Mini3 - M3 - Beta22 - Close Specs / Differences?
Sep 7, 2009 at 6:45 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 20

CodeToad

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Posts
394
Likes
10
Sep 8, 2009 at 2:41 AM Post #2 of 20

FallenAngel

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 7, 2006
Posts
9,627
Likes
72
Location
Toronto
How do you figure that the specs are similar? They're drastically different, look at output power.

Mini3 is small and portable, sounds nice.
M^3 and Beta22 are home amps, I like the Beta more
smily_headphones1.gif
 
Sep 8, 2009 at 3:36 AM Post #3 of 20

johnwmclean

Aka: capone, bignurse.
Joined
Apr 28, 2008
Posts
2,909
Likes
51
Mini - Portable
M3 - Great quality Home amp
Beta 22 - Reference Amp

The specs are drastically different. They all sound fabulous within their respected categories.
 
Sep 8, 2009 at 4:37 AM Post #4 of 20

luvdunhill

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 22, 2006
Posts
2,304
Likes
12
I agree, the measurements are indeed very similar. You have a good eye for detail.

One thing to consider is the bandwidth of the various designs, some are bandwidth limited for instance. I remember coming to an "oh yeah..." moment when I realized that.
 
Sep 8, 2009 at 4:43 AM Post #5 of 20

CodeToad

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Posts
394
Likes
10
Ah, yes, it would have made more sense had I been able to link directly to the pages. This is the "specs" I was referring to.

Beta22 into 330ohms:
Frequency response (from 40 Hz to 15 kHz), dB: +0.05, -0.05Excellent
Noise level, dB (A): -90.2Very good
Dynamic range, dB (A): 90.1Very good
THD, %: 0.0010Excellent
IMD, %: 0.0072Excellent
Stereo crosstalk, dB: -86.0Excellent
IMD at 10 kHz, %: 0.0072Excellent


M3 into 330 ohms:
Frequency response (from 40 Hz to 15 kHz), dB: +0.04, -0.05Excellent
Noise level, dB (A): -97.4Excellent
Dynamic range, dB (A): 97.1Excellent
THD, %: 0.0009Excellent
IMD, %: 0.0052Excellent
Stereo crosstalk, dB: -94.2Excellent
IMD at 10 kHz, %: 0.0058Excellent

Mini3 into 330 ohms:
Frequency response (from 40 Hz to 15 kHz), dB: +0.05, -0.05Excellent
Noise level, dB (A): -93.2Very good
Dynamic range, dB (A): 92.8Very good
THD, %: 0.0011Excellent
IMD + Noise, %: 0.0064Excellent
Stereo crosstalk, dB: -90.4Excellent
IMD at 10 kHz, %: 0.0061Excellent


I see where you guys are coming from with the other measurements, so, is it purely a function of voltage swing since distortion, crosstalk, dynamic range are all so close?
 
Sep 8, 2009 at 5:03 AM Post #7 of 20

amb

Member of the Trade: AMB Laboratories
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Posts
4,933
Likes
41
The frequency response, THD, IMD, etc., are steady state measurements which only provide a glimpse into an amp's performance, and is not the be-all and end-all. A poor showing here would point to a problem. Good specs of these sorts is only a starting point. There is much more going on in the circuit than meets the eye.
 
Sep 8, 2009 at 5:30 AM Post #8 of 20
Joined
Jan 4, 2008
Posts
17,317
Likes
10,831
Location
Fukuoka, Japan
I think Head-fi is due for a good article explaining the electrical differences between amps that make them sound different and drive headphones better or worse.
 
Sep 8, 2009 at 5:52 AM Post #9 of 20

CodeToad

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Posts
394
Likes
10
Please indulge my ignorance for a second.

My limited understanding is that music enters a microphone and becomes a voltage level that is recorded at the rate of 44,100 times per second and stored in binary 1's and 0's. On my end the 1's and 0's are decoded/recreated as voltage readings at the rate of 44,100 times per second and sent through a series of transistors of different sorts to "amplify' that voltage.

Why is there so many "differences" in amplifiers and their amplification of that voltage considering the closeness of distortion specs?

Quote:

I think Head-fi is due for a good article explaining the electrical differences between amps that make them sound different and drive headphones better or worse.


I second that thought.
 
Sep 8, 2009 at 10:23 AM Post #11 of 20

madwolf

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 15, 2008
Posts
197
Likes
1
Even notice that you are able to hold a conversation, even with a noisy drill running beside you. But if you are using a MIC to record the same conversion what is recorded is most likely garbage.

Our ear and brain have the ability to cut out the noise even if it is louder. If you concentrate on the music on a particular detail you are able to isolate what you want to hear, this is something unique to our ears and brain.
 
Sep 8, 2009 at 12:16 PM Post #12 of 20

amb

Member of the Trade: AMB Laboratories
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Posts
4,933
Likes
41
Quote:

Originally Posted by CodeToad /img/forum/go_quote.gif
My limited understanding is that music enters a microphone and becomes a voltage level that is recorded at the rate of 44,100 times per second and stored in binary 1's and 0's. On my end the 1's and 0's are decoded/recreated as voltage readings at the rate of 44,100 times per second and sent through a series of transistors of different sorts to "amplify' that voltage.


The amplifiers mentioned in this thread do not amplify in the digital domain. They are linear amplifiers and work on analog signals. The digital stream that you speak of must be converted to analog by a DAC, then fed into the amp for amplification.

Quote:

Why is there so many "differences" in amplifiers and their amplification of that voltage considering the closeness of distortion specs?


I already said:
Quote:

Originally Posted by amb
The frequency response, THD, IMD, etc., are steady state measurements which only provide a glimpse into an amp's performance, and is not the be-all and end-all.


 
Sep 8, 2009 at 7:15 PM Post #14 of 20

CodeToad

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 30, 2008
Posts
394
Likes
10
My intention was not to rate the amps, I think the pecking order is well established. I am just trying to understand what it is under the hood that makes the difference between what I would consider three best of breed designs with extremely close "specs". The only thing that stands out as a difference between them to this retard is the voltage swing.

Is it really that simple?
 
Sep 8, 2009 at 10:18 PM Post #15 of 20

amb

Member of the Trade: AMB Laboratories
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Posts
4,933
Likes
41
Quote:

Originally Posted by CodeToad /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Is it really that simple?


Of course not.
I repeat again... those specs are useful, but they are not the only ones that matter. There are so many other aspects to an amplifier's performance it would take a book to write about them (and there are some good books out there, as are whitepapers and other material on the 'net). And like many things in life, some of these are biased or controversial, and we're not going to solve those puzzles in this thread.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top