[Ren19]

If the "Objective Combo" and "The Schiit Stack" would be the same price, wich one should i get for a pair of headphones like the Q701?

 

[miceblue]

Quote:

If the "Objective Combo" and "The Schiit Stack" would be the same price, wich one should i get for a pair of headphones like the Q701?

tdockweiler has reported pretty good sound with the Schiit Stack and Q 701.
From my own experience the Objective Combo works really well with a new K 701.
 
From the looks of things, the two are nearly identical in sound both objectively and subjectively. The problems I've read about the Schiit Stack make me lean towards the Objective Combo though.

 

[proton007]

Quote:

If the "Objective Combo" and "The Schiit Stack" would be the same price, wich one should i get for a pair of headphones like the Q701?

Objective ofcourse. I doubt any amp has been tested as thoroughly as the O2.

 

[miceblue]

Quote:

Quote:

If the "Objective Combo" and "The Schiit Stack" would be the same price, wich one should i get for a pair of headphones like the Q701?

Objective ofcourse. I doubt any amp has been tested as thoroughly as the O2.

Yeah, although the Schiit Stack has had relatively positive findings so far, I would place money on the Objective Combo because of its reputation, availability, customisability, and thorough findings/reviews/anecdotes/testimonies.

 

[moshen]

The O2 design has been tested and measured thoroughly and blind a/b puts them close enough together. So unless you like the ergonomics of the Schiit stuff much better I'd go O2/ODAC.

 

[proton007]

Quote:

The O2 design has been tested and measured thoroughly and blind a/b puts them close enough together. So unless you like the ergonomics of the Schiit stuff much better I'd go O2/ODAC.

IDK, but I can't let go of the feeling that its a bit vindictive, launching an O2 competitor just to make a statement. But thats just my hunch.

 

[KamijoIsMyHero]

but O2/ODAC is open source, seems like the designer wanted it to be known how to make a good amp
 
schiit seems to be more secretive in keeping their designs known, patent issues maybe, with the praise that O2/ODAC is being given as a good design, its like you're all discrediting schiit's engineers, whom I think are quite brilliant themselves, 

 

[cel4145]

schiit seems to be more secretive in keeping their designs known, patent issues maybe, with the praise that O2/ODAC is being given as a good design, its like you're all discrediting schiit's engineers, whom I think are quite brilliant themselves, 

Patents have nothing to do with it, unless they have been stealing designs from someone else (lol).

An electrical engineer could easily take the cover off the Schiit electronics and analyze what's inside of it. There's not likely to be any major secrets there that can't be figured out by someone with some good knowledge of audio engineering.

Regardless, proton007 has a good point. There are quite a few Internet audio manufacturers who publish extensive benchmarks of their equipment. I'm not going to speculate on their reasons, but there is no reason that Schiit couldn't do so if they wanted to. If their engineers are as good as you think that they are, they are already benchmarking their own stuff.

 

[mikeaj]

Quote:

Objective ofcourse. I doubt any amp has been tested as thoroughly as the O2.

 
And not just tested by the designer, but by others potentially with a bone to pick.  These others haven't found results that disagree with what's out there.  Also Tyll at IF to some degree.  So it is better-known, for whatever that is worth.  You can check the schematic too.
 
 
Schiit allegedly and most probably does plenty of testing internally (all the right ones?  maybe, maybe not); they just don't think it's important or a good idea to publish all kinds of results.  Most importantly, like many other audio designers—correctly or not—they probably don't believe the measurements they take are enough to represent the sound of the products.  Part of their marketing is how they're not numbers guys pursuing the top benchmarks.  Also, not that many people are interested in see all the measurements.  Many companies post even fewer specs.  Furthermore, any specs they do publish may likely be misunderstood by a lot of people (particularly at the point where numbers become good enough, further improvements don't really mean anything).  Finally, of course, the specs would be worse than some others.  The last thing a manufacturer of vacuum tube amps and champion of minimal feedback wants to do is get in a numbers war.  It tends to be gear intended for the professional market that comes with more published testing results.  And those with the best results, of course.
 
Personally I'd like to have more information available about everything, but I don't think they're all out there to cater to me.
 
 

but O2/ODAC is open source, seems like the designer wanted it to be known how to make a good amp
 
schiit seems to be more secretive in keeping their designs known, patent issues maybe, with the praise that O2/ODAC is being given as a good design, its like you're all discrediting schiit's engineers, whom I think are quite brilliant themselves, 

 
ODAC is not open source, cannot be DIY.  (party line is that chips used require NDAs and so on, which is true; some people furthermore suspect ulterior motives, money under the table, which you may or may not believe).  O2 is.
 
It's not at all a fair comparison from the designers' point of view in terms of information available and transparency because Schiit needs to make money and stuff, keep things under wraps.  No company wants to disclose too much to the customers and competitors.  From the consumer's point of view, depends on your priorities.
 
 
 
I think one of the most interesting differences here is that the O2/ODAC designer likes (sensitive, relatively high-end) IEMs, and of course some others.  If I understand correctly, Schiit owns or listens to or uses some planar magnetics like LCD-2 or something.  I forget.  Probably others too.
 
So the O2 gets extremely low noise.  Magni gets high default gain and lots of power at low impedance loads.

 

[chicolom]

Any and every thread that mentions the Objective Amp or DAC will eventually leads to people arguing and citing the O2/ODAC measurements.
 
It's like Godwin's Law, but instead of Nazis it's the measurements.

 

[proton007]

Quote:

 
Stop brown-nosing.  There's nothing special about the additional measurements in the Objective 2's blog.  I'm sure you'll find very minimal differences between all these measurements when comparing the O2 and Magni-- and any of the more prominent differences would be below the threshold of realistic listening levels (do we all really need to know that an amp has a -116db noise floor at half volume)  I'm a very measurement first type of guy, but at the end of the day I still rather go off subjective impressions of equipment from people whom I trust rather than looking at graphs all day.
 
Next I expect you to say that the O2 sounds the same as 1000 dollar amps in blind a/b comparisons.

 
 
The thread is about comparison between the two. The strengths of the O2 are its specs, and the measurements to prove them. The Magni, on the other hand  'sounds like the O2'.
You're speculating that they'll both measure the same, and the differences would be small. 
 
Maybe they are, maybe the Magni even exceeds the O2. 
 
Point is, I cannot say for sure, because the O2 has the numbers to prove its performance, and the Magni doesn't. 

 

[compoopers]

Then you're just saying the O2/ODAC are better than everything else because of the numbers. I'm not saying that $5000 amps/dacs are necessarily better than the O2/ODAC. I'm just saying that better things exist.

 

[proton007]

Quote:

 
And not just tested by the designer, but by others potentially with a bone to pick.  These others haven't found results that disagree with what's out there.  Also Tyll at IF to some degree.  So it is better-known, for whatever that is worth.  You can check the schematic too.
 
Personally I'd like to have more information available about everything, but I don't think they're all out there to cater to me.
 
It's not at all a fair comparison from the designers' point of view in terms of information available and transparency because Schiit needs to make money and stuff, keep things under wraps.  No company wants to disclose too much to the customers and competitors.  From the consumer's point of view, depends on your priorities.

 
I agree on most counts, and I certainly don't care about being transparent with the design. Design and performance are related, and the specs are an objective measure of how any design performs. Good specs --> good design. Thats all.

 

[proton007]

Quote:

Then you're just saying the O2/ODAC are better than everything else because of the numbers. I'm not saying that $5000 amps/dacs are necessarily better than the O2/ODAC. I'm just saying that better things exist.

 
Of course better things exist, if they have the numbers to prove that. Otherwise how does one define 'better' ?

 

[cel4145]

It's not at all a fair comparison from the designers' point of view in terms of information available and transparency because Schiit needs to make money and stuff, keep things under wraps.  No company wants to disclose too much to the customers and competitors.  From the consumer's point of view, depends on your priorities.

Audio companies often "keep things under wraps" and put out limited information to consumers to mislead them. For example, Definitive Technology does that all the time with their speakers and subwoofers. They list low end frequency responses that are not the industry standard +/- 3db frequency range, but instead where the response is already -10 to -15db down. That's why they leave it off. In order to mislead the customer.

But if the product is good, what is the downside of being more transparent?