[qveda]

I primarily want the best audio quality I can afford for audiophile listening, rather for recording, but I want to learn to do some home audio recording with bass guitar and soft synths.  Will I need two independent systems?   one for audiophile listening in my home office,  and one for home recording ?  
 
This leads me towards "sound cards" or audio interfaces that do AD and DA conversion.  These products range from very simple to high-end studio gear ($100 - $10K raagen from Focusrite, Apogee, Lynx, Metric Halo, RME, UAD, etc).  Seems like I could get the best of both worlds from the higher end products.    But is there a reason why these products don't show up on Head-Fi?     maybe some considerations I haven't thought about? 
 
Similarly, there are pro audio desktop monitors that might be just fine for audiophile listening.
 
any thoughts?

 

[PleasantSounds]

Having some experience in sound engineering that's the direction I have taken and am more than happy with the results. Once we get to the level of production standards, going beyond that, if possible at all, is only going to reveal issues which have not been managed in the production cycle.
 
Regarding the perceived lack of popularity of pro gear, I think the following factors are at play:
- fear that the "revealing" nature of pro gear may impact it's ability to deliver fun
- some difficulties in integrating it with consumer grade gear (different connectors, signal standards etc)
- lack of the "wow" factor that similarly priced audiophile gear may have
- marketing directed at musicians and studios, hardly any at consumers
- often too many controls for consumer needs create perception of being hard to use

 

[Michgelsen]

I think PleasantSounds has hit the nail on the head. Many audiophiles like to have their setups produce a slightly 'warm' and smooth sound, and this is probably the reason that many pro audio DACs are dismissed as sounding 'too analytical' for their taste. Furthermore, the looks of the equipment play a big role for some people and I can't blame them, although I personally often prefer the 'pro' look.
 
I do think there's much value for money to be had from the pro audio stuff, and some of those products are indeed popular among audiophiles. The DACs from Benchmark, Grace Design, Lynx, Mytek, Weiss and probably others are a good example of this. Combined ADDA converters are unpopular, simply because most audiophiles don't need the AD section and don't want to pay for it.

 

[BeatsWork]

  Combined ADDA converters are unpopular, simply because most audiophiles don't need the AD section and don't want to pay for it.

Bingo. Lacking any ability to create music I have no need for mixer, compression, AD conversion which makes much of the pro equipment a poor bargain. That said with the popularity of balanced DAC/AMPs growing I now have plenty of XLR cabling reducing the entry barrier to pro equipment.
 
For fun I'm looking at a heavily modified  Art MPA Pro II digital to stick in between SS DAC and Amp to add tube warmth when the mood strikes. Yes it's stupid, yes it will "degrade" SQ - but hey it might sound great to me ...

 

[Tablix]

consider that the manufacturers of recording software such as protools ableton steinberg and cakewalk invest heavily into these manufacturers, due to link with hardware/software bundling.  
 
you also have build quality for pro gear is awesome if you are talking about investing on a RME or Benchmark DAC
 
resale values on pro gear is also very good if you intend to upgrade later on.
 
I think you get as much bang for buck in the pro market as you do with more hi-fi brands who, I would think have a greater profit margin at point of sale

 

[OddE]

you also have build quality for pro gear is awesome if you are talking about investing on a RME or Benchmark DAC.

-Bingo. I've seen bricks which didn't inspire as much confidence in their ruggedness as did my Benchmark DAC1 or DAC2...

 

[ProtegeManiac]

 
Regarding the perceived lack of popularity of pro gear, I think the following factors are at play:
- fear that the "revealing" nature of pro gear may impact it's ability to deliver fun
- lack of the "wow" factor that similarly priced audiophile gear may have

 

Not true for all (though not necessarily technically accurate either) - that basically describes the "WM874x" fan club. Slap "ES9018" on a pro audio interface and you can find a bunch of people pouncing on it (or just have someone review it along with the top off and show that it has the ES9018). Somewhat similar to the Sabre DACs, there's AKM, and of course the Benchmark DAC-X series. It kind of looks pro-audio but not enough to look like a command console - perfectly at home with an audiophile rig with more aesthetically discrete components (although some even with fewer visible gizmos did come out in non-greyscale colors).

 

 
- some difficulties in integrating it with consumer grade gear (different connectors, signal standards etc)

 

Hasn't stopped a lot of people from balanced gear though, including portables that used even rarer connectors, like the Hirose plugs on Ibasso amps and the square balanced plug on everybody else's amps/DACs. 

 

 
- often too many controls for consumer needs create perception of being hard to use

 

Or the perception that they're paying for a lot of features they don't need, vs an "audiophile" DAC at the same price point that without particular factors aside (like profit margins) are assumed to have put more money into the hardware. The reality though is that when business economics are considered the lower volume production audiophile DAC doesn't just have a more solid case or an exotic analog output stage (HDAMs, or fully discrete), but may have a higher profit margin due to the lower production volume, cancelling out the costs that would have gone to the ADC section (including the mic preamp stage).

 

----

 

There is of course another factor in all this: gaming, and many people who use headphones for audio likely use their primary PCs also. Interfaces need data to go both ways, so they're almost exclusively USB or Firewire. This bypasses the DSP chip in the motherboard or soundcard, which means no virtual surround. I can't remember how many times I've had to explain in this forum that 1) you don't get virtual surround with a pro recording interface and 2) whether one really needs to have a really nice condenser mic just to tell somebody what to do or that they're a bunch of noobs; more so when one considers that a good external soundcard isn't really that much more expensive (or they should just ditch the idea of using a hard to drive headphone with, say, a $40 Xonar U3).

 

[boatheelmusic]

And let's not overlook a five year warranty, such as Grace offers.

 

[RonaldDumsfeld]

Actually mate pro and semi pro monitors and interfaces do get a regular mention here on HF. What is more surprising is the relatively low take up given the price/performance on offer. Particularly with audio interfaces.
 
'Audiophiles' are now buying active near field monitors in droves but for some reason there is a reluctance to pair them with the devices they were designed to compliment and which they have evolved in tandem with for over 2 decades.
 
There does seem to be a geographical difference as well. I'm not sure if this is economic or cultural.
 
Potential buyers subject to the North American tax and duty regime show a marked preference for products offered by keen hobbyist audiophile manufacturers who market direct via mail order. Passing some of the saving on dealer margins on to the customer.
 
International buyers appear to be much more inclined to buy from established pro and semi pro manufacturers. The value proposition is too great to ignore and the usual audiophile type companies have been slow to adapt to changing technology and market conditions and are therefore playing catch up. Particularly as regards software.
 
I'm a big fan of pro audio gear in the home but perhaps if I lived in the US of A I might be tempted by the likes of Emotiva or Schitt. Hard to say.

 

[ProtegeManiac]

  Actually mate pro and semi pro monitors and interfaces do get a regular mention here on HF. What is more surprising is the relatively low take up given the price/performance on offer. Particularly with audio interfaces.
 
'Audiophiles' are now buying active near field monitors in droves but for some reason there is a reluctance to pair them with the devices they were designed to compliment and which they have evolved in tandem with for over 2 decades.
 
There does seem to be a geographical difference as well. I'm not sure if this is economic or cultural.
 
Potential buyers subject to the North American tax and duty regime show a marked preference for products offered by keen hobbyist audiophile manufacturers who market direct via mail order. Passing some of the saving on dealer margins on to the customer.
 
International buyers appear to be much more inclined to buy from established pro and semi pro manufacturers. The value proposition is too great to ignore and the usual audiophile type companies have been slow to adapt to changing technology and market conditions and are therefore playing catch up. Particularly as regards software.
 
I'm a big fan of pro audio gear in the home but perhaps if I lived in the US of A I might be tempted by the likes of Emotiva or Schitt. Hard to say.

 

Or it's because of the headphone amp. As much as people are using pro active monitors, the problem with many interfaces is you don't see confidence-inspiring specs in terms of how much one can guess it will do with their headphones. Sometimes all you see is Dynamic Range, which on its own means nothing if you can't tell how it will do driving a 107dB, 300ohm dynamic or a 50ohm, 90dB planar. Usually it will list the output impedance as well, but I've noticed many of them tend to have the a lot higher than "audiophile" amps, and yet in some cases even with the 8x "rule" applied, I've run into two threads here that report issues with the sound on HD600s for example (I've never had any trouble on fullsize consoles though, save maybe for tighter decay - ie a little bit less distortion - on audiophile amps at lower prices, and smaller form factors), at least on the more prosumer-oriented interfaces. Sometimes THD is listed as well but it doesn't say the output power at any impedance, so for all one knows that was taken at 5mW output.

 

That said, in some cases "audiophile"/HiFi HPamp specs sometimes are waaaaaay past "confidence inspiring" (for buying deaf, ie, not hearing it first), and already at what some may regard as "overkill" territory (to the more sarcastic, it would be more like "overcompensating for something"). Barring really low efficiency headphones and/or ones that require a lot of current, I don't see the point in using a headphone amp as large as a small push-pull Class A speaker amp making 20watts or so (think of the old Musical Fidelity A1) for a desktop set-up. But hey, maybe other people have larger desks, or at the very least, they have this where their speaker system is.

 

 

 

[OddE]

 

Or it's because of the headphone amp. As much as people are using pro active monitors, the problem with many interfaces is you don't see confidence-inspiring specs in terms of how much one can guess it will do with their headphones. Sometimes all you see is Dynamic Range, which on its own means nothing if you can't tell how it will do driving a 107dB, 300ohm dynamic or a 50ohm, 90dB planar. Usually it will list the output impedance as well, but I've noticed many of them tend to have the a lot higher than "audiophile" amps,

 
-Allow me to quote the Benchmark Media DAC2 manual, specifically page 61, where it lists the headphone amplifier specs:
 
Output impedance: <0.11 ohms
Output range (at 0dBFS) into 60 ohm load: off to +17dBu (5.5Vrms, my comment)
Bandwidth: >500kHz
THD+N: -106dB, 0,0005% into 30 ohms at +18dBu (1.26W)
 
That should do nicely even for the most discerning audiophile.

 

[BeatsWork]

-Allow me to quote the Benchmark Media DAC2 manual, specifically page 61, where it lists the headphone amplifier specs:

Output impedance: <0.11 ohms
Output range (at 0dBFS) into 60 ohm load: off to +17dBu (5.5Vrms, my comment)
Bandwidth: >500kHz
THD+N: -106dB, 0,0005% into 30 ohms at +18dBu (1.26W)

That should do nicely even for the most discerning audiophile.

Back to the value proposition. In US the benchmark DAC 2 retails for close to USD 2000 plus tax and shipping. Not exactly a bargain compared to many "consumer" oriented options!

 

[Tablix]

Back to the value proposition. In US the benchmark DAC 2 retails for close to USD 2000 plus tax and shipping. Not exactly a bargain compared to many "consumer" oriented options!

Yes, but this DAC is will last you 10 years or more, and I would rather buy overkill than upgrade 3 times in the same time frame.  You are now in the point of diminishing returns where every extra $1k buys you 1%.  I just question how many people actually need a device of this quality.

 

[ProtegeManiac]

   
-Allow me to quote the Benchmark Media DAC2 manual, specifically page 61, where it lists the headphone amplifier specs:
 
Output impedance: <0.11 ohms
Output range (at 0dBFS) into 60 ohm load: off to +17dBu (5.5Vrms, my comment)
Bandwidth: >500kHz
THD+N: -106dB, 0,0005% into 30 ohms at +18dBu (1.26W)
 
That should do nicely even for the most discerning audiophile.

 
The DAC-1 isn't part of my considerations for that post, sorry I neglected to mention that. That one's well known already and is in use by those for purely playback systems.

 

[BeatsWork]

  Yes, but this DAC is will last you 10 years or more, and I would rather buy overkill than upgrade 3 times in the same time frame.  You are now in the point of diminishing returns where every extra $1k buys you 1%.  I just question how many people actually need a device of this quality.

If it's guaranteed to cure "upgraditis" for 10 years I'm sold!