[3X0]

Quote:

Originally Posted by music_4321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif While I agree with a lot of what you've said so far -- I sold both my portable amps as they didn't really improve the sound of the iPod Classic I used to have -- I believe the same argument is valid for the purchase of high-end customs (JH13, JH16, UE18, ES3X, and so on). I strongly believe that high-end customs, just like portable amps, are terribly overrated. I also feel that a lot, A LOT of what's often said on these forum threads is quite misleading

I haven't personally heard the ES3X, but I'm not sure it would be the same argument per se.

High-end customs confer many benefits. Off the top of my head, they have comfort, sound, and headroom that is of an echelon beyond that of universals. The top-tier customs of today are actually competitive with top-tier headphones (though I only own the JH13s which I am certain of, not sure of the others), so they can be used in lieu of an full-size high-end headphone and perform even better than said high-end headphone in a desktop system. Being portable is a bonus. There is a versatility in high-end customs that I believe no other class of product in the audiophile world offers. Even today the JH13s are the best money I spent in this hobby, and I vastly prefer them to almost every headphone out of every system I've ever heard. I preferred the Stax O2 to them slightly, but the choice was not hard: I am not prepared to wield the O2 in a portable environment while still getting impressive sound, and even in a desktop environment they strain my head after a time. One could make the case that top-end customs deliver much more value than top-end headphones.

Digital audio players are limited mostly to out-and-about usage as virtually all of them (perhaps excluding the HM-801) simply are not competitive with desktop systems. There are a few very cost-effective ones (such as the offerings by Sansa) that offer outstanding value through the delivery of certain user-demanded features, like storage expansion and the playback of various formats. They do it at a price that undercuts the competition. Oftentimes the more expensive competition will sound "better," but the difference is so marginal you'd have to sit down and focus to appreciate it -- where even a portable DAC/amp through a PC would wreck either.

Then portable amps are the worst of it. Even the LISA III doesn't hold a candle to a mid-range dedicated desktop amplifier. Portable amplifiers are simply not attractively versatile -- their sound is not compelling enough to substitute a powerful home amp for the desktop application. They are relegated to portable use only, and have terrible value. Not only that, they are designed expressly to pair with portable players, which are compromised to begin with.

I suppose here I'm proposing a certain value element to the argument. This is why I consider DAC/amps to be more worthwhile since the DAC components usually add little to the cost but are effective even in a compromised portable circuit. The limited size of the amplification circuitry has no recourse. If you're considering an s:flo2 or X, don't -- get a Clip or Fuze, and put the rest of that cash towards a uDac or something.

 

[fzman]

size costs-- ie, smaller is harder to do well, hence the premium price/performance ratio. for portables, it should really be an index based on price/performance/size ratios!

also, incremental performance offers "poor value" in terms of incremental cost. However, different people will have different value systems, and will rate different performance increments very differently.

For me, there is a performance thrshold, below which, I'll pass, and not listen/use it. Getting to the threshold can be a bit pricey, and making small increases in performance past that threshold can be even more costly. However, once you hear what is possible, it is harder to settle for less, so long as it is in the realm of possible purchases.

While I think my gigabeat and fuze sound good to very good, the 801 sounds enough better, that I now have no option but to get one. I had supplemented both with an RSA SR71a, which is probably a better amp than what is built into the 801, but a 1-box solution is too compelling to pass up, so, there it is.

I have an extremely good home system, so the portable rig has a lot to live up to. Sorry if this seems more like a review of the 801, but i think it is the (or at least one of) the current watermarks for portable audio, and so is relevant to the discussion.

 

[music_4321]

Quote:

Originally Posted by 3X0 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I haven't personally heard the ES3X, but I'm not sure it would be the same argument per se. High-end customs confer many benefits. Off the top of my head, they have comfort, sound, and headroom that is of an echelon beyond that of universals. The top-tier customs of today are actually competitive with top-tier headphones (though I only own the JH13s which I am certain of, not sure of the others), so they can be used in lieu of an full-size high-end headphone and perform even better than said high-end headphone in a desktop system. Being portable is a bonus. There is a versatility in high-end customs that I believe no other class of product in the audiophile world offers. Even today the JH13s are the best money I spent in this hobby, and I vastly prefer them to almost every headphone out of every system I've ever heard. I preferred the Stax O2 to them slightly, but the choice was not hard: I am not prepared to wield the O2 in a portable environment while still getting impressive sound, and even in a desktop environment they strain my head after a time. One could make the case that top-end customs deliver much more value than top-end headphones. Digital audio players are limited mostly to out-and-about usage as virtually all of them (perhaps excluding the HM-801) simply are not competitive with desktop systems. There are a few very cost-effective ones (such as the offerings by Sansa) that offer outstanding value through the delivery of certain user-demanded features, like storage expansion and the playback of various formats. They do it at a price that undercuts the competition. Oftentimes the more expensive competition will sound "better," but the difference is so marginal you'd have to sit down and focus to appreciate it -- where even a portable DAC/amp through a PC would wreck either. Then portable amps are the worst of it. Even the LISA III doesn't hold a candle to a mid-range dedicated desktop amplifier. Portable amplifiers are simply not attractively versatile -- their sound is not compelling enough to substitute a powerful home amp for the desktop application. They are relegated to portable use only, and have terrible value. Not only that, they are designed expressly to pair with portable players, which are compromised to begin with. I suppose here I'm proposing a certain value element to the argument. This is why I consider DAC/amps to be more worthwhile since the DAC components usually add little to the cost but are effective even in a compromised portable circuit. The limited size of the amplification circuitry has no recourse. If you're considering an s:flo2 or X, don't -- get a Clip or Fuze, and put the rest of that cash towards a uDac or something.

Quote:

Originally Posted by fzman /img/forum/go_quote.gif size costs-- ie, smaller is harder to do well, hence the premium price/performance ratio. for portables, it should really be an index based on price/performance/size ratios! also, incremental performance offers "poor value" in terms of incremental cost. However, different people will have different value systems, and will rate different performance increments very differently. For me, there is a performance thrshold, below which, I'll pass, and not listen/use it. Getting to the threshold can be a bit pricey, and making small increases in performance past that threshold can be even more costly. However, once you hear what is possible, it is harder to settle for less, so long as it is in the realm of possible purchases. While I think my gigabeat and fuze sound good to very good, the 801 sounds enough better, that I now have no option but to get one. I had supplemented both with an RSA SR71a, which is probably a better amp than what is built into the 801, but a 1-box solution is too compelling to pass up, so, there it is. I have an extremely good home system, so the portable rig has a lot to live up to. Sorry if this seems more like a review of the 801, but i think it is the (or at least one of) the current watermarks for portable audio, and so is relevant to the discussion.

Both of you make very valid points.

I haven't personally heard the JH13's, but having read a few posts from those few who own both --all slightly preferring the JH13, BTW-- my take is that the UM3X is not that far from these high-end customs. The ES3X has also been very favourably compared to some top-tier full-sized phones. I've often noticed, though, what I consider to be very exaggerated statements such as 'night & day', 'blows them out of the water', and so on when comparing either the ES3X or (mostly) JH13's to the UM3X or similar top-tier universals. Unfortunately a marginal improvement can be vastly exaggerated by our misuse (and abuse) of language.

Yes, certainly everyone's threshold is different, no doubt, and some people will be willing to spend quite a bit for a slight/ marginal improvement in SQ, and some --perhaps not too few-- will try, often unconsciously, to convince themselves (and others) that such large amounts of money is money well spent. It may be money well spent for some (very few, I believe) who can easily afford to and are old/ mature enough to make such purchases. However, time and time again I keep coming across posts by (mostly) very young members who almost blindly will do anything to get their hands on such expensive gear, when they really shouldn't be spending such large sums. $350 (for the UM3X) is already A LOT of money!

That's why I maintain that an iPod Nano (or its equivalent) + a top-tier universal IEM is already quite a luxury providing excellent SQ -- and not only for young head-fiers. The UM3X, I believe, can easily be used with a good desktop system, BTW; I personally always preferred them to my HD650's.

 

[tds101]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bikertrash /img/forum/go_quote.gif Best I can tell, ABI is biased toward Cowons, which might be the best sounding but I understand their usability takes some getting used to. They also like the Clip+. Everything in between is like 'OK'.

And the only reason you claim this is that your Creative Zen is trashed all the time, by me and quite a few others.

Face it, Creative is no longer the SQ powerhouse they used to be, and every other DAP maker kills it. And that includes, like I told you, my iPod touch 64gb.

And yes, like here, the Sansa lineup is quite favored, same as Sony AND Cowon.

PS: I've got a couple Toshiba DAP's, a few others I don't even talk about, and I don't currently own a Cowon, so what the heck are you really trying to start?

BTW, I'm The DarkSide on ABI, and quite a few other members of Head-Fi are ABI members as well. Really, keep the controversy out please.