[SmellyGas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's on the first page, go back and read your reply.

And here it is for you to read: "The reality is that the source and amp don't make dramatic differences in sound quality."

Now tell me. Is this statement equivalent to "all DAC's sound the same?" If you cannot honestly differentiate between the two statements, then you should find someone with better grasp of English to help you. If you CAN understand the difference, then you are welcome to acknowledge your mistake (because you do this a lot). thanks.

 

[Graphicism]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmellyGas /img/forum/go_quote.gif I want to highlight the fact that Graphicism completely fabricated a piece of information in order to support his argument: I just checked the frequency response graph on headphone.com of the SR60 and the D5000. THEY ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. The Grado is -5dB at 20Hz, a +3dB peak at 2-3khz, and lacks a -7dB dip ~16khz. These are HUGE differences, and this is on a smoothed graph. You should be ASHAMED of yourself for making up a "fact" to try to prove a point. Can I ask you some questions? Why did you make up data to try and support your point? Are you really that desperate to be right? Do you think it is a hypocritical of you to completely fabricate data, then turn around and demand that others provide you with data to support their points? Do you think it is helpful or hurtful to your viewpoint when you have to make up data to support it?

From this thread.

 

[Graphicism]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmellyGas /img/forum/go_quote.gif And here it is for you to read: "The reality is that the source and amp don't make dramatic differences in sound quality." Now tell me. Is this statement equivalent to "all DAC's sound the same?" If you cannot honestly differentiate between the two statements, then you should find someone with better grasp of English to help you. If you CAN understand the difference, then you are welcome to acknowledge your mistake (because you do this a lot). thanks.

Nice try.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmellyGas The reality is that the source and amp don't make dramatic differences in sound quality. You've fallen for one of the classic "shared delusions" that is propagated and reinforced by people on these audio forums. ... You might even be tempted to upgrade your source/amp, only to find that it sounds....exact the same. Now, in all fairness, I would have expected there to be a subtle improvement going from a sound card to a dedicated amp...but that being said, if you want to dramatically alter your sound, upgrade your headphones.

This was in reply to Ntropic saying there was little to no difference going from an Audigy 2ZS to a iBasso D2 Boa. "You might even be tempted to upgrade your source/amp, only to find that it sounds....exact the same." - so in otherwords spend more it doesn't matter, there is no thing better than a Audigy 2ZS.

 

[AtomikPi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif So would it be a fair comparison to do a blind test between the EMU 0404 ($90) and the Grace m902 ($1,600) with lets say a variety of headphones; D2000, HD 800, K701, etc ~ perhaps even EMU 0404 + presonus hp4 if lack of power is an issue...

D2000 would be fine, high sensitivity (105db/mw I IIRC) and low impedance. HD800 is higher impedance but lower sensitivity; with the hp4 it would be a reasonable comparison. K701 is a bit tricky - the HP4 has a high output impedance and I'm not positive if the emu alone could provide enough current. (low sensitivity/low impedance phones are the most difficult to amplify I'm sure you know) I do think though that the cute beyond would work as the website lists
AKG K270S 75 ohm480 mw 119 db
the 701 is a bit lower in impedance (60 ohm) but it would probably be fine

 

[SmellyGas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif Nice try. This was in reply to Ntropic saying there was little to no difference going from an Audigy 2ZS to a iBasso D2 Boa. "You might even be tempted to upgrade your source/amp, only to find that it sounds....exact the same." - so in otherwords spend more it doesn't matter, there is no thing better than a Audigy 2ZS.

So you really don't know. I don't want to be rude, but perhaps you could find someone to help you with the English.

I wrote: "You might even be tempted to upgrade your source/amp, only to find that it sounds....exact the same"
THIS DOES NOT EQUAL "All DAC's sound the same" nor does it equal "nothing is better than an Audigy 2ZS." You are inserting your own personal interpretation and logical twist which isn't there. If you have trouble with reading comprehension, no big deal....but get someone to help you rather than continuing to burdeon this thread with these comprehension errors on your part.

 

[SmellyGas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif From this thread.

Yes, this is what I saw. So, Graphicism, looking at the frequency response graphs for the D5000 vs. Grado SR60, do you STILL maintain that the two plots are IDENTICAL? Would you NOT expect them to sound considerably different just by looking at the graphs for 5 seconds?

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif From this thread.

There's some definite differences in that graph in terms of extension, dips, and peaks.

You also aren't showing square wave response tests, especially the 50hz which is going to show the Denon provides a more constant pressure which is desirable for reproduction.

 

[Graphicism]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtomikPi /img/forum/go_quote.gif D2000 would be fine, high sensitivity (105db/mw I IIRC) and low impedance. HD800 is higher impedance but lower sensitivity; with the hp4 it would be a reasonable comparison. K701 is a bit tricky - the HP4 has a high output impedance and I'm not positive if the emu alone could provide enough current. (low sensitivity/low impedance phones are the most difficult to amplify I'm sure you know) I do think though that the cute beyond would work as the website lists AKG K270S 75 ohm480 mw 119 db the 701 is a bit lower in impedance (60 ohm) but it would probably be fine

Well I used those headphones for example, I'm simply trying to understand this debate and decipher it best I can. I am willing to pick up an EMU 0404 or perhaps a Beresford TC-7520 and put this theory too the test. I want nothing more than to see someone fail at differentiating between a $100 source one costing over 10x more. I can almost imagine a Darren Brown like situation at a meet, wowing people with my fancy looking amp only to expose an empty box with a simple wire running from input to headphone out. I understand however there is an issue of under powering the headphone which is why I'm looking for the bare minimum, which should also be the be-all and end-all of source equipment.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmellyGas /img/forum/go_quote.gif So you really don't know. I don't want to be rude, but perhaps you could find someone to help you with the English. I wrote: "You might even be tempted to upgrade your source/amp, only to find that it sounds....exact the same" THIS DOES NOT EQUAL "All DAC's sound the same" nor does it equal "nothing is better than an Audigy 2ZS." You are inserting your own personal interpretation and logical twist which isn't there. If you have trouble with reading comprehension, no big deal....but get someone to help you rather than continuing to burdeon this thread with these comprehension errors on your part.

I'd beg to differ, I think you do want to be rude and controversial which can be seen from your first post to this thread. You said, and this is the last time I'm going to say it. "You might even be tempted to upgrade your source/amp, only to find that it sounds....exact the same." what you are saying is, you might be tempted to spend more money on a better source/amp however you will find it sounds exactly the same. I am not inserting or twisting your statement, this is what you said and now you're not standing by it, simple as.

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmellyGas /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes, this is what I saw. So, Graphicism, looking at the frequency response graphs for the D5000 vs. Grado SR60, do you STILL maintain that the two plots are IDENTICAL? Would you NOT expect them to sound considerably different just by looking at the graphs for 5 seconds?

Considering how close they are compared to the majority of other graphs out there I would expect them to sound somewhat similar, instead they are at alternate ends of the sound spectrum.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif Considering how close they are compared to the majority of other graphs out there I would expect them to sound somewhat similar, instead they are at alternate ends of the sound spectrum.

You're treating frequency response as if it's the only measurement, and beyond that don't seem to be aware of how great a difference those peaks and dips can make. I'm guessing you're disregarding them due to the scale of the graph, but I assure you they don't correlate nearly enough to say they would sound the same.

 

[AtomikPi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well I used those headphones for example, I'm simply trying to understand this debate and decipher it best I can. I am willing to pick up an EMU 0404 or perhaps a Beresford TC-7520 and put this theory too the test. I want nothing more than to see someone fail at differentiating between a $100 source one costing over 10x more. I can almost imagine a Darren Brown like situation at a meet, wowing people with my fancy looking amp only to expose an empty box with a simple wire running from input to headphone out. I understand however there is an issue of under powering the headphone which is why I'm looking for the bare minimum, which should also be the be-all and end-all of source equipment.

If you want to use a high end source, you could probably use a DAC1 as a DAC and also use it as a headphone amp. So you'd be comparing good dac --> good amp of your choice to good dac --> good enough amp. I found through a google that its output impedance is less than one ohm. The only concern would be making sure it has sufficient power. HP4 would be fine for the HD800. DAC1-->DXXXX would probably be fine too. You would need to be able to volume match, get an abx box, and a few other things to do the test (I have never done dbt other than foobar for comparing mp3 to flac so I am not the best reference (however I do volume matched comparisons frequently)).

 

[Graphicism]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif You're treating frequency response as if it's the only measurement, and beyond that don't seem to be aware of how great a difference those peaks and dips can make. I'm guessing you're disregarding them due to the scale of the graph, but I assure you they don't correlate nearly enough to say they would sound the same.

It's not that I'm disregarding the difference, I'm simply saying they look close and sound completely different. Take the Sennheiser HD600 and HD650 for example, they sound very similar, the 650 is a little warmer overall but are certainly no grados, very neutral headphones... yet the difference is about the same as my previous graph.

And if the difference is huge what about left and right channel on headphones, they should be exactly the same.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's not that I'm disregarding the difference, I'm simply saying they look close and sound completely different. Take the Sennheiser HD600 and HD650 for example, they sound very similar, the 650 is a little warmer overall but are certainly no grados, very neutral headphones... yet the difference is about the same as my previous graph.

Here's the issue though. You're also not looking where the differences are which if smack dab in the midrange may change some things. Beyond that the Denon's have greater exention in the bass. You also aren't comparing the square wave responses (especially 50hz).

Once again, you're saying "they look close" . . . if we were to say each dB was worth $1,000,000, would you still say they're that close?

This is the problem. You're minimizing the graph based on visual interpretation and not relating it back to what's actually there.

Quote:

And if the difference is huge what about left and right channel on headphones, they should be exactly the same.

Generally the theory is that under 3dB difference is seen as barely percievable. Still, I'm not very amused to see such wide tolerances.

 

[SmellyGas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif I want nothing more than to see someone fail at differentiating between a $100 source one costing over 10x more. I can almost imagine a Darren Brown like situation at a meet, wowing people with my fancy looking amp only to expose an empty box with a simple wire running from input to headphone out.[/b]

Why don't you start by reading and understanding this article published in Stereo Review, June 1998.
http://www.nousaine.com/pdfs/To%20Tweak%20or%20Not.pdf
The comparison equipment was:
System #1: PS Audio Digital Link II Outboard DAC, Musical Design SP-1 vacuum tube preamp, Bryston 4B-NRB power amp, $120/meter Tributaries interconnects and Monster Cable Sigma 2.2 speaker cables.
System #2: Marantz CD-63 cd player analog out, $99 preamp kit built in 1976, and a Parasound HCA-800II amp ($200), junk interconnects/cables.

76 trials over 7 listeners. MANY listeners could easily identify differences when they knew which system they were listening to. NOBODY could reliably distinguish between the two systems when blinded. Let's start with this.

Quote:

You said, and this is the last time I'm going to say it. "You might even be tempted to upgrade your source/amp, only to find that it sounds....exact the same." what you are saying is, you might be tempted to spend more money on a better source/amp however you will find it sounds exactly the same. I am not inserting or twisting your statement, this is what you said and now you're not standing by it, simple as.

NOPE. You have a major problem, Graphicism, and this involves your inability to read what people write without inserting your own interpretation. Once again, your "interpretation", as stated by you, is that I wrote the equivalent of "there is no thing better than a Audigy 2ZS." Nothing I wrote can be taken to mean this. NOTHING. To date, you have failed to provide me with a quote that even remotely suggests this. And just in case there was any confusion, my verbose explanation (stated multiple times by myself and paraphrased by others for YOUR benefit) was that two devices that have sufficiently flat frequency responses, low distortion, and low nose will SOUND THE SAME. You should re-read that statement over and over again to make sure you either you pretend not to understand, or the words are beyond you. I don't know anymore. So just admit that you're wrong, try to avoid misquoting people, and let's move on.

 

[SmellyGas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's not that I'm disregarding the difference, I'm simply saying they look close and sound completely different. Take the Sennheiser HD600 and HD650 for example, they sound very similar, the 650 is a little warmer overall but are certainly no grados, very neutral headphones... yet the difference is about the same as my previous graph.

I don't see what your point is. They frequency response curves are different and so is the sound. There is no conflict with any points I have made so far.


Quote:

And if the difference is huge what about left and right channel on headphones, they should be exactly the same.

[/QUOTE]

Okay, so these headphones have poor tolerances and the left and right drivers measure differently. They will sound different too. So what's your point? There is no conflict with any points I have made so far.

Posting these frequency response curves just further supports my point. Headphones have different frequency response curves AND they sound different as well.

If you produced frequency response curves of two DAC's or amp's that also showed such marked differences, I would also predict that they could sound different.

HOWEVER, this is rare. With few exceptions (there are some), all of the DAC's and amps I've seen have nearly perfectly flat frequency response curves on RMAA testing. The magnitude of frequency response deviations in headphones are at least an order of magnitude greater than those seen DAC's and amps.

But you know what? I don't think you're getting it. I don't think you ever well. So you're welcome to continue believing what you believe. Perhaps someone with more patience than I have can continue this discussion with you.

 

[bixby]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmellyGas /img/forum/go_quote.gif So you really don't know. I don't want to be rude, but perhaps you could find someone to help you with the English. I wrote: "You might even be tempted to upgrade your source/amp, only to find that it sounds....exact the same" THIS DOES NOT EQUAL "All DAC's sound the same" nor does it equal "nothing is better than an Audigy 2ZS." You are inserting your own personal interpretation and logical twist which isn't there. If you have trouble with reading comprehension, no big deal....but get someone to help you rather than continuing to burdeon this thread with these comprehension errors on your part.

Uh, last time I was in english class i think they told us to say exactly the same, no?

I also agree with your "does not equal" statement, but come on, you left the door wide open there, upgrade to an "exact the same" sounding source/amp or all bets are off, yes?