[slwiser]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EliasGwinn /img/forum/go_quote.gif The DAC1 does produce a 'true' balanced signal. However, regardless of the source (two DAC's, balanced analog drivers, whatever...), we simply have no reason to believe balanced headphones provide any performance advantages. We have read the statements HeadRoom has made concerning this technology, and we have engaged in discussions regarding the validity of the claimed advantages. You can read about it on this post: http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/...pic=53801&st=0 Not only is there no clear advantages, there is a MAJOR DISADVANTAGE in that it will double the source impedance seen by the headphones (which will halve the damping factor). So, from an engineering perspective, balanced headphones does not seem like a good idea. We are always open to engaging in analytical discussion on the matter. Also, if there is a real reason to believe this configuration is advantageous, we would absolutely be in favor of advancing the technology. Until then, we are considering it unfounded. Thanks, Elias

Elias

With this you are taking on one of the newest "religions" here on Head-Fi. Many are moving about as fast as they can to jump onto the train. I hope others engage you since I would like to see a vigorous debate from those who can actually set things up to test this tenet of the balanced system for headphones.

 

[EliasGwinn]

Quote:

Originally Posted by slwiser /img/forum/go_quote.gif Elias With this you are taking on one of the newest "religions" here on Head-Fi. Many are moving about as fast as they can to jump onto the train. I hope others engage you since I would like to see a vigorous debate from those who can actually set things up to test this tenet of the balanced system for headphones.

I certainly want people to understand that we are not rejecting the idea of balanced headphones. We simply wish to determine the legitimacy of its claimed advantages, and we are open to discuss the idea with anyone who is interested in analyzing the technology.

When analyzing new technologies to explore and develop, Benchmark does not simply follow consumer trends, but instead, strives to determine and develop technologies which truly progress the state of the art.

And, just as a doctor doesn't guess when he is prescribing medicine (hopefully

), we will not resort to guessing when it comes to developing superior audio technology.

That should not imply that we only bench-test without listening. I, personally, listen to our products on a regular basis at home and at a recording studio where I moonlight. I listen along side, and in combination with, lots of other audio gear (pre's, amps, monitors, headphones, mics, compressors, eq's, etc.). I know from experience that specs and graphs don't tell the whole story, but designing intelligently does.

Oh my, I just ranted again, didn't I?

Thanks,
Elias

 

[EliasGwinn]

Oh and one more thing.....

Have a great weekend everybody!

Thanks,
Elias

 

[Tassie Devil]

Quote:

Originally Posted by music_man /img/forum/go_quote.gif this guy just shows up on this board. after we just got done complaining about this thread turning into a sales pitch for modders. i don't know about you guys but i am smelling some bs here. if i am wrong i do apologize. seems sketchy though. music_man

You are rather offensively suspicious Music Man. Why on earth would I be a salesperson for a modder who lives thousands of miles away? Come on, get a life and accept my findings as sincere from someone who only just found this site but who has been dabbling in high quality reproduction for 50 years (not 60 as it took the first 10 years to be able to afford good gear).

And I think Nugent's prices for cabling is over the top and have bought elsewhere. I similarly remain unconvinced that he has found the Nirvana of transport using a laptop and his software. But I'll defend his brilliance at modding a Benchmark any day. I have the proof of the pudding here in a very high end system.

And to reply to another poster, yes, those mods are expensive, but you get what you pay for. Pity Benchmark did not design it better in the first place. I'll get in touch with them to suggest they use Nugent as a consulant although I'd be surprised if they are open minded enough to do that. Such is life.

John

 

[Icarium]

There are actually two Benchmark engineers (One their director) posting on this thread ;p The guy who posted right above you is one of them.

 

[The Monkey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tassie Devil /img/forum/go_quote.gif Pity Benchmark did not design it better in the first place. I'll get in touch with them to suggest they use Nugent as a consulant although I'd be surprised if they are open minded enough to do that. Such is life. John

I think the Benchmark reps posting in this thread have shown they are plenty open-minded.

 

[jpelg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by slwiser /img/forum/go_quote.gif With this you are taking on one of the newest "religions" here on Head-Fi. Many are moving about as fast as they can to jump onto the train. I hope others engage you since I would like to see a vigorous debate from those who can actually set things up to test this tenet of the balanced system for headphones.

I severely doubt that such a discussion would lead to any conclusion other than that there are those people who hear a difference and like it, regardless of what the numbers say.

 

[Tassie Devil]

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Monkey /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think the Benchmark reps posting in this thread have shown they are plenty open-minded.

I hope you are correct Monkey but professional ego can sometrimes be disruptive to logical thought.

However the fact that such a basically good product is so well priced and that price has not risen as a result of such good press gives hope.

I have just written the promised email and will let you guys here know the response.

BTW the comment above about why I suddenly appeared here was spot on.

Audio Asylum was down and I had been working on that essay/review for a week but could not post it there (although I did do so a hour or so ago). A Google search discovered you guys as interested in the Benchmark so I thought my findings would be of interest to you.

But I'm not into headphones so am probably in the wrong slot. But I guess that is not important - it is how to achieve the best sounding music from those silver platters that is of most interest whether it be via headphones or speakers.

John

 

[Jetlag]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EliasGwinn Our objective is to provide the most accurate reproduction and representation of the audio possible, and let the recording speak for itself. We believe, as designers of audio reproduction systems, that we owe it to the musicians/producers/recording engineers to represent the colors and images which they artistically derived. We believe it is not our place to add such impurities, even if it pleases our own subjectivities. If I want to hear such artifacts, I'll add it to my own hi-fi in my house. We use the most accurate measurement equipment and techniques available to achieve our objectives. We will strive and strive for precision and accuracy as we believe it is the crux of engineering fidelity.

I think I love you Elias, will you marry me?

 

[CanMad]

Thanks for your answers Elias.

I often use the Benchmark hooked up to my PC, while working, using my RS-1s from the HP out. I think it is as intended and very accurate, but would agree that it sounds a little thin compared to my Sugden ( which doesn't seem to be very highly regarded around Head-fi these days). I can only get to around the 5th detent (depending on the recording) but I haven't ever messed with the output pads. I can't say I've noticed any channel imbalance though.

My other source is a Townshend 565 (which is a hot rodded Pioneer), I have certainly noticed a wider soundstage using it compared to the Benchmark, and I do wonder if this is artificial? The main reason I got it was because once I got the Benchmark, it meant that my CDs sounded better than my SACDs in a number of ways (particularly the pin point placement of musicians). Also I couldn't pass my copy protected DVD-As to the Benchmark, and with a number of AIX recordings which sounded superb through the Benchmark I wanted that for all my DVD-As (If the recording was good of course, which some are definitely not).

I for one would certainly be interested in hearing a hot rodded Benchmark, and comparing it to my Townshend. But would not be prepared to take the risk of losing it's accuracy for a more euphonic sound if this is what the result of the mods is actually doing, without hearing them for myself first. The benchmark still gets a lot of use in my main system hooked up to my squeezebox 3 playing apple lossless files, when I feel like a random mix of music.

BTW, if anyone hasn't heard an AIX recording through their benchmark, it's really worth doing.

PS John if you do bring the Turbo Benchmark to Melbourne, I'd love to hear it. I could give you a demo of my AKG K1000 rig, might convert you to a sometimes headphone listener!

 

[jules650]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EliasGwinn /img/forum/go_quote.gif And, just as a doctor doesn't guess when he is prescribing medicine (hopefully )

You'd be surprised.

I can't claim to understand it all but thanks for your very informative posts.

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tassie Devil /img/forum/go_quote.gif You are rather offensively suspicious Music Man. Why on earth would I be a salesperson for a modder who lives thousands of miles away? Come on, get a life and accept my findings as sincere from someone who only just found this site but who has been dabbling in high quality reproduction for 50 years (not 60 as it took the first 10 years to be able to afford good gear). And I think Nugent's prices for cabling is over the top and have bought elsewhere. I similarly remain unconvinced that he has found the Nirvana of transport using a laptop and his software. But I'll defend his brilliance at modding a Benchmark any day. I have the proof of the pudding here in a very high end system. And to reply to another poster, yes, those mods are expensive, but you get what you pay for. Pity Benchmark did not design it better in the first place. I'll get in touch with them to suggest they use Nugent as a consulant although I'd be surprised if they are open minded enough to do that. Such is life. John

I think you are out of line. The Benchmark was made at a reasonable price point in mind. Under a grand. I'm sure the engineers of the DAC1 could have made the DAC1 much better but would have made them raise the price. To get the maxed out mods from Steven, you are looking at 2,800..

 

[vcoheda]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EliasGwinn /img/forum/go_quote.gif The DAC1 does produce a 'true' balanced signal. However, regardless of the source (two DAC's, balanced analog drivers, whatever...), we simply have no reason to believe balanced headphones provide any performance advantages.

That is an interesting opinion and I'm sure you and others at Benchmark are experts when it comes to DACs, but I'm not sure how knowledgeable you are when it comes to headphone amps and the benefits of a balanced headphone amplifier. No offense, but in this area, I tend to trust the opinions of Ray Samuels, Justin Wilson over at HeadAmp, and Tyll Hertsens at HeadRoom, as well as others who have spent their lives making amps dedicated for headphone use.

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by EliasGwinn /img/forum/go_quote.gif I certainly want people to understand that we are not rejecting the idea of balanced headphones. We simply wish to determine the legitimacy of its claimed advantages, and we are open to discuss the idea with anyone who is interested in analyzing the technology

Quote:

Originally Posted by EliasGwinn /img/forum/go_quote.gif . When analyzing new technologies to explore and develop, Benchmark does not simply follow consumer trends, but instead, strives to determine and develop technologies which truly progress the state of the art. And, just as a doctor doesn't guess when he is prescribing medicine (hopefully ), we will not resort to guessing when it comes to developing superior audio technology. That should not imply that we only bench-test without listening. I, personally, listen to our products on a regular basis at home and at a recording studio where I moonlight. I listen along side, and in combination with, lots of other audio gear (pre's, amps, monitors, headphones, mics, compressors, eq's, etc.). I know from experience that specs and graphs don't tell the whole story, but designing intelligently does. Oh my, I just ranted again, didn't I? Thanks, Elias

Elias you should really try the 650's balanced through the DAC1 with your Hi Fi gear. I'd be surprised if you thought they sounded bad..

 

[music_man]

i'm sorry tassie devil. i should not have insulted you. i apologize. if you like it thats all that matters. i cannot see how mr. nugent can mod it to be more accurate. maybe add a "flavor" that some people would like. i primarily use it as a reference tool. it is very clean. i'd rather add the coloration elsewhere in the signal chain.

i think benchmark did a great job within it's price point. i wouldn't go saying it is a shame they didn't do better. they did as they intended. many products are made just to sell a product. some will take it. some will leave it. that makes enough sales for such companies. benchmark made what they felt was best from the onset i think. it is not trying to sound good or pleasent. it is trying to sound true to the source. it measures as such. other products have their own sound and also measure likewise.

mr. gwinn,
i used a 0dbfs 1khz solid tone. the sony is louder at nearly 1 volt less. i scoped it. you are correct that sony is full of distortion! so much for sonys flagship sacd player. i guess that is why i am using the benchmark,eh?

music_man