[Neruda]

I think Headroom took their crossfeed circuit too far. From what I know, they did more equalization than Jan did and that might affect the sound more. I've read some descriptions, and compared to Jan's theirs seems too complicated. I have Jan's crossfeed on my portable amp and I hardly ever notice the difference, but it certainly never makes the music unlistenable nor does it make the music sound noticably different.

 

[Duncan]

Quote:

Originally posted by MacDEF Actually, the big missing poll choice is "depends on the music." Some albums sound simply amazing with crossfeed, while others sound horrible.

Added...

As for me, I've never heard ANYTHING with crossfeed on it, so... Ignorance is bliss as they say

 

[KurtW]

So far I'm seeing what I expected to see. The HeadRoom crossfeed changes the frequency response when it's engaged. Some people will like that and some won't. Jan Meier's crossfeed on the Corda doesn't alter the frequency response, so depending on the music you'll hear varying degrees of changes in the soundstage, but that's it. But that's the point of crossfeed. By the way, the Cmoy/linkwitz, HeadRoom, and Jan Meier's crossfeed are all different.

 

[skippy]

Quote:

I believe that the Cmoy circuit is the same as the HeadRoom circuit

i believe that headroom uses active circuitry to acheive the crossfeed, while jan meier uses a simple (only 3 resistors and 2 capacitors) passive circuit.

Quote:

From what I know, they did more equalization than Jan did and that might affect the sound more.

from what i recall headroom's circuit utilises a delay that is independent of the frequency, which results in the comb-filter effect (a bunch of dips in the frequency response). the most noticable effect is a loss of highs. to alleviate the loss of highs, headroom implemented a treble boost to compensate. jan's circuit uses a frequency dependent delay, avoiding the comb-filter effect and any equalisation.

 

[thomas]

skippy is right...

The thing with crossfeed is it actually decreases the soundstage. With headphones, you get the "super stereo" effect that makes the soundstage seem wider than its supposed to be. Crossfeed "solves" this problem by blending the two channels to simulate sound comming from two speakers. However, crossfeed has its limits and to my ears it simply reshapes the soundstage to match the soundstage of a pair of speakers. However, it also seems to veil the highest frequencies (i used jan's filter, the degradion is probably from the caps, even though i used polypropylenes i could still here it).

Overall, i find that x-feed can make headphone sound less "in the head", but it makes the sound seem too distant and too much is lost in the high frequencies for my tastes....

 

[Neruda]

personally I like the in-the-head soundstage headphones have. Makes me feel more "at one" with the music. I know apheared agrees, too...

 

[jatinder]

In my experience, the cables used in the system have a very definite impact on the "sounds-in-the-head" syndrome.

With some interconnects, the sound seems to be very "polarized" - with the left and right channels sounding seperated - almost operating independently.

With other interconnects, I hear a very natural soundstage, and do not get the "independent" left--right channels. The sound is gel-ed together in the same way as normal speakers generally are.

I put this down to microscopic timing differences in the cables. If they're different, then you hear a very marked difference between the two channels. If the timing is the "same" then you just get an all-enveloping sound.

I've never used a crossfeed filter and certainly don't have any problems listening to headphones with or without the "sounds-in-the-head".

--Jatinder

 

[Alan_P]

Since nobody else mentioned it:

I have the Headroom Max, one of a few of the Headroom amps that come with their 'filter' switch. Without this switch, I would hate Headroom crossfeed - with the 'filter', I can't live without it!