[U-3C]

As for one-size-fits-all, IMHO CEntrance DACPort Slim is the best semi-portable solution for both laptops and smartphones. 

Just gonna chime in. Although it's a decent device, I'm not really a big fan of supporting that company.

---------

^^ Ignore my little rant.

The DACport Slim has some driver issues and a relatively high noise floor. Might not be an issue with planars, but if you also plan to use it with more sensitive IEMs, hiss may become an issue.

In the end, the best way to know is to see if you can test something yourself. There are too many variables so it's impossible to check one by one by chatting online, especially when the most useful info are the ones that companies spend so much efforts to hide (which is why you often hear the statement: specs don't tell the whole story. They can, which is why you never get accurate specs or entire data sheets).

An amplifier... Amplifies sound. Everyone has different preferences. Try to get the best headphones that suit you. It's difficult, and sometimes you may talk yourself into getting something, only to realise that you misunderstood something (such as other people's vague impressions, or even your own description if what you like. Happens to everyone, including me. ). After that, if there are issues, for example, you cannot get the volume you want, then consider an amp to amplify your sound. Now, if the headphones don't sound good, don't blame it on the amp. The headphone has its sound. That's how it is made to sound. There is the sound signature that you subjectively prefer, and there is the sound that the company making the headphone is trying to achieve. Won't assume an amp will fix it and give you the sound you like, as it is a gamble. Take some time to get used to the headphones, as sudden changes may come as a shock (personal example: I used to hate bass heavy headphones and prefer more neutral ones. Once, I has access only to my very bassy setup, so I listened to that for weeks. After I got my old setup back, I couldn't bear the headphones I once lived because everything sounds tinny. They weren't damaged. I just had to giver my brain a whole to adjust). If you still don't like it, unless you got access to an amp that colours the sound in exactly the way you like it, I highly recommend against getting an expensive amp based on other people's impressions. Reason is that what sounds good to them may not sound good to you. If you can, see if you can change the headphones into something you like instead.

If the headphones are simply too quiet, get an amp. Personally, I'm not a big fan of tube amps. I'm okay with them once in q whole, but I always switch back to a neutral amp to get back what I lost. Others love them and cringe at my setup. Get something that suits you, has the features you want, and use it to get the volume loud enough. For any changes, I usually use dsp, which transforms music completely compared to multi thousand dollar setups I've tested.

Finally, if you hear a lot of interference and noise and there are no problems with your amp and computer, them maybe you can consider a DAC. Of course, even high end DACs may have poor shielding, so don't expect price to justify your purchases. Get a DAC that does not distort sound or add noise, and you should be good to go. The reason people claim that DACs sound the same is because it has one job: to convert digital signals to analogue signals. If it does it perfectly, you should get the same sound, as it's the same digital file. However, depending on the implementation, things may sound different. This seems to be the case with high end DACs, where they sometimes intentionally distort the sound to sound different? Though you can do the same thing yourself with EQ and such???!!! :blink: However, when properly implemented, there should be no reason to not get a fully transparent sound, as even cheap onboard can be very good (yes, many onboard audio are terrible, but hey, I prefer all my onboard as they are less noisy than my dedicated DAC which everyone praises!).

Intentionally changing the sound by design does work. You have an entire industry based on that. However, it is very vague, and unless you can get your hands on a loaner unit to try something out for a while, it's very hard for you to accurately predict if you like the sound or not.

I'll use the example of he-who-shall-not-be-named: say you have a cup of water that is 38 degree Celsius. Your right hand is 36 degrees. Your left one is 40 degrees. One will say it's hot, the other will say it's cold. Neither is wrong. Saying something is a good pairing, that it has good synergy, that it sounds great is kinda useless. Just look at the people who swear by the O2, and the people who swear against it. There really isn't a common language on these forums either, so terms are very vague. What you think is what you are looking for may be completely different from what you have read.

This is why I recommend unless you are experienced, get something dear neutral and play with dsp to get the sound you like. Play it safe until you are sure.

Or be stubborn like me and stick with onboard even though there is a tube amp glowing in front of me. ^_^


*btw, I'm probably the most uneducated person on the forum. Everyone feel free to correct my illogical ramble so I can behave properly.

 

[GuyUnder]

Here are images from two different headphone amplifiers.

First, the O2:

Second, the Master-9:

As we can see there's a lot more going on in the latter. As it turns out, all of those extra components do things.

I very much doubt anyone who has heard both of these amps would prefer the O2.

 

[skhan007]

Great thread and great info thus far! I'm new to the whole audiophile world, but understand all that's being discussed with perceptions and placebo effect, as I work in neuroscience. That being said, I purchased my first set of audiophile cans a couple of weeks ago; Sennheiser HD800's, and I love them. I tested about maybe 8 or so different headphones and settled on these. I'm listening to my lossless files through an Apogee Duet, which I have used for years in a home recording studio environment. 
 
I listened to a couple of other DACs at the high fi shop and noted that some DACs that are reported to be "warmer" or other adjectives I can't remember, are essentially doing exactly the same thing as my current DAC- This led me to believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that slight tweaks in my EQ can likely match what I heard with other DACs (we were playing music files in 16/44 and 24/96).
 
Regarding tube amps, I'm told that if my DAC can't properly drive my cans, then to consider a tube amp or amp in general. If my sound is lacking "body" or "depth" etc., I should also seek out an amp. Maybe those adjectives can't be addressed with EQ? I don't know. I'm new at this. 

 

[Morkai]

Here are images from two different headphone amplifiers.

First, the O2:

Second, the Master-9:

As we can see there's a lot more going on in the latter. As it turns out, all of those extra components do things.

I very much doubt anyone who has heard both of these amps would prefer the O2.

There is more things in the master 9. Surely it must sound better. To answer the OP question, you must weight your amp before buying. It there isn't enought things in it it won't sound good. Hope I helped. 

 

[GuyUnder]

Great thread and great info thus far! I'm new to the whole audiophile world, but understand all that's being discussed with perceptions and placebo effect, as I work in neuroscience. That being said, I purchased my first set of audiophile cans a couple of weeks ago; Sennheiser HD800's, and I love them. I tested about maybe 8 or so different headphones and settled on these. I'm listening to my lossless files through an Apogee Duet, which I have used for years in a home recording studio environment. 

I listened to a couple of other DACs at the high fi shop and noted that some DACs that are reported to be "warmer" or other adjectives I can't remember, are essentially doing exactly the same thing as my current DAC- This led me to believe (correct me if I'm wrong) that slight tweaks in my EQ can likely match what I heard with other DACs (we were playing music files in 16/44 and 24/96).

Regarding tube amps, I'm told that if my DAC can't properly drive my cans, then to consider a tube amp or amp in general. If my sound is lacking "body" or "depth" etc., I should also seek out an amp. Maybe those adjectives can't be addressed with EQ? I don't know. I'm new at this. 

EQ can adjust tonal color, but will be useless for changing the character of an amp, DAC, or headphones. You have the HD800 -- could you imagine being able to replicate them with one of your cheap headphones with just EQ? There are other aspects such as speed, time domain and impedance curve that go into making the HD800 sound the way they do. Likewise there are several factors that go into an amp sounding the way they do. Volume is simply a function of power vs sensitivity and impedance. Slew rate, time domain, power supply, noise, distortion, etc, go into making an amp sound "dimensional", "full", etc and so on.

The Duet is a $600 product and so is probably superior to 90% of users' DACs on the Sound Science forum. For a meaningful upgrade try listenining to a hardware-balanced DAC, a high-end NOS DAC and a R2R DAC. You'd be looking at a full-sized DAC unit with built-in power transformers.

Tube amps will add a layer of noise to the signal which will add to an illusion of dimension, warmth and texture to sound. For a somewhat similar experience in the world of solid state amp, look into designs that use discrete class A (i.e., class A using MOSFET / JFET). The HD800 is very microscopic (revealing) and will not take kindly to poor matches.

 

[watchnerd]

As we can see there's a lot more going on in the latter. As it turns out, all of those extra components do things.

 
Here is a modern laptop motherboard.  Look how tiny it is.  All those surface mount components and integrated circuits. It's so small.  It must be a horrible performer.
 

 
 
 
 
But here is ENIAC, one of the world's first computers.  Look how much there is going on!  All those components do things! It must be better!
 

 
 
 
If that alone isn't a clue, here is another: older tech in electronics, including audio, is bigger than newer tech. It's a consequence of Moore's law.  
 
If I was going to make any generalization about size and weight for audio electronics it's that, all other things being equal, bigger / heavier may indicate that older technology (discrete components, linear power supplies) are being used.  That's not a comment on which sounds better.  But to say something bigger has "more going on", with no qualifications or circuit examination, is so ignorant of the process and history of electronics miniaturization that it must be called out.

 

[Morkai]

 
Regarding tube amps, I'm told that if my DAC can't properly drive my cans, then to consider a tube amp or amp in general. If my sound is lacking "body" or "depth" etc., I should also seek out an amp. Maybe those adjectives can't be addressed with EQ? I don't know. I'm new at this. 

Tube are good for high power RF transmitter or microwave oven.. We are in 2017. No amp, preamp or (geez..) cd player need a tube. What's wrong with tube ?  What's wrong with gold teeth ? nothing. Moderns dentists just have better option. Everything that a tube can do, can be done better without tube, for less $$, and more reliability.
What about "tube sound" ? Either it comes from the mind of the audiophile, or it's a deliberate sound coloration introduced by the manufacturer in order to maintain altered preferences. In this case, even without  tube, one could easily imitate said sound coloration.

 

[Morkai]

 
If I was going to make any generalization about size and weight for audio electronics it's that, all other things being equal, bigger / heavier may indicate that older technology (discrete components, linear power supplies) are being used.  That's not a comment on which sounds better.  But to say something bigger has "more going on", with no qualifications or circuit examination, is so ignorant of the process and history of electronics miniaturization that it must be called out.

This begs a question : is audiophile hobby a penis size contest ?

 

[rlpaul]

I cringe at that Master 9 board.
 
KISS applies in audio. The less 'stuff' in the audio path, the better, generally speaking. That's why something like the O2 can sound surprisingly good. When proper engineering is applied, it doesn't have to be huge, heavy, and complex. Generally, the opposite happens.

 

[asymcon]

EQ can adjust tonal color, but will be useless for changing the character of an amp, DAC, or headphones. You have the HD800 -- could you imagine being able to replicate them with one of your cheap headphones with just EQ? There are other aspects such as speed, time domain and impedance curve that go into making the HD800 sound the way they do. 

You can readily replicate sound of other (even more expensive) headphones using EQ. But as you said that's not enough. "Speed" and "time domain" aren't those things though. Mainly it's about reflections (ER and LR) and phase. But there are models which, quite accurately can mimic the sound of other headphones and/or compensate for frequency variations so that the sound is perfectly flat. 
Compare two references and negate EQ. I don't recall the name of that software, but I should be able to find it with relative ease, if anyone's interested.

 

[watchnerd]

 
This begs a question : is audiophile hobby a penis size contest ?

 
Any comment I have on this would be devoid of evidence and I don't want to get involved in the kind of anatomy study that would be required to meet Sound Science standards.

 

[watchnerd]

  I cringe at that Master 9 board.
 
KISS applies in audio. The less 'stuff' in the audio path, the better, generally speaking. That's why something like the O2 can sound surprisingly good. When proper engineering is applied, it doesn't have to be huge, heavy, and complex. Generally, the opposite happens.

 
+1
 
Active components add self-noise.  
 
One should have as few as needed to meet design goals.

 

[asymcon]

  I cringe at that Master 9 board.
 
KISS applies in audio. The less 'stuff' in the audio path, the better, generally speaking. That's why something like the O2 can sound surprisingly good. When proper engineering is applied, it doesn't have to be huge, heavy, and complex. Generally, the opposite happens.

Other amps in O2 price/performance range tend to be also power hogs. O2 can surprisingly manage with very little power (about 300mW idle and over 1.3W on full power). If that's not enough its op-amps can be switched for OPA2277 and TLE2062 for even lower idle consumption (140mW) and still admirable output of 5Vrms into 600Ohm at under 1% THD+N. I don't know of a single headphone amp, which could surpass those numbers. 

 
Less is often more
 
PS: For comparison, tubes are often rated over 20W. 
 

 
penis size contest

I believe the correct term is dick measuring contest. 

 

[istfleur]

"The Duet is a $600 product and so is probably superior to 90% of users' DACs on the Sound Science forum. For a meaningful upgrade try listenining to a hardware-balanced DAC, a high-end NOS DAC and a R2R DAC. You'd be looking at a full-sized DAC unit with built-in power transformers. "
I've been following this thread with passion, reading all comments.
I'm no expert, but these can't be considered as a valid argument.
I find these disrespectful and ignorant.
I laughed when you post the pics of the boards of the amps and claiming as there are more components in one it should be better. This is so funny.

 

[skhan007]

EQ can adjust tonal color, but will be useless for changing the character of an amp, DAC, or headphones. You have the HD800 -- could you imagine being able to replicate them with one of your cheap headphones with just EQ? There are other aspects such as speed, time domain and impedance curve that go into making the HD800 sound the way they do. Likewise there are several factors that go into an amp sounding the way they do. Volume is simply a function of power vs sensitivity and impedance. Slew rate, time domain, power supply, noise, distortion, etc, go into making an amp sound "dimensional", "full", etc and so on.

The Duet is a $600 product and so is probably superior to 90% of users' DACs on the Sound Science forum. For a meaningful upgrade try listenining to a hardware-balanced DAC, a high-end NOS DAC and a R2R DAC. You'd be looking at a full-sized DAC unit with built-in power transformers.

Tube amps will add a layer of noise to the signal which will add to an illusion of dimension, warmth and texture to sound. For a somewhat similar experience in the world of solid state amp, look into designs that use discrete class A (i.e., class A using MOSFET / JFET). The HD800 is very microscopic (revealing) and will not take kindly to poor matches.

Thank you so much for this feedback. Head-Fi is such a great education and I appreciate the insight and suggestions. You're mentioning some DAC terms I'm not familiar with. Could you offer some suggestions of specific DACs you're referring to? I'd like to get out to hi-fi meets and hear some of these with my HD800s and see what difference/improvement, if any, I would notice. It's also good to have some validation that my Apogee Duet is a good product. It's excellent for home studio recording, but I wasn't sure about its merits in hi-fi applications. It certainly sounds good to me, but what do I know at this point? Good feedback on the tube amps- I'm naturally biased towards tube amps, as I'm a guitarist and vintage Marshall and Fender guitar amps are about as good as it gets for my tastes in music. I had held an assumption that they (tube amps) would be equally as blissful for hi-fi, but perhaps not, given what folks are suggesting on this thread. My Duet seems to drive my HD800s just fine, so I'm not even sure I need any amp at all; but perhaps I should be open-minded about solid state for this application.