[jasonb]

Switch from Spotify to MOG. I've always had great luck with MOG.

 

[eke2k6]

   
To who's standards? 320 is a lossy compression.  Lossy compression reduces a file by permanently eliminating information. although the average person may not notice it, only a part of the original information is there.  
 
With lossless files, every single bit of data is there.  This is high fidelity as I understand it.

 
If you opened a "high res" FLAC file in a hex editor, you'll be surprised to see just how many empty bits are present. This is the source of the "headroom" that is so often talked about. There is zero auditiory benefit from the extra 300 megabytes or whatever from the file. I'd be willing to bet my entire audio gear collection on people not being able to differentiate between a FLAC file, and a 320kbps file generated from the lossless. The converters work by eliminating these empty bits, so no "information" is actually lost.
 
This, though not directly related to MP3 vs lossless, should expand on the topic.

24bit vs 16bit, the myth exploded!

 

[aamefford]

I think I helped point us to a treacherous off topic rant again. Let's take this one to sound science, where it has no doubt already been beaten to a bloody pulp. Let's keep this the Alpha Dog thread. Thank you!

 

[swspiers]

I think I helped point us to a treacherous off topic rant again. Let's take this one to sound science, where it has no doubt already been beaten to a bloody pulp. Let's keep this the Alpha Dog thread. Thank you!

Oh gosh, please...

 

[koiloco]

   
If you opened a "high res" FLAC file in a hex editor, you'll be surprised to see just how many empty bits are present. This is the source of the "headroom" that is so often talked about. There is zero auditiory benefit from the extra 300 megabytes or whatever from the file. I'd be willing to bet my entire audio gear collection on people not being able to differentiate between a FLAC file, and a 320kbps file generated from the lossless. The converters work by eliminating these empty bits, so no "information" is actually lost.
 
This, though not directly related to MP3 vs lossless, should expand on the topic.

24bit vs 16bit, the myth exploded!

Don't be so sure.  You might be really surprised!  Some music genres hide imperfections well.  Others can make it not too difficult to distinguish.  Just my opinion!

 

[AnakChan]

I think aamefford has made the point of carrying this conversation elsewhere. Let's get back to the AD topic.

 

[Hutnicks]

I think aamefford has made the point of carrying this conversation elsewhere. Let's get back to the AD topic.

Oh please lets!
 
On that point has anyone had any experience with the AD's vs the new NAD's?  Tyll seems to think the NAD's are the bestust closedest phones ever created by mankind. I have my suspicions and would be eager to see a shootout between the two.

 

[hans030390]

 
I also disagree with the AD being better than the HD600. I view the AD as very similar to the Etymotic in FR, but with bottomless extension and less impact. It's not any more detailed than the HD600, rather its FR places emphasis on an area that is harmonics-rich (the diffuse field response). This pushes things more in your face, giving the illusion of more detail. A quick A/B with a phone that is not so lifted in that region will still reveal all those details. The elevation in that region of the FR is also partially responsible for the AD's lack of dimensionality/black space, where cues don't materialize effortlessly in the sound field. I say it's a good mastering tool to detect artifacts in the recording, but not a pleasurable listening tool for me without EQ or a warmer tube amp.

 
This is almost exactly what I noticed when I tried the AD, right down to particularly elevated spots in the FR hindering soundstage, imaging, etc. Not pleasurable at all with most of my music and relatively sensitive ears (apparently). Softer, less complex music gave me little to no issues, though.
 
To whoever asked about the HD700, I haven't heard them, but they are generally not well-regarded (very under-engineered from a sound perspective even compared to the HD600/650, from what I can tell). I would not purchase them unless you can get some hands-on time with them first.

 

[Craigster75]

Academically, I agree. Practically, I haven't been able to hear a difference between 320 and lossless, so in my case, I've come to the conclusion that 320 files are essentially high fidelity for me. Oh, and pardons for jumping in...

+1

 

[Craigster75]

 
Oh please lets!
 
On that point has anyone had any experience with the AD's vs the new NAD's?  Tyll seems to think the NAD's are the bestust closedest phones ever created by mankind. I have my suspicions and would be eager to see a shootout between the two.

IMO, they can both be considered the best closed headphones available in their respective price ranges.  I will offer a simple comparison from impressions as I have not spent extensive time with either, but the NAD has a punchier, more impactful low end while the Alpha Dog is clearly superior related to detail retrieval and resolution.  

 

[Homage]

That deep red silk cable on the attached Alpha Dog phones photo looks beautiful, fit together perfectly...

Might be something Dan would want to consider selling in the future, as an upgrade option over the standard cable that goes with the headphones!

 

[koolas]

Oh please lets!

On that point has anyone had any experience with the AD's vs the new NAD's?  Tyll seems to think the NAD's are the bestust closedest phones ever created by mankind. I have my suspicions and would be eager to see a shootout between the two.

I don't know about new NAD's, but I can only tell about my old NAD T744. And it drives them quite OK. However I found that I'd be driving them +6dB at times, and this (because all NADs are digital) means potential distortion. On the other hand if there was strong signal and no distortion I would probably loose hearing, so maybe it's not so bad
I like using Pan Am connected via RCA to NAD pre-outs. That NAD as a DAC is really good, and Pan Am does very good job amping


Sorry, I thought you were talking about new NADs like D1050 or D3020.

 

[JeremyR]

That deep red silk cable on the attached Alpha Dog phones photo looks beautiful, fit together perfectly...

Might be something Dan would want to consider selling in the future, as an upgrade option over the standard cable that goes with the headphones!

While it's very nice, I don't think it follows Dan's philosophy.
 
Dan's all about high end performance without the high end price. I don't think a $300 cable is going to qualify.

 

[mrspeakers]

  While it's very nice, I don't think it follows Dan's philosophy.
 
Dan's all about high end performance without the high end price. I don't think a $300 cable is going to qualify.

 
We wouldn't offer a cable like that because it puts the phones out of reach of many people, but that some find it worth investing is pretty cool....  It's certainly beautiful!

 

[vincent215]

   
We wouldn't offer a cable like that because it puts the phones out of reach of many people, but that some find it worth investing is pretty cool....  It's certainly beautiful!

How about making as an add on option? or create an affiliate program with Qcable maker