kapanak
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 17, 2014
- Posts
- 941
- Likes
- 370
For me, the Auralic Vega is the DAC endpoint goal.
This begs the question, does a DAC such as Octave or M51 leave one wanting a better front end for the HD800 or will it satisfy so that one can spend one's time/money pursuing great music? And if this level DAC is not an end point, is a PWD or Yggdrasil or Hex, or BADA or QB-9 an end point, or does it never end?
This begs the question, does a DAC such as Octave or M51 leave one wanting a better front end for the HD800 or will it satisfy so that one can spend one's time/money pursuing great music? And if this level DAC is not an end point, is a PWD or Yggdrasil or Hex, or BADA or QB-9 an end point, or does it never end?
There is a reason it sounds wider. Some of the available "width" info is being "masked" be the "resonance" that the grilles were causing.(Spatial cues are much easier to hear when you start removing mechanical colorations that the headphones are producing)
Joni Mitchell sums this up perfectly in the lyric from "Big Yellow Taxi" ..."You don't know what you've got til it's gone !"
Metrum Octave MkII > Metrum Aurix > HD800 --- This is my current "final solution" for the HD800.
I have been enjoying the Wyred 4 Sound DAC2 DSDse for a while now and it is a great combo with the HD800's. They have a great deal on the DAC1 atm which now can do DSD.
Only you can answer that question.
I've lived with the M51 for some time and have not once entertained the notion of upgrading
There is a reason it sounds wider. Some of the available "width" info is being "masked" be the "resonance" that the grilles were causing.(Spatial cues are much easier to hear when you start removing mechanical colorations that the headphones are producing)
Joni Mitchell sums this up perfectly in the lyric from "Big Yellow Taxi" ..."You don't know what you've got til it's gone !"
Um, that may or may not be the ‘source’’ of the pinched width of the sound stage.
My SAA modded 800's have no shelf liner, creatology foam, felt, nor inner covers, and the spatial cues are pinpoint precise and expansive, where the recording calls for such.
I suspect there are 'other' influences at play.
But what I do notice as a result of all of these (Anax & SAA) mods, is a major reduction in LFF (Listener Fatigue Factor), which 'allows' me to turn up the DRC (Dynamic Range Control, aka, the volume control), to 'higher' levels before I reach 'too much' and don't wish to go any higher, mostly due to the (lack of) ‘comfort' level of the SPL (Sound Pressure Level).
When the LFF is improved, by whatever means, the SQ raises accordingly.
I hear this as an increase in the degree of being ‘in focus’, for the entire acoustic presentation.
And interestingly, as the LFF is improved, this 'additional' degree of being ‘in focus’ remains quite evident, even when the volume is turned down.
What this allows is a greater dynamic range in the playback of the music, which in turn increases all of the subtle cues (spatiality, and all the other related harmonics associated to each instrument/voice), not to mention better bass due to our hearing's natural frequency gain of the low end, as the overall SPL is raised.
And there seems to be another 'mechanism' at play as well.
As the 'choke points' in the entire system are ameliorated, the overall 'get out of its own way' factor 'allows' more of the original signal to arrive at the transducers, in the first place.
And
As we reduce the transducers ‘unwanted/undesirable’ acoustic 'traits', this can also 'allow' more of the actual signal to be heard, because these ‘bad’ traits no longer act as a 'mask', which means the need for further masking the mask, can become both unnecessary to begin with, and unwanted.
But as we all know improvements to the transducer (speakers, headphones) are usually most effective.
And these types of mods, such as adding masking with foam/felt, experimental removal of 'extra' parts (grills, etc), have been popular forever.
And further it is also commonly held that these sorts of improvements can sometimes be quite significant, as is the case before us.
So it can be a challenge for us DIY’rs to figure out the ‘best’ balance between different mods.
Which has lead me to the understanding that as further 'choke points' are removed from the system, it is able to resolve to even greater degrees of inner definition, and be able to deliver 'more' of each instrument/voice, with a greater sense of acoustic 'realness' as the level of precision and resolution is increased.
That's another thing I’ve noticed, as our systems become more and more precise and resolving, it becomes all to easy to assign causation of the undesirable sonic traits, to an incorrect originating source of the 'irritation'.
But not always…
Like, with some 800's that have a 'resonant?' peak in the ≈ 5-8KHz region.
Or (fill in your favorite example here)…
But with any reduction of the causes of LFF, the overall sound level seems to lower at the same time that the DRC has been raised. Which is rather curious, if you think about it. (I raise the DRC and the volume goes down????)
Because now, to reach the same level of LFF as before the last improvement of LFF, the DRC needs to be increased, even further…
It sounds like the acoustic presentation seems to present less ‘energy’ (SPL). And due to the reduction of the causative factors of LFF and other choke points, the available acoustic energy seems more tightly ‘bound’ to its original ‘parent’/source.
Which points back to the increase in the Dynamic Range, because while there is less ‘smeared’ acoustic energy (since more of it is ‘bound’ to its acoustic source), the amount of silence between individual notes for each instrument/voice/source of acoustic energy, has increased. And so there is a greater amount of time where less acoustic energy is being generated, and we can perceive this as lower SPL.
IOW, when the amount of available acoustic energy is aligned and associated more precisely and accurately with its original source, there is more complete coupling of the original sonic signal to its re-created acoustical cousin, which also means there is less acoustic energy where it doesn’t belong.
Which is another way of saying the sound level seems to drop due to the reduction of LFF, as the entire system has gotten ‘out of it’s own way’, all the more.
And, "You don't know what you've got til it's gone !" indeed! :thumb
JJ
"LFF" I like this term tremendously & I'm sure I will have occasion to use it. Fortunately it doesn't appear to be that symptomatic
of my listening lately
(He says as he gives a repeat listen to Paul Lewis & the BBC SO proceed through Beethoven's "Emperor
Concerto; if only he would take the same tempi that Kempf takes in the Adagio this would be the "perfect" Emperor)...(Sorry, lost my
train of thought, but I think "it's returned to the Station).
You given me much food for thought here as I believe we're on the same page. I tend to be a bit less diplomatic in calling real time
acoustic energy events, colorations, as the former simply takes many more keystrokes to describe & certain aural elements are
plainly discernable as not being part of the sound that originates from a recording. particularly when you don't hear the same colorations of the same music in question played through a different tansducer..
I may have other "semi-literate" points I had intended to discuss , but I have prior engagement to attend to so I'll say as A. Hitchcock
would say "Good Eeeev-ening"(cue the Victor Herbert music)
"LFF" I like this term tremendously & I'm sure I will have occasion to use it. Fortunately it doesn't appear to be that symptomatic
of my listening lately
(He says as he gives a repeat listen to Paul Lewis & the BBC SO proceed through Beethoven's "Emperor
Concerto; if only he would take the same tempi that Kempf takes in the Adagio this would be the "perfect" Emperor)...(Sorry, lost my
train of thought, but I think "it's returned to the Station).
You given me much food for thought here as I believe we're on the same page. I tend to be a bit less diplomatic in calling real time
acoustic energy events, colorations, as the former simply takes many more keystrokes to describe & certain aural elements are
plainly discernable as not being part of the sound that originates from a recording. particularly when you don't hear the same colorations of the same music in question played through a different tansducer..
I may have other "semi-literate" points I had intended to discuss , but I have prior engagement to attend to so I'll say as A. Hitchcock
would say "Good Eeeev-ening"(cue the Victor Herbert music)
I look forward to reading your thoughts. :thumb
And when the 'mechanism' of LFF first 'appeared' on my 'radar' it struck me as 'important'.
The thing is I'm not sure I could 'define it' well enough to use it to 'point at' some fundamental source or cause of what is a fairly common 'problem', namely what is 'Listener Fatigue', really…
It seems fairly obvious when we hear it, but taking the next step to define it, seems just outside of my/our grasp, at least for now.
JJ