[odigg]

 
Quote:

As I can see the frequency response is not flat, but the roll-off seems to be not so obvious until 10 kHz. I listen to a lot of Metal music and I could not think of one instrument that reaches that high anyway (other than subharmonics maybe). Aren't those frequencies cut off by mp3 encoding anway? To me it seems like we are not taking into account how the Hifiman actually sounds. I mean the graph is all nice and it is obviously not a flat frequency response but so what? Do you actually listen to music at those frequencies?

 
Let me present this from a different point of view.
 
Let's say you go to the store and purchase an expensive product with a feature called X.  When you get home and play with the device you find that feature X does not work properly.  You go back to the store and a store employee says "Well most people don't use feature X so who cares if it works properly or works at all.  It's not like people will notice it."
 
Would you then say "Oh, I guess that makes sense.  I'll just keep it."
 
According to the Hifiman specs it supports 96khz files.  Yet, based on these graphs, it cannot fully support that feature.  The measurements show it cannot support the claim that it can accurately (according to industry specifications) reproduce the standard frequencies reproduced on a standard CD or FLAC file.
 
If you cannot hear it, or if some people prefer the treble rolloff, does that mean everything is fine with the player?  What about the people that can hear 20khz?  What about the people who can successfully ABX the files dfkt has provided?
 
Let me be honest, if this was a $50 mp3 player I wouldn't even post in this thread.  But this is an $800 player that IMHO, should be held to the highest standards.  That includes (as I've said many times before) industry standard measurements and specifications.
 
As for where the EQ should be, let's remember that both the professional, home, and audiophile audio industry have striven to create products that are sonically transparent.  Products like the HD800 have been praised for the transparency.  The statement "I'm listening to the music, not eqiupment" is used as a blessing on the best eqiupment.
 
The measurements RMAA provides are one indicator of just how "transparent" a piece of gear is.  A non-flat FR is an indicator that "transparency" is not where it should be.
 
Perhaps you don't like a flat FR.  Myself, I find myself favoring headphones with a boosted bass or EQing the bass when using speakers or headphones that are designed around neutrality.  But that's my choice.  And I can do it for free with a software EQ or with changing my headphones or speakers based on measurements.  When my other eqiupment measures flat I don't have to think about how this eqiupment is deliberately changing the sound.
 
And as a last point - I don't think I'm going to post in this thread any more.  I've made my point (repeatedly) and I'm sticking to it.  I have little to add beyond this.

 

 

[h.rav]

Quote:

A common misconception on this forum is that the DAC chip makes the sound.  It doesn't.  So while you might have preferred the Perfectwave to another DAC, that would be the result of the entire design of both.  Also, the popular WM8740 has pretty poor distortion measurements compared to other DA chips (the manufacturer measurements are available online), which is an incredible irony in this thread.  Yes, the Perfect Wave doesn't use the 8740, but my point still stands.

 
Agree, it's the implementation, I never meant to say that the chip itself makes the good sound
I was merely pointing out that I like what I hear from WM874x based DACs. The PerfectWave uses WM8741, AMB y2 also uses WM874x variant.

 

[super_fied]

I guess what I meant to say got interpreted at face value.hahaahah
 
The entire point is if such premiums are being charged for such so-called high end players, we should all just look for what is cheap AND good right? 
 
Then we will have absolutely no use for the big names charging such premiums for their products already, because we're all overpaying for stuff anyway. They should really simply sell it at cost price, for the components and chassis et al.
 
What really constitutes a reasonable price then? If the person likes what he hears and feels that that is a fair price to pay, then so be it, it's not as if anyone's really pointing a gun at the person to buy anything.
 

 

[buz]

I fail to see how selling at cost (which is obviously not really feasible) follows from the premise that you should buy cheap but good stuff (which is a rather rational thing to do), really.
 
But I have to hand it to dfkt, he sure knows how to start entertaining threads. Now how about a cable thread

 

[Galatian]

Galatian: If you can, please create the deltas of the four files. I couldn't get it to delta properly, because of the minuscule differences in playback speed between the players compared to the original file, which create a flanging effect rather than a proper delta. The tracks would have to be meticulously trimmed and time-stretched with a good algorithm to produce a valid delta. I just don't have the tools... or the patience.
 
Not to mention the Hifiman inverts the phase of the playback signal 180° compared to the original and the other players (which of course is easily fixed).

I did not realize it would be so difficult but then again what you said makes perfect sense and the website I was talking about merely compared two cables through one source (a guitar). Although if technically possible it should be the right test for a difference in sound quality. Again I agree that the hifiman having a roll-off is not what I would consider hifi either but then again note how I said "what I consider". I suppose it is all a question of definition and personal preference. I for one am very happy with the hifiman and other are not. I really don't have any problems with the size (considering that an iPod + amp) will be roughly the same size or bigger) and the UI except for gapless playback, but then again that's something that could be fixed on later software version. For me the upgrade in sound quality was huge. 1000 $ (including the new amp plus SD cards?) huge? Probably not but is a sport shoe that costs 2 € in production worth 150 € street price? The better you want to get the more expensive it gets. It's not linear but expotential. Now I completely wrote somehing else from what I actually wanted to say so here comes my bottom line: Looking at some frequency curves and going out to bash some product is never a wise decision. You might not have done it but some other members here have been very direct in their posts. Same goes for all the fanboys though. I embrace science and i definitely accept it outcomes, no matter how devastating they might be. For me the conclusion is: yes the hifiman has a roll-off but it does not affect the sound quality. Again that's a subjective impression and if you think something else sounds better then I'm glad. Soundquality can't be measured.

 

[Sonic 748i]

 
Quote:

I did not realize it would be so difficult but then again what you said makes perfect sense and the website I was talking about merely compared two cables through one source (a guitar). Although if technically possible it should be the right test for a difference in sound quality.Again I agree that the hifiman having a roll-off is not what I would consider hifi either but then again notehow I said "what I consider". I suppose it is all a question of definition and personal preference. I for one am very happy with the hifiman and other are not. I really don't have any problems with the size (considering that an iPod + amp) will be roughly the same size or bigger) and the UI except for gapless playback, but then again that's something that could be fixed on later software version. For me the upgrade in sound quality was huge. 1000 $ (including the new amp plus SD cards?) huge? Probably not but is a sport shoe that costs 2 € in production worth 150 € street price? The better you want to get the more expensive it gets. It's not linear but expotential. Now I completely wrote somehing else from what I actually wanted to say so here comes my bottom line: Looking at some frequency curves and going out to bash some product is never a wise decision. You might not have done it but some other members here have been very direct in their posts. Same goes for all the fanboys though. I embrace science and i definitely accept it outcomes, no matter how devastating they might be. For me the conclusion is: yes the hifiman has a roll-off but it does not affect the sound quality.

Well said.
 

 

[Edwood]

 
Quote:

 
 
Let me present this from a different point of view.
 
Let's say you go to the store and purchase an expensive product with a feature called X.  When you get home and play with the device you find that feature X does not work properly.  You go back to the store and a store employee says "Well most people don't use feature X so who cares if it works properly or works at all.  It's not like people will notice it."
 
Would you then say "Oh, I guess that makes sense.  I'll just keep it."
.......................
 
Let me be honest, if this was a $50 mp3 player I wouldn't even post in this thread.  But this is an $800 player that IMHO, should be held to the highest standards.  That includes (as I've said many times before) industry standard measurements and specifications.
 
As for where the EQ should be, let's remember that both the professional, home, and audiophile audio industry have striven to create products that are sonically transparent.  Products like the HD800 have been praised for the transparency.  The statement "I'm listening to the music, not eqiupment" is used as a blessing on the best eqiupment.
 
The measurements RMAA provides are one indicator of just how "transparent" a piece of gear is.  A non-flat FR is an indicator that "transparency" is not where it should be.
 
Perhaps you don't like a flat FR.  Myself, I find myself favoring headphones with a boosted bass or EQing the bass when using speakers or headphones that are designed around neutrality.  But that's my choice.  And I can do it for free with a software EQ or with changing my headphones or speakers based on measurements.  When my other eqiupment measures flat I don't have to think about how this eqiupment is deliberately changing the sound.
 
And as a last point - I don't think I'm going to post in this thread any more.  I've made my point (repeatedly) and I'm sticking to it.  I have little to add beyond this.


 

 
Quote:

 so here comes my bottom line: Looking at some frequency curves and going out to bash some product is never a wise decision. You might not have done it but some other members here have been very direct in their posts. Same goes for all the fanboys though. I embrace science and i definitely accept it outcomes, no matter how devastating they might be. For me the conclusion is: yes the hifiman has a roll-off but it does not affect the sound quality.

 
 
 
I'll repost and clarify my analogy I posted earlier.
 
A car that has a faster 0-60 time, does not always make it better at a race track.
 
It only guarantees that it will go faster in a straight line.  There are many other factors to racing, and nearly all race tracks have curves.  Only drag racing tracks are completely straight. 
 
I don't just sit there listening to nothing but frequency sweep tracks.  I listen to music.
 
-Ed

 

[Sonic 748i]

 
Quote:

 
 
 
 
I'll repost and clarify my analogy I posted earlier.
 
A car that has a faster 0-60 time, does not always make it better at a race track.
 
It only guarantees that it will go faster in a straight line.  There are many other factors to racing, and nearly all race tracks have curves.  Only drag racing tracks are completely straight. 
 
I don't just sit there listening to nothing but frequency sweep tracks.  I listen to music.
 
-Ed

And the HiFiMAN brings me closer to that then any other audio device has ever done.
 

 

[Galatian]

Exactly and I just wanted to express my support for this test and it has shown that although the Hifiman sounds good to me a generalized word like "hifi" should not be associated with it due to the roll-off, as I believe that the general consus on hifi is the reproduction of the music as closely to the original as possible. And I suppose we see clearly now that this is not the case. So the hifiman is best described as "musical" instead off staying it sounds "hifi", no? BTW: I also have to express my gratitude for choosing this thread title as it does not imply some off the bashing that has been written here. After all it is a product that does receive a huge amount of customers from people reading on this forum, so I'm glad that we can discuss the results of the test in an objective manner as we are. I know some threads where hype/bashing makes it extremely hard to come to a decision and I end up choosing not to buy a product at all because I'm more confused after reading the thread then before and I believe that this thread will clearify things for possible customers.

 

[MrGreen]

I shall take this challenge when I have some spare moments.

 

[Nankai]

Quote:

Here you can download the test tracks. In that folder is also a password protected RAR archive with the solution key to the files. I will give out the password in a few days, after some people have listened to the files and posted their results.

I recommend Foobar2000's ABX plugin for a comfortable way to test these tracks. But of course any other method works as well. Happy listening!

I am not sure if your method is a proper way. When you were doing your recording, you need to get analog signal from players, pass analog signals throw buffer on your recorder (soundcard), then do A/D converting to change the output analog signal to digital. After other head-fier download your files, they will have to do D/A again in their side.
 
We don't know how good your D/A device is, and I don't know how good their A/D device is. I believe your A/D device should be a soundcard line-in. I guess most people here also use a soundcard in their computer to do their comparison. Most soundcards have very poor analoge buffer, and have below average A/D accuracy. In addition, computer is not a clean environment because computer power supply add way too much high freq noise to the sound card circuit. For example, My computer set up was RME 9652 soundcard with coax output. The coax output was connected to a Wadia 12 DAC. I can easily tell difference from regular power supply and a expensive fanless powersupply.
 
All of these will add distortion to these tracks. After people download the track to their computer and play the track from their soundcard, the hole procedure of adding distortion will repeat again.

 

[Galatian]

Actually I listened to the tracks on my Hifiman...Dunno which one actually sounds better though... Sorry, couldn't resist :-D

 

[dfkt]

Nankai: Testing the quality of my sound card is very easy - listen to the tracks and tell me which one is the original CD rip, the one I didn't record.

 

[Nankai]

How about this: Add a $3000 price level CD player to this game？Say, Meridian 588 or G08.

 

[Nankai]

Another thinking: dfkt mentioned that HM-801 is worse than clip. Can anybody here tell the "clip" track is better than "HM-801" track?