[Davesrose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NiceCans /img/forum/go_quote.gif So in the interest of simplicity in the comparison, can't we just leave the source out of the equation? (since it is common to both sides of the equation we can multiply both sides by 1/Source thus eliminating it completely)

My assertion is that source still plays a factor, even when comparing two amps. Heck, especially when comparing two amps

To generalize, a more expensive source will bring out more details so that differences in the amps will be more apparent. If your source isn't revealing (and say even uses 128 kbps mp3s

), then there's going to be less detail for amps to be accentuating and they'll sound more alike. IMO, amps have less effect on sound difference then source does. You need a revealing source in order to evaluate an amp.

My dad is no longer an audiophile. He's converting all his CDs to 128kbps mp3s so he can listen straight through a Creative Zen.....on wireless Sennheiser headphones. With the internal amp and headphones that he has, I'm sure you can't tell a difference between 128kbps vs lossless. Why I'm a big advocate of CD, SACD, and vinyl for expensive headphones: why invest more in a headphone and amp if you're running off of a compressed source?

 

[NiceCans]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davesrose /img/forum/go_quote.gif My dad is no longer an audiophile. He's converting all his CDs to 128kbps mp3s so he can listen straight through a Creative Zen.....on wireless Sennheiser headphones. With the internal amp and headphones that he has, I'm sure you can't tell a difference between 128kbps vs lossless.

I felt like someone was running their fingers down a chalkboard while I read that.

You have taken it to the extremes, but at that point I must agree, especially after my reaction above

 

[laxx]

Going to have to agree with Davesrose (we parted ways when he went HD650 and I went K701. =]). Source is often overlooked where blame is mostly put onto the amp. You can't amp something that's not there. Without the source outputting details, there's nothign for the amp to do since it can't recreate the details.

I don't know what kind of source the OP has, but my cheap CDP ($250 retail I believe, but picked up locally for $40) is much more reveiling than using my comp as source.

 

[Davesrose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by NiceCans /img/forum/go_quote.gif I felt like someone was running their fingers down a chalkboard while I read that. You have taken it to the extremes, but at that point I must agree, especially after my reaction above

I knew this extreme example would make my point

Same is true for really expensive gear. Heck, now with my really revealing CD transport/DAC, I can tell how well a CD was mastered. A lot of new rock CDs just suck with compression (just got Jet's new CD and it's horribly loud/compressed). Also got a recent live recording of the Vienna Philomarnic, Placido Domingo conducting, from my aunt. Detail was nice, but my expensive rig clearly shows a faint feedback their recording equipment had. SACD can be quite scary. One Glen Gould SACD I have, you can also hear the next recording session they had in the next room....right in the background.

Quote:

Originally Posted by laxx /img/forum/go_quote.gif Going to have to agree with Davesrose (we parted ways when he went HD650 and I went K701. =])

Well I won't hold you to your decision of going with the k701 laxx

Eventually I'm going to listen to it to see what the hubub is about. Meanwhile, the HD650 is sounding very sweet indeed now.

 

[Gravitas]

My source is a Pioneer DV-578A. Admittedly not an "audiophile" source, but at the time I bought it I was looking for a "budget" source that played SACD and DVD-A ...and in the future I could stick it in a bedroom to use as a straight up DVD player.

Anyway, like NiceCans said, it would seem that an A/B comparison wouldn't matter much if both are using the same source? But I see there are other opinions. I'm still on the search for a source that will pair nicely with the Hd650 and be USB compatible as I will eventually have all of my music on PC...but still break out the CDs on occasion.

In the meantime, I'll try long listening sessions with the Glite for awhile until I'm completely accustomed to its sound. Then give the H5 a whirl and see what happens.

 

[Sinwerm]

I have to say the Head 5 is really not as "warm" as is stated in alot of reviews. Meier Audio is known for an analytical sound , very accurate and precise , no ? I don't think he would change this for the release of an amp for the people who want detail and quality sound reproduction. Yes on first listen the (before burnin) the lower registers may seem flabby or bloated and the highs a bit decreased. I think he reccomends 270 hrs. of burn time ( I could be wrong don't hang me). After that the bass is tight and well defined and the highs are sharper but not overbearing just a nice balance.

 

[Zorander]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sinwerm /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have to say the Head 5 is really not as "warm" as is stated in alot of reviews. Meier Audio is known for an analytical sound , very accurate and precise , no ? I don't think he would change this for the release of an amp for the people who want detail and quality sound reproduction. Yes on first listen the (before burnin) the lower registers may seem flabby or bloated and the highs a bit decreased. I think he reccomends 270 hrs. of burn time ( I could be wrong don't hang me). After that the bass is tight and well defined and the highs are sharper but not overbearing just a nice balance.

I gave mine a solid 150 hours of burn-in (and a further 50-100 hours of personal listening on it) before I decided I still prefer my Creek and ultimately sold it. It's a musical piece of kit (and neat too, having an integrated PSU as well as Crossfeed module). Unfortunately it could not work its magic on my beloved HD-650 and (regardless of your belief they will disappear after further use) its prominently warm signature is not to my liking.

Cheers!

 

[Graphicism]

I would think it depends on the music you are listening too... not only the bit-rate but the instruments being used. Today I just went from a Headfive to a SinglePower Slam and the difference is night and day. Perhaps listen to something slower if you are not already, Mike Oldfield or something with a lot of clear instruments.

 

[Sinwerm]

Listen with love , all ears are different. Enjoy !!

 

[smeggy]

If you really have to try that hard to hear a difference, let alone an improvement, then it's really not worth it as far as I'm concerned.

 

[crazyfrenchman27]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zorander /img/forum/go_quote.gif That's a surprise. There is definitely a HUGE difference between the GS Solo and Headfive amps. I'm expecting the Gilmore Lite to sound closer to the former wrt sound or am I wrong in this?

There really isn't a "huge" difference in any amp setup, unless we are comparing unbalanced against balanced.

-Matt

 

[Patrickhat2001]

I'm really suprised no one has mentioned an obvious solution.

When doing these tests don't use the loop out on the Gilmore Lite. Why? Because when you're listening to the Headfive this way it's still going to through the Gilmore's internals first before the signal is sent to the Headfive. So, when doing this the sound you're hearing from the Headfive is the sound of the Gilmore Lite and Headfive signatures combined (plus whatever characteristics your extra set of interconnects impart).

 

[smeggy]

I don't know how the GL is wired up but some loop outs don't go through any internal circuitry at all.

 

[Patrickhat2001]

Quote:

Originally Posted by smeggy /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't know how the GL is wired up but some loop outs don't go through any internal circuitry at all.

Whoops, looks like I was partially wrong on that. From some reason I was thinking the Gilmore Lite also had PreAmp capabilities. Still, the signal does go through the circuit boaord of the Gilmore Lite (only it is not amplified before it hits the loop out). So, I would recommend, for the sake of fairness, to still avoid using the loop out when comparing the two amps because the signal still has to run through two more jacks, a circuit board and wires before it actually reaches the second amp. This could effect the signal--with analog audio there is no such thing as a pure transport, afterall.

 

[fjf]

I think that the differences between amps are very overstated here. You have two good amps, and both sound good. They let you listen to the music without coloration or noise. They just amplify the signal they get from the source to your cans. Honestly, what did you expect?. If you want differences now get a bad transistor radio and listen to it. Two good amps sound like music.