[MattTCG]

I just don't see much of anyone talking about the hd800 and project ember. On paper, it looks to be a good budget choice. 

 

[DecentLevi]

Hi guys, I just found that using other medium/low level amps as a pre-amp into the Ember can further refine the sound! Just when I thought my 'Franken Ember' was the best it can possibly sound, this setup seems to have taken it about 20% further. You can read my impressions here. That would also be interesting to read from others when they connect their other medium/low level amps into the Ember, and see how it may further improve it for them as well, using various tubes. Don't get me wrong, I saw no fault with the Ember alone, until someone recommended this to me - you may be surprised! 

 

[Solrighal]

What were you feeding the Ember with before the Capella?

 

[DecentLevi]

I was just using the Ember directly from the line-out of my Gustard X12 DAC. I'm pretty sure I like this setup using the Capella as a preamp (via headphone out to RCA) to the Ember - it's more detailed, etc. but sometimes it seems a little too analytical. I'm sure some of you have a low/medium spec amp lying around and that would be interesting to see how much farther you can up the performance of the Ember using it as a preamp like I had done.

 

[Solrighal]

  I was just using the Ember directly from the line-out of my Gustard X12 DAC. I'm pretty sure I like this setup using the Capella as a preamp (via headphone out to RCA) to the Ember - it's more detailed, etc. but sometimes it seems a little too analytical. I'm sure some of you have a low/medium spec amp lying around and that would be interesting to see how much farther you can up the performance of the Ember using it as a preamp like I had done.

 
You may prefer the sound but it cannot be "more detailed". It's just not logical Captain.

 

[DavidA]

  I just don't see much of anyone talking about the hd800 and project ember. On paper, it looks to be a good budget choice. 

Tried my HD-800 with the Ember but the BH Crack just sounds better with the HD-800, the dynamics are better and the highs are smoother IMO.

 

[MattTCG]

  Tried my HD-800 with the Ember but the BH Crack just sounds better with the HD-800, the dynamics are better and the highs are smoother IMO.

 
Thanks David...I appreciate the input. 

 

[Demo3]

Got my Ember today... wooot.

 

[DavidA]

  Got my Ember today... wooot.

Hope you enjoy it as much as I have enjoyed mine

  Its one of the most versatile amps I've ever come across, great with almost all the headphone that I have.

 

[DecentLevi]

"...I like this setup using the Capella as a preamp (via headphone out to RCA) to the Ember - it's more detailed..." (than with Ember alone)
 
Quote:

   
You may prefer the sound but it cannot be "more detailed". It's just not logical Captain.

 
When looking at connecting an amp to another amp in the perspective that each time you add an extra component to a signal path it must subtract from the original signal, it would seem logical to assume as above. However, as I understand it, since each amp is essentially further enhancing 'amping' the signal, then you do actually get more detail from 2 amps connected series than with just one amp alone. I have done rigorous A/B testing with multiple daisy-chained amp setups, dozens of times and with multiple hi-end headphones, only to conclude the this method unmistakably adds extra detail to the sound - usually noticeable by more accurate reproduction of cymbals and faster attack / decay of the drums & bassline.
 
This method is more experimental than mainstay however, because sometimes it gives you too much detail and a more 'distant' feel to the sound.

 

[DavidA]

   
When looking at connecting an amp to another amp in the perspective that each time you add an extra component to a signal path it must subtract from the original signal, it would seem logical to assume as above. However, as I understand it, since each amp is essentially further enhancing 'amping' the signal, then you do actually get more detail from 2 amps connected series than with just one amp alone. I have done rigorous A/B testing with multiple daisy-chained amp setups, dozens of times and with multiple hi-end headphones, only to conclude the this method unmistakably adds extra detail to the sound - usually noticeable by more accurate reproduction of cymbals and faster attack / decay of the drums & bassline.
 
This method is more experimental than mainstay however, because sometimes it gives you too much detail and a more 'distant' feel to the sound.

But doesn't each amp also add its own distortion to the signal?  Would it not be better to use a signal processor (EQ) within the computer to "enhance" the signal prior to sending it to your amp?
 
As a test I tried sending the headphone output of my UD-301 to the Ember and there is slight drop in clarity, the highs are not as clear and the bass is not as extended.
 
This is just me and my GF doing some simple listening test so take it with a grain of salt.

 

[DecentLevi]

In my setup I was using a solid state amp as the preamp, and as far as I know, these don't add distortion. The changes I heard were mostly detail retrieval and speed related changes. Equalizers can boost/reduce certain frequencies, but don't generally actually add nuances in the recording that weren't audible before. Compressors on the other hand can change the speed (attack, decay, sustain, release) of sounds, so comparing the way daisy-chained amps to the way compressors effect the speed would be more of a valid argument.
 
Double-amping is dependent the output amount and gain settings of the two amps, especially the first amp, so not all double amp setups have good synergy together. It's generally more efficient to use the lower spec amp first, otherwise the more powerful amp's output would be cancelled out. You can also read from some others who have gotten a marvelous result from double amping here and here.
 
"For what it's worth, the 1/4 to RCA between my Capella and both my Garage 1217 tube amps works extremely well. More power, headroom, sound-stage, no distortions-but I limit the vol on the Capella to around 10 and the Garage amps settle at around 10-11 for loud realistic listening. Actually this set up sounds better than connecting RCA to RCA, and you can, of course, use all the tweaks."
 
"Alright, I made it work and it does sound better. Connection is Capella 1/4 jack to H10 RCA. 
All relative but: bass is tighter and sub-bass is much stronger. Much more detail extraction, more organic sounding (especially vocals!), more dynamic, soundstage is holographic, much more expansive..."

 

[Solrighal]

I've sat here for a good 10 minutes thinking of what to type but I can't really come up with anything constructive so I'll stick with my original statement, you cannot have more detail by simply making the signal path longer. You may prefer the resultant sound but that is not the same thing.

 

[connieflyer]

  In my setup I was using a solid state amp as the preamp, and as far as I know, these don't add distortion. The changes I heard were mostly detail retrieval and speed related changes. Equalizers can boost/reduce certain frequencies, but don't generally actually add nuances in the recording that weren't audible before. Compressors on the other hand can change the speed (attack, decay, sustain, release) of sounds, so comparing the way daisy-chained amps to the way compressors effect the speed would be more of a valid argument.
 
Double-amping is dependent the output amount and gain settings of the two amps, especially the first amp, so not all double amp setups have good synergy together. It's generally more efficient to use the lower spec amp first, otherwise the more powerful amp's output would be cancelled out. You can also read from some others who have gotten a marvelous result from double amping here and here.
 
"For what it's worth, the 1/4 to RCA between my Capella and both my Garage 1217 tube amps works extremely well. More power, headroom, sound-stage, no distortions-but I limit the vol on the Capella to around 10 and the Garage amps settle at around 10-11 for loud realistic listening. Actually this set up sounds better than connecting RCA to RCA, and you can, of course, use all the tweaks."
 
"Alright, I made it work and it does sound better. Connection is Capella 1/4 jack to H10 RCA. 
All relative but: bass is tighter and sub-bass is much stronger. Much more detail extraction, more organic sounding (especially vocals!), more dynamic, soundstage is holographic, much more expansive..."

Unless you have been trained in Electronic theory you really have to stop making statements that you "think" are true.  All components add distortion some more than others, but until you can come up with a straight wire with gain, discounting the wire of course, you will always have some distortion.

 

[melkenshawn]

Unless you have been trained in Electronic theory you really have to stop making statements that you "think" are true.  All components add distortion some more than others, but until you can come up with a straight wire with gain, discounting the wire of course, you will always have some distortion.

Personally I think your reply was kinda harsh. His statements might not be scientifically correct, but if he thinks it makes a discernible difference for the better and wanted to share his experience with everyone else, should we discourage such behavior?