[purrin]

Of course using the hd800 and the senn hvdvd800 as amp,only. I swear if one more person post these headphones are Brite I will hunt them down .

Al

 
That combo not bright. I also know your music collection helps. You probably don't have anything marginally bright.

 

[purrin]

On "truth". Truth isn't absolute. Truth is relative, a personal view, and sometimes a moving target. People around the world kill each other because they think their truths are absolute. The search for truth starts innocently enough, until it hardens to the point where the seeker can not resist telling others that their old ways are wrong (or placebo), and decides to impose his way as "the one true way". As Voltaire? said: "Cherish those who seek the truth but beware of those who find it." What irony.
 
Personal truths, or audio goal such as "fidelity", "euphonic", "objectivist" can be further broken down into additional sub-goals which are shared among those main goals. Terms of as "fidelity" can be vague if they are not well defined. Who's to say that that one cannot find euphony, from high fidelity, which correlates with certain objective measurements? In terms of "fidelity", what aspects of fidelity does one prize over the other? Perceived resolution? Smooth frequency response? Tonal balance? Lack of compression? Natural timbre? (note even the term "natural" is a relative or personal truth.)
 
Personally, I don't give a rat's ass provided that one's audio goal(s) are understood - that readers know where a person is coming from. Indicating specific gear as references for aspects of sound such as "natural", "muffled", "analytic", "organic" goes a long way toward helping others understand and allowing them to calibrate their own sensibilities appropriately. It helps to go out there and actually meet with real people to get a sense of where the bell curve lies in terms of "bright vs. not bright" or "etched vs. blunted." It also helps to have owned or borrowed a large variety of amps and DACs; and trying combinations thereof specifically with the HD800.
 
Those who have PM'd me know that I sometimes make their purchasing decisions even more difficult, because rarely do I say "buy X gear because it is the best". I try to take my own goals out of the equation and see where people are coming from. I often ask, what do you use? What do you not like about it? Then I reply consider gear A, but be concerned about aspect H; however also consider gear B, but be aware of aspect J.
 
In terms of the HD800, a headphone which I have had a love and late relationship, my approach is how do we take an otherwise dry and bright sounding headphone with almost infinite scalability, and turn in into something more listenable, while still retaining its german toilet aspects (ability to reproduce low level information). And then it's a matter of trade offs. I understand why people like the WA2 or Leben with the HD800; but I feel the trade off in lost speed, resolution, attack is too much. Way too much. The GSX2 is on the lean and fast sounding side of the spectrum in the universe of amps, but these characteristics do nothing to ameliorate to HD800's dry and bright sounding nature. However, none of what I think matters if my own goals (preferences) are different from yours. But at least I've stated (or at least it should be fairly obvious by now), what my goals and references are so one can calibrate accordingly.
 
The conversation ends when one claims to speak "truth".
 
Or hasn't heard (or for those "objectivists" measured) enough stuff to know the difference, e.g. "I've heard craptastic tube amp with HD800, therefore all tube amps suck" ; "tube amps sounds good because have artificially high levels of even harmonic distortion" (when they haven't measured any tube amps, or even worse, ignore actual measurements showing none such behavior); or amp X is totally transparent and wire-with-gain.

 

[Mentis]

So the next person who finds them too bright or lack of bass should check to see if they were wearing them the right way..... 

 

 

[purrin]

Less bright if backwards.

 

[James-uk]

On "truth". Truth isn't absolute. Truth is relative, a personal view, and sometimes a moving target. People around the world kill each other because they think their truths are absolute. The search for truth starts innocently enough, until it hardens to the point where the seeker can not resist telling others that their old ways are wrong (or placebo), and decides to impose his way as "the one true way". As Voltaire? said: "Cherish those who seek the truth but beware of those who find it." What irony.

Personal truths, or audio goal such as "fidelity", "euphonic", "objectivist" can be further broken down into additional sub-goals which are shared among those main goals. Terms of as "fidelity" can be vague if they are not well defined. Who's to say that that one cannot find euphony, from high fidelity, which correlates with certain objective measurements? In terms of "fidelity", what aspects of fidelity does one prize over the other? Perceived resolution? Smooth frequency response? Tonal balance? Lack of compression? Natural timbre? (note even the term "natural" is a relative or personal truth.)

Personally, I don't give a rat's ass provided that one's audio goal(s) are understood - that readers know where a person is coming from. Indicating specific gear as references for aspects of sound such as "natural", "muffled", "analytic", "organic" goes a long way toward helping others understand and allowing them to calibrate their own sensibilities appropriately. It helps to go out there and actually meet with real people to get a sense of where the bell curve lies in terms of "bright vs. not bright" or "etched vs. blunted." It also helps to have owned or borrowed a large variety of amps and DACs; and trying combinations thereof specifically with the HD800.

Those who have PM'd me know that I sometimes make their purchasing decisions even more difficult, because rarely do I say "buy X gear because it is the best". I try to take my own goals out of the equation and see where people are coming from. I often ask, what do you use? What do you not like about it? Then I reply consider gear A, but be concerned about aspect H; however also consider gear B, but be aware of aspect J.

In terms of the HD800, a headphone which I have had a love and late relationship, my approach is how do we take an otherwise dry and bright sounding headphone with almost infinite scalability, and turn in into something more listenable, while still retaining its german toilet aspects (ability to reproduce low level information). And then it's a matter of trade offs. I understand why people like the WA2 or Leben with the HD800; but I feel the trade off in lost speed, resolution, attack is too much. Way too much. The GSX2 is on the lean and fast sounding side of the spectrum in the universe of amps, but these characteristics do nothing to ameliorate to HD800's dry and bright sounding nature. However, none of what I think matters if my own goals (preferences) are different from yours. But at least I've stated (or at least it should be fairly obvious by now), what my goals and references are so one can calibrate accordingly.

The conversation ends when one claims to speak "truth".

Or hasn't heard (or for those "objectivists" measured) enough stuff to know the difference, e.g. "I've heard craptastic tube amp with HD800, therefore all tube amps suck" ; "tube amps sounds good because have artificially high levels of even harmonic distortion" (when they haven't measured any tube amps, or even worse, ignore actual measurements showing none such behavior); or amp X is totally transparent and wire-with-gain.

'The good thing about science is that it's true whether or not you believe in it.' Some truths are just that. Facts are facts . Yes sound preference is subjective but trying to fix a headphone with a broken amp is stupid IMO .

 

[purrin]

Science requires you to run experiments, sometimes numerous times, before you can say anything definitive. BTW, I've actually measured some of the amps my my list. They all measure flat 20-20khz  and have a magnitude of distortion less than that which is inherent in the HD800. A few other people have measured the Vali. The Vali measurements are out there. It's probably the most measured (with different kinds of measurements) head amp of all time. The fact is, FR or distortion measurements based on FFT of sweeps are too limited to even describe the complexity of human hearing. We don't hear in the frequency domain from discrete cosine or fast fourier transforms of MLS "noise" or sweeps.
 
If you are the subscriber of science you say you are, why don't you run larger scale tests (involving people more than yourself) noting subjective impressions and objective measurements of different amps with the HD800 and document in the results?
 
No one else is claiming science, so they get a pass in this thread. I'm sure your findings will be better appreciated in the sound science forum as this conversation was over before it started.

 

[Madmollusk]

  My Valhalla 2 comes in today...really looking forward to hearing it. We'll see if my fully upgraded WA7 ends up in the For Sale forum...should be interesting! I'm honestly hoping the Valhalla 2 & the Mjolnir (for the HD800 & LCD-2F respectively) are a better low budget amp solution.

Would you mind comparing and contrasting the WA7 and Valhalla 2 when your new Schiit arrives? I would love to know what you think. 

 

[frankrondaniel]

  Would you mind comparing and contrasting the WA7 and Valhalla 2 when your new Schiit arrives? I would love to know what you think. 

 
Definitely interested in that comparison!

 

[BournePerfect]

I like Dan Brown's (DaVinci Code) quote about science vs religion: 'Science and religion are not at odds. Science is simply too young to understand.' I think the same could be applied to science vs the human auditory system.

-Daniel

 

[purrin]

Look, just say it once and move on. Do you really need to interject your objectivist leanings over and over again every 10th post? It obvious the tilt of this entire thread is very different from your own beliefs so why keep imposing your view? You disagree, that's fine. But why don't you leave us alone?

 

[James-uk]

Look, just say it once and move on. Do you really need to interject your objectivist leanings over and over again every 10th post? It obvious the tilt of this entire thread is very different from your own beliefs so why keep imposing your view? You disagree, that's fine. But why don't you leave us alone?

I agree. I don't conform . I will keep out from now on.

 

[JoelT]

  Would you mind comparing and contrasting the WA7 and Valhalla 2 when your new Schiit arrives? I would love to know what you think. 

Absolutely. I'll need to give the Schiit some burn in time obviously, so it will be awhile before I can make any comments of substance. Also, I have the tubes fairly dialed in for the HD800 on the WA7, so it may be a bit lopsided in that aspect. I can compare the stock WA7 tube PSU tubes as well if that'd be desirable (I'm honestly not a fan of those tubes, but they represent the "default", for better or worse).

 

[Madmollusk]

  Absolutely. I'll need to give the Schiit some burn in time obviously, so it will be awhile before I can make any comments of substance. Also, I have the tubes fairly dialed in for the HD800 on the WA7, so it may be a bit lopsided in that aspect. I can compare the stock WA7 tube PSU tubes as well if that'd be desirable (I'm honestly not a fan of those tubes, but they represent the "default", for better or worse).

Just to keep things fair, I suppose it's best to do the "stock" evaluation, but if, after a brief listen, you're tempted to call the Valhalla 2 a genuine over-performer, well please, don't handicap the WA7. I appreciate and look-forward to your forthcoming impressions.  Thanks in advance!

 

[Dopaminer]

Does anyone have a link to a good disassembly guide?  It looks pretty straightforward but I would like to to have a guide before I proceed. . 
 
Thanks
 
d

 

[drdiem]

  Does anyone have a link to a good disassembly guide?  It looks pretty straightforward but I would like to to have a guide before I proceed. . 
 
Thanks
 
d

 
It's a lot easier than you might fear. First thing is to pop off the back frame. I start near the angled piece that covers the area where the sockets are on the frame; just pull this directly away from where your head would be if you were wearing them. Once that's off, you'll see how the earpad folds around the main baffle - simply work around the edge of the pad (doesn't matter where you start) and roll it outwards - the earpads will pop off without a fight. Reassembly is the procedure in reverse.
 
Note that there are some guides on these forums (with pics even) that don't tell you to take the rear frame off first. This'll work but you'll put more stress on the earpads so I'd recommend the method I describe above.