[grawk]

properly drive is an awfully amorphous statement. I'd say that headphone jacks are almost always compromises that can be improved on with a good amp.

 

[Kestrel]

There are players out there that can drive just fine. NJB3 for example has absolutely ludicrous headphone output numbers.

In such cases - you gain absolutely nothing by hooking up an amp. Take a smaller player and stick some ridiculously hard to drive monitors on it and then we've got a problem.

Average 60ohm headphones straight of the ipod curses much of the bass falloff and provides fairly decent sound. The pod can power those just fine. At that point we're looking at recording quality.

 

[IstariAsuka]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kestrel The amp CANNOT make the music "better" - only play it back more true to the original source.

You're getting caught up on an ambiguity of language, I think.

When people say that the amp is making the music better, they mean this: it sounds better with the amp than without it.

You're right, it in no way effects the inherent quality of what's being output by your source, but it DOES effect how well the transducer is able to translate this input into the output that you hear.

Thus, an amp does have an effect on the quality of the music--it effects what you hear. We're not talking abstractly about the innate quality contained on the record. We're talking about how well that is translated to actual sound--and the amp plays a part in that.

Think. By your reasoning if an amp can "adequately drive" headphones, then there's nothing more to it. I take it by adequately drive you mean drive to listenable volumes. So, what if we had an amp with 50% harmonic distortion, but that could amplify the signal to very high levels? Obviously the amp quality has an effect on the sound quality. And, given this, a better amp which distorts less and better powers your transducers is going to sound better than a different amp. Thus yes, for all intents and purposes, making the music "better."

There are other factors in play other than raw mvA output for some given ohmage, which are the figures you're referring to in products like the NJB3. There are distortion considerations, the type of distortion produces (even vs odd), slew rate, and the like. Ask someone more familiar with these things than me, and I'm sure you'll learn quite a bit about it. You're oversimplifying the matter.

 

[grawk]

What it seems is that you're trying to justify not trying an amp...

 

[Spad]

Kestrel, I think you realized somewhere in this discussion that you're wrong and are simply too stubborn to admit it.

Let's take the example of a source that has difficulty driving a relatively low impedance, quality headphone such as the 32 Ohm Sony CD3000. Plugging the headphone output into an amp with a typically high input impedance can cure the problem. This change will most likely be limited to frequency response and, with low sensitivity 'phones, dynamic range. OTOH, any perceived increase in detail will be the result of the amp's enhanced ability to control the drivers, not in the quality of the source's output.

Your "garbage in, garbage out," analogy simply doesn't apply.

 

[Kestrel]

Quote:

What it seems is that you're trying to justify not trying an amp...

I use(d) (and in the future will be using) an amp via a sik din. Ampless at the moment due to financial constraints. Furnishing an apartment is more important than a portable amp at the moment. Nobody said moving off campus was easy

Quote:

Think. By your reasoning if an amp can "adequately drive" headphones, then there's nothing more to it.

Asuka - I do agree with you on many points. I was disagreeing some of the above posters in that there is an improvement in quality when driven through the headphone output. The quality of the amp itself is always in question.

Oversimplifying however? Distortion issues I can understand. But to claim improved musicality / bass / treble / whatever when double amping is a joke... Nothing is going to increase beyond the capabilities of the original amp in this case.

Quote:

Kestrel, I think you realized somewhere in this discussion that you're wrong and are simply too stubborn to admit it.

Oh?

Quote:

Let's take the example of a source that has difficulty driving a relatively low impedance, quality headphone such as the 32 Ohm Sony CD3000.

Lets.

Quote:

Plugging the headphone output into an amp with a typically high input impedance can cure the problem. This change will most likely be limited to frequency response and, with low sensitivity 'phones, dynamic range. OTOH, any perceived increase in detail will be the result of the amp's enhanced ability to control the drivers, not in the quality of the source's output.

Exactly. As I said before - assuming the first amp was driving the phones efficiently and correctly with the proper load - the additional amp through the headphone out will do nothing.

Quote:

Your "garbage in, garbage out," analogy simply doesn't apply.

It does apply. Double amping will not net any gains that the original amp did not. After being processed through the original amp - whatever original music remains is what you get. There is no way to get what was lost back.

 

[Spad]

Kestrel, you must be scouring half the country for enough straw for these constructs.

Straw men notwithstanding, the point is that an amp can, of often does, actually change the output of the source. With an iPod, for example, the low frequency roll off associated with low impedance headphones is eliminated. This isn't supposition, it's a demonstrable fact. You will find this addressed in various threads right here on good ol' Head-Fi.

BTW, when time permits, it would be helpful if you would fill out your profile. A little insight into a member's tastes and experience can be useful in these discussions.

 

[grawk]

The real benefit of amping: more toys.

 

[IstariAsuka]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kestrel Oversimplifying however? Distortion issues I can understand. But to claim improved musicality / bass / treble / whatever when double amping is a joke... Nothing is going to increase beyond the capabilities of the original amp in this case.

Well, if the 2nd amp is of good quality, then it will add very little distortion or coloration of its own over what's already occured, yet the superior and increased power provided by a good amp over a stock amp will allow for better control of the transducers. Hence, since the transducers will be behaving better, this may very well result in better bass, or treble, or whatever. It will be more true to the source, since the better control of the transducer will allow it to perform at a higher level.

The only reason double amping like this is detrimental, as far as I can tell, is because you wind up with additional distortion due to amping twice. However, the gains that may be made in transducer articulation could very well be much above the loss from slight increases in distortion. Hence, amping a portable in this way makes sense.

 

[Kestrel]

Quote:

With an iPod, for example, the low frequency roll off associated with low impedance headphones is eliminated. This isn't supposition, it's a demonstrable fact. You will find this addressed in various threads right here on good ol' Head-Fi.

I know it

Not fighting that whatsoever. Load on the line really does help the bass issue for the Pod.

 

[fewtch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kestrel Good Source + Good Recording + Ability to Drive Phones + Phones = Quality music. That's all there is to it. Simple. Amp into a headphone out? And you claim the amp is giving you more detail? Ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.

Your snooty, dismissive "holier-than-thou" attitude isn't going to win you any brownie points around here. I'd be willing to bet you've never even tried the experiment yourself, you merely want to wave your d*ck around and proclaim the superiority of your knowledge. Get lost.

P.S. I'm a big proponent of "source first" when it comes to analog gear, but IMO with digital it's closer to source LAST. DACs and supporting electronics have gotten so good and cheap that differences between reasonable-quality gear have gotten very small indeed. IMO it should be "headphones first" (which make by far the biggest difference) followed by amps, then sources, then cables and such. But of course, all this is probably too complex for your flat-earth way of thinking.

 

[Kestrel]

You don't seem to be living up to your Budget Hi-Fi Guy name. I'm more surprised with your attitude than anything else. I also consider myself to be one of the ultimate bang for the buck type guys and am always interested in the maximum gains for the minimum dollars. Amps providing diminishing returns which in many cases is not worth shelling out multiple hundreds over your basic good quality amp. It's necessary to have a basic understanding of how things work to achieve the maximum gain for your dollar. In many cases folks are spending extra where they may have not needed to. Are you in it for yourself or for the benefit of the general populous here?

 

[fewtch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kestrel Are you in it for yourself or for the benefit of the general populous here?

What a stupid question. I'm in it for myself, of course. Are you about to proclaim yourself a saint now, who posts here for the benefit of the community? That would really fit your general attitude to a "T."

 

[grawk]

Biggest bang for the buck seems to be in the order stated above:

phones first
then amp
then source
then cables

find phones that sound the way you like
then add an amp that can drive them to your liking
THEN get a source that drives the amp to it's limits

If you have a madrigal, and plug a cmoy into it then a pair of koss 75s, you won't appreciate what you get from the madrigal

If you have koss 75s, and plug them into a dynahi, you won't appreciate the differences you get from the dynahi

But I DO notice a difference with my dynahi compared to my supermacro plugged into the headphone out on my powerbook with my PS1s. A significant difference. Was the difference as great with the MPX3 vs the dynahi? No. It was a difference, but not as drastic. Do I notice MORE of a difference with the sacd player as the source? Yes...but I generally listen from the powerbook anyway. Because it's more convenient to have 120gb of music vs 1 hour at a time. And a good amp helps. An apogee minidac is on my list to get, but I wouldn't give up my dynahi to get a $1000 cd player.

 

[Kestrel]

I'd swap amp and source but at least we agree on cables last and phones first

Have a nice evening.