Calling All "Vintage" Integrated/Receiver Owners
Apr 20, 2014 at 12:31 AM Post #12,346 of 19,143
I've found the best headphone out is when I wired a headphone extension cable directly to the speaker outs. Effortless power, high s/n. :D
 
Apr 20, 2014 at 6:10 AM Post #12,347 of 19,143
I've found the best headphone out is when I wired a headphone extension cable directly to the speaker outs. Effortless power, high s/n.
biggrin.gif


Yeah - Yeah, can drive even the most inefficient headphones into meltdown. 
very_evil_smiley.gif

 
Apr 20, 2014 at 10:05 PM Post #12,354 of 19,143
Some of those older Marantz units were monsters and sounded great - smooth and warm.
 
Let us know how it's headphone amp sounds. 
smile_phones.gif

 
Apr 21, 2014 at 2:37 AM Post #12,356 of 19,143
  With some of us it's simply because we can. 
evil_smiley.gif

blink.gif
 ... - if you EVER monitored real music off some really good recording on an oscilloscope ( comparing the input to the power amp with its output  )  , you would quickly learn you can (almost - except with super efficient speakers ) NEVER have enough, let alone too much power. Whether the speakers can use it to convert to sound without selfdestructing is yet another matter ...
 
The peaks that are short enough in duration for humans not to be able to discern them as clipped/distorted
can exceed what we think is "perfect" -  by 6 and more dBs ... Setting the volume so that an amp is always within its clipping capabilities will generally produce too low listening level. ( basically, the same thing as loudness wars in mastering of the CDs these days )
 
That is why tube amplification manufacturers are boasting "their" watts are more "powerful" than transistor variety.
When clipped, tubes behave in much more benign way than transistors - yielding resulting distortion audibly lower. For this distortion during the overload to remain approximately comparable, a transistor amp has to be much more powerful than the tube one - at least twice, preferably 4 times.
 
100 W tube amps are reasonably common - 400 W good sounding trannies are scarce. Monster Pioneer receivers on this thread do come close...
 
Apr 21, 2014 at 7:14 AM Post #12,357 of 19,143
 
blink.gif
 ... - if you EVER monitored real music off some really good recording on an oscilloscope ( comparing the input to the power amp with its output  )  , you would quickly learn you can (almost - except with super efficient speakers ) NEVER have enough, let alone too much power. Whether the speakers can use it to convert to sound without selfdestructing is yet another matter ...
 
The peaks that are short enough in duration for humans not to be able to discern them as clipped/distorted
can exceed what we think is "perfect" -  by 6 and more dBs ... Setting the volume so that an amp is always within its clipping capabilities will generally produce too low listening level. ( basically, the same thing as loudness wars in mastering of the CDs these days )
 
That is why tube amplification manufacturers are boasting "their" watts are more "powerful" than transistor variety.
When clipped, tubes behave in much more benign way than transistors - yielding resulting distortion audibly lower. For this distortion during the overload to remain approximately comparable, a transistor amp has to be much more powerful than the tube one - at least twice, preferably 4 times.
 
100 W tube amps are reasonably common - 400 W good sounding trannies are scarce. Monster Pioneer receivers on this thread do come close...

I've monitored real music over the years in studios but never with an oscilloscope; wasn't my aim at the time. Your example sounds a lot like the analogy of cars, motors, horsepower and torque converters. Give me your biggest baddest motor but if you can't efficiently convert it and put it on the ground, well... 
rolleyes.gif

 
To be clear, I wasn't making a case for having enough or way too much power to drive headphones. Rather, that some of us already have the quantity of power we do in-house and chose to drive our HE-6 with 'em. And we got enough to handle it! 
wink_face.gif
 But I do understand where you're coming from.
 
Apr 21, 2014 at 7:37 AM Post #12,358 of 19,143
  I've monitored real music over the years in studios but never with an oscilloscope; wasn't my aim at the time. Your example sounds a lot like the analogy of cars, motors, horsepower and torque converters. Give me your biggest baddest motor but if you can't efficiently convert it and put it on the ground, well... 
rolleyes.gif

 
To be clear, I wasn't making a case for having enough or way too much power to drive headphones. Rather, that some of us already have the quantity of power we do in-house and chose to drive our HE-6 with 'em. And we got enough to handle it! 
wink_face.gif
 But I do understand where you're coming from.

Well, for the HE-6 (although never saw one in flesh) it should be more than enough. And having it in-house rather having to buy is 
cool.gif
.
 
Jecklin Float (electrostatic, either vintage or new age reincarnation by Quad Atelier of Germany )  - THAT can hardly ever have "enough". Magnaplanar Tympani, itself not known to be the most efficient speakers on the planet, barely moved the meters of a Phase Linear 700B - those meters REALLY came to life when pushing Floats at about the same SPL ...
 
Apr 21, 2014 at 10:36 AM Post #12,359 of 19,143
For me it's a matter of 'why not?' With 64 ohm headphones I still get reasonable range on the volume dial, so why not use ALL the capability of the amp instead of a cutdown version :D
 
Apr 21, 2014 at 4:19 PM Post #12,360 of 19,143
  For me it's a matter of 'why not?' With 64 ohm headphones I still get reasonable range on the volume dial, so why not use ALL the capability of the amp instead of a cutdown version :D

I agree. With 2 monster receivers and a pair of mono blocks, my HE-6 has shown me so much love I'm suspicious. 
tongue_smile.gif

 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top