[o0Ampy0o]

Hello All,

I have read that an audio interface used for connecting musical instruments to computer DAW's are essentially DAC's.

I have a TC Electronics Impact Twin audio interface (Firewire FWIW).

My headphones: Sennheiser HD 580's and HD 600's.

Question: With a computer would I experience much of an improvement in sound quality listening to CD content if I used a Schiit Jotunheim or maybe a Schiit Magni 2 paired with a Schiit Modi 2? Or whatever component or combo of components in this price range?

I would like to improve the sound quality and listening experience. As things are the audio is clean and neutral. I would like it to be more high-fidelity. I am aware of the subjectivity involved. I am hoping this is enough information to solicit suggestions and advice.

I apologize if this is too common a question but I am asking it believing that responses will lead me down more specific paths than if searched through the entire content of the forum and sorted through such a broad scope of material, a lot of which is probably associated with outdated products.

Thank you in advance.

 

[Monsterzero]

Your post is confusing,to me.

So,youre using this audio interface in conjunction with what,your computer? Or something else and are wanting to make your computer sound as good,or better than what this other device is providing?

If you are using this with your computer how are you connecting it?

 

[VGoghs earfrmsc]

I suggest you ask this q in the computer audio section as well.

 

[cossix]

I'll help. If your 600s aren't connected to some amp yet, you should definitely pick up a Magni 2. The Jot is a bit bright and it may become fatiguing with the 600 (I'm doing Jot + 650 balanced and it's very nice). I've not heard the 600 yet though so don't cross Jot off your list just yet. A good DAC usually makes a difference, if you have good ears. For the 600 you won't need more than a Modi 2 and Magni 2, after that the diminishing return idea kicks in hard. The only reason I even upgraded from my Schiit stack to the Jot was because it's balanced and has much more power (900mW into 300 ohms...mmm).

 

[o0Ampy0o]

@cossix I appreciate the specifics with regards to Sennheiser 600's. From what I have read I believe you are correct encouraging me to stay away from something that brightens the headphone models I have. I might have tried only the Magni 2 to see whether that produced a significant improvement but I will need the Modi 2 for the USB connectivity.
@VGoghs earfrmsc I am brand new here and reading the alerts it appeared to me that there would only be 3 options available to me, Intro, Recommendations and one other that I don't recall but I know it is not the Computer Audio section. Thank you. As soon as I can I will attempt a post there although at this point some forums would view it as SPAMMING by posting the same topic more than once.
@monsterzero The TC Electronics audio interface can only be used with a computer. I did describe that it is Firewire which is the way it is connected to the computer. I have listened to CD's played through the computer using the described headphones connected through the audio interface and directly using the headphone jack. Through the interface the audio is cleaner although the signal directly out of the computer's headphone jack is usable. Up until recently I thought an audio interface was something different than a DAC but I read that they are the same thing but their objectives are different. One is geared toward musical production/recording while the other is geared towards recreational listening. I have also read that in many ways there is not necessarily that much difference in the sound quality between the two devices provided each is a decent product. Some say otherwise as I have read both sides and it comes down to asking the specific question whether it would be worth switching to something like the Schiit products in order to significantly improve the quality of the audio when I am listening to music for pleasure.

 

[ProtegeManiac]

I have read that an audio interface used for connecting musical instruments to computer DAW's are essentially DAC's.

A DAC and an ADC in one box since it processes the signal both ways.

I would like to improve the sound quality and listening experience. As things are the audio is clean and neutral. I would like it to be more high-fidelity. I am aware of the subjectivity involved. I am hoping this is enough information to solicit suggestions and advice.

How are "clean and neutral" different from "high fidelity"? Neutral means you don't bias for or against anything, clean means no noise and distortion, high fidelity means "not adding to or taking away from the original signal." You're basically saying "things are like this, but I want to be more of the same thing."

As it is assuming you are correct that the device is clean and neutral and high fidelity with your headphones (ie no distortion, no noise, damping factor isn't affected by high output impedance, etc) and at your listening level (some interfaces have low output voltage and relatively higher distortion), the only way you can make it any different with a neutral and clean high-fi headphone amp is that you can get more power with even less distortion and noise. Depending on your listening level or if you'd like to listen louder, you might not necessarily notice any difference here, considering the impedance isn't really an issue with those 300ohm headphones.

Question: With a computer would I experience much of an improvement in sound quality listening to CD content if I used a Schiit Jotunheim or maybe a Schiit Magni 2 paired with a Schiit Modi 2? Or whatever component or combo of components in this price range?

You can listen louder, and since those amps aren't going to run out of current or voltage on those headphones vs trying to crank it up on your interface, playing louder will also have them play cleaner. It will sound better to your ears the same way that cranking it up will always sound better, but in this case you'd do so with less distortion and noise.

As to whether you'd be able to easily notice that or how much time you'd actually spend listening at that level (ex I crank it up for one or two songs for each album) and whether that will be worth it, we can't answer that for you. What is audible to me can be inaudible to you, or you might think the difference is so huge it's just placebo and you're listening at 90dB.

 

[o0Ampy0o]

@ProtegeManiac I will attempt to use more specific terms for what I am really hoping for. I read through the Head-Fi glossary and have collected a few words that pin it down. The audio characteristics I initially described were inaccurate.

I see that my idea of "high-fidelity" is incorrect. It is interesting that that term is not included in the Head-Fi glossary. I spent a lot of time around musicians in recent years. I have not discussed audiophile subjects much at all for much longer than that. I am used to "high-fi" referring to pickups that sound more like a picture of a tone rather than having the spatial presence of being produced by the amp when it is in the immediate vicinity. That concept may not be easily comprehended by everyone. I was also mistakenly under the impression that "high-fidelity" music included the refined colorization of the audiophile systems they are produced and listened with.

Here is a list of what I would like to hear more of. As it turns out this probably requires using different headphones so I am open to all suggestions including changing to specific headphones.

I would like to hear more form if "form" can be considered an opposite of "flat." Something more articulate, more definition, better imaging, detail, a wider soundstage, more depth, some reviews describe an experience of a particular headphone as "knowing you are wearing headphones" when relating to spatial perception (the "headstage"?)......in this regard I'd like to widen that soundstage without losing the focus of things front and center.........it may not be possible but headphones that sound like you are in the room (large and small) full of musicians on stage performing as opposed to distinct reminders that the sound is coming through headphones.

 

[Monsterzero]

@ProtegeManiac
I would like to hear more form if "form" can be considered an opposite of "flat." Something more articulate, more definition, better imaging, detail, a wider soundstage, more depth, some reviews describe an experience of a particular headphone as "knowing you are wearing headphones" when relating to spatial perception (the "headstage"?)......in this regard I'd like to widen that soundstage without losing the focus of things front and center.........it may not be possible but headphones that sound like you are in the room (large and small) full of musicians on stage performing as opposed to distinct reminders that the sound is coming through headphones.

What youre describing can be found if youre willing to pay for it.
The only "normal" headphone that gives that kind of definition,imaging,and sound stage is the Sennheiser HD800.However it is highly dependent upon the upstream components,as well as source material,but thats going to be the case in most detail-oriented AKA "revealing" headphones.

Another possibility,and typically not cheap is to get into a STAX system.I recently listened to STAX 009 thru a Blue Hawaii amp,and it was truly breathtaking . I fired up some vintage Deep Purple and Jon Lord's opening keyboard sequence on "Lazy"wasnt coming from the right,nor the left,nor was it stereo.No,it was coming from somewhere in the room...and it put a smile on my face. But for a set-up that costs around ten thousand dollars,i had better smile.

There are cheaper E-stat systems out there,like the Koss E-stat,or lesser Stax units,but how well they pull off what I just described,i have no idea.

Another option is the AKG K-1000,if you can find one...and theyre not cheap either,unfortunately.

 

[Music Alchemist]

High fidelity simply means that the equipment is accurately reproducing what is on the recording. (It can also mean that the recording is accurately reproducing the original performance, but that's somewhat outside the context of this gear discussion.) Any given audiophile component is going to excel in certain areas and have potential problems in others, with varying degrees of fidelity. With electronics (as opposed to transducers like headphones and speakers), problems become less likely since they measure so well.

If you want it to sound like real instruments in a room, then headphones will never give you that; you need speakers. Even the most spacious headphones (such as the Sennheiser HD 800, Abyss AB-1266, HIFIMAN HE1000, etc.) still have all the sounds coming from right next to your ears, with almost no depth, whereas with speakers, you get many times more depth, along with full-body impact.

It's possible to make headphones more speaker-like via virtual surround processing. I've read about the Smyth Realiser and how it can emulate specific speaker systems that are measured. There's also the much more affordable Out Of Your Head software. I have not heard either for myself; all I know is that the free virtual surround plugins I've used just made the sound worse.

STAX was mentioned. I've owned four STAX systems and definitely prefer electrostats over other headphone technology. But this is very much a matter of preference. I still prefer my speakers over any headphone, for example. You'll have to listen to lots of equipment with your own ears to determine which you prefer.

On to the topic of amps and DACs for your Senns...

I've owned around a dozen DACs (ranging from $30 to four figures) and pretty much all of them sounded different. In my experience, they make more of a difference than amps do. (This goes against the general consensus, but what can ya do...) How much of an improvement you hear compared to a computer's onboard DAC or an audio interface depends on its quality, which other DACs you're comparing to, which headphones or speakers you're listening with, and so on. In some cases, you may not hear a difference at all, especially if you're dealing with entry-level DACs like the Modi 2.

That said, I do think a good next step is to try the Magni and Modi. (Any variation, such as the Magni 2 Uber.) If you don't hear much of an improvement, don't be discouraged. You can get noticeably better sound depending on the components you choose. I really like the HD 600 on the Chord Mojo DAC/amp.

 

[o0Ampy0o]

Would it be worth skipping the Magni/Modi Schiit stack and going for the Jotunheim with USB DAC module? I would rather get something I can keep than to begin a process of rolling gear. I do not like to have to sell gear and generally lose in the process.

I have to work with headphones as I live in an apartment. I rarely listen through speakers and those occasions are at barely audible volume just enough to hear while working with the freedom of not wearing headphones. At those times I only listen to ambient music without an engaging beat, more or less stimulating my mind and as stress relief. Simple computer speakers suffice under these conditions.

 

[Music Alchemist]

Would it be worth skipping the Magni/Modi Schiit stack and going for the Jotunheim with USB DAC module? I would rather get something I can keep than to begin a process of rolling gear. I do not like to have to sell gear and generally lose in the process.

Personally I'd go for a Magni 2 Uber (or just Magni 2) and Modi Multibit. (I did own all of those in the past.) It would be less expensive, you'd get a better DAC (the Jotunheim DAC uses the same DAC as the Modi 2 and Fulla 2), and you'd have far more than enough power available for nearly any headphone.

 

[Monsterzero]

Would it be worth skipping the Magni/Modi Schiit stack and going for the Jotunheim with USB DAC module? I would rather get something I can keep than to begin a process of rolling gear. I do not like to have to sell gear and generally lose in the process.

I have to work with headphones as I live in an apartment. I rarely listen through speakers and those occasions are at barely audible volume just enough to hear while working with the freedom of not wearing headphones. At those times I only listen to ambient music without an engaging beat, more or less stimulating my mind and as stress relief. Simple computer speakers suffice under these conditions.

If youre trying to achieve the out from between your ears sensation you described in your earlier post,you will not get it with your current headphones,nor the Schiit products youre mentioning.

i have owned the Magni Uber 2 and the Senn HD600 previously,and while both are fine products,they wont give you what you previously described.The HD600 has a quite narrow sound stage,even when paired with a Woo Audio WA2,which is a highly regarded combo.Again its a good set of HPs,but as both Alchemist and I mentioned your best bet are speakers or check some of the products I linked earlier.

At the end of the day i think most members here would enjoy an affordable product that pulls the audio from between your ears and projects a holograph of music around you.Simply put neither the Schiit stack nor the HD600 will give you that. Frankly I havent heard that sensation on any set-up that didnt clock in at least two thousand dollars minimum.

Not trying to rain on your parade,just trying to save you from chasing unobtanium and spending cash needlessly.

Good luck.

 

[ProtegeManiac]

@ProtegeManiac I will attempt to use more specific terms for what I am really hoping for. I read through the Head-Fi glossary and have collected a few words that pin it down. The audio characteristics I initially described were inaccurate.

I see that my idea of "high-fidelity" is incorrect. It is interesting that that term is not included in the Head-Fi glossary. I spent a lot of time around musicians in recent years. I have not discussed audiophile subjects much at all for much longer than that. I am used to "high-fi" referring to pickups that sound more like a picture of a tone rather than having the spatial presence of being produced by the amp when it is in the immediate vicinity. That concept may not be easily comprehended by everyone. I was also mistakenly under the impression that "high-fidelity" music included the refined colorization of the audiophile systems they are produced and listened with.

Taking that into context, "high fidelity" means "as close as possible to what was recorded." That value of truth is such that infidelity can cost you a lot in the divorce proceedings, or being an infidel can cost you your head in some places. Basically, coloring the sound is no longer "faithful" to the original sound, because you're changing it. It would be like how the people who use the word "infidel" a lot don't like translating certain works from one language.

Basically, high fidelity means "low distortion, low noise playback." And depending on the sensitivity of the speakers or headphones, you'd need an amp that can supply power without piling on distortion and noise, much less clipping.

If anything the reason why people think there is a difference between pro audio and "HiFi" at home is due to a lot of misunderstandings. Some people prefer hi-fi gear thinking that's what instruments sound like, or maybe that's what they do sound like live, except that person doesn't realize that wherever the hell he heard them the venue was coloring the sound more than when it was recorded in a sound dampened studio. This would be like if I demand that my rock albums sound like crap, with drums overwhelming everything and there are barely any vocals, because that's what they sound like in small bars and I'm boozed out of my mind. Except the older folks who do this have some kind of legitimacy when they make Norah Jones sound like she needs to shoot hot chicken soup up her nostrils. Or how they think their Les Pauls and Marshall amp sound better in their garage than the same gear recorded in a well-dampened studio.

Likewise, in some cases some people hear pro gear and tend to think that the relatively lean sound counts for flat sound, when in fact, it can be due to a number of things. Most commonly, studio headphones that have a smooth curve in the midrange for checking the recording but roll off too early at the low end (like a bunch of older AKGs and Sonys). Some Class H pro amplifiers meant to provide a LOT of power with reliability in mind more than super low distortion - just look at the THD % of pro amps at 300watts per channel meant to drive PAs tht have 12in woofers and horns saturating a small auditorium vs Class A home audio amps that make 15watts per channel meant to drive 90dB+ speakers in a small room.

And apart from having no coloration the "picture" of the pickup vs spatial presence aren't necessarily two different things. You can get the tone of the pick up while programming spatial information depending on how the mics and the amp are set up. If anything, electric guitars tend to be recorded like a huge wall spanning the entire length, but in some cases either on the mixer or putting one amp far off to one side (to distinguish the lead on one side from the rhythm doing the Wall of Sound) does put in the spatial information. If that sounds like you're not getting the tone of the guitar well enough, that also has a lot to do with your reference for hearing that tone - standing next to the amp would sound fuller than recording the amp positioned farther out from the middle of two mics.

@ProtegeManiacI would like to hear more form if "form" can be considered an opposite of "flat." Something more articulate, more definition, better imaging, detail, a wider soundstage, more depth, some reviews describe an experience of a particular headphone as "knowing you are wearing headphones" when relating to spatial perception (the "headstage"?)......in this regard I'd like to widen that soundstage without losing the focus of things front and center.........it may not be possible but headphones that sound like you are in the room (large and small) full of musicians on stage performing as opposed to distinct reminders that the sound is coming through headphones.

Again here we have that seeming conflict that isn't. A flat and wide respoonse is more articulate and has better definition throughout the range, since you have less auditory masking going on. When you think of them as polar opposites the problem really is you might have as reference studio gear that rolls off early at the bass range and has a spike in the treble (like the K701). This is not the perfect design for monitoring, it was just the best that was available at the time it came out. At the same time you can have something like the HD650 and the non-Fazor LCD-2, which have very smooth graphs if it wasn't for 1000hz and below being considerably stronger than above 1000hz. So on either side of 1000hz they're as smooth as you can get, but having that lower midrange to bass plateau, along with wearing them tight (or several people have already done so before you did at the same show, compressing the earpads too much), you get the sense that they're not articulate because the low end plateau gets boosted even more.

Similarly, in some cases what some people tend to think of as "flat" is just a weak amp distorting or clipping (but not adding noise). For example, a lot of people tend to think Grados are the only headphones that can have a high dynamic range, when in fact the primary factor for that is their high sensitivity. Hook up a headphone many describe as "boring" like the HD650 to an amp like a Meier Classic, Violectric V281, or WooAudio WA3, and you can crank it up to a level where you'd match the Grados' output and without clipping or distorting (or noise masking some of the notes). Ditto using a K702 with the Classic, V281, and the Woo WA6SE (not the same as the WA3, which delivers more power at 300ohms).

As for imaging, you're not supposed to go with coloration either. The more colored the response the more screwed up the imaging gets. Grados are a good example - the boost in the upper bass and lower midrange puts the bass drum forward, the boost in the midrange does the same to the vocals, and the treble boost does the same to the cymbals. Some people feel that sounds "3D," but it's out of proportion - sure, the vocals seem to jump out of the image like a pop-up book, but why would hte bass drum be at the same point on the Z-axis as the vocals? Why would the cymbals be way off to the flanks where the guitars are? No drummer has arms that long, unless Marvel Comics has Reed Richards or Doc Octopus playing drums in a heavy metal band with Thor.

One other barrier is the reality of headphone listening compared to speakers. On the latter the speakers are way out in front of you and each ear hears both speakers. On headphones the transducers are right outside your eardrums, and worse, some headphones just fire into the ear canals at a direct angle, which you may notice is not how speakers are positioned. Some headphones try to remedy one problem with angled earpads or driver mounts, so at least they'd be positioned relative to the ear canals as speakers set to toe-in would be. The hearing problem is dealt with using Crossfeed, which unlike outright Crosstalk applies a filter so that only a given range of frequencies are filtered across both channels and at a set or variable gain depending on the implementation.

So basically, what you need is a headphone that has good spatial performance, an amplifier that can supply more than enough power to destroy your eardrums (not that you'd use all of it) at low THD+N levels, and Crossfeed. Simplest and most direct way to get all these can be a little expensive - Meier Corda DACcord and Classic driving the AKG K702, HiFiMan HE400i, HD800, or HD600 on angled HM5 earpads. I get all that but I do a lot of tweaking - I use an Android phone as a music server so I can run Neutron Music Player, which has variable Crossfeed plus an up to 10-band parametric EQ to help me flatten out the response more, a Pangea HP101 (my old Meier Cantate hasn't been repaired yet, nobody here can figure out what's wrong with it) which has a lot of power for my HD600 headphones, which are also on thick, angled/asymmetrical HM5 earpads.