Something important that has been forgotten about by many.

[bagwell359]

My samsung galaxy buds pro have better treble and bass extension and better soundstage than sennheiser hd 600. I prefer galaxy buds pro over the majority of headphones ive used lol. The majority of headphones are so tonally flawed that you might as well get studio monitors. The weakest link in your signal chain is your god awful measuring headphones.

Most headphones of note have more extended bass and treble than the 600. Sadly for many of them the music lives in the mids. The 600 is also quite flat in terms of FR (not including under 60 Hz). Still compared to what they sound like on OTL tube amps (sweet, bass down to 35 Hz, much better soundstage), they just don't come to life on solid state equipment.

Transducers have the most difficult job. There are lots of cruddy bass crazy and treble crazy cans - the presence of those don't obviate the quality of the truly good ones. You can get some excellent cans in the $600-700 range that if properly run blow away many room speakers.

 

[Steven31]

I've owned two headphones with balanced cables (The AKG 702 and the Ultrasone Edition M, the wiring inside their cables being different to the wiring inside normal cables) and whilst I like both headphones (huge fan of the AKG K702) I don't think their cables play a significant part in their sound. If they had been made with normal cables, imo they would sound just the same- or maybe improve the bass response in both headphones (not that the bass response in said headphones is lacking). I don't really see the point in balanced cable connections, yes, technically they are "supposed" to have a lower noise floor, which should translate as more detail, but subjectively, in reality according to what I hear I don't think that is the case. I also owned a headphone amp a few years ago (it was a Musical Fidelity amp but I can't even remember the exact model) that had a mini XLR balanced connection and this amp sounded terrible to me. It sounded lifeless/dull and boring. But I understand that it's all very subjective and this is just my opinion.

 

[Kammerat Rebekka]

There’s a whole lot of wishy washy psychology at play when folks start bringing out the ‘analogue card’. The thing is…if you are listening to music - even over a digital system…well you are then listening to analogue sound. That is why it’s called a dac: digital to analogue converter. We can’t hear the music if it’s not analogue.

Then again audiophiles and especially vinyl-philes have succeeded in metamorphosing the meaning of ‘analogue’ into something it never was. Kinda like people using ‘sick’ as something positive and great.

I own both cds and lps. I mostly listen to cds because my apartment is the opposite of sound-proofed. I can literally hear my upstairs neighbour farting…and I really don’t care for the extra noise, pops and flutters I get from vinyl over headphones. Slapping on a record is entirely reserved for speakers and chilling out.

The most important bit that has been forgotten by many? Elderly folks love old things. That’s why they love old gear….yet they can’t leave it at that. They need to prove that it somehow is superior to the new stuff that they do not fully understand…and we end up at these types of discussions

Edith: as for wireless technology? I’m willing to bet a ton of beets on the fact that nobody here would be able to distinguish between a cd on a wire vs an MP3 320 over wireless…at least not in blind setting.

 

[Steven31]

I think there is always some sort of trade off with everything in life, vinyl is not perfect but the "pops and flutters" are in my book a worthy trade off for an overall richer, far more natural and closer to reality sound compared to digitised methods. It's a bit like comparing a plasma TV (remember those?!) to a modern tv 4k tv. I have a 50 inch Toshiba 4k micro-dimming hybrid log gamma ray Dolby Vision TV and it's picture is spectacular (the in buit speakers are what I would consider to be audiophile grade quality too, the best i've heard in a tv) - but I also have an old Samsung 43 inch plasma TV and despite the trade off of electromagnetic interference you get with plasma technology (placing a phone or speakers near the screen will mess with the pixels) and despite my Samsung having half as many pixels (it's only 1080P) as the Toshiba (which is 4k) - the Samsung still beats the living daylights out of the Toshiba. Doing a side by side comparison, it's like you only see one colour with the Toshiba (white) whereas the Samsung plasma is like a watercolour painting, full of vibrant and diverse colour in comparison. And it's clarity and resolution is outstanding too. So I think the same can be said for analogue vs digital audio. The minute an analogue signal becomes digitised, compression takes place and audible information is lost..

 

[Kammerat Rebekka]

This is an old discussion that has been around ever since we switched from LPs to CDs…and I kinda get it. Hell I love my vinyl records and wouldn’t change them for anything. I love the fact that I get to look at this huge beautiful artwork and that I am physically envolved in the process. It’s tangible.
There is also something way more sexy about watching a needle slip into a vinyl groove vs watching a plastic disc being consumed by a box that then shoots a laser into it..or having an invisible cloud beam information to my headset.
I even have some LPs that sound better than the digital version I own of the same album. That is however not because of the source or medium in play but rather has to do with the master/mix being used. Similar to how some audiophile streaming services trick people into believing their platform is superior with added resolution and whatnot…yet it has nothing to do with that but everything to do with the mix.

Either way I would love for music fans to buy more music - like in physical releases. Streaming services certainly don’t pay the artists their due and downloading music illegally has almost become the norm in some places. Folks used to excuse themselves with the fact that artists made huge revenues on live shows and the merch they sold at the very same…yet with the whole Corona nonsense happening..how on earth are artists going to support themselves?

So yeah buy the LPs - regardless of whether you believe the sound quality is superior to digital. The end result should preferably amount to more music being made..because that wonderful guitarist you love oh so dearly now can focus on music instead of having to work fulltime as a freelance gardener in order to provide for his family.

 

[Redcarmoose]

Balanced or not balanced may not matter. It probably can’t be proved if balanced or not balanced is better. This argument has been going on since the days it was introduced into audiophile land.

Not balanced less wire/shorter signal path, than balanced. Still microphone cables are of course another story and need it due to the noise diminishing design.

Analogue or digital is really not an argument truthfully. The reason it doesn’t matter is the application. There is no way that one way is better. It depends on the individual and how their system is set up and how they hear. I don’t steam or use wireless technology but defend the people who like it. I have gone on many a tangent to explain how vinyl offers something that digital does not, still it doesn’t matter.

The reason is mental. All of us have taken a journey, some 10 years some 50 years to come to the place we are now. The fact is you can make digital sound really pretty good. Vinyl can also be loved and a person can learn to not hear the noise floor, ground loop hum and pops after a while.

But it sounds nice for someone to jump up on a soap box and explain how audio is this or that. How they can somehow save people from going down the wrong path? But it has to be remembered that audio is many things, way more than we understand, in the way it’s used.

Meaning some folks need the 320 kbps to enjoy music, or need to stream music to get their music, or want to stream music to get their music. The main thing is they are enjoying music. Believe me there are ample bandaids to the issues with digital. It’s most important if someone makes the connection between the music and themselves. Meaning this game is far more psychological than any single methodology in use.

There is a certain natural tone to vinyl sound, yet you may be surprised how great digital sounds. It’s not exactly the same but has it’s own special character which can be obtained.

The whole debate over digital vs analogue or streaming or whatever will always go on. The talk of balanced or single ended will also go on for years and years, probably be talked about well after we are gone.

So much of it is marketing. So balanced amps at times actually may have better components. It doesn’t mean balanced is better..............it again is in the application. Same as digital; there has been some amazing sounding digital. Same as analogue, there has been some amazing analogue!

Speaking of Bluetooth, you would be blown away how good I’ve got LDAC to sound. There are possibilities everywhere!

 

[Steven31]

@Redcarmoose Thanks for commenting, you make a fair point and I value your (and everyone else's) opinion. I always enjoy reading your posts!
Thanks.

 

[Redcarmoose]

@Redcarmoose Thanks for commenting, you make a fair point and I value your (and everyone else's) opinion. I always enjoy reading your posts!
Thanks.

It really is tricky! We are bombarded with all these choices. It must be bewildering to new folks. I mean how many Bluetooths are there? Still it is a challenge finding your way around all the stuff?

As far as Bluetooth goes, it’s absolutely a compromise most of the time, but there are ways to make it work. I do get your point though and if anything it has to do with pace or timing. I do get what your saying, I mean I’m paranoid about wireless too in a way.

 

[bagwell359]

I've owned two headphones with balanced cables (The AKG 702 and the Ultrasone Edition M, the wiring inside their cables being different to the wiring inside normal cables) and whilst I like both headphones (huge fan of the AKG K702) I don't think their cables play a significant part in their sound. If they had been made with normal cables, imo they would sound just the same- or maybe improve the bass response in both headphones (not that the bass response in said headphones is lacking). I don't really see the point in balanced cable connections, yes, technically they are "supposed" to have a lower noise floor, which should translate as more detail, but subjectively, in reality according to what I hear I don't think that is the case. I also owned a headphone amp a few years ago (it was a Musical Fidelity amp but I can't even remember the exact model) that had a mini XLR balanced connection and this amp sounded terrible to me. It sounded lifeless/dull and boring. But I understand that it's all very subjective and this is just my opinion.

They do have a lower noise floor - it's axiomatic. So your opinion is based on one experience?

1. Some makers want to cash in on "balanced" and the circuit runs the same path on SE or balanced. No difference there

2. Some makers have engineers that don't know how to pull out the best from balanced, so the performance is poor,

3. Other makers such as Schiit, know how to max it out. Witness the Rag 1. Output in balanced .1 ohm, SE 3.3.

WPC? 15 @ 32 ohms for balanced; 3 @ 32 ohms for SE

Believe me NO headphone sounds nearly as good as on the balanced vs SE.

I'd say try again.

 

[Redcarmoose]

They do have a lower noise floor - it's axiomatic. So your opinion is based on one experience?

1. Some makers want to cash in on "balanced" and the circuit runs the same path on SE or balanced. No difference there

2. Some makers have engineers that don't know how to pull out the best from balanced, so the performance is poor,

3. Other makers such as Schiit, know how to max it out. Witness the Rag 1. Output in balanced .1 ohm, SE 3.3.

WPC? 15 @ 32 ohms for balanced; 3 @ 32 ohms for SE

Believe me NO headphone sounds nearly as good as on the balanced vs SE.

I'd say try again.

Again you are only referring to a single experience, your own?

https://www.moon-audio.com/blog/balanced-audio-always-better

 

[bagwell359]

Balanced or not balanced may not matter. It probably can’t be proved if balanced or not balanced is better. This argument has been going on since the days it was introduced into audiophile land.

Not balanced less wire/shorter signal path, than balanced. Still microphone cables are of course another story and need it due to the noise diminishing design.

Analogue or digital is really not an argument truthfully. The reason it doesn’t matter is the application. There is no way that one way is better. It depends on the individual and how their system is set up and how they hear. I don’t steam or use wireless technology but defend the people who like it. I have gone on many a tangent to explain how vinyl offers something that digital does not, still it doesn’t matter.

The reason is mental. All of us have taken a journey, some 10 years some 50 years to come to the place we are now. The fact is you can make digital sound really pretty good. Vinyl can also be loved and a person can learn to not hear the noise floor, ground loop hum and pops after a while.

But it sounds nice for someone to jump up on a soap box and explain how audio is this or that. How they can somehow save people from going down the wrong path? But it has to be remembered that audio is many things, way more than we understand, in the way it’s used.

Meaning some folks need the 320 kbps to enjoy music, or need to stream music to get their music, or want to stream music to get their music. The main thing is they are enjoying music. Believe me there are ample bandaids to the issues with digital. It’s most important if someone makes the connection between the music and themselves. Meaning this game is far more psychological than any single methodology in use.

There is a certain natural tone to vinyl sound, yet you may be surprised how great digital sounds. It’s not exactly the same but has it’s own special character which can be obtained.

The whole debate over digital vs analogue or streaming or whatever will always go on. The talk of balanced or single ended will also go on for years and years, probably be talked about well after we are gone.

So much of it is marketing. So balanced amps at times actually may have better components. It doesn’t mean balanced is better..............it again is in the application. Same as digital; there has been some amazing sounding digital. Same as analogue, there has been some amazing analogue!

Speaking of Bluetooth, you would be blown away how good I’ve got LDAC to sound. There are possibilities everywhere!

Damn. Very well observed through wise eyes, It is important to leave people to their own truths even if one doesn't agree.

This has to be one of the best posts I've read here in 5 years.

 

[Frisker76]

Wireless technology is detrimental to our enjoyment of music. if you’ve only ever heard music played on a streaming platform through your headphones (in this case- no matter how expensive they may be) connected to your phone or a mono phone speaker or tv speakers or cheap (sub $100) all-in-one hifi system and have never heard a non digital hifi separates setup you will be non the wiser what you’re missing out on and this post won’t make sense to you. The detriments modern technology introduces to music/audio reproduction includes streaming to your phone/dap/pc - and wireless headphones too. A simple fact that seems to have gotten lost in the times we live in.

Anyways, I’m out of here, fellas
Have a good one!

Agree, well said

 

[bagwell359]

Again you are only referring to a single experience, your own?

https://www.moon-audio.com/blog/balanced-audio-always-better

I determined in the 1990's after a long concentrated tour through the Krell, Pass, ARC, Classe, etc. makers that balanced was better - when it wasn't just a marketing gimmicks. I also noted that various balanced cables sounded the same. RCA's did not - and they are very sensitive to placements in rooms. I had a lot of fancy RCA's that had to go: Cardas Golden Cross, AQ Emerald, etc. - expensive to move them.

The Rag happens to be my current example. It's matching DAC also sounds a lot better in balanced. Before that I had two Pass X-150's, Pass P, and Adcom GFP-750, ARC SP15, and Pass Aleph 3 & 5. All in balanced.

So no, not a single experience.

 

[xeizo]

Balanced gives a clean signal, unbalanced can pick all sorts of noise, in some applications it's a very big difference like powered speakers near computers. Balanced is a must. Or for live music, stage microphones would pick up tons of noise from all over if they weren't balanced. To a headphone, not so critical as a headphone has very very low sensitivity compared to my other examples and those noises most likely won't ever be heard.

 

[Steven31]

Balanced gives a clean signal, unbalanced can pick all sorts of noise, in some applications it's a very big difference like powered speakers near computers. Balanced is a must. Or for live music, stage microphones would pick up tons of noise from all over if they weren't balanced. To a headphone, not so critical as a headphone has very very low sensitivity compared to my other examples and those noises most likely won't ever be heard.

Thanks for your comment. I can understand the logic in preferring headphones with balanced cables, from an objective/technical standpoint. Objectively they should be better than non balanced, but subjectively I never heard a difference. But I guess i'm just not a fan of them. For me it's a matter of preference. I don't like how thin balanced cables (for headphones) can be, and to offer a counter argument on their technical advantages,- if you ever took the time to research/study and understand the nature of how a current of electricity runs through a wire, you will know that thin cables are more prone to distorting the signal than thicker cables. This is just one reason why I prefer headphones with thick, non detachable cables. I don't prefer headphones with detachable cables (which accounts for most headphones nowadays) because the cabling behind the drivers are terminated into a jack for the detachable cable to plug into. Whereas with headphones with non detachable cables, the signal is runs from the amp (or whatever device you have it connected to) straight to the drivers of the headphone, and in my opinion there is less room for error in the signal chain. Headphones with non detachable cables have I would say around a 0.5% advantage and benefit in sound quality over headphones with detachable cables. 0.5% doesn't sound like much but on a very high end system you would notice this difference. The sound is just that bit smoother and micro details are easier to hear. Of course you need to know what to look out for, you need to train your ears first before doing any tests.