[headfever]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dana789 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've read on the amp3 threads that the AMP3 was designed to work well with mp3 files encoded at lower rates. Can anyone verify that the AMP3 has special capabilities in this regard? Not sure how one would do such a test, I don't see how a standard ABX would work. I know some folks in this community can describe artifacts found in the typical 128k mp3 in some detail, do any of them think those artifacts are diminished with the AMP3 compared to other players?

I want to share with you of one of my "discover" by a mistake. Once I ripped some tracks directly from CDs, after few hours listening, I felt the sound quality has slightly changed, Then I hook to PC to check the files size, it changed my setting from 320KPS to 128KBPS, I have not noticed it at the first listing. I am amaze the low bit rate processing capability of AMP3.

Then, I try the 96kpbs MP3 files curiously, to my suprise, I can still live with it. the rhythem is still there, only lose few details.

I normally listening to AMP3 with 192KBPS mp3 files, 1/3 are 320kbps.

You have an AMP3 too, you can test it by yourself and share your experies with us.

 

[shigzeo]

Artifacts should not/cannot be diminished by a player claiming to be neutral. I will call it separately: higher resolution MP3 files have more: treble detail, space and high frequency; the AMP3 already has a warbled treble, so extra details may be hard to differentiate anyway. The AMP3 is about signature, not total resolution. If it were really revealing, those 96kbps files would sound harsh as they should sound.

 

[dana789]

thanks to both shigzeo and headfever for your responses. Shigzeo, if I understand you correctly, if AMP3 sounds "better" with lower bitrate mp3s, that's because AMP3 has a signature (a departure from neutrality) that masks the artifacts present in the lower bitrate mp3s. I suspect this means that the higher bit rate mp3s don't sound as good (or as true) as they could with the AMP3.

While I have your attention, let me ask another AMP3 question. Many of my recordings (250kbps mp3s from Amazon, 320kbps ripped with lame) have very prominent sibilance with female vocals (Joan Baez, Alison Krauss). This is true with the PAA-1 that came with the AMP3, my Grado SR80, and my Beyer DT770/80. Are these recordings bad or does the problem lie with my setup? I tried using mp3gain to avoid saturation, that changed nothing.

dana789

 

[sbulack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dana789 /img/forum/go_quote.gif ... I suspect this means that the higher bit rate mp3s don't sound as good (or as true) as they could with the AMP3. dana789

I certainly don't hear the performance of the AMP3 that way. I very much enjoy how the AMP3 units (Pro.1 and Pro.2) present lower bitrate material, especially in cases where I don't have a way to get the material at higher bitrate. But, over the months since August 2009, when I first got the AMP3-Pro.1 and since October (the Pro.2), my music stored on each unit (when I have a choice) and my listening time has shifted to almost exclusively .wav files on the Pro.1, and .flac files on the Pro.2 - mainly because of the additional musical dimensions portrayed by the AMP3 units when they have the information in that higher bitrate available.

In comparing the performance from the AMP3 units using higher bit rate material (320 kbps mp3's, .wav and .flac files) with the performance of the stationary rigs in my sig, I can't bring myself to say that the AMP3 does not sound as good or as true as them in their portrayal. To the contrary in my experience, a fact of my listening since I got my first AMP3 (one that I bring up with an appreciation of the humor in it) is that the AMP3 not only gets most of my listening time, but that it has become my "reference" rig as well. When I get new music, I don't consider myself as "really having heard it" until I hear it as .wav files played on the AMP3 using my full-sized phones (best suited to the music) straight from the AMP3. My other, more costly, rigs do optimize this or that set of the attributes of the music more than the AMP3, but, overall, to my ear, the AMP3 gives me the most satisfying presentation of the content and the impact/message of my music.

 

[dana789]

thanks sbulack, I'm just learning about all this, your comments are very helpful. I've been ripping both flac and 320kbps since I got my Amp3 Pro2 (give the price of disk space these days), but I have lots of old stuff at 128kbps. The 128kbps stuff sounds very good to my ears.

Which of your full-size phones do you like best with your Amp3? I see from your .sig that you have lots of nice 'phones.

dana789

 

[headfever]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dana789 /img/forum/go_quote.gif thanks to both shigzeo and headfever for your responses. Shigzeo, if I understand you correctly, if AMP3 sounds "better" with lower bitrate mp3s, that's because AMP3 has a signature (a departure from neutrality) that masks the artifacts present in the lower bitrate mp3s. I suspect this means that the higher bit rate mp3s don't sound as good (or as true) as they could with the AMP3. While I have your attention, let me ask another AMP3 question. Many of my recordings (250kbps mp3s from Amazon, 320kbps ripped with lame) have very prominent sibilance with female vocals (Joan Baez, Alison Krauss). This is true with the PAA-1 that came with the AMP3, my Grado SR80, and my Beyer DT770/80. Are these recordings bad or does the problem lie with my setup? I tried using mp3gain to avoid saturation, that changed nothing. dana789

I have noticed the sibilance matter recently.One day I found the evident siblance in the noise store, I wondered what had happend? I didn't feel the siblance is bore when i listen AMP3 at home or office. What has happened?

At night, I tested the same tracks again. I found out that the "siblance" is pleasure details. For I can hear the "whole sibilance" processing with every details, the sibilance is very intimate and exactly portrait the mouth expression of the signer. While at the noise environment, I can only hear the sibilance sound but not the details. so, it is boring.

Of course different earphone pairing will have different sibilance level. Be aware, AMP3 has very high resolution and extended highs, so, some times the details are misunderstanding as noise "sibilance". of course, it is depend on one's tolerance. to some one, it could not be the pleasure sibilance.

 

[dana789]

With regard to the sibilance I'm hearing with the AMP3 and all my 'phones, I think I'm dealing with the case of the AMP3's performance exposing poorly mastered tracks. I've listened to the same tracks carefully with my Sanza Fuze with the PAA-1 buds, the sibilance is there as well, maybe a bit less pronounced. I can reduce the sibilance with the EQ on the Fuze, but at the expense of the highs. No thanks.

I think I agree with headfever on this.

 

[dana789]

oops, repeated last entry, sorrry. Don't know how to delete an entry

 

[sbulack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dana789 /img/forum/go_quote.gif ... Which of your full-size phones do you like best with your Amp3? I see from your .sig that you have lots of nice 'phones. dana789

The full-size phones that I use with the AMP3 are:
Beyer DT531
ALO-modded (woodied, recabled) SR225,
HD650 (with ALO Senn replacement cable),
ALO-modded, recabled HFI-780

Which I like best is related to which works best with the particular music that I'm listening to - and my listening mood.
The Beyer DT531 is an overall good fun-listening phone. This phone sounds really good, but is not so involving or have so much punch that it would distract me from working while listening, for example.
The modded-SR225's are best for me when I'm listening to Rock or electric guitar-driven music. I also really enjoy hard-driving electronica on them which, like Rock, makes extensive and prominent use of the treble and bass ranges, such as techno. I DO enjoy pretty much all genres of music using these. It's just that these are the types of music that would induce me to switch to these phones.
The HD650's I like best for music involving more refined, or carefully crafted sound such as electronic and instrumental ambient, as well as orchestral and smaller instrumental ensembles. Spacious trance is also a real treat on these. I also enjoy other types of music with these phones a LOT, but these are the genres that would cause me to switch to using the HD650's.
The ALO-780's I especially enjoy when I want to sink deep into the music and allow my mind to get lost in it. They really are excellent for all genres of music that I enjoy. Not only are they so vivid because of the amount, impact and texture of their bass, but also for their crystalline clarity and the gorgeous intensity with which they portray timbral and tonal aspects of the music. Human voice using these can just send shivers up and down my spine (in the best possible way). It's just too immersive and distractingly beautiful a listen to use these when I might be trying to get something else done at the same time.

And, to my ear, the AMP3 (Pro.1 and Pro.2) drives each of them really well - as compared with the main and bedside rigs in my sig.

It's funny. Writing up this list, I am noticing that I don't use the HF-2 with the AMP3. It's not that I've tried the pairing and do not like it. I've habitually come to think of the HF-2 as joined at the hip with my Mapletree Ear+ HD. Now that I notice this, I'll need to at least try this pairing more. Given the similarities that the HF-2 has with both the modded-SR225 and the HD-650, it seems like there'd be a lot of promise for pairing it with the AMP3.

 

[headfever]

Thank Sublack's reviews on the full size phones paring with AMP3. I have HD 600, AND HD 800, They are good paring. I was thinking to trade one second hand HD 650 to paire with AMP3 for fun. Now it seems I don't need to worry about the match of them.

 

[sbulack]

I've been using my HF-2 with the AMP3-Pro.2 today and I'm really happy with the results. The sound reminds me more of the sound using the AMP3 with the ALO-780 than any of my other phones - but (pleasantly) not AS all-encompassingly immersive nor as attention-rivettingly beautiful, although it is both quite immersive and beautiful. That may seem strange that I am valuing a sound because it is not-as-much-of-a-good-thing, but I do a lot of my listening while I'm working at my computer doing other things. So, I really am happy to find a sound that is very much like the sound that I love so much using the ALO-780 that I can listen to while doing other things without finding myself frequently "awakening" from periods of "WOW!!! Where have I been?". It really is as fine and as high-quality a listen as that to which my other rigs have made me accustomed, from the AMP3-Pro.2 with the HF-2.

My AMP3-Pro.2 (running FW V5.42), in its volume range of 20-25 (depending on the recording level of the source material) is giving my ears all that they can feast on through stock HF-2. Even though the HF-2 are of low impedance, their relatively lesser sensitivity enables their use with the AMP3 with no noticeable hiss, and no other noticeable sonic background artifact, distractions.

 

[dana789]

sbulack, I really enjoyed your comments, esp concerning the subjective aspects. For me, it's all about enjoyment in the end.

My first pair of non-stock phones were ety er6i driven by an iPod and the combination was a revelation (at the time). The er6i hiss badly with the AMP3, but I always liked the signature and the fit. Maybe I'll start saving up for the HF2.

 

[shigzeo]

Funny, the AMP3 I returned to China about 2 months ago came back to me... I am waiting from HiSound to see what happened. Expensive bugger to send once, then have to pay for again. Pretty soon, it will be as expensive as buying another.

But, in the meantime, I might as well hook one up to a TRS and the other to a TRS input and have the AMP3 power my DT880 in balanced operation when they arrive back. My headphones broke recently and Qusp will be rewiring them to work in both SE and Balanced in any format, one being dual mini TRS. So, that will be fun to see how each handle one channel and if it is better than when separate.

 

[dana789]

wow, was I ever confused. I though sbulack was refering to ety hf2, not grado hf-2. I guess I'll be saving up for longer than I thought....

dana789

 

[sbulack]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dana789 /img/forum/go_quote.gif wow, was I ever confused. I though sbulack was refering to ety hf2, not grado hf-2. I guess I'll be saving up for longer than I thought.... dana789

I wasn't aware that Ety (or anyone else, for that matter) had a headphone out designated as the hf2 (however capitalized or hyphenated). If I had known, I'd have specified in my post above that my HF-2 is, as you've come to realize, the Grado HF-2. Now that I know, I'll need to be a little more careful to specify Grado as the manufacturer when I refer to my HF-2. Thanks for catching, and resolving, that ambiguity.