[Mython]

Where’s the line as to what is the designer’s responsibility and what is our responsibility? I’ve had that same problem going to an IEM and forgetting to change the volume. Not sure Rob Watts should be responsible for my lack of thought?

Why not? My wife blames me for everything that goes wrong in the World...

Sounds like a volume control might be useful for your wife, too?

That or an emotional balance control.


Just kidding.



For Mojo 2, I think a user-set default volume setting is a good idea, provided it's not too much of a head-ache for you to implement.

 

[Mython]

No there is no need for CCK or any other version of the same thing.

Sigh.... the hours & hours & hours that would've saved in the Mojo 1 thread, a few years ago!!

 

[Hypops]

Sigh.... the hours & hours & hours that would've saved in the Mojo 1 thread, a few years ago!!

The difference between then and now is that Apple finally conceded the data connection format war and switched to USB-C.

 

[BS5711]

The difference between then and now is that Apple finally conceded the data connection format war and switched to USB-C.

Apple were forced to adopt USB-C to meet European requirements otherwise they never would have.

Odd because I understand that Apple helped develop USB-C then went with Lightning but I guess that is Apples way.

 

[FunkyBassMan]

Apple were forced to adopt USB-C to meet European requirements otherwise they never would have.

Odd because I understand that Apple helped develop USB-C then went with Lightning but I guess that is Apples way.

Apple's corporate mission is to lock the customer in in as many ways as they can.

 

[davehutch]

Is anyone using the Mojo 2 with a separate headphone amp? Is it a worthwhile upgrade for a pair of HiFiMan HE1000SE?
I have plenty of headroom as a lot of the time I'm listening around the double green range but wondered if people had found an external amp is a worthwhile addition?
Particularly I'm thinking about a hybrid tube like an Xduoo TA-20 Plus or even a Sparkos Gemini. I'd love to have the option of a 'tube' sound. For SS maybe the Geshelli Labs A3 Pro?
What are your thoughts?

 

[gylyf]

Is anyone using the Mojo 2 with a separate headphone amp? Is it a worthwhile upgrade for a pair of HiFiMan HE1000SE?
I have plenty of headroom as a lot of the time I'm listening around the double green range but wondered if people had found an external amp is a worthwhile addition?
Particularly I'm thinking about a hybrid tube like an Xduoo TA-20 Plus or even a Sparkos Gemini. I'd love to have the option of a 'tube' sound. For SS maybe the Geshelli Labs A3 Pro?
What are your thoughts?

95% of the time, I run my Mojo2 through my Lyr+ and I think it's great, even for transducers the Mojo drives well by itself. I really love the combination of the Mojo2 and tubes - I find it rounds out the Mojo's digital sheen a bit, while preserving all the good things the Mojo brings to the table.

 

[meomap]

Is anyone using the Mojo 2 with a separate headphone amp? Is it a worthwhile upgrade for a pair of HiFiMan HE1000SE?
I have plenty of headroom as a lot of the time I'm listening around the double green range but wondered if people had found an external amp is a worthwhile addition?
Particularly I'm thinking about a hybrid tube like an Xduoo TA-20 Plus or even a Sparkos Gemini. I'd love to have the option of a 'tube' sound. For SS maybe the Geshelli Labs A3 Pro?
What are your thoughts?

Get a used WA6SE tube amp....
Wonderful with mine, HE1000SE.....

 

[Hypops]

Is anyone using the Mojo 2 with a separate headphone amp? Is it a worthwhile upgrade for a pair of HiFiMan HE1000SE?
I have plenty of headroom as a lot of the time I'm listening around the double green range but wondered if people had found an external amp is a worthwhile addition?
Particularly I'm thinking about a hybrid tube like an Xduoo TA-20 Plus or even a Sparkos Gemini. I'd love to have the option of a 'tube' sound. For SS maybe the Geshelli Labs A3 Pro?
What are your thoughts?

I use Mojo 2 primarily with a solid-state Singxer SA-1 amp. It provides a rather noticeable difference in quality (and power), particularly for my Hifiman HE6se v2. IMO the Mojo 2 shines as a DAC far more than it does as a headphone amp. I imagine this is true regardless whether you run it into tubes or a solid state amp.

 

[davehutch]

@gylyf @meomap @Hypops thanks for the replies. I shall carry on pursuing this I think. Yes, my suspicion was that as a DAC it’s excellent but as it doesn’t have an actual amp stage, I could look at improving there. Might nip to Central London and listen to the Sparkos to see what it can do

 

[Pulcino]

Is anyone using the Mojo 2 with a separate headphone amp? Is it a worthwhile upgrade for a pair of HiFiMan HE1000SE?
I have plenty of headroom as a lot of the time I'm listening around the double green range but wondered if people had found an external amp is a worthwhile addition?
Particularly I'm thinking about a hybrid tube like an Xduoo TA-20 Plus or even a Sparkos Gemini. I'd love to have the option of a 'tube' sound. For SS maybe the Geshelli Labs A3 Pro?
What are your thoughts?

Hi, I use a WA 7 for my active speakers. Using them as a headphone amp between mojo2 and HE1000se is good but I prefer the sound of Poly/Mojo2 HE1000se without. There’s the small sensation of lost clarity. Maybe just in my head.

 

[AnamCeoil]

Is anyone using the Mojo 2 with a separate headphone amp? Is it a worthwhile upgrade for a pair of HiFiMan HE1000SE?
I have plenty of headroom as a lot of the time I'm listening around the double green range but wondered if people had found an external amp is a worthwhile addition?
Particularly I'm thinking about a hybrid tube like an Xduoo TA-20 Plus or even a Sparkos Gemini. I'd love to have the option of a 'tube' sound. For SS maybe the Geshelli Labs A3 Pro?
What are your thoughts?

I use the Mojo 2 almost exclusively to feed my desktop amps: the Violectric V202, Beyerdynamic A20 and my just arrived TA-26. Does a fantastic job with all of these, and having its double output is very handy as I can have 2 amps connected at a time. Very much recommended to my ears.

 

[Achlys]

You should know by now saying "You can't hear a difference" here on HeadFi is a big trigger for a lot of members.

I can't hear a difference but I still want the file decoded and passed through at the original bit-rate, crazy I know but OCD rules apply.

Any EQ applied, which is necessary for virtually every headphone to achieve optimal sound, is not Bit Perfect

Speaking as someone who has actually designed sample rate converters (SRC) for ADCs and - more importantly in this context - actually listened to the effects of sample rate conversion, this video and the assertion that SRC is so good you can't hear the difference is just plain wrong. To make SRC work completely transparently is almost impossible, and to get it to work tolerably well requires incredible precision and oversample rates - something that crude interpolators inside computers are incapable of doing. And this is when I am SRC from 104MHz down to 98MHz (for eventual 48kHz decimation). Going from 44.1k up to 192k is very much more difficult, as you have the transient timing issue to worry about too - and the interpolation filters for SRC ignore the transient timing reconstruction issue completely.

When using my DACs do not use SRC or upsampling, always ensure bit perfect data is given to the DAC - then the WTA filter will do a very much better job at reconstructing transient timing than any SRC or external filter. Remember that the WTA filter is the only filter that has been designed (with thousands of listening test to optimise it) to reconstruct the original timing of transients as accurately as possible. Transient timing is absolutely vital for perception, as the brain uses the timing of transients to perceive instruments as separate entities, place them in 3D space, perceive LF pitch, determine timbre, and of course the stopping and starting of notes - vital for rhythm. Music without timbre, pitch, instrument separation and rhythm is just nasty noise.

If I meet you in Canjam, can I provide you with a blind test between bitperfect and resampled audio and upload it to my youtube channel?

Speaking as someone who has actually designed sample rate converters (SRC) for ADCs and - more importantly in this context - actually listened to the effects of sample rate conversion, this video and the assertion that SRC is so good you can't hear the difference is just plain wrong. To make SRC work completely transparently is almost impossible, and to get it to work tolerably well requires incredible precision and oversample rates - something that crude interpolators inside computers are incapable of doing. And this is when I am SRC from 104MHz down to 98MHz (for eventual 48kHz decimation). Going from 44.1k up to 192k is very much more difficult, as you have the transient timing issue to worry about too - and the interpolation filters for SRC ignore the transient timing reconstruction issue completely.

When using my DACs do not use SRC or upsampling, always ensure bit perfect data is given to the DAC - then the WTA filter will do a very much better job at reconstructing transient timing than any SRC or external filter. Remember that the WTA filter is the only filter that has been designed (with thousands of listening test to optimise it) to reconstruct the original timing of transients as accurately as possible. Transient timing is absolutely vital for perception, as the brain uses the timing of transients to perceive instruments as separate entities, place them in 3D space, perceive LF pitch, determine timbre, and of course the stopping and starting of notes - vital for rhythm. Music without timbre, pitch, instrument separation and rhythm is just nasty noise.

Regarding transient timing, the Mac OS SRC is amplitude and phase linear.

 

[Hypops]

Any EQ applied, which is necessary for virtually every headphone to achieve optimal sound, is not Bit Perfect

Even as someone who has extensive EQ profiles for all of my headphones across multiple devices, as well as multiple speaker EQ profiles for multiple rigs, I don't agree with this statement. "Optimal sound" is entirely subjective. I'd wager at least half of head-fi doesn't use EQ.

 

[Achlys]

Even as someone who has extensive EQ profiles for all of my headphones across multiple devices, as well as multiple speaker EQ profiles for multiple rigs, I don't agree with this statement. "Optimal sound" is entirely subjective. I'd wager at least half of head-fi doesn't use EQ.

It is very rare for a headphone to have good out-of-the box measured tonality (on a measurement rig) and good technical performance (leakage tolerance, response smoothness, reseat performance, distortion, etc.) The only headphone I can think of that probably meets this criteria is the Sennheiser HE-1, but even this could use more optimization to more closely match the Harman 2018 OE target. For example, the headphones I use, Audeze LCD-5, have poor tonality out of the box, but they have high technical performance, so they are a good candidate to EQ to the Harman 2018 OE target.

Even as someone who has extensive EQ profiles for all of my headphones across multiple devices, as well as multiple speaker EQ profiles for multiple rigs, I don't agree with this statement. "Optimal sound" is entirely subjective. I'd wager at least half of head-fi doesn't use EQ.

For any of head-fi user that does not use EQ, I guarantee with absolute certainty they will prefer some EQ in a blind listening test over their stock headphones.

Even as someone who has extensive EQ profiles for all of my headphones across multiple devices, as well as multiple speaker EQ profiles for multiple rigs, I don't agree with this statement. "Optimal sound" is entirely subjective. I'd wager at least half of head-fi doesn't use EQ.

Also, I think the better question to ask is whether or not the lack of EQ use by at least half of head-fi comes from a place of ignorance or expertise.