[oozy2007]

I would recommend Monoprice cables simply because they look and feel nice to me. If you care about measurements as in https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-of-rca-cables-mogami-amazon-monoprice.27871/ and https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/battle-of-budget-xlr-cables.31301/, they should be transparent, though the Amazon cables might even have better mains noise rejection, though that measurement result may have mainly been due to differences in cable length, and even then, for short runs, any noise picked up should not be audible. Is there anything you think you are hearing with the Amazon cables? Whether you choose to spend more in hope of hearing some kind of improvement is up to you.

i don't believe in measurements i dont think u can measure what the brain translate to sound and i do hear difference in cables sometime massive maybe it's faulty cables but i can perceive the differences.

 

[MrHaelscheir]

Particularly the R2R part, I read somewhere that Dr Bian from Hifiman like R2R DACs so it is likely they tune their headphones using R2R DACs which also may explain the slight sizzle up top on all Hifiman HPs, if you see their DAC offering they are also all R2R topology.

How are you finding your Holo Audio Spring 3 KTE compared to the Topping D90LE?

 

[MrHaelscheir]

i don't believe in measurements i dont think u can measure what the brain translate to sound and i do hear difference in cables sometime massive maybe it's faulty cables but i can perceive the differences.

We can measure audio transparency or confirm that two chains transmit a signal identically, but we of course cannot measure subjective responses which may not necessarily be due to the actual physical properties of the gear. If you are susceptible to hearing differences, that is fine, but one can still be open to the possibility of the physical sounds themselves differing meagrely. Two identical acoustic signals can be heard differently when other percepts are present.

 

[borkenarrou]

How are you finding your Holo Audio Spring 3 KTE compared to the Topping D90LE?

I kept the A90D / D90LE in their boxes soon after I got my Spring 3 / V550 stack (mostly due to space issue), never opened ever since and properly compare them, I think I'll soon sell these after I get a chance, busy life , but my first impression of the Spring 3 after listening to D90LE for few months (connected to A90D, V550 was incoming) was bigger sounstange (even with my HD6XX), realistic timbre, instrument seperation / holograhic presentation and very slight warm sound going by my auditory memory, A90D/D90LE is also good in resolution, ultra low noise, but bit thin, dry and 2D sounding (in comparison).

 

[BlakeT]

We can measure audio transparency or confirm that two chains transmit a signal identically, but we of course cannot measure subjective responses which may not necessarily be due to the actual physical properties of the gear. If you are susceptible to hearing differences, that is fine, but one can still be open to the possibility of the physical sounds themselves differing meagrely. Two identical acoustic signals can be heard differently when other percepts are present.

The devil is in the details. This statement is not accurate, not provable. This is dumbing down an incredibly complex subject. Not scientific at all.

 

[MrHaelscheir]

The devil is in the details. This statement is not accurate, not provable. This is dumbing down an incredibly complex subject. Not scientific at all.

If in the hypothetical scenario of a state-of-the-art ADC measuring the output of two stacks already shown to have nigh identical transfer functions, a null test between the synchronized and level matched signals yields a difference between the recorded files or with the source file well below audibility, does this not qualify as "transparent" between those points A and B? https://audiofi.net/2019/01/audio-engineer-claims-his-null-tester-settles-the-debate-on-wires/ for more context on null testing. I suppose Paul McGowan's rebuttal simply refuses to admit that the extra-electrical thing not captured by the null test is most likely psychological in nature. https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...-error-metric-discussion-and-beta-test.19841/ is the latest that I know of for applying null tests to DACs or amps. Now, maybe we do need to see more precise acoustic null testing to see how the transducer purportedly interacts with the gear. I cannot say whether your gear or whatever specifically would fail the null test (show no differences) since we have not measured them, but my stance is that in the case that it does fail but differences are still heard, then it is much more likely that the differences are psychological in cause, which isn't a problem if those effects provide consistent enjoyment for you.

 

[BlakeT]

First, read all the below, as though we are two friends at a bar, just having a friendly, perhaps at times vigorous debate, nobody is killing puppies... Also, if you've come to this thread to read about the HE1000 (a great headphone btw), please skip my post.

Nobody can even come up with an accurate description of all of the sonic attributes that comprise sounds/music we hear and how are brains, sensory abilities process them. We don't have measurement gear capable of measuring every single aspect of sound- not even close and you cannot prove otherwise (and yes, you prove, you are the one that thinks you have science on your side, I believe your measurements are rudimentary). The bolded words, in my view, are the crux of the debate.

And, don't even get me started on how our different brains, hearing abilities, physical ear make up, room (for speakers), headphone design and how it interfaces with your ears... this is all sort of a "best educated guess" kind of a hobby... a try for yourself and make your own conclusions hobby. IMHO. I don't have the answers, heck I know very little. Nobody should give my opinions/views any more weight than any other person with access to the web and a keyboard.

If this hobby was as neat and tidy and straightforward as the hard core objectivists think it is, we'd all be listening to whatever the best measuring Topping du jour that ASR tells us is perfection (actually strike that.. because hey, just resort to the 'threshold of human hearing' Topping has already achieved 'good enough perfection'). We'd have a handful of DAC's/amps/headphones/speakers to choose from because, well, ASR has figured out everything and no need to have any variation, unless of course, you enjoy distortion.

There is literally no such thing as a perfectly transparent audio component and you can't prove otherwise, and your arguments above, just miss the boat. If you can't see that, I can't help you. Also, you can never isolate anything in audio as we are talking about a chain, and how each component, cable or connection flows through the system.

"Nothing to see here folks, I can take these measurements, plug them into my perfect machine, and I'll tell you what is real, and what isn't. If what you hear doesn't align with my close minded, objectivist dogma, and my rudimentary measurements, well kid, you are delusional my son (patronizing tone included)". See, I have a degree in [fill in the blank science degree], or I am a networking specialist, or my day job is "x" so just believe me, or hey, ASR is the authority, and they say...

Yet, this whole arena requires a multi-disciplinary approach involving more than just electronics, and a lot more research and actual rigorous scientific approach. I don't think any audio company can justify the expense, etc.

The irony is, the hard line objectivists are actually anti-science, in that they have the most close-minded approach. Hubris, an extreme lack of intellectual curiosity, in my opinion. They think they've got this audio thing all sorted out, and feel the need to jump in and school everyone, whether someone is looking to be schooled or not, and perhaps, this is a school people shouldn't want to attend in the first place?

Anyway, I'm out, and no, you won't convince me, and I won't convince you, and ultimately, who cares anyway.
Going back to your "hope you enjoy" comment. I also hope you derive some fulfillment with your approach to this hobby. I don't really understand your approach, it doesn't make sense to me, but big deal. For me, this hobby is about music and equipment that enhances that experience, which, ultimately, is subjective, it is art, and yes, science. An incomplete science. The vast majority of us here, try, buy, experiment and hopefully, have fun along the way. When we kick the bucket, no online objectivist/subjectivist debate is probably worthwhile, and I think I've just wasted 15 minutes of my precious time on this spinning globe. D'oh, the joke is on me.

All good though. Again, see my first comment above. And please don't be offended if you are a hard line objectivist reading this thread, and don't interpret that I am offended if you have a different viewpoint. Mildly annoyed from time to time, yes, but who cares.

Back to music...

P.S. no more posts from me on this topic, as this is a waste of time for everyone..

 

[MrHaelscheir]

First, read all the below, as though we are two friends at a bar, just having a friendly, perhaps at times vigorous debate, nobody is killing puppies... Also, if you've come to this thread to read about the HE1000 (a great headphone btw), please skip my post.

Nobody can even come up with an accurate description of all of the sonic attributes that comprise sounds/music we hear and how are brains, sensory abilities process them. We don't have measurement gear capable of measuring every single aspect of sound- not even close and you cannot prove otherwise (and yes, you prove, you are the one that thinks you have science on your side, I believe your measurements are rudimentary). The bolded words, in my view, are the crux of the debate.

And, don't even get me started on how our different brains, hearing abilities, physical ear make up, room (for speakers), headphone design and how it interfaces with your ears... this is all sort of a "best educated guess" kind of a hobby... a try for yourself and make your own conclusions hobby. IMHO. I don't have the answers, heck I know very little. Nobody should give my opinions/views any more weight than any other person with access to the web and a keyboard.

If this hobby was as neat and tidy and straightforward as the hard core objectivists think it is, we'd all be listening to whatever the best measuring Topping du jour that ASR tells us is perfection (actually strike that.. because hey, just resort to the 'threshold of human hearing' Topping has already achieved 'good enough perfection'). We'd have a handful of DAC's/amps/headphones/speakers to choose from because, well, ASR has figured out everything and no need to have any variation, unless of course, you enjoy distortion.

There is literally no such thing as a perfectly transparent audio component and you can't prove otherwise, and your arguments above, just miss the boat. If you can't see that, I can't help you. Also, you can never isolate anything in audio as we are talking about a chain, and how each component, cable or connection flows through the system.

"Nothing to see here folks, I can take these measurements, plug them into my perfect machine, and I'll tell you what is real, and what isn't. If what you hear doesn't align with my close minded, objectivist dogma, and my rudimentary measurements, well kid, you are delusional my son (patronizing tone included)". See, I have a degree in [fill in the blank science degree], or I am a networking specialist, or my day job is "x" so just believe me, or hey, ASR is the authority, and they say...

Yet, this whole arena requires a multi-disciplinary approach involving more than just electronics, and a lot more research and actual rigorous scientific approach. I don't think any audio company can justify the expense, etc.

The irony is, the hard line objectivists are actually anti-science, in that they have the most close-minded approach. Hubris, an extreme lack of intellectual curiosity, in my opinion. They think they've got this audio thing all sorted out, and feel the need to jump in and school everyone, whether someone is looking to be schooled or not, and perhaps, this is a school people shouldn't want to attend in the first place?

Anyway, I'm out, and no, you won't convince me, and I won't convince you, and ultimately, who cares anyway.
Going back to your "hope you enjoy" comment. I also hope you derive some fulfillment with your approach to this hobby. I don't really understand your approach, it doesn't make sense to me, but big deal. For me, this hobby is about music and equipment that enhances that experience, which, ultimately, is subjective, it is art, and yes, science. An incomplete science. The vast majority of us here, try, buy, experiment and hopefully, have fun along the way. When we kick the bucket, no online objectivist/subjectivist debate is probably worthwhile, and I think I've just wasted 15 minutes of my precious time on this spinning globe. D'oh, the joke is on me.

All good though. Again, see my first comment above. And please don't be offended if you are a hard line objectivist reading this thread, and don't interpret that I am offended if you have a different viewpoint. Mildly annoyed from time to time, yes, but who cares.

Back to music...

P.S. no more posts from me on this topic, as this is a waste of time for everyone..

I am certainly not the described "hardline objectivist" who tells people that they literally don't perceive the differences they perceive; I strive to avoid those abrasive takes. My concern is about discerning the actual causes of those differences that apparently keep the industry running. I did express the desire to be able to conduct null tests across the entire chain including the transducers. If (hypothetically) even no acoustic differences could be detected down to 100 dB below the music signal, then where else can the difference lie? Apparently signal identicality (to the level of inaudible differences) does not count as "transparent" for you in regard to transmission between two points.

Nobody can even come up with an accurate description of all of the sonic attributes that comprise sounds/music we hear... [intentionally truncated]

Are you saying there is more to be extracted out of a recording and compared than the encoded samples or the grooves on a vinyl? The point is that my stance is that the "immeasurable" thing/aspect described in the rest of that sentence and your second and third paragraph (assuming that the transducer/room and recording are kept the same) is probably as simple (and complex) as our psychoacoustic reaction ("more than just electronics") to the stimulus of knowing about the gear and all the lore surrounding its sonic properties, and at that point, are we really talking about sound as in air vibrations or electrical signals anymore? The remaining unknown complexities and variability of "how we hear/perceive/process" is independent of the musical content itself and the capacity to show whether a chain prior to the transducer has succeeded in minimally altering that content. Then all the audio "engineering" going on ends up being little more than the art (if not rigorous field) of extrasonically manipulating sonic perception of the same signals.

Then you have my findings from page 320 where I in all my skepticism and curiosity finally acquired an HE1000se, measured only small improvements over the Arya Stealth, and heard virtually nothing advantageous when volume-matched compared to the improvement I get from personal HRTF measurements and binaural head-tracking EQed to my free-field response. I also got the Lavricables Grand for the HE1000se both for looks, feel, function (4.4 mm termination), and curiosity, and indeed, I measure and hear no sonic differences when volume-matched. And now I'm saving up for a Holo Audio stack to either come upon a revelation or bust those myths for my personal perception. If people are told they should hear differences between measurably very similar things, follow the recommendation, and by all their critical faculties perceive only substantial similarities, they would be rightfully disappointed, this being the counterpart of the understood case where ASR recommends something and someone find that it sounds "bad" or "lifeless" anyways. Transducers are obviously a matter of preference, but I have issue with the proliferated use of DACs, amps, and cables as tone controls or exhibiting properties I've only heard out of DSP.

By all means, you can choose to keep your silence, but that will not silence my attempt to talk sense where loose ends remain. Or I would like for undecided newcomers to still have both a red and blue pill to choose between.

 

[morpheus69]

Hifiman planers really need to be broken in before you judge their sound. You need to exercise that diaphragm. It's not a magical thing, it is just a mechanical thing to get them to sound as intended on each model/level of headphone.

 

[joseph69]

Hifiman should have kept this unique model instead of releasing a poor man's HE1000SE to replace it.

Poor choice of words because by far--the Stealth is not a "poor man's" headphone.
$1399.00 is a lot of money for a headphone--and as I've mentioned before, you'd be hard pressed to find the Stealth sound quality at its price point. However--I do agree with your description of the v2 sound and do prefer my v2 to the Stealth.

While still in 30 day return period on SE I am considering v2. I see it refurbished at hifiman store. Anyone have experience with refurbished units there? Same 3 year warranty applies...

Have you ever heard the v2? If not--are you just interested in hearing it in comparison to the SE, or is there something you don't like about it?

Equipment should be a great consideration when discussing how headphones/speakers sound.

You also need to check under "About" in members profiles--not everyone lists their gear in their signature.

Unless you are doing it to save money, stick with the SE, it's a better headphone, Susvara tech, and if you haven't broken it in yet. wait... it's an amazing pair.

Purely subjective.
Just because X is more technical than Y doesn't;t mean it's a "better" headphone. I've said this a million times: I owned both--the Susvara and v2 at the same time and preferred my v2. I also preferred my v2 to the Stealth which has Stealth Magnets (hence the name) so it as well is more technical than my v2. I do have the SE coming in this week and I'll listen if I prefer it over my v2 regardless of the technology.

How many hours would you say I need to break in the SE?

Per HiFiMAN: 100hrs

 

[MrHaelscheir]

Hifiman planers really need to be broken in before you judge their sound. You need to exercise that diaphragm. It's not a magical thing, it is just a mechanical thing to get them to sound as intended on each model/level of headphone.

I am aware and am currently "burning in" the unit shown in https://www.head-fi.org/threads/totl-disappointments.925164/post-17949397 (post #936). If I still measure no improvement in those distortion defects, I will pan that as the second properly defective HE1000se I've received and be off to my third replacement hopefully from a better batch (the two problematic ones were from November). My target is 150 hours of pink noise and Mahler. Nonetheless, being "just a mechanical thing" should imply some form of measurable change, else I personally can only conclude that perceived changes are psychological. I personally cannot possibly trust what I believe I "heard" 150 hours ago.

 

[morpheus69]

The main thing i guess i want to say is that you may miss out if you don't judge any of them before breaking them in. Also suggest sticking with the included cable and stay off the EQ, till you get a chance to hear them as intended. But just my suggestion.

 

[Daniel4IEM]

Have you ever heard the v2? If not--are you just interested in hearing it in comparison to the SE, or is there something you don't like about it?

I have not heard the V2 yet and am about a week into an 30 day window where allowed to return new SE.

I love the SE but do find some frequencies/ tones acoustically uncomfortable- violins, horns and some vocals make me cringe.

From what I’ve read the warmer V2 might be just right for me so I’m interested in hearing the comparison to inform which I stick with.

 

[MrHaelscheir]

The main thing i guess i want to say is that you may miss out if you don't judge any of them before breaking them in. Also suggest sticking with the included cable and stay off the EQ, till you get a chance to hear them as intended. But just my suggestion.

Is there an issue with "burning in" the balanced Lavricables Grand?

 

[morpheus69]

Is there an issue with "burning in" the balanced Lavricables Grand?

Shouldn't... more just a hear it as intended... the control group before testing other combos.