Hooster
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2010
- Posts
- 2,159
- Likes
- 1,208
If all you need is what the Deckard offers, then I would buy a Deckard. The HA-1 would be overkill because it has so many features that you would not be using.
Balanced is a superior engineering design; properly implemented, it improves S/N by 6 dB. And balanced cables are more immune to external noise. But the S/N of well-engineered unbalanced is already so high (can be well over 100 dB) that balanced may not offer any practical audible benefit.My only concern is the balanced outpout, Deckard does not have it, does it make a big difference or a feature which I many not use?
My only concern is the balanced outpout, Deckard does not have it, does it make a big difference or a feature which I many not use?
The HA-1 doesn't output the same level to balanced and unbalanced outputs. If you switch back and forth to compare, you must have a way to ensure the levels match. Doing this by ear is unreliable because small differences in volume (a fraction of a dB) are psychoacoustically perceived not as volume, but as differences like richness or timbre. The only way to level match reliably is to measure levels with equipment. Thus even if the balanced and unbalanced outputs of the HA-1 (or any other amp) were identical, people auditioning them would find they sound different because the levels would never perfectly match. This is not a dig on any listener's experience, skill or caution; it's just a biological fact of how our ears & brain work.After hearing all the experts' opinions, I am just getting a little confused. When I auditioned the HA-1 a while back, I could hear the difference between a balanced and single ended output. It seems to be very well implemented on the HA-1.
The HA-1 doesn't output the same level to balanced and unbalanced outputs. If you switch back and forth to compare, you must have a way to ensure the levels match. Doing this by ear is unreliable because small differences in volume (a fraction of a dB) are psychoacoustically perceived not as volume, but as differences like richness or timbre. The only way to level match reliably is to measure levels with equipment. Thus even if the balanced and unbalanced outputs of the HA-1 (or any other amp) were identical, people auditioning them would find they sound different because the levels would never perfectly match. This is not a dig on any listener's experience, skill or caution; it's just a biological fact of how our ears & brain work.
That said, I like balanced outputs; it's the best/right way to deliver the signal. And the HA-1 in particular implements it well. But put it in the proper perspective. It adds complexity, it's not always implemented properly, and even when it is, it doesn't always make any audible improvement.
PS I like the article posted above. Well put, and essentially what I've been trying to say. Though I disagree a bit with Benchmark in that they imply that the additional complexity always overwhelms the advantages, which I would dispute. I believe balanced, when properly implemented, is superior engineering. But everything else they said is spot-on correct.
Unfortunately, there's no good analogy to car engines.You are right, it must have been the extra output through balanced output making me think that it was driving the headphones a bit more effortlessly without really pushing the volume knob all the way down. If I was to draw an analogy then is it correct to think of balance output V single ended output to a car with V8 car engine V a V6 engine?