Is Hifiman HM-801 an overkill if I only have CD quality FLACs???

[kiteki]

Hey guys, I'm just going to sit on the fence now, and I've already stated I don't support neither the clip+ nor the HM-801, but here's some information for you guys to consider, I'm copying this from a review on a high-end DAC that uses NOS (non-oversampling) like the HM-801 does, the opposite of say, some old Sony Discmans which used 8x oversampling (and people thought it sounded fabulous), I myself bought one of those Discmans recently on ebay, but I can't get it to work! So I haven't heard 8x oversampling yet =( poor me.
 
Anyway, here's the excerpt from the review/essay, which might shed some light on the differing opinions on clip+ versus HM-801. If El_Doug thinks the clip+ sounded better than the HM-801 on his JH13's he's fully entitled to that opinion and it's a good one, but technical matters come into play, a 6, or rather 12 driver balanced-armature low impedance IEM might respond really well to the clip+! Whereas people have reported the Hifiman RE0 doesn't, and you simply can't get the volume up high enough (I have the RE0 on close to max volume with my T51, so that makes sense).
 
Ok here comes the essay stuff:
 
 
"[size=x-small]As for my preference in sampling rates, I like them both, but I vacillate. I'll go for a while listening to the stock, NOS chip and then I'll get a wild hair and install the upsampling board and listen to it for a few months. Then I get bored and yank the board back out for something different. As you can tell, I really don't have a preference. I sort of sway with the prevailing winds. I just like the breeze.[/size]
[size=x-small]When it comes to the sonic differences between the two sampling rates, hopefully I can explain them without causing some sort of flame war or getting too many email bombs. The upsampled units that I've heard tend to exude a large amount of (apparent) detail. I said 疎pparent' because of the mathematic interpolation an upsampler does. The upsampler samples the information on a CD and then 疎pproximates' the additional detail through a complicated algorithm. Upsampling (as I understand it) stretches the data points apart (of sorts) and fills in the gaps with approximated data, smoothing the data stream curve. The end result is, the upsampled signal that comes out of your speakers supposedly has higher resolution. You hear more detail, there is a greater breathiness to the sound on your CD. As I stated earlier, done well, upsampling can sound very good. Done poorly, it can sound like cats mating. Upsampling can also bring the soundstage quite a bit more forward into your room. And yes, just 疎verage' upsampling can be quite harsh, fatiguing and can have a definite digital sheen to it.[/size]
[size=x-small]In a back to back comparison between the two, non-oversampling can sound a bit dull and lacking in detail. But, after your ears become accustomed to the non-oversampled chip, you begin to understand that the presentation becomes far more relaxed and less aggressive. I hate to use this term but it sounds less forced. In essence, less digital sounding. Even though it isn't vinyl, it contains a few more of its qualities (IMO) than its higher resolution cousin, upsampling.[/size]
[size=x-small]I guess what I'm getting at is the differing sampling rates are ultimately a personal preference. Each can sound quite good when done properly. If you want some seriously technical information regarding sampling rates, do a Google search using "upsampling vs. oversampling" as the search parameter. You'll get enough reading material to keep you going for weeks on end."[/size]
 
 
[size=x-small]source: [size=x-small]http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/equipment/0406/mhdt_laboratory_dac.htm[/size][/size]
 
 

 

[DaveBSC]

Quote:

Thanks, very informative post.
 
How powerful is the HO on the QA350?

[size=small]QA350 Output Power:                   70mW/16Ω;     130mW/32Ω;    26mW/150Ω;    13mW/300Ω;
QA350 MOD V2 Output Power:   500mW/16Ω;   250mW/32Ω;    97mW/150Ω;    49mW/300Ω;[/size]
 
[size=small]The Mod V2 version has some real guts, and should be able to drive just about anything including orthos. The typical mass market DAP has less than 30mW at 16 Ohm. [/size]
 

 

[DaveBSC]

Quote:

I haven't heard any Hifiman and the HM-801 seems overpriced I mean seriously I could buy the best vintage rare Sony portable CD player BRAND NEW for less than that price, so yeah....

That eats four AA batteries in two hours and skips if touched.. so yeah...
 

 

[DaveBSC]

Quote:

 

Now I understand you may prefer a rolled off sound, but did not occur to you that maybe HIFIMAN could use a decent DAC that doesn't roll off and include an "analog" sounding filter instead? What are you paying for? Big bucks for a permanent filter.

Oh yeah, PCM1704-U is such a piece of crap :ROLLS EYES:
 

 

[DaveBSC]

Quote:

I used JH-13s with both the HM-801 and the Clip+, and preferred the Clip+ by a long shot. 
 
FYI, the JH-13s cost a ton more than $200

With the Game or V2 card, or the original card? The original 801 wasn't designed for IEMs. I might amend my original statement to say that there may have been a slight edge with the 7509 in bass response with all EQ and enhancements on, compared to the 801 flat. I did not try the 7509 on the 801 with its own EQ. Other wise with every full size can I have tried, it was either toss up or advantage 801.
 

 

[kiteki]

Wait what?? That is some insane power on the QA350 MOD V2 does it come with a car battery? Is the build quality rock solid or is the housing thin like a tin can? Please say rock solid........

 

[DaveBSC]

Quote:

I love when the price of the gear gets brought into these debates....just because something costs a lot of money does not automatically mean that it will sound good, whether you're talking about a source or headphones. Yet that price argument seems to come up a lot when the HifiMan players are being discussed, doesn't it? Like the "you just bash it because you can't afford it" comments in another thread....lol.
 
So as far as the sentence in the quote above that I put in bold.....so what if you use a set of Beats?

I was not trying to say that a headphone that costs $198.99 won't work, and one that costs $201.99 will. As you move up the price ladder, you get more resolution and performance? We can agree on that, yes? Using a poor sounding or performance limited headphone on the 801 is a waste of time, regardless of cost. I actually quite liked my 7509 (before it fell apart), and with a lot of EQing it sounded pretty darn good out of the S9, at least with certain types of music. It was not good enough for the 801.
 

 

[kiteki]

The Sony MDR-V6 (same as the HP you're talking about right) is overrated, just like the Ety ER-4P, I've heard both, and I think their fame comes from times long in the past and surviving until now! The V6 has been in production for over 20 years! Because it works as an industry standard, just like the ER-4P, but when I listened to them, I just wasn't overly impressed, especially with the ER-4P and it's quote unquote "unrivalled detail".
 
Back on topic, I'm reading about the QA350, and here we go again with NOS discussion versus oversampling.
 
 
"[size=x-small]headfonia_mike[/size][size=x-small]

[/size]9 months agoin reply to file624
Whoa, that's a pretty nasty experience with the S:Flo2.

So, just curious, why the QLS QA350? I mean, the HM-602 is far more sensible to me, especially in the size department.


Flag

 

file624 9 months agoin reply to headfonia_mike

I don't like non-oversampled (NOS) sound -- never have, never will! Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the 602 uses low (budget)Philips TDA1543. I my own DIY projects, I overwhelmingly prefer digital filtering (oversampling).

You can sorta polish the NOS turd by placing a superb output (I/V) section after (e.g., that's what diyparadise.com did for their Monica/Mojo DAC). But, frankly ... that's cheating.

Also, the 602 has the yukky-sounding OPA2604 -- same as that S:Flo2. These are cheap opamps. OPA2132 is better if you want that Burr-Brown sound. AD opamps sound better, especially AD825."
 
 

 

[ClieOS]

Quote:

... just wasn't overly impressed, especially with the ER-4P and it's quote unquote "unrivalled detail"....

You should get yourself a P to S adapter.
 

 

[DaveBSC]

Quote:

The Sony MDR-V6 (same as the HP you're talking about right) is overrated, just like the Ety ER-4P, I've heard both, and I think their fame comes from times long in the past and surviving until now! The V6 has been in production for over 20 years! Because it works as an industry standard, just like the ER-4P, but when I listened to them, I just wasn't overly impressed, especially with the ER-4P and it's quote unquote "unrivalled detail".
 
Back on topic, I'm reading about the QA350, and here we go again with NOS discussion versus oversampling.
 
 
"[size=x-small]headfonia_mike[/size][size=x-small]

[/size]9 months agoin reply to file624
Whoa, that's a pretty nasty experience with the S:Flo2.

So, just curious, why the QLS QA350? I mean, the HM-602 is far more sensible to me, especially in the size department.


Flag

 

file624 9 months agoin reply to headfonia_mike

I don't like non-oversampled (NOS) sound -- never have, never will! Correct me if I'm wrong but I think the 602 uses low (budget)Philips TDA1543. I my own DIY projects, I overwhelmingly prefer digital filtering (oversampling).

You can sorta polish the NOS turd by placing a superb output (I/V) section after (e.g., that's what diyparadise.com did for their Monica/Mojo DAC). But, frankly ... that's cheating.

Also, the 602 has the yukky-sounding OPA2604 -- same as that S:Flo2. These are cheap opamps. OPA2132 is better if you want that Burr-Brown sound. AD opamps sound better, especially AD825."
 
 

The V6 is the same as the 7506. I had the 7509, which was released to consumers as the V900. Sadly both are out of production, replaced by the thoroughly mediocre "HD" versions. The 801 uses much higher quality parts than than 601 and 602. It is now listed with the PCM1704U-K chip, which apparently the original batch also had. Some of the later models may have had the 1704U. The K version of this chip in particular is among the best R-2R DACs ever produced, and you will find anywhere from two to sixteen of them in some of the greatest DACs ever built. The idea that the 801 stinks because its not using some el cheapo Wolfson or Cirrus Delta-Sigma is ridiculous. The opamps are the OPA627 and OPA275.
 
The infamous treble rolloff (OH NOES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!) is blown way out of proportion. The ES10 had recessed highs on both the Cowon and Hifiman, and the K601 was treble titled on both.
 
The TDA1543 on the other hand isn't so hot, I'm not really a fan of that. The TDA1541A S1/S2 would've been a much better choice, but probably impossible to get in any quantity, and not for the price that Hifiman wanted to hit. The AD1862N-J and the PCM63P-K would also be cool choices in a high-end portable.
 

 

[wind016]

 
Quote:

Oh yeah, PCM1704-U is such a piece of crap :ROLLS EYES:
 

That chip is an oversampling DAC chip. Sure, cutting off frequencies instead makes a whole lot of sense.
 

 

[DaveBSC]

Most high-end DACs begin rolling off the highs before the 20Khz point, although admittedly not to the level that the 801 does (from the measurements I've seen, anyway). A typical high-end DAC is down anywhere from 0.2-0.5dB at 20kHz. In any case, the 801 does not sound Conrad Johnson style dark to me at all, nor does it sound the same as a -2dB cut at the S9's highest EQ point. If there's a shift in the highs its like going from Nordost to Siltech cabling - and that's an improvement to my ears. Detail is not lost, you actually hear more of the recorded information because of the 801's better separation of instruments, and reduction in grain and digital hash. The highs from the S9 on at least a medium grade pair of headphones are like looking through a dirty plastic window, while the 801 is freshly polished glass.

 

[wind016]

 
Quote:

Most high-end DACs begin rolling off the highs before the 20Khz point, although admittedly not to the level that the 801 does (from the measurements I've seen, anyway). A typical high-end DAC is down anywhere from 0.2-0.5dB at 20kHz. In any case, the 801 does not sound Conrad Johnson style dark to me at all, nor does it sound the same as a -2dB cut at the S9's highest EQ point. If there's a shift in the highs its like going from Nordost to Siltech cabling - and that's an improvement to my ears. Detail is not lost, you actually hear more of the recorded information because of the 801's better separation of instruments, and reduction in grain and digital hash. The highs from the S9 on at least a medium grade pair of headphones are like looking through a dirty plastic window, while the 801 is freshly polished glass.

How exactly are you using the Cowon? Do you use BBE at all? Even comparing my Anedio against the Cowon, which involve obvious audible improvements, I can not make a statement like that.
 

 

[kiteki]

Anedio..... is it just me or is that DAC subliminally saying "I need yoou". LOL.

 
Quote:

You should get yourself a P to S adapter.
 

Funny you say that, ordered one weeks ago, just arrived at the post office today! Yay!
 
 

 

[umvue]

Quote:

@piggy why HM-801 and not HM-602?

 I am considering both. But since I can get a used 801 for $550, I am leaning more to 801 now