[oktapod]

Hi folks - quick question:

How should one apportion their headphone system budget?

Without putting figures on it, would (say) a 50:50 split between headamp and headphone produce a better result than (say) a 20:80 split.
For example, £500 headamp and something like a pair of HD650s as compared to a £250 headamp and Sennheiser HD800s?

My instinct tells me that no matter the quality of the headphone, if the amp isn't driving the headphone well then that quality is being lost. So, the £250 headamp might well be masking the capability of the expensive headphone, whereas the £500 headamp would be more than capable of handling the less expensive headphone.

What I don't want to do, really, is to get into a mind-set of upgrading. I would like to buy once and live with my decision for a number of years. I've had so many changes and inevitably 'upgraditis' spoils ones enjoyment of listening to music. So, I want to do it properly from the outset, but within a particular budget (in my case approximately £1000, though I could feasibly stretch to the HD800+£250 headamp level IF I buy the headamp first and wait a while for the HD800s).

In the meantime, I have a pair of solid but unspectacular AKG K171 Studio headphones, which are good for the money but whose suitability for critical listening is untested (I've been using them with the iMac, connected to a PreSonus Firebox 24/96 audio interface). So, I could feasibly live with them driven by a headamp whilst I save for better headphones.

Anyway, I've waffled on enough. Any input is much appreciated!

Thanks,

John

 

[Ashirgo]

Always headphones first, then all the rest. It is because you cannot do much with headphones once you bought them. There is little chance to modify anything, unless you are a bit open-minded and thus willing try some expensive DSP/VST equalizers and other such effects, then you could go with the cheapest headphones that say do not distort too and have a nice soundstage - then you would just shape their sound signature completely as you wanted.

But if you are one of those rich and conservative, then I would suggest choosing the best headphones possible and then thinking about auxiliary equipment. That is the word, everything else is just an addition then (however necessary) - unless it is of a terrible quality

All modern (and decent) sources and amps have flat frequency characteristics. Headphones differ wildly. Another aspect is impulse response of hps (and time domain). We can assume that with more powerful amps, performance in that aspect improves and hence the changes in sound quality (sound is faster and better controlled, no distortion).

So, following that logic, your headphones will account for at least 70% of the whole effect, as long as you do not believe in some magic items, sound-improving and money-stealing. Now it is you to decide how much to spend on what.

 

[Lantis]

Hey Ashirgo, nice link on "The Death of High Fidelity"

oktapod, I'm the same boat as you are, avoiding 'upgraditis' at all costs. I'm still starting, but what I did was:

- bought the nicest cans that I can buy, with the consideration that it'll hopefully be the last one (I bought an HD650). Asihrgo is right, there is not much things you can do once you bought a headphone. I bought the Senn HD650 because I've been using Senn earphones for a long time (earbuds, noice cancelling for flights) and find them good and comfortable to my ears.

- I then researched for an amp with the consideration of the following: can drive my headphone? have upgrade options? can fit in my desktop? nice reviews? tried and tested? and most importantly, is in synergy with my can? From what I've been reading here, amp technology is stable already as compared with DAC which always have FOTM. So, with all this I've decided to buy a Little Dot MK III. If I have an itch to upgrade, then it's tube rolling for me. When tube rolling is not enough that's the time I upgrade (which I think will be quite a while) which brings me to my choice of DAC!

I bought a DAC with upgrade options in mind. I didn't go for the FOTM because for me, as long as it's not garbage in, a decent DAC with good reviews will do. So I bought a Little Dot DAC_I with XLR and SE output, as I heard balanced equipment is another beast. So if I'll upgrade, it will be for balanced equipment. I can buy a new cable for my HD650, then buy a balanced amp.

 

[oktapod]

You see, what I'm wondering is whether something like the latest Graham Slee Solo headamp (at around £480) coupled with HD650s might work out as a better all-round sound to a pair of HD800s coupled with a much cheaper headamp.

I don't think anyone would argue that either headphone is particularly flawed (at least in its price category) and so I'm curious about how much the better headphone would be hindered by the lesser headamp, as compared to the not-quite-so-great headphone and the better headamp.

This is all about overall price, without any plan for upgrading. I really, honestly *don't* want to start thinking 'what if I sold the headamp and bought a...' or whatever.

I could afford the Slee amp and the HD800s but it's less about having the money and more about justifying the purchase. That's £1500 all told for that combo and whilst I'm sure it'd be very fine indeed, I'm not sure I'm going to be listening enough to justify that kind of spend. Which is why I set a limit of around £1000 all-in, with the caveat that if I found the HD800s in the 'had to have' category (as compared to say the HD650s) then I could buy the headamp first and 'slum it' with my AKG 171s in the meantime.

I'm going down to a local shop which has the HD650 and HD800 on demo (with a Graham Slee Nova headamp), and so I will get to hear for myself just how they stack up, but unless they can do me an exceptional deal on the HD800+Nova (i.e. under £1100) or unless it is spectacularly better than the HD650+Nova, I'm not sure I'd be able to justify it...

Anyway, once again, getting carried away...

 

[estreeter]

I look at it this way - even if you spent all your budget on the best headphone amp you could afford right now, chances are very good that such an amp will do justice to any headphones you buy. It simply doesnt work the other way with headphones - you could have the nicest pair of Beyer/AKG/Senn phones dangling from your source : underamped, you may as well be trying to pull a cart with a pushbike. That said, there is nothing forcing you to buy cans that require a dedicated headphone amp - the crunch comes when you realise that the headphone out on your CDP or integrated amp isnt doing it for you - one way or another, most folk with higher end cans end up investing in an amp.

I dont know what the Sugden Bijou Headmaster costs in England, but its ferociously expensive here - thats the kind of amp that would put you in good stead for many years, even if it isnt considered particularly 'sexy' by many here. Personally, I'm more interested in source components right now, but I wish you luck.

 

[Dogbane]

All that I know is that when I bought my LD MK V, it made all of my headphones sound significantly better. Even my Bose Triports sound pretty decent through it.

 

[Drubbing]

Build a system around the headphones; they are things you actually listen to. The other things help them perform to their best. If you're going that large straight away, you need a decent source too.

You don't want to overcapitalise on any major component, so find the sound you like, then match an amp to it. If you've money to burn, then there's no harm in getting a top end amp. A few listening sessions are mandatory with that spend, IMO, and make sure you'd be listening on components you're interested in buying, as dealers may often hook up demo's to their best ancillary gear.

 

[baka1969]

I think we all want to have our cake and eat it too. The perfect phone with an invisible amp that work in symbiotic unison. Ah, but reality prevails and logic takes over. The truth is both sides are a compromise. Just deciding between tubes and SS is a compromise. Dynamic or stax. The varieties and combos are infinite. I believe it's difficult to quantify a percentage between what should be spent on headphones or amps, but I think they should marry well together based on what you're looking for listening to music. If they both don't work together, you'll always wonder 'what if?'. -Ross

 

[Gossling]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashirgo /img/forum/go_quote.gif There is little chance to modify anything, unless you are a bit open-minded and thus willing try some expensive DSP/VST equalizers and other such effects, then you could go with the cheapest headphones that say do not distort too and have a nice soundstage - then you would just shape their sound signature completely as you wanted.

Interesting. But does it work this smoothly in practice? Can detail that isn't audible to begin with be brought out with EQ? And EQing headphones that are already highly colored to begin with (as are many inexpensive headphones) can be a nightmare, if not downright impossible. Also, one needs to take into account transient speed. Also, I have always wondered: what makes one headphone more "EQable" than another? I would think a relatively flat response to begin with, but there must be other factors. Is there a correlation between harmonic distortion found in stock form and "EQ-ability"? Is harmonic distortion even related to EQ-related distortion?

 

[Happy Camper]

Go after as much amp as you can afford now. Power supply components are of vital importance in getting a wide variety of headphones to perform to ability. Your current headphones will give you an immediate improvement. You can buy headphones on a whim. Your source and amp should be the best you can attain. Headphones all have +/-. You will search until you find your sound(s). Then you can do the tweaking of choice.

I chose an amp first, then source when I hear something that is vastly improved over my current source.

 

[Ashirgo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gossling /img/forum/go_quote.gif Interesting. But does it work this smoothly in practice? Can detail that isn't audible to begin with be brought out with EQ? And EQing headphones that are already highly colored to begin with (as are many inexpensive headphones) can be a nightmare, if not downright impossible. Also, one needs to take into account transient speed. Also, I have always wondered: what makes one headphone more "EQable" than another? I would think a relatively flat response to begin with, but there must be other factors. Is there a correlation between harmonic distortion found in stock form and "EQ-ability"? Is harmonic distortion even related to EQ-related distortion?

1. It does work smoothly.

The most part of details audible with a given headphone is frequency response related. The rest is connected with the impulse response of transducers - a time domain, many people mistake that for sheer performance in high frequencies, thus attributing "speed" to headphones such as K 701, which are mediocre in this regard in comparison with some darker but in truth objectively faster cans (this is measurable, waterfall graphs for reference). The conclusion is that it is the proper frequency response that accounts for the impression of "speed".

2. Equalizing cheap headphones is usually a nightmare, because it is very hard to get reliable frequency response graphs (not to mention spectral decay graphs!). But as long as you can get quality measurements, it should be fine.

3. Transient speed (etc.) - actually, you would like to add even more reverb and resonance effects (which makes the spectral decay graphs irrelevant) - but those of your choice, to make for a higher realism and sense of spaciousness, and fullness of the sound. What for? 99% of the recordings are intended to be played on speakers of some kind and in rooms - rooms that have some natural resonances and reverberation. Your job would be to add resonances and reverb of a perfect listening environment (which is easily achievable with some known to me VST effects, but I do not want to play a salesman now

), maybe together with your individual HRTF compensations for even a greater effect!

4. I agree, a "relatively flat freq. resp." and little levels of distortion are highly recommended. To avoid making things worse, with equalizer you actually subtract from some frequencies rather than emphasize other.

A good guide of some kind may be comparing frequency graphs of various renowned headphones, to get the idea what to look for when equalizing (my favorite being Stax Omega 2 MkI

)

PS I mentioned the consideration that our music is mostly intended to be reproduced with speakers and in rooms, and actually many headphone companies take that into account, making headphones with so called diffuse field equalization. But still the reverb and resonances are lacking.

 

[artears]

According to my experience, the importance is as follows:
1. Transducers -> headphones/speakers
2. Source -> more important than an amp, since an amp only amplifies what the source provides, so a good source is a must
3. Amp -> if the source and transducers are good, the differences of different amps won't be as dramatic as an upgrade in the items listed above
4. Cables -> most of the time, stock ones are ok, one should not spend more than 10% of the total cost of one's setup on the total cable cost IMHO

 

[estreeter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Happy Camper /img/forum/go_quote.gif Go after as much amp as you can afford now. Power supply components are of vital importance in getting a wide variety of headphones to perform to ability. Your current headphones will give you an immediate improvement. You can buy headphones on a whim. Your source and amp should be the best you can attain. Headphones all have +/-. You will search until you find your sound(s). Then you can do the tweaking of choice. I chose an amp first, then source when I hear something that is vastly improved over my current source.

Agree 100%, but I also understand why so many of us accumulate headphones first then go looking for a decent amp/source.

Lets assume I have the asking price of the RS1, the only headphone left on my (real world) wish list. That sort of money would also buy me a very nice amp, or a more modest amp and a better DAC than the Topaz. As much as either of these prospects excites me, the 'instant gratification' pull of the RS1 is undeniable. It helps that you can get a good result from most Grado cans without needing an amp, but I would have improved every aspect of my listening experience with *all* of my cans by opting for the improvements in source/amp.

We rationalise with our heads, then spend with our hearts.

 

[Mink]

Quote:

Go after as much amp as you can afford now.

I don't think my Denon D5000's will sound that much better with a more expensive amp as my current X-Can V8.
I bought the X-can after I bought the Denons and this will be the order in which I will upgrade: headphones first.
And only a different amp if I don't find any synergy or if I think the headphones 'deserve' and can do better.
Not sure if I ever upgrade again though...

I got the X-can for €399 ($596) and the D5000's for $369, but the D5000's had an initial retail price of $699.
And considering both D5000's and X-Can are overpriced (at their retail price) I think the amp/headphones ratio is close to 50:50

 

[Drubbing]

I still think buying a super costly amp, just because he has the funds to do so, is putting the cart before the horse. The headphone is what you listen to, if you're listening to your amp, then you've way too much time on your hands.

What if he prefers the sound of a more modest phone than his budget allows for?

You choose the sound you want to listen to. Not all high end amps are a going to be a good compliment for every phone out there.

To answer the OP question, I think apportioning a set amount, or spilt, is too simplistic; pick your sound, then an amp to match it - if your ear is keen enough to acclimatise to different amps easily on demo that is; amps can be subtle and take decent ear time to hear their different capabilities - even harder when trying different phones at the same time. If that happens to be $500, fine. If it's $250, even better. More money for music and beer. I definitely wouldn't leave a good source out of the equation either, as you haven't mentioned what you're using there.