[Trogdor]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sovkiller What about if I tell you that I have heard some that will beat the dust of some very good reviewed headphone amps...??? Nik right now is using a Leben integrated amp, a classic push-pull tube amp, nothing fancy in design, and he absolutely love it, he sold of his expensive headphone amps, so IMO there is nothing written in stone here yet... I'm testing right now a Marantz PM7200 and the PM7001 is on the way also, to keep one at the end, and the 7001 has a dedicated section with buffers for headphone driving, there is an after-though circuit, and both sound very very good as headphone amps, very clean, and with guts enough to drive anything... Some vintage amps are very good sounding amps and very good driving headphones, all you need is clean sounding amp, to make a headphone sound and do not show the noise floor....typically not a problem with speakers, specially the hiss...Over this you will have a tone network just in case you need to for some recordings, non of the headphone amps I have seen so far have it with a very few exceptions of bass boost.. Of course a very good dedicated headphone amp, will sound better but the price is ten times as much also...if you have the means go for it, if you do not, just get an old vintage good amp....and be happy...

And Sov, I'm telling you that that output stage is a complete after thought in the receiver/amps design. A complete after thought...

 

[BluePhone]

Hendrix, the K1000 is meant to be driven from the speaker outs, so it comes (at least mine did) with cable with 4 exposed wires for the speaker out. All I did was stick them in, tightened them and I was up and running.

 

[russedelic]

I thought I was getting pretty fine sound running my 701s through my Adcom 565 preamp. It has a pretty highly regarded headphone section.

However, once I tried the Musical Fidelity X-can v.3 and then my Granite 823, the difference was like night and day. The preamp sound was limited, constricted, and harsh. I strongly recommend at least trying a headphone amp; there's good companies out there that give you a 30 money back guarantee. You'd only be out a few bucks for shipping.

rr

 

[jacdan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by dokebi /img/forum/go_quote.gif With bass, mid and treble control, a lot of people enjoy the colored sound from receivers much more than standalone headphone amps. I recently listened to an old sony receiver and it was a fresh and fun change from the clinical and relatively colorless sound of my headphone amps.

x2. My old Sony A/V Receiver adds much more punch to the sound than my headphone amp and stopped me from buying another pair of headphones which I really don't need. For my sonic enjoyment, I need to have something that allows me to "color" the sound to my liking, accurate or not.

 

[Penchum]

There is also the issue of "how much energy is used to enjoy headphones". Many dedicated headphone amps draw very little power (20-35 watts) and many vintage high-end receivers/integrated amps draw between 150-300 watts.

This may not be the most important or favorite aspect in anyones decision making, but it should be included non the less. We have to start caring about this power usage subject sometime in the near future, so it can't hurt to be looking at it now, IMHO of course.

I did a quick check of my current favorite late night listening setup, to see how much power I was using. My Zune80 playing lossless files draws less than 1 watt, and my MKV SS headphone amp draws 12 watts. So, I can have decent SQ and only draw 13 watts total, about 1/4 the draw of a standard light bulb!!

For a better sound quality listening session, I can change the sources to my Notebook (average 22 watts) and my Zero DAC (10 watts) hooked to a pre-amp (13 watts) and use them with the MKV SS amp (12 watts), the new total is only 57 watts, still less than a standard light bulb!

Using a larger amount of power to drive speakers makes total sense, and my vintage equipment does just that.

However, listening to headphones seems like the perfect situation for using less power (especially during the more expensive on-peak hours), while still enjoying excellent SQ.

How much power are we using for headphone audio? Many users have no idea. I think this is worth checking into and many will be surprised. IMHO and YMMV of course.

 

[pp312]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Trogdor /img/forum/go_quote.gif Absolutely not. What they typically do is split a wire off the main line and put some huge reisistor on it, i.e. the deisgn of the headphone amp is typically a complete after thought! Get a dedicated headphone amp...its worth it....

This same post, with only slight variations, is still appearing in different threads, so it's worth taking a closer look at it. Firstly, there's nothing wrong with taking a line from the main amp for the HP out; it at least ensures that the HP user is hearing the same amp that got 5 stars in ye olde Hi-Fi World mag, or whatever. Second, there's a note of hysteria in the term "huge resistor". The output is likely to pass through one 220 to 330 ohm resistor per channel--hardly likely to be audible in an amp already chockers with components. There may be some marginal effect on low impedance phones due to high output impedance but it may not necessarily be detrimental--indeed many comments in other threads suggests the opposite. The effect on high impedance phones will almost certainly be nill. The overall difference between typical dedicated amps and well designed speaker amps appears to be a slightly looser bass on the latter due to poorer damping, but again, this is often as not described as an improvement, as more accurate bass can seem a little dry with many phones. So the question is nowhere near as cut and dried as Trogdor then, and maybe now, believe in subjective terms, and anyone with an opportunity to try a good brand (Marantz, NAD, Rotel) speaker amp with their phones should grab it; it could save them a bundle.

 

[pp312]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penchum /img/forum/go_quote.gif There is also the issue of "how much energy is used to enjoy headphones". Many dedicated headphone amps draw very little power (20-35 watts) and many vintage high-end receivers/integrated amps draw between 150-300 watts.

Penchum, I actually consider this the most valid reason for getting a dedicated amp, far more so than sound quality. In fact it's the reason I decided to get a Cute Beyond (plus it was cheap on Ebay

) when I already had a nice sounding integrated. But dedicateds are inconvenient and limited. You still need a switching device to use multiple sources (CD, Tuner, TV, DVD etc). Many people, despite using mainly phones, still have speakers for the TV. Integrateds on the other hand do use a heap of power when just used for phones. I'm in the process of selling my beloved Marantz PM6010 (50 watts) for that reason, but I've tried to find a half way measure by buying a 25 watt Marantz "lifestyle" system--receiver/CD player. I'm lucky in that it sounds at least as good as the PM6010, which I wasn't expecting (it even beats the Cute with Supplier), but I'm probably fooling myself that it saves much power, especially given that it puts out heat almost like a Class A. I guess what's needed is for some manufacturer to put out a low power integrated especially for phones, which has many inputs and will drive speakers to medium levels. Won't happen of course so we continue to search for a compromise.

 

[tfarney]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pp312 /img/forum/go_quote.gif This same post, with only slight variations, is still appearing in different threads, so it's worth taking a closer look at it. Firstly, there's nothing wrong with taking a line from the main amp for the HP out; it at least ensures that the HP user is hearing the same amp that got 5 stars in ye olde Hi-Fi World mag, or whatever. Second, there's a note of hysteria in the term "huge resistor". The output is likely to pass through one 220 to 330 ohm resistor per channel--hardly likely to be audible in an amp already chockers with components. There may be some marginal effect on low impedance phones due to high output impedance but it may not necessarily be detrimental--indeed many comments in other threads suggests the opposite. The effect on high impedance phones will almost certainly be nill. The overall difference between typical dedicated amps and well designed speaker amps appears to be a slightly looser bass on the latter due to poorer damping, but again, this is often as not described as an improvement, as more accurate bass can seem a little dry with many phones. So the question is nowhere near as cut and dried as Trogdor then, and maybe now, believe in subjective terms, and anyone with an opportunity to try a good brand (Marantz, NAD, Rotel) speaker amp with their phones should grab it; it could save them a bundle.

What he said. I'm not even sure the "bass control" issue is going to be real for most folks as the amount of control any amp exercises over bass is variable and dependent on several things, not the least of which is the power supply. High-quality integrateds of modern design and even mid-fi from the 70s generally have very hefty power supplies. Some integrateds and receivers will have better bass control than some dedicated HP amps and vice versa. The bottom line is generalizations are bogus. Use your ears.

Tim

 

[Penchum]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pp312 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Penchum, I actually consider this the most valid reason for getting a dedicated amp, far more so than sound quality. In fact it's the reason I decided to get a Cute Beyond (plus it was cheap on Ebay ) when I already had a nice sounding integrated. But dedicateds are inconvenient and limited. You still need a switching device to use multiple sources (CD, Tuner, TV, DVD etc). Many people, despite using mainly phones, still have speakers for the TV. Integrateds on the other hand do use a heap of power when just used for phones. I'm in the process of selling my beloved Marantz PM6010 (50 watts) for that reason, but I've tried to find a half way measure by buying a 25 watt Marantz "lifestyle" system--receiver/CD player. I'm lucky in that it sounds at least as good as the PM6010, which I wasn't expecting (it even beats the Cute with Supplier), but I'm probably fooling myself that it saves much power, especially given that it puts out heat almost like a Class A. I guess what's needed is for some manufacturer to put out a low power integrated especially for phones, which has many inputs and will drive speakers to medium levels. Won't happen of course so we continue to search for a compromise.

Thanks PP312,

After switching things around for a while, I settled on using my Yamaha C-40 pre-amp, for signal routing. It's clean (and old) and draws little power. It also has two full tape loops, so I can have two headphone amps hooked up to it at once, and several inputs too. It has turned out to be a very good choice overall.

 

[seaice]

What is the quality of nowadays in-receiver integrated head-amps concerned, I own the Yamaha RX-797 quite a long time and the headphone output is very good. I am also a fresh owner of LD MKV head-amp and I must say, the LD sounds better to me (especially in stereo imaging and the overall impression of the sound, maybe more detailed...). But I must concretize my first impressions of LD MKV in several weeks (months) of listening. I plan to compare it with the yamaha closer in the near future.

 

[wyki]

I have an Onkyo MC 35 TECH mini system.  I use it exclusively with my vintage 300 ohm Sennheiser headphones (HD 530, which is more like a 580/600 than like a 595).  The receiver in this system is R-805X.  It has WRAT (wide range amplifier technology).  It is excellent, very full yet very clear.  I think that any Onkyo amp with WRAT will be very satisfying.  I don't know whether it would work well with the 600 ohm Beyerdynamic DT880; I'm tempted to try.  In any case, at the price of an Onkyo 8555 or a used model with WRAT, I suspect you would be hard pressed to get a headphone amp of equal quality.  Of course, it is more space.

 

[pp312]

Yes, I have a quality Sony mini system on standby, and I find the sound excellent when driving my 650. Many mini systems, especially those by Onkyo, Denon and Yamaha, are as good as any highly regarded integrateds (or, dare I say it, many dedicated HP amps).

 

[vo328]

I have found that most vintage Sansui and Marantz models I've heard tend to sound a bit too warm for my taste.

 

[pp312]

I'm not a fan of vintage amps. Personally I think the golden age of most of the good manufacturers (Marantz, NAD, Rotel etc) was the mid-80s to late 90s, up to just before HT amps began to take over.

 

[Canuck57]

 
Quote:

I'm not a fan of vintage amps. Personally I think the golden age of most of the good manufacturers (Marantz, NAD, Rotel etc) was the mid-80s to late 90s, up to just before HT amps began to take over.

 
 
The quality of manufacturing/parts declined significantly for Marantz, Luxman, Yamaha, Pioneer, Sansui, etc., after 1980. Here's a quote from a vintage gear website. I have many vintage (pre- 1980) receivers & integrated amps. which sound fantastic. My main amp. is a Sansui AU-7900 from the late 70s.
 
http://www.classicaudio.com/value/san/AU7900.html
 
What the heck happened in 1980?
The exact date varies from brand to brand, but the bottom fell out of the build quality. Manufacturers sacrificed quality for production speed and started aiming at the 'general' market instead of the 'audiophile' market. Analog tuners were replaced with digital tuners. Discrete output devices were often replaced with integrated circuits, many of which are no longer available today. Some pre-1980 models used output ICs, and some post 1980 models were still well built.