[Solrighal]

I thought I'd post this here as there's no more suitable place for it. I've been looking to upgrade from the Shure's in my sig but to do so and get an appreciable improvement over the Shure's out of the Rotel was looking like I'd need to take the plunge and buy an amp too. I was (and still am) looking at the AKG K702's and the Beyerdynamic DT880/600Ohm. I was thinking a good option for the K702's would be the Schiit Valhalla and it was seemingly voiced using the AKG's. The Beyer's the jury's still out.
 
Anyway, the reason for this post. I was comparing the sound from the Rotel as compared to my Cowon D2/Fiio E5. There's a bit more body to the Rotel sound but it's a bit all over the place. I done some research online and found a thread here (which I've temporarily lost written by a guy extolling the virtues of the headphone output on his Rotel RA-01! What was I missing? I initially dismissed it as demented raving (apologies to the OP). How could I test it properly? I've had the Rotel connected to the sound card with the cheapest, thinnest patch lead you've ever seen, purely because it was the only one long enough I had to hand. However, I knew that somewhere I had a pair of Furukawa interconnects that were a gift from Hi-Fi Choice magazine when I took out a three year sub some 23-ish years ago. Well I found them, rigged up the amp nearer the PC and connected everything up. Wow! The improvement is absolutely stunning! I know these cans aren't meant to be particularly suitable for amping but it's night and day.
 
Listening to O by Damien Rice there's so much more space between the instruments. Every sound has so much more definition and the bass has layers now, if that makes much sense. The track Cold Water in particular is just sublime. It always seemed great before but now it sounds so unforced, so natural. Damien's vocal is so fragile at the start and then a girl (sorry, don't know her name) starts singing and previously the sound became congested - but not now. Now there's space for them both to breathe ansd so when the percussion finally kick in for the chorus there's a place for it, instead of it getting lost behind the two powerful vocal tracks.
 
On Tigerlily by Natalie Merchant (one of my very favourite singers) the sound has always been quite nasal but that seems to have gone too. Now it's more open and airy yet with even more bass weight and a lovely treacly midrange.
 
I haven't got to Patricia Barber yet but I'm expecting very great things indeed.
 
The long and the short - I should be happy I've saved a fortune. However it makes me wonder just what is possible. I mean new cans might bring even more out of this amp. Even if they don't it's a springboard for getting something even better. Maybe the WA6 which I read so much about might actually be worth the money, lol. It's a pity I live where I do because I'd dearly love to hear some of this equipment so I could gain some terms of reference. I'm basically in the position of assuming that more money equals more quality. I know that's not correct though. It's not necessarily correct in any field. Besides my source isn't too great so that will be a limiting factor.
 
Sorry for the ramble. I just wanted to share this moment because this evening has been a real eye opener for me. Who'd have thought that just changing the cable would make such a difference. Having said that I'm guessing the improvement says more about the very poor quality original cable than it does about the Furukawas' (although they were good cables back in the day).
 
Thanks for listening. I fear for my (wife's) wallet. It is Christmas after all.

 

[Lenni]

Quote:

I'm basically in the position of assuming that more money equals more quality. I know that's not correct though. It's not necessarily correct in any field. Besides my source isn't too great so that will be a limiting factor.

where is that not correct? can you explain further - because I can make thousands of examples where more money = more quality (whether is clothes, shoes, furniture, food, electronics, and on...) - what am I missing? spending wisely is the key - as they say, "not all that shine is gold" - still, quality comes at a price, wisely or not. maybe you're referring to fields like art, etc.
 
 
Quote:

Who'd have thought that just changing the cable would make such a difference.

 
welcome to the club. glad you've seen the light. some cables can either make or break a system indeed. we all make compromises in building our systems, and cables seem where this is mostly at. spending thousands on a system, but only very little on cables - makes as much sense to me as buying a Ferrari for commuting in city traffic.
 
I think you should put that poor quality cable in FS next to nothing here - just so maybe some of the cheapskate ohmies buy it for their system - wouldn't that be nice?
 
they can't tell a difference anyway...

 

[Solrighal]

 I didn't say money is pointless in every case. I did point out that my source isn't so good and this is bound to limit the potential no matter what I hook up to it. I have to hand a pair of QED interconnects which were around about £150 per metre. In almost all scenarios I've used them they were beaten by my Furukawa's. Hell, they're bettered in the bass & treble by £40 Audioquest interconnects. The QED's are also very poorly assembled. They're are similar examples in the car industry too. In almost any real world situation a Nissan GT-R is a better car than a Ferrari (any Ferrari) yet it costs half as much. Similarly I'd rather drive the cheaper Golf GT TDi than a Golf GTI. In fact, I do.
 
The best headphones I've ever heard are probably these Shure's I'm using right now but supposing there were two systems set up. One with a budget Marantz CD player, amp & DT770's. The other system consists of an iPod & Senn HD800's. What would sound better? If it's the latter I'll sign up immediately. And I've always been a member of the cables club. Ever since I worked in a hi-fi shop in the early 80's and sent people home with the most awesome upgrade they'd heard - QED 79 strand cable!
 
I'm rambling, sorry. It's late.

 

[Lenni]

good question. one would presume that HD800 + iPod is the better choice. I'm not too sure.
I have a pair of portable  AKG 450 that I never used - they don't even sound like AKG's - a huge disappointment.
then one evening I plug them into the amp, and they don't sound as bad. they're not great, but I actually kinda like them. in fact, I sometimes use them for late-night listening.
 
of course the HD800 are in a different league than the 450's. however, given the choice of what to listen to (not to have), I'd probaly choose the CD+amp+DT770.

 

[Solrighal]

You see I've read this same opinion here a lot. That the headphone is going to be the most important contributor to sound quality. But it flies in the face of the theory used in hi-fi that the source is the most important component. The old addage Garbage in, garbage out is often mooted. Of course I've never heard high-end headphones so I'm in no position to judge this. If I do pull the trigger on the Beyer's they'll be the best I've ever heard. Actually I did once hear a pair of Sennheiser Orpheus cans at a show but it was so long ago I can't remember how they sounded.