[BIG POPPA]

Quote:

Originally Posted by aimlink /img/forum/go_quote.gif Suspiciously snake oil indeed.

The QLS-6 can speak for itself. You will have to audition it sometime? Just because you do not understand what it does, does not mean it doesn't work? With audio everybody has a different path to take. Very happy with mine. About 30 years in the making.

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIG POPPA /img/forum/go_quote.gif With audio everybody has a different path to take.

Yep. Some walk, some run, some quantum tunnel their sneakers

 

[waterlogic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIG POPPA /img/forum/go_quote.gif The QLS-6 can speak for itself. You will have to audition it sometime? .

Audition only ? I thought you can also communicate with it through the quantum tunnel ?

For 400 $, would be nice it would tell the weather at least.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif If we go by known measurements there shouldn't be a real difference. I think most difference are placebo, or lack of level matching. That is of course providing both are similar in their capabilities. The headroom example falls apart as they don't provide enough measurements and results to honestly compare them.

Good try! But why bother with these specs at all? After all they're perfectly in line with your world view. So their cheapest home amp sound as good as their most expensive. Doesn't that correspond to your credo?

BTW, I know enough measuring data to tell that Headroom's specs are absolutely credible and on a normal level for modern solid-state amps.
.

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif That should not be. A headphone cable should not exceed ~1 Ω, so on a 62-Ω headphone it should not cause a noticeable difference in volume. .

Of the two cables I have made I have the volume at between 9 and 10, rather than the stock cable's 9 maximum.

 

[waterlogic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Good try! But why bother with these specs at all? After all they're perfectly in line with your world view. So their cheapest home amp sound as good as their most expensive. Doesn't that correspond to your credo? BTW, I know enough measuring data to tell that Headroom's specs are absolutely credible and on a normal level for modern solid-state amps. .

You mean cable (or amp) view. And what has this to do with credo (=belief) ?
Belief = a wish that something is true (ex. God is !).

Regarding amps: all correctly designed SS amps sound the same - proven in DBT many many times among other check Sir Nick Charles links above ...

 

[Prog Rock Man]

Quote:

Originally Posted by nick_charles /img/forum/go_quote.gif Interesting, are any of these online ?

If you search through the What Hifi forum you will find discussions about the various Big Questions. Otherwise you need to buy the magazine.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prog Rock Man /img/forum/go_quote.gif I have just made my second cable for my K702s. I have not tested them extensively, but the only difference between them so far is that each needs the volume reset. I wonder now how many people have bought a different cable and mistaken a sound improvement for a slight change in volume?

I thought this may have been the case with the stock K702's so I turned up the volume but the sound was indeed still different. There was a significant loss of high frequency response and sparkle when compared with the ALO cable.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif Good try! But why bother with these specs at all?

To check for any possible problems with the design and to make sure it can sufficiently drive headphones with no gross deficiencies.

Quote:

After all they're perfectly in line with your world view.

You're going to have to preface this with something as it makes no sense really.

Quote:

So their cheapest home amp sound as good as their most expensive.

Never said that sparky.

Quote:

Doesn't that correspond to your credo?

What are you getting at?

Quote:

BTW, I know enough measuring data to tell that Headroom's specs are absolutely credible and on a normal level for modern solid-state amps.

Cool story bro, what's their output impedance, IMD percentage, acceptable load to be driven, and measurements at that loads highest and lowest impedance?

The measurements they provide are credible, but they don't provide enough. Would you dare buy a speaker amp not knowing if it would clip at a specific load? If you would then maybe you'd by Headroom for your headphones, cause it's a guess at best.

 

[DayoftheGreek]

Quote:

Originally Posted by BIG POPPA /img/forum/go_quote.gif The QLS-6 can speak for itself. You will have to audition it sometime? Just because you do not understand what it does, does not mean it doesn't work? With audio everybody has a different path to take. Very happy with mine. About 30 years in the making.

Sometimes I pray at my TV to make it look better. I don't understand why it works, but it sure works! Everyone has a different path for sure.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif To check for any possible problems with the design and to make sure it can sufficiently drive headphones with no gross deficiencies.

As I understood, you were doubting HeadRoom's specs for their amps. So I was asking: «Why that» – if it corresponds to your belief that all amps sound the same (roughly spoken), because they're all wires with gain?

Quote:

Never said that sparky.

What does «sparky» mean in this context? – I was the one who said that – as a consequence of the axiom «equal specs = equal sound», to reproduce your point of view.

Quote:

Cool story bro, what's their output impedance, IMD percentage, acceptable load to be driven, and measurements at that loads highest and lowest impedance?

For me the published specs are good enough to deduce that the rest of the measuring criteria are on a similar level – close to perfection (as with virtually all solid-state measuring specs I've seen). If you know enough about electronics you may know that solid-state amps usually have very low output impedances. So personally I don't care for this point. Of course you're free to do that if you're picky about amps.

Quote:

The measurements they provide are credible, but they don't provide enough. Would you dare buy a speaker amp not knowing if it would clip at a specific load?

That's a very hypothetical question. Which modern solid-state amp does have problems with which impedances? Granted, there are a few speaker amps with problems with loads below 4 Ω, but that's not relevant for the examples at hand. With headphone amps you don't have to care for headphone impedances – certainly not with HeadRoom amps.

What was your point again? That different amps do measure different? Yes, but only so much – and virtually all measuring data (in terms of signal alteration) are below the officially approved hearing threshold. Agreed?
.

 

[BIG POPPA]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DayoftheGreek /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sometimes I pray at my TV to make it look better. I don't understand why it works, but it sure works! Everyone has a different path for sure.

Plug your TV into a silver plated wall receptacle. That will improve your picture. They are around 50 bucks. That is an easy fix.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif As I understood, you were doubting HeadRoom's specs for their amps. So I was asking: «Why that» – if it corresponds to your belief that all amps sound the same (roughly spoken), because they're all wires with gain?

I don't doubt what they give, they just don't give enough.

Quote:

I was the one who said that – as a consequence of the axiom «equal specs = equal sound», to reproduce your point of view.

Reproducing my POV wrong isn't reproducing it.

Quote:

For me the published specs are good enough to deduce that the rest of the measuring criteria are on a similar level – close to perfection (as with virtually all solid-state measuring specs I've seen). If you know enough about electronics you may know that solid-state amps usually have very low output impedances. So personally I don't care for this point. Of course you're free to do that if you're picky about amps.

There's been plenty of poory built amps in the past . . . how many people are still getting amps fixed that were built buy that one guy on this forum that hightailed it?

Quote:

That's a very hypothetical question. Which modern solid-state amp does have problems with which impedances? Granted, there are a few speaker amps with problems with loads below 4 Ω

Actually, there's more speakers amps that don't rather than do support 4ohms.

Quote:

but that's not relevant for the examples at hand.

It is relevant which you'll see in a moment.

Quote:

With headphone amps you don't have to care for headphone impedances – certainly not with HeadRoom amps.

You DO have to care. An AMB Labs amp maxes out at 300ohm capability . . . so it would have large problems with say an HD650. This is why it's important to know what they're capable of rather than assuming like you're so quick to do.

Quote:

What was your point again? That different amps do measure different? Yes, but only so much – and virtually all measuring data (in terms of signal alteration) are below the officially approved hearing threshold. Agreed?

Many measure well in certain aspects, but you must examine more than that to make sure everything's up to snuff. Beyond that if they measure close enough there shouldn't be an audible difference.

 

[JaZZ]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif Reproducing my POV wrong isn't reproducing it.

So in which respect was I wrong? It would be more productive if you could offer your version instead of speaking in riddles.

Quote:

There's been plenty of poory built amps in the past . . . how many people are still getting amps fixed that were built buy that one guy on this forum that hightailed it?

I think you're trying to nebulize the discussion. Those were tube amps, as you may remember. And we don't know their measuring specs. Apart from that they were reported to sound excellent nonetheless. But let's not lose track!

Quote:

It is relevant which you'll see in a moment. You DO have to care. An AMB Labs amp maxes out at 300ohm capability . . . so it would have large problems with say an HD650. This is why it's important to know what they're capable of rather than assuming like you're so quick to do.

I'm so quick because I'm 100% sure that those HeadRoom amps can drive the HD 650 and the HD 800 and the T1... And litterally every solid-state headphone amps I've tried has smoothly driven all headphones I've attached to them. The amp you're speaking of must be an exotic.

Quote:

Many measure well in certain aspects, but you must examine more than that to make sure everything's up to snuff. Beyond that if they measure close enough there shouldn't be an audible difference.

So far you haven't addressed absolute numbers. Which data would you consider above the hearing threshold? I don't think it applies to the published HeadRoom specs, do you? What other criteria would you consider important, e.g. what IMD numbers are you expecting to come into play to save the hierarchy among HeadRoom's line-up? Or which output impedances are there implanted into the cheaper models to make them sound cheaper?

And a general question: Do you hear sonic differences with different amps? Have you auditioned a HeadRoom amp or two? – I haven't, but would like to (and I'm sure they sound good, although they're ugly).
.

 

[aimlink]

Quote:

Originally Posted by JaZZ /img/forum/go_quote.gif And a general question: Do you hear sonic differences with different amps? Have you auditioned a HeadRoom amp or two? – I haven't, but would like to (and I'm sure they sound good, although they're ugly). .

They sound great and this discussion is quite fascinating.

They're spartan in appearance yes, and like cables and other audio equipment, their spartan appearance has the opposite effect with regard to expectations.