[castleofargh]

can I do bread analogy?

 
if I'm the one baking, the quality of the wheat will really not matter much. charcoal is still charcoal.(I'm an excellent cook, I can do hard boiled eggs and overcooked pasta, if some fancy American restaurant wants to hire me as a chef, I do have the most horrible french accent that goes so well with the job).
 
seriously, for the reasonable people, it's all about magnitudes, fidelity will never be 100%, noise will always exist... the fidelity we can expect from each components tells us that the headphone is very very very likely to be the weak link in an audio chain. and that even with the very best headphone. headphones must be good in electrical, mechanical, and acoustical domains all at once. so of course it's way easier to get better fidelity from the devices that only need to do the electrical stuff right. it's basic logic, and measurements certainly agree with such idea. in fact measurements make it way more obvious than any audiophile would ever imagine by ear.

 

[Orestes1984]

  Hmmm just a bit food for thought:
 
Of course the $2,000 DAC for a $500 headphone might sound ridiculous (for my a DAC for $2k always sounds ridiculous but that's personal)....but there might be a strategy behind this.
 
Since every piece of equipment might have a range of how good it can sound based on what's in front off it in the chain etc. it might make sense to have:
 
- best source you can get (transport, DAC)
- best amp you can get
= your headphones (no matter how expensive) will sound their personal best
 
While some $500 headphones on a $50 amp might sound like poop - some might sound ok or even as good as it gets. But let's assume the "best amp" is really the best - the headphone will surely sound its best.
 
And since we have already established that changing the headphones makes the biggest impact - having a great source/amp makes total sense - you stick with it - and change headphones for variety.
 
Cheers.

You are only ever as good as your weakest link and contrary to marketing hype a DAC can actually make the situation worse. Given the quality of the DACs in modern MP3 players and phones I just don't see the need for a DAC at all in the first place. If you want to add more presence and fullness to your stage then by all means add an amplifier, or if you want a warmer sound add some valves, but you don't really need to at least not with the phones I've got as I am concerned.
 
At the same rate however people are throwing out perfectly good high end receivers just because they don't have HDMI inputs and so you can pick up units that handle even very inefficient headphones for less than $200 such as my Onkyo unit which handles an input impedence of 470‎Ω and is 110w per channel I got at a yard sale for less than that simply because it's a 12 year old unit that doesn't have HDMI. It has more than enough to blow up even the most high end or inneficient of headphones.
 
People just have a tendency to buy things they don't need and can spend on better quality gear down the road. Given my Focal headphones have a nominal impedance of 32‎Ω and are fairly efficient I would say I've got a complete an utter overkill, but I didn't really pick this receiver up off a yard sale to listen to headphones. If we're talking about the amount of impedence to make a speaker go blip, then I've got that covered 10 times over.
 
Even my iPhone will crank out a precautionary unlistenable sound stage of 100db out of its DAC, they are very good devices by themselves and you will only need an amplifier for the most inefficient of speakers/phones.

 

[Koolpep]

 
You are only ever as good as your weakest link and contrary to marketing hype a DAC can actually make the situation worse. Given the quality of the DACs in modern MP3 players and phones I just don't see the need for a DAC at all in the first place. If you want to add more presence and fullness to your stage then by all means add an amplifier. At that rate however and the rate people are throwing out perfectly good high end receivers just because they don't have HDMI inputs you can pick up units that handle even very inefficient headphones for less than $200 such as my Onkyo unit which handles an input impedence of 470‎Ω and is 110w per channel. More than enough to blow up even the most high end of headphones.
 
People just have a tendency to buy things they don't need and can spend on better quality gear down the road. Given my Focal headphones have a nominal impedance of 32‎Ω and are fairly efficient I would say I've got a complete an utter overkill, but I didn't really pick this receiver up off a yard sale to listen to headphones.

Yep agreed. I didn't say by the way that this was my personal strategy - but that I can see where a guy would be coming from following that strategy. I am so excited listening to a vintage DAC/Amp from Sansui with a rare Sanyo hybrid DAC and it sounds lovely, picked that up for a few bucks and love it.

 

[Orestes1984]

Exactly, and given that this is "sound science" we should be encouraging more people to spend money where it actually counts and making note of the fact that there are plenty of ways to get incredibly cheap and high quality setup without breaking the bank, particularly in this era where even brands like Sennheiser are throwing themselves into the "lifestyle" market that was previously inhabited solely by BOSE and later Beats, I think it should just be a common duty service.
 
One of the reasons why I went to Focal was a middle finger salute to this kind of behavior, I've always trusted Senn to produce true sound at a modest price, but not anymore. In reality I should have just bought another pair of vintage AKG's to add to the collection. I'm aware there are are good Senns and bad Senns but that gap is getting wider and wider and wider, and even more expensive along the way.

 

[cel4145]

I think the issue is, a lot of headphones around that price range can be run out of an ipod or smart phone and sound just as good as when they are plugged into $$$$ worth of equipment.  I had an opportunity to hear the Final Sonorous X which sells for AUD$6.5k but is easy to drive and comes with a 3.5mm plug on it.  If anything was going to show the difference between premium portable players and an ipod/phone, then these would be the headphones to show it.  Plugged it into my ipod classic and an assortment of A&K players up to about $4k I think.  All of them sounded the same. Maybe there would be a very small difference if you did long term critical listening, but I couldn't tell them apart.  If someone with a $500 pair of cans wanted to spend $2k on an upgrade, they could definitely spend it in a way that upgraded their system in a much more effective way (ie. headphones)

I think one of the main objectives of the sound science forum is to let people know that an on board DAC or something like an objective dac will sound just as good as a $2k DAC...  But everyone in the rest of the forum likes to claim that the dac is the most important because without a good dac the rest of your system suffers.  To use the dreaded car analogy, I would liken the DAC to the tyres.  Yes, you need tyres just like you need a dac in your audio system, but when you have a $500 car, you don't need $2000 tyres to 'make it perform at it's potential'.  If you have a $100,000 car, then yes, it's probably a bit more worthwhile investing some extra $, but if you have a $500 car and are looking for an upgrade in performance, don't go and buy bloody $2000 tyres for it.

I agree with most of what you say. A $500 car? That's like a $10 set of headphones. Yep. Don't need to upgrade any tires/electronics. Spend the money on a better car/headphone.

But otherwise, I agree with Koolpep. The tire analogy doesn't work very well because higher performance tires do have measurable performance benefits. Going from a $100-$200 DAC to a $2000 DAC likely may offer nothing at all. But I recently explained to my son the reason we put $110 a piece performance all season radials on his 2008 Honda fit vs. $60 ones (it has tiny tires, so $110 are very high performance). My strategy? Don't cheap out on tires on your car. First, better hardness rating so more durability--saves money in the long run. Second, in day to day driving you might not notice a lot of difference. But the first time you see people hydroplaning in their cars on wet roads due to cheap tires, or you have to swerve hard to avoid an accident and your car sticks to the road, or you brake hard and you narrowly miss plowing in the back of someone, that's when you pat yourself on the back that you spent extra money on tires

I think the car analogy should become our equivalent of invoking nazis in an online debate. Game over.

Or, at least, the person making the analogy needs to thoroughly understand the technical aspects of whatever car attribute they are comparing

 

[pureangus62]

I think the main problem is that component pricing increases exponentially as its quality increases. While the capacitor with the tightest tolerances may cost $300 a pop, its probably not going to improve SQ over one that is say $10 each. Slap 50 of them in a DAC and regardless of how impressive the spec sheet is and how little difference there is in sound, the material cost is through the roof. This combined with marketing buzzwords like "flagship" gives you a huge price tag for what could very well be minimal (if any) improvement

 

[terry parr]

I don't get by head-fi too often, anymore (even to just lurk), but I still do pop in from time-to-time.  glad I popped in now, to catch this thread.  kinda reminds me of the old days, where a thoughtful discussion thread (that was more about delivering the steak, rather than just selling the sizzle) seemed to be a more frequent occurrence!   (to my mind, at least). 
 
congrats to Dillan for getting the ball rolling, and for all you guys for contributing to a good thread.  I thought the thread read a little better in the beginning pages (where the comments stayed closer to the original points raised), but I've still followed it, even when the thread started to drift.  (there were interesting comments during those times, too).    

 

[KT66]

The reason why I landed here about 6 years ago was that I was fed up with the traditional 2 channel hifi industry, it had got to the point where any upgrade to my system, even just a tonearm, was £3k plus, that to me to hard to justify to SWMBO or myself.

I loved the attitude here then of squeezing the most out of cheapish products, and that for less than a grand I could get an HM801 with DT1350, resulting in an incredible sound.

AK started entering the dark side first with silly prices and Charles A responded by literally taking the piss.

It's a shame to see prices of AK240s and Hifiman flagship headphones, but don't forget that for much much less you can get 90% of that sound with DX80 and a pair of XSs or DT1350.

And cables, don't get me started on cables, one of the reasons I came here was to get away from Nordost and the like, and I see Mike Mercer using Odin or Valhalla, and I see I am not safe.

Headfi is still vfm compared to normal hifi but the gap is getting closer and I see more and more old hifi industry bods appearing and trying to jump on the band wagon.

The only traditional hifi manufacturer that has successfully moved into Head fi is Chord, for me B&W, Arcam, Focal, Meridian etc just don't get it.

 

[krismusic]

I agree with most of what you say. A $500 car? That's like a $10 set of headphones. Yep. Don't need to upgrade any tires/electronics. Spend the money on a better car/headphone.

But otherwise, I agree with Koolpep. The tire analogy doesn't work very well because higher performance tires do have measurable performance benefits. Going from a $100-$200 DAC to a $2000 DAC likely may offer nothing at all. But I recently explained to my son the reason we put $110 a piece performance all season radials on his 2008 Honda fit vs. $60 ones (it has tiny tires, so $110 are very high performance). My strategy? Don't cheap out on tires on your car. First, better hardness rating so more durability--saves money in the long run. Second, in day to day driving you might not notice a lot of difference. But the first time you see people hydroplaning in their cars on wet roads due to cheap tires, or you have to swerve hard to avoid an accident and your car sticks to the road, or you brake hard and you narrowly miss plowing in the back of someone, that's when you pat yourself on the back that you spent extra money on tires
Or, at least, the person making the analogy needs to thoroughly understand the technical aspects of whatever car attribute they are comparing

I just think that audio has absolutely nothing in common with cars and vice versa.
I completely agree with you about tires though!

 

[cel4145]

I completely agree with you about tires though!

I'm a little worried after his comment that mulder might be putting cheap tires on his car. Makes me cringe a little to imagine riding around on budget tires. :eek:

 

[U-3C]

Honestly I feel more and more disappointed as I spend time reading into other dacs by following their discussion threads.

The one I have has had driver issues for months, sometimes catastrophic, as in Windows shuts itself down to save itself at times due to conflicts. I see other popular dacs, such as the Schiit Modi, also has driver issues at times. These seem to have arose due to Windows 10, but they are a huge inconvenience factor and are just another reason to make me wonder...what's the point compared to onboard audio that works just fine and sound just as good if you bypass whatever the drivers are doing in the background and move/shield the cables in your pc so there's no noise. I find it funny because the noise for on my external dac is higher than my onboard audio....

 

[musikevan]

Comparing audible differences in DACs can be easy and inexpensive...many older tablets end up in the used marketplace for about $20-$30. Compare an Alcatel pop 7 to an Azpen a727 for noticeable, consistent differences. At those prices, I could save for better headphones or amplifier, or better yet, tix to your local community orchestra.

 

[U-3C]

Comparing audible differences in DACs can be easy and inexpensive...many older tablets end up in the used marketplace for about $20-$30. Compare an Alcatel pop 7 to an Azpen a727 for noticeable, consistent differences. At those prices, I could save for better headphones or amplifier, or better yet, tix to your local community orchestra.

I have this old MP3 player from over 10 years ago. It costs less than 10 bucks, if I remember correctly. With it, I was finally able to actually notice a difference! Hooray!!!

Modern smartphones/tablets compared to well implemented AK4490...meh. Nothing.

 

[reginalb]

I have this old MP3 player from over 10 years ago. It costs less than 10 bucks, if I remember correctly. With it, I was finally able to actually notice a difference! Hooray!!!

Modern smartphones/tablets compared to well implemented AK4490...meh. Nothing.

 
If you need an outboard DAC pickup a Behringer UCA202 or 222. Works great, no driver issues, even through a USB3 hub. I don't get dropouts, and I can use its input to measure FR. And it was $30. Can't really beat that. 
 
If you want something with a good low impedance amp built in, you can get a Schiit Fulla, and use a usb 2.0 port or hub. Or just use the onboard audio, for 90% of use cases you'll be just fine with that

 

[U-3C]

If you need an outboard DAC pickup a Behringer UCA202 or 222. Works great, no driver issues, even through a USB3 hub. I don't get dropouts, and I can use its input to measure FR. And it was $30. Can't really beat that. 

If you want something with a good low impedance amp built in, you can get a Schiit Fulla, and use a usb 2.0 port or hub. Or just use the onboard audio, for 90% of use cases you'll be just fine with that

Unfortunately I already have a outboard dac that measures better than both, and I still can't hear a difference between that and my onboard, so I guess I simply don't need to spend money on outboards, even if it's just 10 bucks. I'll just save that 30 dollars and buy a good book instead~