Quote:
Perhaps no 6 owners has one? I think the 6 provides more amp options than any HP. Some here are satisfied with less powerful amps but others are using speaker amps with the same satisfaction. To each his own, I guess.
HifiMAN HE-6 Planar Magnetic Headphone
- Thread starter JIGF
- Start date
Quote:
Perhaps no 6 owners has one? I think the 6 provides more amp options than any HP. Some here are satisfied with less powerful amps but others are using speaker amps with the same satisfaction. To each his own, I guess.
Baird GoW
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 5, 2008
- Posts
- 996
- Likes
- 28
Quote:
It was talked about much more in the NFB-10 thread. I own the NFB-10ES and it drives the my HE-6 VERY well. With all the upgrades I've made to my digital interface since the last meet I was at, I would say it sounds as good as it did at a meet when I played them out of WA 5LE (Being fed by the NFB-10ES dac).
I love my NFB-10ES.
If I wasn't 20 and I had more money I would buy a Audio-gd Reference 7.1 and a Ray Samuels Audio Dark Star. THAT is my dream setup.
Quote:
Many people including a close friend of mine use NFB-10 with the HE-6
sphinxvc
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- May 28, 2010
- Posts
- 3,469
- Likes
- 109
All in all I think there are 3 people here that use it with the 6. I was just surprised to see something quietly putting out 8 watts and getting no press.
Quote:
It's the NFB-10SE now, it looks like they have dropped the Sabre chip entirely from their lineup.
sphinxvc
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- May 28, 2010
- Posts
- 3,469
- Likes
- 109
Quote:
Yes and if this second edition replaces the older one, it can be dropped out of the "HE-6 capable" camp, the SE only puts out 5.9W.
Edit:
I have a hard time getting this chart out of my head, even though many claim their Lyrs and what-have-you are driving the HE-6 capably. (It's from sixmoons review of the HE-500--but the recommended power numbers are probably straight from Fang)
Yes and if this second edition replaces the older one, it can be dropped out of the "HE-6 capable" camp, the SE only puts out 5.9W.
Edit:
I have a hard time getting this chart out of my head, even though many claim their Lyrs and what-have-you are driving the HE-6 capably. (It's from sixmoons review of the HE-500--but the recommended power numbers are probably straight from Fang)
[size=10pt]
|
Quote:
Huh? 5.9W is enough to drive the HE-6 to 120dB... Are you saying that this isn't loud enough? That's hearing damage territory...
Quote:
[size=10pt]
|
My Auditor only does 360mW (+25,6dBm) @ 1 kHz and 30 Ohms and it powers the HE-4 with ease. Never have to go past 10'clock.
sphinxvc
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- May 28, 2010
- Posts
- 3,469
- Likes
- 109
.
singh
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2010
- Posts
- 588
- Likes
- 14
am not sure if this is the correct to ask this .( its about the HE-adapter for HE6 )
but the 10 Ohm resistor that has to be added in parallel to the headphone has no part to play in the sound quality , only reason we are using a wire-wound resistor is because of the fact that wire-wound resistor has high wattage ratting. But adding a wire wound resistor also adds un-required inductance, now what if we add a caddock 30 W resistor (MP930 ) with a heat sink .. it most definitely wont have ANY inductance ( which even the best wire-wound will have , lets face it they are "wire-wound" resistor )
any thoughts ?
but the 10 Ohm resistor that has to be added in parallel to the headphone has no part to play in the sound quality , only reason we are using a wire-wound resistor is because of the fact that wire-wound resistor has high wattage ratting. But adding a wire wound resistor also adds un-required inductance, now what if we add a caddock 30 W resistor (MP930 ) with a heat sink .. it most definitely wont have ANY inductance ( which even the best wire-wound will have , lets face it they are "wire-wound" resistor )
any thoughts ?
There are wire-wound resistors like Mills that are non-inductive.
Speaking of the Mills resistors:
After further evaluation I have removed my Rothwell inline RCA attenuators, as the sound out of my speaker amp is better without them. The background seems blacker and there is more clarity. Then I installed the 10 ohm Mills resistors to equalize the impedance and the imaging improved, I think that there is more depth to the sound now. The unfortunate part is that I am now driving my HE-6 at 9 am on the dial without the attenuators, as the resistors are in parallel and not in series but I can live with that. I would prefer to be closer to my amp's "sweet spot" volume-wise, but it sounds great and there is no channel imbalance. Even if there was some imbalance, the amp has dual mono volume pots so I could compensate.
My next goal on that system would be to upgrade my DAC to a balanced one that will upsample to at least 96k (using Devilsound NOS DAC now) so I can adjust my volume down out of the computer digitally without sacrificing any sound quality. The DAC I have set my sights on is the Balanced Havana which would provide a multitude of benefits besides upsampling: a balanced source would match up better with my balanced speaker amp, and it has a tube output stage which my SS amp benefits from as well. This would allow me to drop the tube stage which does increase the volume of the Devilsound preamp-style.
But even at 9 am on the dials the sound is better than ever out of my HE-6 now, many thanks to wuwhere for helping me sort this out so far. I am already starting to like this rig as much or better than my other setup which wasn't the case before.
I do have another question however, as my math skills have evidently declined somewhat, I think it's an algebra thing (I was better at geometry lol). I am trying to figure out how much power I am putting into the 50 ohm HE-6 exactly with my 45 wpc amp:
8 ohms, 45 wpc
16, 22.5
32, 11.25
50, X
64, 5.625
I think X may be 7.2 (wpc) but I'm not sure, my secondary conclusion is 8.4 wpc. But I wouldn't be surprised if it was something else entirely. If there's anybody that has the math skills to confirm the value of X I would appreciate it.
Also I think that with my resistors in parallel I am not attenuating the volume like I would be if these resistors were wired in series. I believe that the sound quality is better this way?
After further evaluation I have removed my Rothwell inline RCA attenuators, as the sound out of my speaker amp is better without them. The background seems blacker and there is more clarity. Then I installed the 10 ohm Mills resistors to equalize the impedance and the imaging improved, I think that there is more depth to the sound now. The unfortunate part is that I am now driving my HE-6 at 9 am on the dial without the attenuators, as the resistors are in parallel and not in series but I can live with that. I would prefer to be closer to my amp's "sweet spot" volume-wise, but it sounds great and there is no channel imbalance. Even if there was some imbalance, the amp has dual mono volume pots so I could compensate.
My next goal on that system would be to upgrade my DAC to a balanced one that will upsample to at least 96k (using Devilsound NOS DAC now) so I can adjust my volume down out of the computer digitally without sacrificing any sound quality. The DAC I have set my sights on is the Balanced Havana which would provide a multitude of benefits besides upsampling: a balanced source would match up better with my balanced speaker amp, and it has a tube output stage which my SS amp benefits from as well. This would allow me to drop the tube stage which does increase the volume of the Devilsound preamp-style.
But even at 9 am on the dials the sound is better than ever out of my HE-6 now, many thanks to wuwhere for helping me sort this out so far. I am already starting to like this rig as much or better than my other setup which wasn't the case before.
I do have another question however, as my math skills have evidently declined somewhat, I think it's an algebra thing (I was better at geometry lol). I am trying to figure out how much power I am putting into the 50 ohm HE-6 exactly with my 45 wpc amp:
8 ohms, 45 wpc
16, 22.5
32, 11.25
50, X
64, 5.625
I think X may be 7.2 (wpc) but I'm not sure, my secondary conclusion is 8.4 wpc. But I wouldn't be surprised if it was something else entirely. If there's anybody that has the math skills to confirm the value of X I would appreciate it.
Also I think that with my resistors in parallel I am not attenuating the volume like I would be if these resistors were wired in series. I believe that the sound quality is better this way?
7.2 is correct. Here is the calculation link that somebody posted here before.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?authkey=CLzO7qkI&key=0AqltAVdBqS1DdDVzakNjR1k2QmItNGFTMHhETG82ekE&hl=en&authkey=CLzO7qkI#gid=0
If you wire the resistors in series, they become a voltage divider, this would allow you to increase the vol knob setting. You can try 100ohms. The value of the parallel resistor will also change.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet/ccc?authkey=CLzO7qkI&key=0AqltAVdBqS1DdDVzakNjR1k2QmItNGFTMHhETG82ekE&hl=en&authkey=CLzO7qkI#gid=0
If you wire the resistors in series, they become a voltage divider, this would allow you to increase the vol knob setting. You can try 100ohms. The value of the parallel resistor will also change.
- Joined
- Jul 12, 2007
- Posts
- 571
- Likes
- 41
grokit
you're underpowering them ! (joke)
Seriously if you look at the table and your calcs ~50w at 8 ohms seems to be the recommendation
you're underpowering them ! (joke)
Seriously if you look at the table and your calcs ~50w at 8 ohms seems to be the recommendation
sunneebear
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2002
- Posts
- 1,626
- Likes
- 161
Nooooo!! They need moah powwwah!
Users who are viewing this thread
