nbakid2000
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2012
- Posts
- 158
- Likes
- 23
Any differences in sound between the V2 and Infinity? From what the other guy said, they're not audible if there are. Hype?
FTM or TCM? The standard v2 doesn't have Femto clocks.
So in plain exact terms (sorry, again) I can just go with the V2 normal edition, and use the 100mW setting for either my 558s or 600s (not really interested in the 650s), from the looks of it. ?
edit: also changed to the .47 jack on your recommendation. Thanks!
tcm = minimum phase filter with less pre-ringing, frm = linear phase filter less phase distortion
Two digital anti–imaging filters are on offer, allowing you to trade frequency domain for time domain optimization. One filter mode is called TCM or “Time Coherent Mode,” the other FRM or “Frequency Response Mode.” Regarding TCM, Larry Ho tried to make the time domain behavior the best he could manage with the ESS DAC chip. “We try to make the impulse response as perfect as possible. In theory, NOS (non–over–sampling) will be the best in this field. Da Vinci and (a) few more DACs (also) perform well here…Pre–ring(ing) is one thing that we like to remove, but also minimize the post–ring(ing as well, making)…the sound even more relaxed/smooth.” According to Ho, the other filter mode, FRM, attempts to optimize frequency domain behavior by “…properly setting the roll–off frequency according to the sampling rate, fine (tuning) the pre-ring and post-ring behavior…and also tweak(ing) the FIR/IIR settings in DSD and PCM mode.” In FRM mode, the “…sound will become more ‘accurate’…and sounds nice for some type of music.” The FRM mode provides slightly lower harmonic distortion and noise (THD+N), because the intermodulation distortion (IMD) at higher frequencies is reduced due to high frequency artifact optimization.
the difference is subtle, I'm using frm
edit: more info on digital filters here http://dspguru.com/dsp/faqs/fir/properties
Thanks for the explanation
I was switching back and forth and the green light mode seems a wee bit sharper to me (more treble). But it was slight, not really night and day.
I guess that goes with what you were mentioning in your explanation
You should be using the 0.47ohm output for your 558, by the way. It sounds softer and more laid back with the 47ohm output because it's badly mismatched with the headphones 50ohm impedance. That causes wonky frequency responses in dynamic drivers like the 558, most often causing woolly bloated bass, that robs it of impact.
So I've tried both outputs frequently, and I honestly prefer the 47 ohm output with these headphones. The .47 is more dynamic and pops more, but I really prefer the more laid back smooth sound signature it's giving me with the 47 ohm. I'm continuing to use both but I dunno, the one mentioned really agrees with me.
^^ not much volume either.
Oddly I got two shipment notices from Luna, October 9 and then also October 14. Assuming the second notice was the actual shipment, it took 21 days to arrive.
::
I must say, I feel this box is not the same running balanced! The slight edge of harshness I heard in single-ended is not at all there, during this, my initial listening today. Balanced playback truly elevates this to an entirely new level. I will need to re-adjust my thoughts regarding how good this is. I am much more pleased with the balanced performance than I had anticipated!