However, if you use a single-ended triode amp that does not use feedback, they can sound 'dynamic' on account of the distortion they make. But such an amplifier will be challenged to drive the speakers you have in mind, especially with your budget.
Pioneer made an expander unit back in the 1970s. You might look for one of those- they turn up on ebay on occasion.
both song where level matchedIs that to mean that they were level matched to each other, or that they were peak-normalized?
But any other time that 16bit and 24bit sounded different was due to the audio path and the DAC, because in this situation while the 16bit and 24bit sound different a 16bit to 24bit converted file sound identical to the native 24bit audio version.
FWIW, 34 was chosen so that there would still be plenty of margin for filtering.
If you want a very objective approach, Inner Fidelity has great raw headphone measurements (IEM not so much). But it demands a very good understanding of how to read them because his current compensation is bollocks. Also his axes are very clinched which makes reading the peaks very difficult sometimes. Headphone.com is the old website for which Tyll Hertens worked for. I think he did a good job catching up on Inner Fidelity.
Rtings has some good raw measurements, but do keep in mind that they use a different measurement setup (head and coupler) so the raw frequencies might deviate from Tyll and thus would need a different compensation. I also don't agree with their target if you want studio linearity but they are currently working on a refined target curve. Again, be very careful when trying to read the frequency response because I know people discussing headphones for 10 years who still misinterpret them.
IMO, GoldenEars is not too useful. Their curves are heavily smoothed and their selection of head- and earphones is quite different to what is available on the European market. YMMV.
If you want subjective opinion and prefer to read articles, more often than not I would agree with Tyll from Inner Fidelity. I do think he prefers warm sounding headphones (ironically his compensation shows the opposite) but overall I think he is without bias.
I write a tiny fraction of articles on Headfonics but Marcus is the main guy. His tuning description is usually spot on and I personally rarely disagree.
First time I managed 8 times: iMac > RME ADI-2 Pro > Oppo PM-3
I wanted to do better, so I swapped the headphones with custom-fit IEM. I could hear the "high resolution" of the 9th time, but not the complete sentence. I forced myself to get past the first two parts by going beyond comfortable listening and I could hear the 10th time as noise - if at all. So I guess 9 is the absolute limit for headphones or private listening, IMO.
I thought I'd have another go to see how much the DAC can handle, so I slowly increased volume as the track played. I easily managed 13 times at max volume and was able to understand the first word of the 14th time. Since I was using high gain, the noise floor made it difficult to understand the rest. But of course this test is irrelevant because I would be deaf in a normal listening test.
I guess it's impossible to hear the full dynamic range of a CD. I chose my username well...
Why 34 though?
16 khz is a widely used cut off in psychoacoustics. It is certainly as low as I would want to go.
Maybe someone is keen to lend a syntax-hand...
I had this for a while - which is meant to add 'DISCOGS_CREDIT_FEATURING' to the title, IF it exists:
$if(%DISCOGS_CREDIT_FEATURING%,%TRACK_TITLE%' (Ft. '%DISCOGS_CREDIT_FEATURING%')',%TRACK_TITLE%))
Turns out, this only partially works... i.e. if I tag it fresh, it does not work... but, if I re-run the same through foo_discogs, it then, and only then (on 2nd run) does add the (Ft. '%DISCOGS_CREDIT_FEATURING%') tag to the title correctly.
If you see what might be causing this, and maybe even how to correct it so it does work on first run, that would be swish.
Nevermind, I found it.Yes
Another question: Is this program portable?