[TSAVJason]

Oh I get that. But getting ones hackles up over someones "Opinion" to me is pointless. Sure a constructive critique is always appreciated and Id like to know if someones developed problems with the build quality or if there is a buzzing in the left channel and 50 other people have the same issue etc. But the whole " To me between 20-50hz I detected a small sprazzle because the hair on my right ball bristled" is as subjective as hell. Listen I read the review and sure it was as scientific as the gentleman could make it. BUT unless his findings can be measured and shown scientifically then what does it really matter?

I read the review. He used 2 different rigs each on one headphone not both on each rig. That is not science as I understand it. Maintaining 1 constant would weight the comparison more accurately.

 

[Tobes]

   
but ignoring that...... okay, use the Deckard.... why not use the Deckard with both headphones?  why use two different amps?  what was the purpose of that?
 
 
it's basic scientific method - if you want to see which seed of grass (dependent variable) grows faster, you hold all independent variables constant.  you put them in the same soil, with the same water, in the same sunlight, in the same location.  you don't put two different seeds of grass in two different soils that you "swear" are similar in nature and then declare one seed to be better.  that is, by definition, and invalid result.  

My understanding from reading Bob's review is that he found, to his satisfaction, that the Deckard and AMB were virtually identical in performance.
The idea behind using the two amps was then to level match the two headphones, which have very different sensitivities, and be able to directly compare them from the same source.
This way you can do comparisons without unplugging stuff and fiddling with level matching. I found this very useful myself when making comparisons between my HE6 and Utopia. 
 
Since I haven't heard the LCD4 I've got nothing much to say about Bob's comparison to the Utopia. Some of his comments do have me scratching my head though - like criticism of the Utopias handling of sibilants (which I find a great strength and very natural) but I guess everything is relative.
I love the Utopias and find the tonal balance close to ideal - and my Harbeth monitors.

 

[EdmontonCanuck]

  Just bought a Utopia.
 
I hope to have them sometime next week and I plan to compare them to Abyss for a round two!
 
Round one ended with the Abyss coming out on top for me, but we'll see. I didn't get to try the Utopia balanced. This time, I am getting a custom cable.

 
I keep asking this hoping someone will give me an answer, but when I read where someone is saying they are trying the headphone "balanced" are they implying that the headphone is itself balanced? This just isn't so....just because the headphone cable has a 4-pin XLR connector on it doesn't mean the headphone is balanced, right? That's just not how it's wired up.
 
What am I missing?

 

[bigfatpaulie]

   
I keep asking this hoping someone will give me an answer, but when I read where someone is saying they are trying the headphone "balanced" are they implying that the headphone is itself balanced? This just isn't so....just because the headphone cable has a 4-pin XLR connector on it doesn't mean the headphone is balanced, right? That's just not how it's wired up.
 
What am I missing?

 
You aren't missing anything.  Head-fi has an obsession with "balanced" - many people here think it is universally better.  I've seen people complain that the Cord DAVE doesn't have a 'balanced' headphone output.  
 
How many times have you read something like, "my XYZ headphones sound better balanced"?  Just ignore them.  You aren't missing anything - they are.

 

[TSAVJason]

You aren't missing anything.  Head-fi has an obsession with "balanced" - many people here think it is universally better.  I've seen people complain that the Cord DAVE doesn't have a 'balanced' headphone output.  

How many times have you read something like, "my XYZ headphones sound better balanced"?  Just ignore them.  You aren't missing anything - they are.

I'm not sure I'd call it an obsession. Balanced does tend to provide better channel separation while allowing for higher gain and a lower noise floor. I think that is better noted as a quest for better performance more than it is an obsession ......don't you think so? As for Rob Watts and his feeling SE is all you need, I suppose that it one perspective but for me coming from the recording & concert business, I'm still a firm believer in balanced connections

 

[Exidrion]

I keep asking this hoping someone will give me an answer, but when I read where someone is saying they are trying the headphone "balanced" are they implying that the headphone is itself balanced? This just isn't so....just because the headphone cable has a 4-pin XLR connector on it doesn't mean the headphone is balanced, right? That's just not how it's wired up.

What am I missing?

I don't think they mean they want to try the headphone balanced, they mean they want to try them with an amplifier that has a balanced output. The thing is, not all amps benefit from it. I'll PM you a link.

 

[bigfatpaulie]

I'm not sure I'd call it an obsession. Balanced does tend to provide better channel separation while allowing for higher gain and a lower noise floor. I think that is better noted as a quest for better performance more than it is an obsession ......don't you think so? As for Rob Watts and his feeling SE is all you need, I suppose that it one perspective but for me coming from the recording & concert business, I'm still a firm believer in balanced connections

 
So you are saying balanced is universally better?  So much for all those SET amps...
 
In a concert scenario - I absolutely agree.  100+ foot runs should be balanced - that's what it is built for.  Noise rejection becomes an issue.  I don't think many people here have 100 foot runs in their headphone system, however.  But even if they did, that is between components where three conductors are used per channel for noise rejection.  Headphone balanced connections simply don't do that - it is two conductors per channel - period. 
 
The obsession with, when it comes to headphones, is often literally a matter of plug shape.  Many single ended amps offer a 'balanced' plug which, being a single ended amp, ties the to grounds together effectively making it electrically the same as single ended plug.  
 
Keep in mind we aren't talking about amp topology here - we are talking about wring headphones "balanced" or not.   Amp topology is a totally separate conversation.  Wiring headphones 'balanced' is like saying you are going to wire your speakers 'balanced' - by default, I guess they are always wired in 'balanced' configuration...  But no one says that because, well, it's gibberish.  You can have a balanced DAC, a balanced AMP, sure.  But headphones/speakers aren't like that.
 
Please, I answered someones question about headphones specifically.  Respectfully, don't muddy the already turbid waters by bringing up amp topology and differential signal transmission.  

 

[bigfatpaulie]

I don't think they mean they want to try the headphone balanced, they mean they want to try them with an amplifier that has a balanced output. The thing is, not all amps benefit from it. I'll PM you a link.

 
This is exactly correct.

 

[TSAVJason]

So you are saying balanced is universally better?  So much for all those SET amps...

In a concert scenario - I absolutely agree.  100+ foot runs should be balanced - that's what it is built for.  Noise rejection becomes an issue.  I don't think many people here have 100 foot runs in their headphone system, however.  But even if they did, that is between components where three conductors are used per channel for noise rejection.  Headphone balanced connections simply don't do that - it is two conductors per channel - period. 

The obsession with, when it comes to headphones, is often literally a matter of plug shape.  Many single ended amps offer a 'balanced' plug which, being a single ended amp, ties the to grounds together effectively making it electrically the same as single ended plug.  

Keep in mind we aren't talking about amp topology here - we are talking about wring headphones "balanced" or not.   Amp topology is a totally separate conversation.  Wiring headphones 'balanced' is like saying you are going to wire your speakers 'balanced' - by default, I guess they are always wired in 'balanced' configuration...  But no one says that because, well, it's gibberish.  You can have a balanced DAC, a balanced AMP, sure.  But headphones/speakers aren't like that.

Please, I answered someones question about headphones specifically.  Respectfully, don't muddy the already turbid waters by bringing up amp topology and differential signal transmission.  

where in my response do you read anything about Amp topology? Other than Rob Watts of Chord saying he feels there is no benefit I said nothing that wasn't directly Headphone related. Perhaps you quoted my post by mistake

 

[x RELIC x]

I'm not sure I'd call it an obsession. Balanced does tend to provide better channel separation while allowing for higher gain and a lower noise floor. I think that is better noted as a quest for better performance more than it is an obsession ......don't you think so? As for Rob Watts and his feeling SE is all you need, I suppose that it one perspective but for me coming from the recording & concert business, I'm still a firm believer in balanced connections

To be clear, he does not say SE is universally all you need. He points out specifically that balanced can be beneficial to many setups but SE is better if taking care of X,Y, Z first. It's the X,Y,Z in his perspective that's hard to do, where X,Y,Z is not as necessary with a balanced configuration. There are also more components in the audio path going balanced so this reduces transparency, which is what he strives for. He developed his own discrete Pulse Array DAC and has written his own filters in the FPGA. The dude is on his his own path and has worked with both balanced and SE design, has consulted for big DAC chip manufacturers and worked with R2R designs. He has some perspective.

So, in the end there are solid reasons why he chooses SE and it's not as simple as saying because he has an opinion on the matter. For many configurations balanced is better. For some SE is better. Also, to just cherry pick one designer about SE is interesting as there are others who can do a great sounding SE design as well.

 

[bigfatpaulie]

I'm not sure I'd call it an obsession. Balanced does tend to provide better channel separation while allowing for higher gain and a lower noise floor. I think that is better noted as a quest for better performance more than it is an obsession ......don't you think so? As for Rob Watts and his feeling SE is all you need, I suppose that it one perspective but for me coming from the recording & concert business, I'm still a firm believer in balanced connections

 
 

where in my response do you read anything about Amp topology? Other than Rob Watts of Chord saying he feels there is no benefit I said nothing that wasn't directly Headphone related. Perhaps you quoted my post by mistake

 
For get Watts - again, take any SET amp.  Heck, take many amps out there.  Many, maybe even the majority are singled in their design.
 
That in bold sentence from your first post, that's where amp topology was brought up.  A single ended cable headphone has 4 conductors in.  A balanced headphone cable has 4  conductors in it.  If you tie the two grounds together IN the headphone plug on just behind the connector on the amp, it won't change sound quality.  Given that, you comment has to relate to amp topology. 

 

[TSAVJason]

To be clear, he does not say SE is universally all you need. He points out specifically that balanced can be beneficial to many setups but SE is better if taking care of X,Y, Z first. It's the X,Y,Z in his perspective that's hard to do, where X,Y,Z is not as necessary with a balanced configuration. There are also more components in the audio path going balanced so this reduces transparency, which is what he strives for. He developed his own discrete Pulse Array DAC and has written his own filters in the FPGA. The dude is on his his own path and has worked with both balanced and SE design, has consulted for big DAC chip manufacturers and worked with R2R designs. He has some perspective.

So, in the end there are solid reasons why he chooses SE and it's not as simple as saying because he has an opinion on the matter. For many configurations balanced is better. For some SE is better. Also, to just cherry pick one designer about SE is interesting as there are others who can do a great sounding SE design as well.

I have no dispute with any of that other than to say my Rob Watts comment was as a result of the post specifically calling out Chord.

 

[Allanmarcus]

Balanced means that if you hang your headphone on a nail, the left and right cups are even!
 

 
Back to Bob. Some folks are pointing out that some are complaining that Bob is just giving us his opinion on the Utopia vs PM3 vs LCD4. While technically that is true, there is more to it. Bob is reporting on a headphone site from an audiophile "network" (TEN), and blogging as an expert. The assumption of his readers is that he has done the due diligence to provide his opinion based on accurate data. Many also (falsely) assume audiophile folks use the scientific method to compare and experiment. While someone might, most (especially from TEN) do not. For them it's all about how it sounds. Their conclusions commonly would not stand up to the rigor the folk I work with need to endure (I work at a US National Lab - guess which one?
 
I'm sure Bob is a great guy with impeccable credentials as an audiophile. His scientific credentials, however, may fall short. He has shown that he prefers the LCD-4 and the dekkard over the Utopia and his custom amp, but he reported his findings as headphone only findings. That's all. He also has tons of experience with the LCD line, so his brain has been burned in to the Audeze sound.
 
As stated earlier, the true scientific method would be to hold all variables equal (including past experience, mood, lighting, furniture, etc.), then test one and the other. For human testing, the generally accepted statistics would be large numbers of tests, then averaged to determine statistical significance. That ain't gonna happen here.
 
Best we can hope for is people we trust through past experience, and then reading about their opinion. For example, I like Tyll's taste, but I know that I prefer brighter than Tyll. If he says some phone sound great but is a tad bright, I'm pretty sure I will like it. If he say he loves it, chances are I will think it's a tad warm.
 
Bob blogged his opinion, but he made it appear as if the test was scientific. It wasn't, and I don't think he claimed it was. he just let everyone know what he did. Take it with a grain of salt. Anyone expecting scientific rigor, double blind testing, and peer review needs to move on. 

 

[TSAVJason]

For get Watts - again, take any SET amp.  Heck, take many amps out there.  Many, maybe even the majority are singled in their design.

That in bold sentence from your first post, that's where amp topology was brought up.  A single ended cable headphone has 4 conductors in.  A balanced headphone cable has 4  conductors in it.  If you tie the two grounds together IN the headphone plug on just behind the connector on the amp, it won't change sound quality.  Given that, you comment has to relate to amp topology. 

The expected reasoning for the 4 pin is that the grounds are not common. When the grounds are combined you are in fact single ended. So you see I'm not arguing, I'm simply pointing out an easy way to understand why headphones use the isolated grounds as a balanced feature.

 

[musicman59]

The expected reasoning for the 4 pin is that the grounds are not common. When the grounds are combined you are in fact single ended. So you see I'm not arguing, I'm simply pointing out an easy way to understand why headphones use the isolated grounds as a balanced feature.

Jason,
Am I mistaken saying that for balanced headphones it is not really ground but negative signal? It is my understanding that in balanced headphones the negative is the inverted polarity signal of the positive side so it actually carries signal (power) where in single ended is really just common ground, correct? So a true balanced headphones amplifier has internally 4 amplification sections so the headphones are actually receiving double the power than running them from the single ended output of the same amplifier, correct?