.
 
The one exception is the tube amp.  A tube amp often has a harmonic "flavor" that is different in nature than a static EQ curve.  I think it's nice to have a good solid state amp and a nice tube amp on hand.  There are high-quality tube and solid state amps available for reasonable prices.  You don't have to spend a ton to get really decent sound, especially if you shop the used market.  And if you are willing to build an amp- a project that I think offers a lot of "hobby fun" - you can do really well for not too much money.
 
Although I like to have a tube amp as an alternative, I'd have to say if I was REALLY limited in budget, you get your best bang for your low-budget sonic buck with solid state designs.  But once you have a LITTLE more money, the selection opens up and includes some tube stuff.
 
(Aside from using, for example, EQ in your computer to tailor the sound to the particular phones you're using, I imagine it's also possible to model amplifier sound in the digital domain.  I'm pretty sure you could cook up a DSP plug in for Winamp that would model tube sound.  There is something out there called iZotope Ozone, a DSP plugin for Winamp, that offers some of this stuff.  Winamp plugins also work with Media Monkey.  When I listen using a computer, I use Media Monkey and and this allows me to use an external DAC. I'll have to try this Ozone plugin.)

 

[Nakattack]

To be honest, I don't think amplifiers should have different flavours at all. Amplifiers should do exactly as their names suggest and amplify a signal, not add colouration or "flavour". I don't own a tube amp so I can't really comment on those, but a wire with gain is exactly how an amp should sound in my opinion.

 

[iceman23]

Well I think that, from the results here, we can see that this is most often the case. In general, at least. Going against the supposedly neutral Beta, the fact that the other amps sounds very similar should show that they are in fact not imparting intentionally heavy coloration. What a buyer should look to pay a premium for is more powe and in the case they desire a certain coloration, a tube design.

 

[olor1n]

Those in the "wire with gain camp" are really preaching to the choir here imo. I think the interesting thing with these comparisons is to get a sense of the lowest price point at which that may be achieved. However, people need to factor in the added cost and benefit of better components ie power supply, to account for performance increases (dynamics etc) outside of tonal presentation (which has been the main focus of discussion).

 

[iceman23]

Quote:

 However, people need to factor in the added cost and benefit of better components ie power supply, to account for performance increases (dynamics etc) outside of tonal presentation (which has been the main focus of discussion).

This is of course true, and improves with the output power of the amp. Several of the reviews state difficulties in driving the LCD-2.  
 

 

[baka1969]

Quote:Originally Posted by kwkarth 

"It's clear that you have no appreciation for the incredible melding of art, engineering, precision, and beauty that go into a fine timepiece, but that's ok, it's your preference.  Just don't denigrate others for appreciating something you do not.  I agree with your first paragraph.  Virtually everything in this world is subject to the laws of diminishing returns.  There are very few who even have opportunity to experience things beyond the knee of that curve, and fewer still, who appreciate those achievements for what they truly are and not just the shallow snob value that the the shallower and more distant perspective perceives.  
If one reads this and other threads here with an open and learning mind, it becomes quite easy to discern between those who are questing for perfection, and those who are after snob appeal.  The knee of the curve is discussed quite a bit here, and how to achieve it.  Look for it, and you will find it."


I actually agree with this entire statement. First with wrist watches. There are many brands of mechanical watches that most people aren't even aware of. Much of them are unassuming to look at. So it is the masterful craftsmanship and the brilliance of micro mechanics that are part of the appeal. If you understand what goes into a tourbillon or a minute repeater then you'd appreciate them a bit more. Those are amoung the perfection in the art and skill of watchmaking. I won't get into Rolex but that's a different subject.

As for chasing the ghost of perfect audio reproduction, it's the diminishing returns that what many, like myself, are after. Kevin uses the knee analogy, I've said elbow. Both amount to the same thing. It looks like a natural yield curve. You get incremental gains in sound quality for exponential cost increases. If you're someone that want's to go after the lest few percentage points towards the elusive audio "perfection" then you'll pay dearly for it. Budgets and a willingness to pay are part of the equation too.

I've listened to a good deal of amps and although there may or may not be huge differences between amps as I've moved up in cost, once I've experienced those differences, no matter how large or small, I have found it difficult for me to go back. Justifying the extra cost for me. Everyone's experience will vary.

 

[debitsohn]

Quote:

I actually agree with this entire statement. First with wrist watches. There are many brands of mechanical watches that most people aren't even aware of. Much of them are unassuming to look at. So it is the masterful craftsmanship and the brilliance of micro mechanics that are part of the appeal. If you understand what goes into a tourbillon or a minute repeater then you'd appreciate them a bit more. Those are amoung the perfection in the art and skill of watchmaking. I won't get into Rolex but that's a different subject.

As for chasing the ghost of perfect audio reproduction, it's the diminishing returns that what many, like myself, are after. Kevin uses the knee analogy, I've said elbow. Both amount to the same thing. It looks like a natural yield curve. You get incremental gains in sound quality for exponential cost increases. If you're someone that want's to go after the lest few percentage points towards the elusive audio "perfection" then you'll pay dearly for it. Budgets and a willingness to pay are part of the equation too.

I've listened to a good deal of amps and although there may or may not be huge differences between amps as I've moved up in cost, once I've experienced those differences, no matter how large or small, I have found it difficult for me to go back. Justifying the extra cost for me. Everyone's experience will vary.

well said. 

 

[pp312]

 
Quote:

I've listened to a good deal of amps and although there may or may not be huge differences between amps as I've moved up in cost, once I've experienced those differences, no matter how large or small, I have found it difficult for me to go back. Justifying the extra cost for me. Everyone's experience will vary.

I don't think anyone's questioning your or anyone's right to pursue "perfection" to any kind of fiscal height, but I think one has to be careful not to lose perspective when offering advice to others. As you say, you can't go back, but there are those who, even if they went as far as you, might not hear what you hear, or think it was worth anything like what they had to pay to hear it. I think it's very easy to look back in contempt at what one had and wonder how one ever put up with it, or why anyone should have to, and advise accordingly, forgetting that most people are perfectly happy with gear that would have you running from the room. I personally tend to take more note of those posters whose gear in not too exotic when seeking advice; I never quite trust the perspective of the others.
 
Of course, none of these comments is meant to apply to you personally (unless the shoe fits, of course). I'm merely making a philosophical observation.     
 

 

[baka1969]

Quote:Originally Posted by pp312 


"I don't think anyone's questioning your or anyone's right to pursue "perfection" to any kind of fiscal height, but I think one has to be careful not to lose perspective when offering advice to others. As you say, you can't go back, but there are those who, even if they went as far as you, might not hear what you hear, or think it was worth anything like what they had to pay to hear it. I think it's very easy to look back in contempt at what one had and wonder how one ever put up with it, or why anyone should have to, and advise accordingly, forgetting that most people are perfectly happy with gear that would have you running from the room. I personally tend to take more note of those posters whose gear in not too exotic when seeking advice; I never quite trust the perspective of the others.
Of course, none of these comments is meant to apply to you personally (unless the shoe fits, of course). I'm merely making a philosophical observation."

If you read through all my posts on Head-Fi you'll see I continue to point out the strengths or weaknesses of the equipment I have experience with. Even ones I didn't like personally. An example is the HD650. Not my favorite headphone. That said, I can understand what others like in it and can hear that it's a quality headphone. It just doesn't suit me. I think the Grado SR-80 is one of the best headphone bargains. Period. Even though I've moved on from the Grado house sound. I prefer my humble RE0 to the much more expensive SE535.

When answering a post I try to answer within the OP's needs. That said, I'm not going to back down from my beliefs. Chasing the ghost of "perfection" is something that many of us pursue. I am one of them. I think the fact that it's impossible to achieve only the makes the drive that much more magnetic. So I think an amp that is an improvement to me is worth it. It may seem like a small difference to some. But once I hear it, it becomes pretty substantial to me. As I've said before one person's small is another person's big.

Of course there are things that can be done within the confines of someone's budget and willingness to get that much closer to nirvana. Like making sure their music format, front end source, DAC, and yes, amp are on par with the headphone to get it to perform and sound it's best as a system.

Decide what is and isn't important to you.

 

[pp312]

Just to make my point clear without quoting your post or getting into fine details: your goals and standards in hi-fi are your own business; what I'm cautioning about is you or any poster making recommmendations based on standards which may be completely irrelevant to the enquirer. I believe you did that in another thread when you advised against the OP buying a 650 because he was listening to MP3 files. I don't intend to fight that battle again, but like yourself, neither do I intend to back down from my beliefs and standards nor stand by while enquirers are being given poor, misleading and expensive advice.   
 
Oh, and on a personal note, the 650 is my favourite headphone and I thought the Grado SR80 was the worst HP I'd ever heard. Just goes to show that one man's audio bargain can be the next man's total rubbish.

 

[debitsohn]

Quote:

 


I don't think anyone's questioning your or anyone's right to pursue "perfection" to any kind of fiscal height, but I think one has to be careful not to lose perspective when offering advice to others. As you say, you can't go back, but there are those who, even if they went as far as you, might not hear what you hear, or think it was worth anything like what they had to pay to hear it. I think it's very easy to look back in contempt at what one had and wonder how one ever put up with it, or why anyone should have to, and advise accordingly, forgetting that most people are perfectly happy with gear that would have you running from the room. I personally tend to take more note of those posters whose gear in not too exotic when seeking advice; I never quite trust the perspective of the others.
 
Of course, none of these comments is meant to apply to you personally (unless the shoe fits, of course). I'm merely making a philosophical observation.     
 

that is true, but the ppl on here and around the forum that are suggesting that the fiio e9 can properly drive the hd800 are also losing perspective when offering advice to others.
and 100% your statement is not true about baka1969.  he is always telling both sides of the story and is constantly knocking sense into me about gear.
by exotic, do you mean expensive?  so you must not put any weight into what headphone addict, skylab, and other people on here say?  i assure you, there are people with good and bad gear that will tell you their perspective is absolutely 100% truth. i tend to want to try things myself AFTER seeking advise from the great ppl on the site. by know i think i know who has the same audio ideals and tastes i do.  
 

 

[Lunatique]

Quote:

 
By an affordable parametric EQ, do you mean kind of an Audyssey MultEQ for headphone rigs?
Interesting. Do you have any recommendations?

I think most people will do just fine using a free quality EQ like Easy-Q from re-met.com. You can't really try to measure with standard pro audio measuring mic and then correct the frequency response, since that's not headphones are measured--you need one of those expensive dummy heads with measuring mic inside the ear canal. I've tried using a CD and having the mic through the hole, but I doubt that's all that accurate. So in the end, I do it by ear. Since my reference monitors and my studio are treated/corrected to be as flat as possible, I just compare the headphone to the monitors and then tweak. If the Audyssey ever makes a product that tests headphones, I'm sure it'll sell very well though.
 

 

[baka1969]

Quote:Originally Posted by pp312 

"Just to make my point clear without quoting your post or getting into fine details: your goals and standards in hi-fi are your own business; what I'm cautioning about is you or any poster making recommmendations based on standards which may be completely irrelevant to the enquirer. I believe you did that in another thread when you advised against the OP buying a 650 because he was listening to MP3 files. I don't intend to fight that battle again, but like yourself, neither do I intend to back down from my beliefs and standards nor stand by while enquirers are being given poor, misleading and expensive advice.   
Oh, and on a personal note, the 650 is my favourite headphone and I thought the Grado SR80 was the worst HP I'd ever heard. Just goes to show that one man's audio bargain can be the next man's total rubbish."

Suggesting to someone that they should upgrade from mp3 files to lossless files is hardly irrelevant. It's an improvement. I've also addressed the issues in this thread and commented about them.

 

[Zida]

Quote:

Suggesting to someone that they should upgrade from mp3 files to lossless files is hardly irrelevant. It's an improvement. I've also addressed the issues in this thread and commented about them.

I haven't seen the thread you guys are talking about so I don't know exactly what was said, but I would never deter someone away from a great headphone just because they still use MP3. I personally still have yet to find the difference between 192kbps and flac. I make sure to retest it every time I upgrade my rig and I'm right now up to HE-6. The quality of recording / mastering makes a waaaay bigger difference than having a lossless rip. IF there's something missing it would become apparent to him on his newer better headphones, no need to talk him out of it.

 

[Armaegis]

I have to agree with that. 192kbps is about my threshhold for reliably picking out lossy vs lossless, and heck on some songs even 128kbps can be difficult to pick out when the tracks are acoustically simple. Older encodings (and I'm talking at least 5+ years ago) had more issues with encoding artifacts, but modern ones are quite clean. A good or bad recording/mastering will show through regardless of mp3 quality.
 
One area where I find encoding artifacts really become prominent is when converting from one format to another. This was really bad years ago when people would muck around with their itunes libraries not really knowing what they were doing, rip their cds not knowing aac was the default, then later converting their libraries into mp3. Yuck.
 
So in summary, I blame itunes