[Edwood]

 
Quote:

There is only one way to settle this: volume match the three players people talk about clip+, s:flo2, and Hifiman 801 and let people listen to 4 clips of various genre's of songs.  Set up one station where people can plug in various headphones into a A/B/C selector (without seeing the players) and for each headphone type keep a log of which player people prefer (due to volume matching you would have to only do IEMS at one time and full sized at another).  In my view due to price, size, and battery life difference the Hifiman should be chosen 99% of the time and the second favorite should be the s:flo2 also by a large amount over the clip.  I know the hifiman can do higher bit rate files but even at the lower ones it should still be a clear winner.  Until then this other test that is being done is like picking which camera you like best by looking at a 3 pictures of a picture on your computer from three different camera's.  And I understand how the original picture should look the best but I still don't like the test although I appreciate what it is trying to do. 
 

 
 
That would be my picture I took of my headphone amp switch box I made.  I use it to do head to head tests between headphone amps.  In that pic, I was comparing the stock HM-801 amp to the GAME amp.
 
Mostly it's used to better match volume levels as CSIR correctly deduced.  I've found that most of the so-called audio improvements people hear with different amps is simply they are listening to one at a much louder volume level.  Especially in meet conditions where there is a lot of ambient noise.
 
Either way, it's still not an end all be all testing methodology.  It's simply another tool.  As you need to spend a lot of quiet time comparing different songs, music types, and different sections of passages of music you are familiar with. 
 
Either way, like I said, we're all treading a fine line here.  Trying to get people to "prove" their hearing prowess via ABX, DBT, etc. and then praising or condemning them for it is a quick trip to getting this thread locked and future discussions about the subject becoming a permanently banned topic.
 
So, keep it civil.
 
-Ed

 

[Edwood]

 
Quote:

No matter what hardware you introduce into dfkt's test the premise remains valid as you are still using a controlled variable(the files).
 
People are looking too much into the reason for this test, it is so bloody simple.

 

There is nothing wrong with AB testing, if this thread is closed it will be due to a contributors device being critiqued which might lower sales as this is a place of business when we really get down to it.

You haven't been around here long enough to even know what I was talking about, so don't pretend otherwise.
 
The thread can and will be locked for many reasons,  mostly because it will be going nowhere but beating a dead horse topic.
 
The real problem is that the ABX Double Blind testing discussions will become a banned topic in this forum as well as others since it's already been banned in the Cables forum for exactly what's going on in this thread.
 
Like I said, tread carefully.
 
-Ed

 

[Edwood]

Oh wait.  Nevermind.  What I said did become true. 
 
I just realized that this thread was moved to the sound science forum.

 

[PockyMaster]

Quote:

You can clearly pick which camera you like best from three shots with exactly the same parameters, when looking at them on your computer screen. Given you have a quality screen.

To be fair, cameras have other parameters to look at, such as AF speed, in the dark and light, noise, saturation, screen, ergonomics, ease of use, etc. that cannot be viewed on monitors. On top of that, skill is actually required for photography. I don't think listening to music is a skill.
That's just me. (dfkt, you use a 40d yourself, don't you?, how did you pick out your camera?)
 
That being said, audio devices that supposedly give characteristic properties that are supposedly "better" may just be fodder that makes it seem "better". Sure, some may like how Olympus's, or Pentax's, or Sony's colour is reproduced in jpeg, but in terms of technical quality, (RAW formats) They all differ in various areas that may make it a higher or lower performer. 
 
With that also being said, the differences are minute when you observe it as art rather than data. So, just like photography, stop bigoting over which is better or worse or of higher or lower quality and appreciate the music as art rather than 0's and 1's with whatever device is within your price range. 
 

I won't lie though. Without the hifiman, I wouldn't be able to have this much fun reading a forum. 

 

[dfkt]

Quote:

stop bigoting over which is better or worse

Wow, some of the guys that come out of the woodwork are just amazing. I give you the chance to evaluate all the options on your own, and that is how you (mis)interpret it?

 

[JaZZ]

The test is accurate, Jazz is just trying to distract people from the facts.

 
Please?! That's a tough imputation. Why should I do that? The opposite is true: I'm interested in the facts. Therefore my objections, to which you haven't cared to respond so far.
 
 

It's not about what he calls "peak performance"...

 
That's not how I have called it, that's how MrGreen has called it.
 
 

...it's just the standard at which these tests are usually done, which is 16 Ohm.

 
I have no idea what standard you're referring to, but it makes no sense to stick to it if it doesn't reflect reality and poses problems to a lot if not most portable players.
 
 

The difference to, say, 32 Ohm loads is negligible.
 

 
I have to wonder how you come to this conclusion. Audio is your profession, right? So you don't know what the result of half the load impedance is in the case of undersized buffer capacitors? I will tell you: a doubling of the corner frequency of the bass drop-off. That's anything but negligible. Now add this insight to the fact that at least 66% of the DAPs have undersized buffer capacitors.
 
 

Anyways, it's still about the difference between any of the three players with a 16 Ohm load against the original file. That's all.

 
«That's all» is a good call! It reminds me of the infamous «blind cable test» in which people had to guess which cable is which and call by name, although they hadn't heard any of them before. Why do you think it's so easy to identify the original file? I guess because you think it should sound better than the other three. But that's a misconception. There are many amps which make the music sound better, more attractive than original. At times I have even found some MP3 tracks to sound better than the uncompressed originals.
 
So I have to say: Despite your goodwill for undertaking this test which is certainly meant to do the community a favor, your precondition is as flawed as the test itself. A scientific approach is something else.
.

 

[Rockford]

 
Quote:

 

You haven't been around here long enough to even know what I was talking about, so don't pretend otherwise.
 
The thread can and will be locked for many reasons,  mostly because it will be going nowhere but beating a dead horse topic.
 
The real problem is that the ABX Double Blind testing discussions will become a banned topic in this forum as well as others since it's already been banned in the Cables forum for exactly what's going on in this thread.
 
Like I said, tread carefully.
 
-Ed

I know about the thread you speak of thank you very much.
 
If ABX does become as you believe a banned topic, it will be for no other reason than it's power to demystify the marketing BS used by these companies that make cheap players and sell them at a high mark up because people like you(audiophiles) are such a gullible breed.
 
Interesting the thread was moved to Sound Science so less people see it and are thus sales will remain untainted, well played headfi!

 

[PockyMaster]

Quote:

Wow, some of the guys that come out of the woodwork are just amazing. I give you the chance to evaluate all the options on your own, and that is how you (mis)interpret it?

Sorry, I do have to admit, I have misinterpreted it. =| It just seemed so much like the threads I've read over dpreview. 
 
I guess what I'm trying to get at is, in the end, what do we, as the general population of headfi,  expect out of all of this? 

 

[Edwood]

 
Quote:

 

I know about the thread you speak of thank you very much.
 
If ABX does become as you believe a banned topic, it will be for no other reason than it's power to demystify the marketing BS used by these companies that make cheap players and sell them at a high mark up because people like you(audiophiles) are such a gullible breed.
 
Interesting the thread was moved to Sound Science so less people see it and are thus sales will remain untainted, well played headfi!

 
Again, you don't know what you're talking about.  It's not a SINGLE thread.  It was several that got the topic banned.  But due to popular demand, there is a forum dedicated to this subject matter, so quit your whining.  You can either accept the thread being here in Sound Sciences, or it can also completely go away like Certifiably Inane forum did before.  And be thankful that the forum subscription system automatically updates your subscriptions so that you can still keep track of where a thread moves.  There are a lot of forums that do not do such a thing, and it looks like a thread just got deleted when it was just moved.
 
-Ed

 

 

[Hero Kid]

Quote:

Go back and re-read it, KID. I was the one who posted that popcorn posts were useless; kostalex, Sonic 748i and others are the peasants posting popcorn.

I apologize, being on this forum late in the morning shouldn't be allowed. I post stupid sh-t.

 

[odigg]

I said I wouldn't post but I want to point out using a 16 ohm load makes plenty of sense.  dfkt is also using a real IEM, not a dummy load (resistor).
 
Many BA IEMs have an impedance that varies a lot across the FR.  In the case of some IEMs, the impedance actually dips well below 16 ohms.  Look at the following graphs.
 
UE10
 
 
 
UE11
 

 
My own experiments with the JH13 (and various amp RMAA measurements by shigzeo) have led me to conclude the JH13 has an impedance that varies in similar fashion.  According to Headroom the SE530 impedance varies to a point near or below 16 as well.
 
It's very reasonable to expect that people who own the Hifiman will use them with a top tier IEM that has an impedance that varies in similar fashion.  So the Hifiman should be able to deal with a 16 ohm load without issue.
 
The High Performance version of the Mini3 can deal with these low impedance loads without issue or major detriment to it's measurements as compared to unloaded measurements.  I suspect the extended runtime version can do so as well.
 
And BTW, the above graphs demonstrate a 16ohm load is not a "speaker" load. 

 

[Beefy]

Quote:

Quote:
I apologize, being on this forum late in the morning shouldn't be allowed. I post stupid sh-t.

No problems, and sorry for the nasty tone. The new quoting system sucks, and I can see how the errors are made.

 

[JaZZ]

I said I wouldn't post but I want to point out using a 16 ohm load makes plenty of sense.  dfkt is also using a real IEM, not a dummy load (resistor). Many BA IEMs have an impedance that varies a lot across the FR.  In the case of some IEMs, the impedance actually dips well below 16 ohms.  Look at the following graphs (...UE10, UE11...)
 
My own experiments with the JH13 (and various amp RMAA measurements by shigzeo) have led me to conclude the JH13 has an impedance that varies in similar fashion.  According to Headroom the SE530 impedance varies to a point near or below 16 as well.

I must have overlooked the passage with the headphone as load (from the previous page I take it that it's a Vibe). But instead of making things better, it makes them even worse.
 
When you're listening to a headphone attached to a DAP, the former receives the signal from the headphone output according to its own complex-load properties. The dynamic aspect of it is that there may be some back EMF from the voice-coil which the amp reacts to. The complexity aspect is that the current flow is frequency-dependent according to the impedance curve of the sound transducer. In a real-life scenario that's o.k., since all variables match together, are dependent on and the result of each other. Whereas in the scenario at hand the recorded signal is colored by the headphone used.
 
You could say that the conditions are still the same for all the options except for the original recording, but that poses the question what the goal of the test acually is. According to dfkt it's to find out which is the original Flac file. Since we don't know the original recording, we have no clue how it should sound. It seems that the unexpressed central idea behind this test is that the orignal file is the one that sounds «best». Now with all the variables in play – precolored recording signal, individual soundcards and headphone amps –, the probability is high to get a special synergy with a specific file from the list making it sound «best» in the individual configuration.
.

 

[JaZZ]

 

The new quoting system sucks, and I can see how the errors are made.

That I agree with.

 

 

 

[Ro-amp]

 
Quote:

 
HiFi is not equal to a straight plot.
 
 

Zanden 5000 Mk.IV/Signature D/A converter : $15,470
 
From Stereophile
 
http://www.stereophile.com/cdplayers/1106zanden/index.html

Looking at this graph I was puzzled, I said to myself this is a bad signal graph or something like this, so I decided to read the article, and sure enough that was a defective unit, a new unit was sent and remeasured the low frequency is a lot better...no changes in the highs.
Sometimes graph do speak...
The fact that the hifiman tries to emulate a vinyl treble rolloff is fine with me as long as I am aware, but it ain't hifi, unfortunately the term as been distorted...
Regards