Just upgraded my Rig - MOST of my music sounds worse now ;(
Jun 5, 2013 at 1:20 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 16

Ev0lution

Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 3, 2012
Posts
55
Likes
12
Hi everyone, i just upgraded to a new amp, the Leckerton UHA-4,
and for some reason most of my tracks sound worse now... 
I'm really just enjoying a hand full of my albums... but on most of my tracks it sounds worse... but why?! 
It sounds kinda like if you would look trough an... unsharp lens... kinda blurred... a little, i'd say...
NOW here comes the strange part: it CAN defenetely sound awesome, because on some tracks it makes me eargasm lol 
but on most tracks it just doesn't 
size]

 
this is where i'm at right now: Heir 3.Ai's driven by the leckerton...
 

 
anyway, why am i experiencing this? 
 
Jun 5, 2013 at 6:15 PM Post #2 of 16

jawar

a.k.a. ZARIM, SNOOP_DOGG, HFAUDIOPHILE
Joined
May 23, 2013
Posts
59
Likes
11
The tracks you have your library maybe are low bitrate(192KBPS to 320KBPS) and if they are then you need Apple lossless audio codec to enjoy new highend portable setup.
 
Jun 5, 2013 at 6:28 PM Post #3 of 16

reddragon

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 23, 2011
Posts
1,898
Likes
26
what jawar said and maybe its the recording and mastering themselves which you have no control over... or it can be a simple gear mismatch (most refer it as synergy), i dont know...
 
Jun 6, 2013 at 10:38 AM Post #4 of 16

thatBeatsguy

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
May 24, 2013
Posts
3,609
Likes
1,152
     MP3 files are lossless and you will notice a decrease in quality especially on equipment that is desgigned to be revealing. Even I plan to upgrade mine and see how crappy MP3 really sounds like, because FLAC (wait, I'm an iPod user, so ALAC) just makes me go WOW (or you could call it eargasm, if you will).
     Upgrading to an LAC (lossless audio codec) shouldn't be too hard for you who has a high-capacity DAP, and having a buch of CDs lying around should make it even easier. I, on the other hand, have to put up with an 8GB iPod...oh well.
 
Jun 6, 2013 at 12:14 PM Post #5 of 16

doublea71

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 31, 2011
Posts
3,077
Likes
568
Quote:
The tracks you have your library maybe are low bitrate(192KBPS to 320KBPS) and if they are then you need Apple lossless audio codec to enjoy new highend portable setup.


Few, if any, can distinguish between 320kbps and lossless with any regularity.
 
Jun 6, 2013 at 6:08 PM Post #6 of 16

reddragon

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 23, 2011
Posts
1,898
Likes
26
Quote:
     MP3 files are lossless and you will notice a decrease in quality especially on equipment that is desgigned to be revealing. Even I plan to upgrade mine and see how crappy MP3 really sounds like, because FLAC (wait, I'm an iPod user, so ALAC) just makes me go WOW (or you could call it eargasm, if you will).
     Upgrading to an LAC (lossless audio codec) shouldn't be too hard for you who has a high-capacity DAP, and having a buch of CDs lying around should make it even easier. I, on the other hand, have to put up with an 8GB iPod...oh well.

 
 
you mean lossy
 
Jun 6, 2013 at 6:58 PM Post #7 of 16

audiojun

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 26, 2013
Posts
536
Likes
68
So it sounds worse than your ipod hp out? The ipods have a decent amp inside.
 
Jun 8, 2013 at 9:39 AM Post #9 of 16

Sefelt103

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Apr 24, 2012
Posts
678
Likes
162
Location
Scotland
You are encountering a common 'problem' with audio. The more you increase accuracy, balance, clarity etc. the less you might like some things you hear in recordings. I bought an album by Rainbow recently (Down to Earth 1979) and although it's a great album some tracks sound rather horrible with my S:Flo2/FiioE9/HD555 setup. Certain players might massage this album to 'improve' the sound. The more you compress a file the worse it will sound although some songs might sound 'better' with compression due to anomolies in the way compression works. For outdoor listening I can't see much point in going over 320kbps. Comparing Rainbow's album with the Undertones (Hypnotised 1980) this sounds higher quality in 256kbs mp3 than the other album uncompressed. I don't believe audio quality is what the user likes, audio quality is how faithful the sound is to the original recording.
 
Jun 8, 2013 at 9:55 AM Post #10 of 16

goodvibes

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Dec 28, 2009
Posts
8,908
Likes
1,234
Better should sound better. More revealing shouldn't be worse unless there just happens to be a lack of synergism in the combo where the lower output impedance or general change in tonality is just not to your liking.
 
On good enough kit, lossless is better than 320 though 320 can be surprisingly OK.
 
Evo, Double check that you're not using any EQ and give the amp/cable a couple hundred hours to run in before coming to a conclusion. Folks will also debate run in but so what? Just relax and see if it comes to you.
 
Jun 8, 2013 at 1:16 PM Post #11 of 16

nicks9

New Head-Fier
Joined
May 31, 2013
Posts
23
Likes
10
Quote:
what jawar said and maybe its the recording and mastering themselves which you have no control over... or it can be a simple gear mismatch (most refer it as synergy), i dont know...

 
Most people don't consider the most important factor in this equation, which is the actual music.
Better doesn't sound "better" if the music isn't mixed/mastered properly to begin with. Many CDs/digital releases aren't.
Having good equipment improves high quality audio, but it exposes flaws in other recordings that you might not have noticed before.
You can use $1500 phones if you want, it still won't sound good.
 
Jun 8, 2013 at 4:44 PM Post #12 of 16

LFC_SL

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Posts
3,543
Likes
274
There is bad compression / encoding and also bad mastering. CD as a format is capable of holding all the data needed but you cannot control the producer. So even if you eac rip the CD might still doing bad no matter what. Case in point Californication is unlistenable.
 
Jun 9, 2013 at 6:56 PM Post #14 of 16

Ev0lution

Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 3, 2012
Posts
55
Likes
12
Hey everyone,
sorry for not responding for so long,
anyway, i'm in Audio Heaven Right now, just tried a Hippo Audio Cricri from a friend and i can't describe how MUCH BETTER it sounds, i guess there really was a problem with the amp not matching the Ipod 5.5 Dac..
anyway i just can't believe how that tiny lil thing can sound so much better =O 
 
btw i'm only running 320kbit Mp3 files through the thing... i tried FLAC aswell but on MOST of my songs the deifference seems to be rather small...
 
Jun 9, 2013 at 10:55 PM Post #15 of 16

thatBeatsguy

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
May 24, 2013
Posts
3,609
Likes
1,152
Quote:
Hey everyone,
sorry for not responding for so long,
anyway, i'm in Audio Heaven Right now, just tried a Hippo Audio Cricri from a friend and i can't describe how MUCH BETTER it sounds, i guess there really was a problem with the amp not matching the Ipod 5.5 Dac..
anyway i just can't believe how that tiny lil thing can sound so much better =O 
 
btw i'm only running 320kbit Mp3 files through the thing... i tried FLAC aswell but on MOST of my songs the deifference seems to be rather small...

Lol, so what Brooko said was true, and I agree with him. There isn't much of a difference from FLAC vs Lossy.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top