[Graphicism]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bixby /img/forum/go_quote.gif 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?

Yeah that's exactly what I'm getting at regarding SmellyGas' initial reply; regarding an upgrade from the soundcard to 'sounding exactly the same' means spend more, buy a DAC1 whatever, it will sound exactly the same... otherwise why else would he have said you may be tempted to spend more. It's almost as if he refuses to read what he wrote and then has the nerve to tell me not only to reread it but to learn English.

 

[SmellyGas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bixby /img/forum/go_quote.gif Uh, last time I was in english class i think they told us to say exactly the same, no?

I think you and I both know this was a typo.

Quote:

I also agree with your "does not equal" statement,

Thank you.

Quote:

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?

Oh please. I have already clarified exactly what I mean on multiple multiple occasions. At least TWO other people have contributed to this thread to paraphrase exactly what I wrote. It's honestly not my fault if people "choose" to not acknowledge what is already clearly written. Overinterpreting and misquoting a remark that has already been clarified and elaborated on ad nauseum constitutes "arguing for the sake of arguing," rather than having a rational discussion. I'm not interested in the former.

 

[Graphicism]

Quote:

Originally Posted by SmellyGas /img/forum/go_quote.gif Oh please. I have already clarified exactly what I mean on multiple multiple occasions. At least TWO other people have contributed to this thread to paraphrase exactly what I wrote. It's honestly not my fault if people "choose" to not acknowledge what is already clearly written. Overinterpreting and misquoting a remark that has already been clarified and elaborated on ad nauseum constitutes "arguing for the sake of arguing," rather than having a rational discussion. I'm not interested in the former.

Putting everything aside could you clarify what you meant by, you may be tempted to spend more but you will find it sounds exactly the same as your soundcard please.

 

[SmellyGas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif Putting everything aside could you clarify what you meant by, you may be tempted to spend more but you will find it sounds exactly the same as your soundcard please.

Once again, you have misread. I am bewildered by how you can't simply go back and READ what I wrote, or have someone explain it to you. Okay. You ask what I meant by "you may be tempted to spend more but you will find it sounds exactly the same as your soundcard." If you READ what I wrote, you will see this: "in all fairness, I would have expected there to be a subtle improvement going from a sound card to a dedicated amp.." Phew.

Now, to clarify my statement regarding upgrading the iBasso DAC+amp to something better (which is what the original poster was asking):
You could also READ what I wrote:
"source and amp don't make dramatic differences in sound quality."
Which means that the OP could easily spend more money on another DAC+amp and likely not notice an audible difference. That is something completely different from saying "nothing is better than an iBasso DAC+amp." It is also something completely different from "nothing is better than an Audigy sound card," which represents a comprehension error on your part.

The reasons for all of these statements have already been explained by myself and paraphrased by a couple of other people, so in the interest of brevity, I'm not going to retype them.

 

[xnor]

I know that this is kind of off-topic, but it still fits in here I think.

As I said, looking at FR charts only doesn't really prove anything.
To me, the second most important chart is the harmonic distortion products chart:

Even if both headphones were built with the same driver they'd sound completely different, because one is open and the other one is closed resulting in completely different reverberation effects.. And even if both very closed or open they'd still sound different because of the differences in material choice and housing dimensions.

edit: Does this mean that FR charts are meaningless? Nope.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by xnor /img/forum/go_quote.gif I know that this is kind of off-topic, but it still fits in here I think. As I said, looking at FR charts only doesn't really prove anything. To me, the second most important chart is the harmonic distortion products chart: Even if both headphones were built with the same driver they'd sound completely different, because one is open and the other one is closed resulting in completely different reverberation effects.. And even if both very closed or open they'd still sound different because of the differences in material choice and housing dimensions.

In all honesty . . . most headphones I see the distortion products are going to be largely irrelevent. Even my relatively peaky K601s are -50dB in terms of distortion if I'm reading it right . . . for those unfamiliar with nonlinear distortion testing that's less than 1% distortion. If you're going to argue over less than 1% we may have an issue. Speakers tend to have far more distortion in comparisoon, which is where planar and stats really shine.

In my experience and opinion . . . square wave response is going to be far more telling. The most important measurement is impedance versus frequency to see if your amp can even drive the cans without clipping.

 

[xnor]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Shike /img/forum/go_quote.gif In all honesty . . . most headphones I see the distortion products are going to be largely irrelevent. ...

Well I'm not arguing over the total THD, but it still matters to me.
What I'm looking at is the overall 'image' which quickly shows if the 'can has more of a dulled/closed sound.

Quote:

In my experience and opinion . . . square wave response is going to be far more telling.

Music doesn't consist out of square waves afaik but it still could be a good measurement, I don't know.
If you compare (500 Hz) Denon's ah-d1001 with the d7000 you can see that they both perform equally well, still everyone says that the 1001's don't sound remotely as good as the 7000's. The distortion chart does however show a 'big' 3rd harmonic spike, which is kinda unusual. (could be completely coincidental, I don't know

)
Also the Koss PortaPro's square waves look more like 'squares' than lets say the HD600's ...

Might be nonsense what I just wrote, but besides being smart I'm here to learn one or the other thing so please bear with me.

Quote:

The most important measurement is impedance versus frequency to see if your amp can even drive the cans without clipping.

You shouldn't need to worry as long as you don't have HD6+ sennies.

 

[leeperry]

because of your very personal ear drum resonances, unfortunately all these FR graphs from dummy heads...don't mean jack

 

[Phelonious Ponk]

This is really beginning to get tedious, but, like a wreck on the side of the road, I just have to look. Graphicism, do you have a point or are you just one of those people who keeps repeating the same distortions until the other guy throws up his hands and you can feel like you "won" the argument?

Lets review: Smellygas' original post, full text for context. It's not long. You could have quoted the whole thing anytime...

Quote:

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. Undoubtedly, someone will appear and tell you there's something wrong with your ears if you cannot hear the incredible improvement of this dac/amp upgrade, or perhaps he/she will claim that you have headphone/amp mismatch. 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.

Emphasis mine. Perhaps you never quoted his entire post, in context, because it doesn't support your assertion that he thinks all DACs and amps sound exactly the same? Yeah, well, that's because he never said they all sound exactly the same and judging by his words, as opposed to the ones you keep trying to put in his mouth, he doesn't believe they all sound exactly the same, he believes that the differences are not dramatic, and that sometimes they might sound exactly the same.

I know it must be fun to paint an opponent with a transparently flawed point of view that is easier to attack than the one he actually holds. It's a common (bad) debating technique called the straw man. But it really only works as a sort of hit and run. If you hang around, continue to argue and repeat the same distortion over and over again as the point is pulled out from under you, it just makes you look dumb.

P

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by xnor /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well I'm not arguing over the total THD, but it still matters to me. What I'm looking at is the overall 'image' which quickly shows if the 'can has more of a dulled/closed sound.

The thing though is it's less than a percent at its very peak. Understand that's not an average at all, that's the worse case scenario

Quote:

Music doesn't consist out of square waves afaik but it still could be a good measurement, I don't know.

It measures overall control of a driver . . . the ability to begin and stop without overshoot.

Quote:

If you compare (500 Hz) Denon's ah-d1001 with the d7000 you can see that they both perform equally well, still everyone says that the 1001's don't sound remotely as good as the 7000's. The distortion chart does however show a 'big' 3rd harmonic spike, which is kinda unusual. (could be completely coincidental, I don't know ) Also the Koss PortaPro's square waves look more like 'squares' than lets say the HD600's ...

The Koss Porta Pro also has a pretty bad 50hz square wave though, as do many Grado items. Some people interpret this as an "impact" type response, but it's also very unaccurate. I'm still planning to buy a pair of Porta Pros for use with my Zune while in bed, but I'm aware of its drawbacks.

Take a look at the 50hz response on the Denons too . . . you may be a bit amused to find out the D7000 suffers from similar issues as the porta pro or various Grados. Arguably, these headphones or being tuned for subjective opinion anymore.

This of course if from a reproductive standpoint. If you want "impact" then deviating from the objective ideal is necessary.

Quote:

Might be nonsense what I just wrote, but besides being smart I'm here to learn one or the other thing so please bear with me.

Just make sure to keep your wallet relatively tight.

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif because of your very personal ear drum resonances, unfortunately all these FR graphs from dummy heads...don't mean jack

Sure it does. It measures accuracy of the driver regardless. If I care to compensate out resonance I use an EQ for that. Either way that's not the point of discussion and you're running off on a silly little tangent.

 

[leeperry]

well, keep staring at silly little meaningless FR graphs if that suits you

these headroom measurements are heavily biased and totally irrelevant against a real-life human experience, they don't even take the equal-loudness human curves in account..

 

[AtomikPi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif because of your very personal ear drum resonances, unfortunately all these FR graphs from dummy heads...don't mean jack

The dummy head is an approximate model of your ear. I believe something like 90% of people are within one standard deviation and 99% within two or something like that so it's really irrelevant. Unless you have super weird ears, the dummy is a pretty good model.

 

[Shike]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif these headroom measurements are heavily biased and totally irrelevant against a real-life human experience, they don't even take the equal-loudness human curves in account..

Actually they do AFAIK. On their measurements they apply a calibrated curve for resonance, and offer both raw charts (if you dig) or the calibrated charts.

If you have evidence to contradict this though I'd be happy to see it.

 

[Graphicism]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Phelonious Ponk /img/forum/go_quote.gif This is really beginning to get tedious, but, like a wreck on the side of the road, I just have to look. Graphicism, do you have a point or are you just one of those people who keeps repeating the same distortions until the other guy throws up his hands and you can feel like you "won" the argument?

Okay kids, for the last time.

"You might even be tempted to upgrade your source/amp, only to find that it sounds....exact the same" = THIS MEANS IF YOU CHOOSE TO UPGRADE YOU WILL FIND IT SOUNDS EXACTLY THE SAME.

"I would have expected there to be a subtle improvement going from a sound card to a dedicated amp" = THIS MEANS FROM THE UPGRADE HE WOULD OF EXPECTED IT NOT TO SOUND EXACTLY THE SAME.

So he has said both you will find it sounds exactly the same and it shouldn't sound exactly the same. This is as clear as day to me he is just here to cause trouble and stir the pot, in the very same post he said it will sound exactly the same while also saying he would of expected it to sound different.

Questioning SmellyGas about this all he can do is backtrack and he knows it.

"You might even be tempted to upgrade your source/amp, only to find that it sounds....exact the same" and he explains himself by saying "That is something completely different from saying "nothing is better than an iBasso DAC+amp." It is also something completely different from "nothing is better than an Audigy sound card,"

He has basically said; You can spend more money and upgrade however you will find it sounds exactly the same however that's not to say there isn't something better than an Audigy sound card if your willing to upgrade.

So it's one or the other. An upgrade can be made over the Audigy sound card that will sound better OR you can upgrade however you will find it sounds exactly the same.

And lets all just forget this beauty "You've fallen for one of the classic "shared delusions" that is propagated and reinforced by people on these audio forums." ~ Which means there is no point in upgrading to a better source, amp, DAC because it's all in your head, there are no audio benefits, again, you will find they all sound exactly the same.

Finally, if something is better than an Audigy sound card this is one of the worst ways to communicate with someone I have ever seen. Guy comes in wanting to know why his DAC didn't sound good and he's hit down with 'No matter what you spend you will find it sounds exactly the same' instead of what SmellyGas is now trying to backtrack with; 'Yes there are much better options available to you, your portable ibasso might not be providing sufficient power, whats your budget and we'll work take it from there.'

 

[harmonix]

How much does one expect $160 can get you in terms of Audio heaven?
This is not intended to mean you can't find value out there. At every niche and price bracket there is equipment that offers a better value for money proposition definitely.
But let's be realistic folks....$160 only gets you so far...