[Gravitas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSloth /img/forum/go_quote.gif If you think about it, why should the gilmore lite and headfive sound vastly different to one another? That's not meant as an insult to the OP, but more food for thought as to what to expect from different amplifier designs, particularly ones of a similar type (i.e. solid state).

No insult taken. I am quickly learning just what you said. I suppose since I was easily able to notice major differences among headphones during my upgrade ladder with those, I kinda assumed that the amp process would be somewhat similar. Also reading posts here that said things like, "the Glite is so analytical and the Headive is so warm, almost tubey!"...I was in the mindset of being prepared to hear a night and day difference. Just didn't happen.

But, part of the fun in this hobby is trying different components and sharing what you've learned...err, heard.

 

[nightfire]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Towert7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's quite possible that where these amps truely differ, is simply not being made availible by the source (large soundstage perhapse?). I had the Glite for a while, with both the Elpac and the DPS, and I have to agree with almost everyone in that it's so flat and passive sounding. I couldn't tell much difference with this amp, but once I moved up to the GS-1 it was night and day (especially since I had gotten an external DAC). Agreed. These differences should come to you, not you having to go search for them.

Interesting. I've currently got a GL which absolutely love (with the Elpac), and I've always been curious as to how it compares to the GS-1. Most of the reviews say it's similar, with slightly more bass control..

What differences have you noticed that you can't pin on your DAC?

 

[nightfire]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSloth /img/forum/go_quote.gif In general, assuming the amplifiers have no glaring design flaws, such as an inability to handle the impedance of the headphone used, an unregulated power supply or whatever else could be wrong, the difference between two solid state amplifiers is going to be relatively small. We use hyperbolic terminology to describe the differences we do hear simply to allow us to discuss them and show our excitement about them. Our descriptions are magnified by a huge factor from the difference we really perceive. In my module archive thread I use such terminology as well to describe the difference between electronics modules in a common amplifier which use the same overall circuit design with just a few relatively minor component changes. If you think about it, why should the gilmore lite and headfive sound vastly different to one another? That's not meant as an insult to the OP, but more food for thought as to what to expect from different amplifier designs, particularly ones of a similar type (i.e. solid state). The thing with headphone amplifiers is that, relative to the speaker world, even the cheapest amplifiers are relatively good/accurate compared to the equivalent in the speaker world - in general they only have to drive relatively friendly impedance loads with relatively tiny output levels, and therefore even very simple 'everyman' designs can work very well.

Well I agree we tend to exaggerate in order to relate the differences... but that doesn't meant they're insignificant. Yes it's easy to design a functional and well performing headphone amp (at least easier than a powerful speaker amp) but there are all kinds of design choices that are reasonable that can significantly affect the sound signature.

Yes it's always distortion when the amplified signal isn't a perfect function of the input signal, but all amplifiers distort the signal to some extent. Whether the distortions are audible is a question of intent or design flaw (or cost), and whether they pleasant or not is just a matter of preference.

But there can be huge differences in amps even of the same class (SS covers mosfet buffers as well as multistage bipolar designs!). Not to mention class A vs AB, balanced/floating ground vs. output caps, current vs. voltage gain, etc.

In fact the design can also dictate which sources can drive them well and which can't. For example, my Treo 650 cell phone has a stereo out for playing MP3's (poorly), and it can't drive my GL at more than half volume on the GL's attenuator. One of the channels clips and drops out, presumably because the input impedance on the GL is too low.

No comment with regards to the GL vs. the headfive as I've never heard the H5. But it's certainly not inconceivable that they would sound absolutely identical. But then it wouldn't be surprising if they were quite different either.

 

[Towert7]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nightfire /img/forum/go_quote.gif What differences have you noticed that you can't pin on your DAC?

The most notable is the amp's potential to have great depth in soundstage.
When I got my GS-1, the depth was an instant improvment.

 

[nightfire]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Towert7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The most notable is the amp's potential to have great depth in soundstage. When I got my GS-1, the depth was an instant improvment.

Wow, over the GL? I find it has phenominal soundstage width.. if the GS-1 adds depth to that, I'm definitely going to have to find one for a listen.

 

[Patrickhat2001]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asr /img/forum/go_quote.gif No offense, but please don't try to pass info off as factual on components you don't own. The Gilmore Lite's loop out functions when the amp is completely off, so I highly doubt the signal path traverses much of the PCB (if at all) before it meets the loop out jacks. And if loop outs are as bad as you claim, why do so many other high-end amp vendors include them, let alone HeadAmp?

Actually, I checked out Headamp.com before I wrote my second comment and here you can see that the loop out runs through the circuit board (not that it really matters since it would have to run though something--circuit board or wires). Now, how much running the signal through the Gilmore Lite changes the sound, that I can't answer, I was just pointing out that the comparision is not technically fair--splitting hairs, I know, but isn't that what this hobby is about?

 

[jmmtn4aj]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mikesul /img/forum/go_quote.gif I noticed that in your set up you also have a Denon Reciever. What can you tell us about how the headphone output of this receiver compares to the dedicated headphone amps discussed here?

Heh, I've a Denon AV receiver too, and am using it currently as a headamp (see sig) as well as a speaker amp. Without anything to compare it to, I can safely say I don't like the sound. It's extremely sibilant, especially with my AT can.

But then again, it's a circa 1990 model, and things probably have changed since before or after then