[OneMalt]

Does anyone else feel that the Headroom crossfeed filter, while absolutely improving imaging and soundstage, does so at the expense of some of the detail? I'm basing my observation on the Cosmic and making an assumption that it holds true throughout the line.

 

[Oliver :)]

Do you really mean cutting *detail* or cutting high-end? The CF def. does something to the high-end, which to me qualifies as cutting detail as well, and it was one of the reasons for me to get the Cosmic with its selectable brightness afterall. I wanted that treble back, and that was a no-go with the TAH

I will do some listening with the CF off, although I already am a CF-addict.
Do you have a reference track for your experience? My personal one atm is Björk's "Headphones", but rather for imaging and stage, not for excessive detail...

 

[AssafL]

I find that it depends on the recording.

E.g. MA Recordings use two Microphone capsules to do real stereo field recordings (usually in highly reverberant surroundings as well). In these, diffuse field recordings, CF does not improve imaging and may cause some loss of HF details.

Regular (i.e. non stereo) recordings usually gain from the CF process and the loss of HF information can be negated using the filter.

AssafL

 

[elrod-tom]

I'm not so sure it's that it cuts the high end, as much as it boosts the bass (in my book, there is a difference).

For me, it also seems to depend on the recording. I find that I sometimes feel like my TA (and when I had it, my Little) presents as a tad bit warm on most newer recordings (i.e. after 1970 or so). However, if I pop something like "Rubber Soul" by the Beatles in (love those old mixes...vocals in one ear, instruments in the other), I don't notice it at all. That tells me that the detail is not actually lost as much as it's burried with bass.


I have no idea why this is...I just know that it is.

 

[elrod-tom]

Am I the only person who has trouble with double postings?

 

[taoster]

Quote:

Originally posted by elrod-tom Am I the only person who has trouble with double postings?

do you double-click? on web, you only need single clicks on most things.

 

[elrod-tom]

No...I don't double click. Sometimes I hang up in the middle of one of these postings, and it times out. Then, when I resend, it's already there!!

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by elrod-tom I'm not so sure it's that it cuts the high end, as much as it boosts the bass (in my book, there is a difference).

elrod-tom: you're talking about the Total Airhead, correct?

It should be pointed out that the crossfeed on the Airhead and TA (and possibly the Little) affects the spectrum *much* differently than the crossfeed circuitry of some of the better models. I find that on the Total Airhead, there is a bit of a bass boost. On the other hand, on the other end of the spectrum, the Max has no bass boost whatsoever, but there is a slight treble reduction (which I and many others compensate for by using the filter switch).

 

[elrod-tom]

Thanks MacDEF...I wasn't aware that there was a difference in the crossfeed circuits between models.

Although if I REALLY thought about it, it might have occured to me that there would be a difference between say the TA and the MAX.

DOH!!

 

[Eagle_Driver]

I agree with MacDEF on the crossfeed on the TAH. It doesn't cut the highs - but rather it boosts the mid-bass response, however slightly.

 

[Duncan]

Quote:

Originally posted by Oliver Do you have a reference track for your experience? My personal one atm is Björk's "Headphones", but rather for imaging and stage, not for excessive detail...

Ouch!!

I've had the CD 'Post' for many years, but never really played it... I just listened to it through my META42 and CD1700s and got a bass headache... that is some seriously messed up frequencies that the recording studio used!!

The soundstage is already very wide on this track, so does X-Feed close the soundstage down? make it flatter?