[Audio-Me]

Quote:

Originally posted by tangent -- but the tune's the thing to me. I don't need to be able to discern the pattern of the grain on the parquet floor from the sound the orchestra's chairs make when someone gets up and bumps their chair back a bit.

Lol, right on tangent!

*lights off 1000 bottle rockets at once*

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Hey Snusk,

I'm all for equalization (I think you can tell from my avatar

) but in headphone comparisons I think you should at least try comparing them without EQ first--because when comparing with EQ you may be comparing which phone you have a better EQ for as well as which phone actually is better. For example, my EX70 sucks ass without EQ, but since Etymotics released the excellent frequency response graph in the ER6 brochure I prefer them over my HD580s because to my ears the EX70 sounds just as good, if not better than, the HD580 with an EQ derived from the FR graph--and are much more convenient and offers isolation--whereas I haven't been able to find an EQ for the HD580 that consistently improved their sound. Should I conclude that the EX70 is the superior pair of phones? Of course not.

 

[arnett]

Quote:

Originally posted by Snusk-Pelle I always use the equalizer. The equalizer is connected to X-CANs so everything goes through it. I can't stand any headphone without equalizing. To me all headphones are too bright.

i think you bought the wrong amp with the x-cans (assuming it's the v2, of course). but i agree that most high-end headphones are too bright -- at least to my ears. perhaps you should check out a different amp . . . that way, you wouldn't have to use an equalizer.

maybe a headroom amp . . .

 

[kwkarth]

Snusk-Pelle,
If you're interested in hearing what the 501s are capable of, you really do need a different amp for them. (For that matter, your HD-600s will benefit too!) KR's suggestion was a good one.

Cheers!

 

[jpelg]

Quote:

Originally posted by Snusk-Pelle I always use the equalizer. The equalizer is connected to X-CANs so everything goes through it. I can't stand any headphone without equalizing. To me all headphones are too bright.

Quote:

Originally posted by arnett perhaps you should check out a different amp . . . that way, you wouldn't have to use an equalizer.

I thought that the primary reason to have an equalizer is to "equalize" frequencies that have been adversely affected by room acoustics. While it is also effective in "coloring" the sound coming from your output devices (speakers and/or headphones), it would seem more logical (again that word again) to choose speakers or headphones that output close to your sound preferences in the first place without the need for electronic modification. I personally feel that solid state electronics should be as neutral as possible*.


*Tubes are a whole 'nother story about which I have no opinion at this time.

 

[Joe Bloggs]

Hey guys,

If the XCanV2 is not good for either the HD600 and K501, what *is* it good for?

(very little...

)

 

[Hirsch]

IMO, the X-Can v2 is very good with both the Senn HD-600 and Grado HP-1, and positively sparkles with the Sony MDR-CD3000. Good tubes and the upgraded power supply are necessary for best performance. It was able to drive the K501, and in combination with the TDS Passive Audiophile, got as good a sound out of the 501 as I was able to obtain. Alas, not good enough for me to keep the K501 on hand (but I've since learned a few tricks that I'm interested in trying with the K501 should I chance upon another set someday).

 

[Nezer]

I've said it before and I'll say it again...

I wonder how much a difference changing the stock cable would make on the 501s. We *know* what it does on the HD600s.

It looks to be a fairly easy job and the cable that ships with the 501s doesn't look all that great.

I bet a better cable would do a much better job on the low end but it probably still wouldn't compare to the 600s.

Still, for the price the 501s are hard to beat.

I find myself listening mostly to the HD600s these days which I recently took home. I am now listening to the 501s through a total airhead 9v at work.

Back to the cable, any suggestions on what I should try-out for the 501s?

I'm thinking some pure copper in two twisted-pair configs with a copper braid shield connected at the source end to help drain off interference. Add techflex and some quality jacks and silver solder and a drill for the piece on the right channel.

Perhaps even a dual-mono setup with 2.5mm jacks in the 501s?

If it's a miserable failure (and I doubt it would be if care was taken and quality parts were used) I could always resolder the original back in place and forget I ever thought about it...

PS... Does anyone know what the Cardas HD600 cable is made of and what kind of configuration it is in?

 

[kwkarth]

Quote:

Originally posted by Nezer [size=xx-small]I've said it before and I'll say it again... I wonder how much a difference changing the stock cable would make on the 501s. We *know* what it does on the HD600s. It looks to be a fairly easy job and the cable that ships with the 501s doesn't look all that great. I bet a better cable would do a much better job on the low end but it probably still wouldn't compare to the 600s. Still, for the price the 501s are hard to beat. I find myself listening mostly to the HD600s these days which I recently took home. I am now listening to the 501s through a total airhead 9v at work. Back to the cable, any suggestions on what I should try-out for the 501s? I'm thinking some pure copper in two twisted-pair configs with a copper braid shield connected at the source end to help drain off interference. Add techflex and some quality jacks and silver solder and a drill for the piece on the right channel. [/size]

Shielding is quite unnecessary for headphone cable. The signal level is way too large to be affected by rfi/emi and by twisting the pair you would eliminate any rfi pickup being fed back to the amp through the negative feedback loop if there were one.

 

[Calanctus]

Quote:

Originally posted by vb1 "Can of worms" Isn't that the V600?

hehe!

"can"=headphone
"worms"=lowly life forms
"can of worms"=something unpleasant to deal with, best left untouched

one of the better lines on head-fi

 

[Nezer]

Quote:

Originally posted by kwkarth Shielding is quite unnecessary for headphone cable. The signal level is way too large to be affected by rfi/emi and by twisting the pair you would eliminate any rfi pickup being fed back to the amp through the negative feedback loop if there were one.

Makes sense. So thats one vote for no shielding and twisted pair.

I was thinking that two pair for each channel each signal and return in a TP config.

What wire should I use, good pure OFC of what guage? If I were insanly rich I would hack-up some Cardas HD600 cables and make those work.

 

[kwkarth]

Personally, I'm sold on the (non) sound of OCC copper. Don't know where to buy it though.

 

[domer2004]

Hey kwarth, have you seen those interconnects by Rockford Fosgate. I know you guys are not car audio heads so I don't expect y'all to be familiar, but they make these interconnets that twist but also have a dummy wire (not a ground or anything) that makes 90 degree angles with the two twisting +/- signal wires. I am so out of it now that I do not remember the reason for the 90 degree angle being made, but those cables were supposed to be pretty damn quiet. Hit me up with any enlightenment.

Brett

 

[Nezer]

Any ideas on where to find the OCC wire anyone? I'm thinking of using several strands of individually insulated 24 AWG wire (maybe 2 or 3 per singal and again for return).

OFC is easy to find. I also don't want to spend a fortune for an experiment.