[tfarney]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penchum /img/forum/go_quote.gif On the back of most equipment is a tag showing the maximum watts. If you use this figure, all you have to remember is you're talking about the maximums. Some manufactures put other figures in with the units specs as well. I don't want everyone to get the wrong impression of me. I love vintage equipment and have a ton of it. I will never give up using my vintage systems. To me, they reproduce audio the way I like it best. I will however, limit my usage of them to off peak hours, so I feel I'm doing my part. Its just my way of taking responsibility for my part and taking what small steps I can to lighten the load a little. This is something not everyone is going to be able to do, or won't want to do. That is fine too. This whole "green" thing is all about awareness. Once you buy in, you will find a way to lighten the load without it being a burden. I bought those new fancy fluorescent bulbs to replace incandescents throughout the house. I don't even notice the difference in the lighting any more, but I know they are doing their part for me.

Hey, we didn't think you were a fanatic, we just thought you were more responsible than the rest of us. Well, until Scompton came along with his 75 mpg.

I have a soft spot for the vintage stuff myself, though most of it is long gone. I'll hold that old HK A402 till I die. There's just something about it. And there's an old Thorens in the top of a closet. But the Altecs, the Advents, the KLHs, the Kenwoods and Yamahas and Polks...all gone. I hope they're getting good use somewhere.

Tim

 

[scompton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penchum /img/forum/go_quote.gif I don't want everyone to get the wrong impression of me. I love vintage equipment and have a ton of it.

Your avatar gives it away

Quote:

Originally Posted by tfarney /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, until Scompton came along with his 75 mpg.

Only if you're a masochist who likes driving in traffic jams.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Navyblue /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, it depends on the design of your amp. If it is class A it draws full current even at idle (they are hot), then there are class A/B which draw half the current at idle. Class D are designed with power efficiency in mind. The relatively recent Class T are even more efficient.

It's probably class A/B since it doesn't run hot and doesn't have a lot of venting. The label on the back says 120V 60Hz 340VA whatever VA is

I know V is volts A is amps, but isn't V x A Watts?

 

[stlblues]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tfarney /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hey, we didn't think you were a fanatic, we just thought you were more responsible than the rest of us. Well, until Scompton came along with his 75 mpg. I have a soft spot for the vintage stuff myself, though most of it is long gone. I'll hold that old HK A402 till I die. There's just something about it. And there's an old Thorens in the top of a closet. But the Altecs, the Advents, the KLHs, the Kenwoods and Yamahas and Polks...all gone. I hope they're getting good use somewhere. Tim

Too bad your Altecs are gone, Tim. Mine are very happy w/ the Glow amp. Did you get a chance to listen to one yet?

 

[Navyblue]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scompton /img/forum/go_quote.gif It's probably class A/B since it doesn't run hot and doesn't have a lot of venting. The label on the back says 120V 60Hz 340VA whatever VA is I know V is volts A is amps, but isn't V x A Watts?

It could be class B as well, I could be wrong but it seems that most mid to low end amp out there are class B.

Yes VA = W.

 

[tfarney]

Quote:

Originally Posted by stlblues /img/forum/go_quote.gif Too bad your Altecs are gone, Tim. Mine are very happy w/ the Glow amp. Did you get a chance to listen to one yet?

Not yet. Soon. Those Altecs have been gone for decades. When I was 19 or so I had a job at a fairly nice stereo store, and could watch for the stuff that they were really wanting to move. As a result, my first stereo that wasn't an all-in-one box was a Thorens, a Kenwood integrated amp and a pair of Valencias. It was a good start.

Tim

 

[Headdie]

Regarding the green side of it, NAD says my C720BEE is pure class A amp and preamp... But the cabinet doesn't have many openings for ventilation and the amplifier doesn't get warm that much... Anyway, I'm still happy with the headphone out of this stereo receiver... It does a great job with my still young DT-990 from the 80's...

 

[Headdie]

I'll post on this side of the moon, where the temperature is cooler...

Why the headphone out of an integrated would not come from the preamp stage instead of the power amp stage? Would it have the right type of power to drive most headphones?

Some specs from my NAD receiver,

Maximum output level Pre-out : >11V

Output impedance Pre-out : 80Ω
Output impedance Headphone-out : 100Ω

I notice that on my receiver, the preamp out and headphone out have almost the same impedance... I also notice from the NAD website that preamplifiers do have headphone jack, but none of there power amplifiers...

Questions, questions...

Thanks,

 

[Headdie]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pp312 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I've just sold a Little Dot MkV in favour of a Marantz PM6010 OSE. I had a PM66K1 before this and it didn't grab me. I had a NAD C320BEE, widely regarded as having a good HP out, but that didn't really click with me either. But I had a PM8200 well before that and it was incredibly musical (but hot and wasteful).

PP312 : My NAD C720BEE is based on a C320BEE, so you got my full attention here ! I may change my mind, but actually I'd prefer upgrading my receiver than buying a dedicated headphone amplifier. So, could you briefly compare the sound of the C320BEE against the PM6010 OSE? Could you also tell us wich headphone(s) you've used with the C320BEE and wich on you actually use with the PM6010 OSE? That would be helpfull, at least to me... Thanks,

 

[Penchum]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Headdie /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'll post on this side of the moon, where the temperature is cooler... Why the headphone out of an integrated would not come from the preamp stage instead of the power amp stage? Would it have the right type of power to drive most headphones? Questions, questions... Thanks,

Ya, I saw that other thread too.

Since integrateds and receivers have the pre-amp and amp in the same box, it is cheaper to resistor down the amp output for headphone use. A separate pre-amp doesn't have this, so they must take other steps to amp a headphone jack. Yes, they can use line-level and design a headphone amp around that, and it will sound pretty good too.

That whole issue on how good a headphone jack in a receiver/integrated amp is vs dedicated headphone amp, has far to may variables for anyone to make a real "stand" on it. The only truth that matters is: How does it sound too you? Those that love it, have won the expenditure's war. Those that don't, will love their dedicated headphone amp and have less money.

 

[scompton]

I have the schematic of my NAD 3155 and the headphone out is from the speaker outs, not the preamp section. It's an integrated amp and the NAD 2155 was the same amp circuit in a amp. It had a headphone jack. I've not read what, if any, preamp had the same circuit as the 3155, so I don't know if it has a headphone jack.

 

[Navyblue]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Headdie /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'll post on this side of the moon, where the temperature is cooler...

It sure is.

Anyway, I'd imagine a line out is about voltage and it is minuscule in terms of current, which is unsuitable for powering a headphone. Of course they could build a headphone amp section around it but it cost too much for a "throw in".

 

[Penchum]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Navyblue /img/forum/go_quote.gif It sure is. Anyway, I'd imagine a line out is about voltage and it is minuscule in terms of current, which is unsuitable for powering a headphone. Of course they could build a headphone amp section around it but it cost too much for a "throw in".

Well, a pre-amp's headphone jack is always built around some kind of amp. There isn't any other way. I have two Yamaha pre-amps here and both sound excellent, and both have a dedicated headphone amp circuit built-in. They are from the mid 1980's.

Because of this, they are kinda in a different category than the integrateds and receivers.

 

[Navyblue]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penchum /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, a pre-amp's headphone jack is always built around some kind of amp. There isn't any other way. I have two Yamaha pre-amps here and both sound excellent, and both have a dedicated headphone amp circuit built-in. They are from the mid 1980's. Because of this, they are kinda in a different category than the integrateds and receivers.

Yep, in a pre amp there has to be a dedicated headphone circuit.

I think he is asking why the headphone jack of an integrated amp tap from it's speaker out instead of its pre amp stage.

 

[tfarney]

Quote:

Since integrateds and receivers have the pre-amp and amp in the same box, it is cheaper to resistor down the amp output for headphone use. A separate pre-amp doesn't have this, so they must take other steps to amp a headphone jack. Yes, they can use line-level and design a headphone amp around that, and it will sound pretty good too.

Of course this is exactly the opposite of the myth that has been repeated here a hundred times, stating that all but the most sophisticated and expensive modern integrated amps and receivers use cheap op amps in separate, thrown-in headphone circuits specifically because it is cheaper than stepping down the mains through a nest of resistors. And that is exactly the point of the OP's original post in that other thread.

I think the bottom line, that most of us can agree on, is that there will be some headphone outs that are better than some dedicated headphone amps and vice versa. In the meantime, it should be amusing to watch a very common Head-fi myth die, and to see how fast it is replaced. I give it until the end of the day, tops. Pass the popcorn.

Tim

 

[Penchum]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Penchum /img/forum/go_quote.gif Ya, I saw that other thread too. Since integrateds and receivers have the pre-amp and amp in the same box, it is cheaper to resistor down the amp output for headphone use. A separate pre-amp doesn't have this, so they must take other steps to amp a headphone jack. Yes, they can use line-level and design a headphone amp around that, and it will sound pretty good too. That whole issue on how good a headphone jack in a receiver/integrated amp is vs dedicated headphone amp, has far to may variables for anyone to make a real "stand" on it. The only truth that matters is: How does it sound too you? Those that love it, have won the expenditure's war. Those that don't, will love their dedicated headphone amp and have less money.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Navyblue /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yep, in a pre amp there has to be a dedicated headphone circuit. I think he is asking why the headphone jack of an integrated amp tap from it's speaker out instead of its pre amp stage.

Ow, ya, I talked about that in the first post.