I have a question about headphone amplifiers and what they are supposed to do. Now many professional sources like manufactures say it amplifies the sound, making it louder. But many "audiophiles" claim that you need it for better quality sound which is independent of loudness, and they use a lot of subjective terms to describe that loudness.
I plugged a 300ohm headphone into the Microsoft zune, which is said to "work best with headphones 32ohms and under".
I tried the device with the stock earbuds, a 50ohm headphone and a 600 ohm headphone.
The earbuds were loud enough at volume 8, the 555 achieves the same kind of loudness (to my ears) at volume 11, and the 300ohm is also loud enough at volume 14. Ofcourse they all sound "different" as they have different frequency responses and different sized drivers etc... But the Hd600 really sounded fine at a high volume setting, I can hear the bass, different voices in the music, the voice separation was clear with each voice clearly heard on its own.
Now I know that it wastes more battery pushing the volume up so high, but still, does an amplifier just amplify the signal? Because the 300ohm headphone sounded fine with the zune.
I have a question about headphone amplifiers and what they are supposed to do. Now many professional sources like manufactures say it amplifies the sound, making it louder. But many "audiophiles" claim that you need it for better quality sound which is independent of loudness, and they use a lot of subjective terms to describe that loudness.
I plugged a 300ohm headphone into the Microsoft zune, which is said to "work best with headphones 32ohms and under".
I tried the device with the stock earbuds, a 50ohm headphone and a 600 ohm headphone.
The earbuds were loud enough at volume 8, the 555 achieves the same kind of loudness (to my ears) at volume 11, and the 300ohm is also loud enough at volume 14. Ofcourse they all sound "different" as they have different frequency responses and different sized drivers etc... But the Hd600 really sounded fine at a high volume setting, I can hear the bass, different voices in the music, the voice separation was clear with each voice clearly heard on its own.
Now I know that it wastes more battery pushing the volume up so high, but still, does an amplifier just amplify the signal? Because the 300ohm headphone sounded fine with the zune.
Does turning up the volume so that you can enjoy the music *waste* battery power? No!!! Your enjoyment is the purpose of the device. If you don't have enough battery life to please you, there are probably options - for example my portable recorder can be powered via its USB port, and there is a cheap device by Everready that will use 2 AA batteries to extend it operating time.
Does an amplifier just amplify the signal? Yes, at least on a good day.
The final arbiter of what is enjoyable to you, is *you*. If you find that your Zune gets loud enough and sounds good with high impedance phones, then ignore those who ponitificate on such things and enjoy!
Now I know that it wastes more battery pushing the volume up so high, but still, does an amplifier just amplify the signal? Because the 300ohm headphone sounded fine with the zune.
Turning up the volume to match the 300 ohm headphones does not necessarily increase battery consumption. Because the higher impedance headphones place less load on the output circuit, it is possible that there is less battery usage rather than more, It all depends on the efficiency of the headphones and the design of the amplifier circuit.
The point of an headphone amplifier is not to make the signal louder, but they can generally do that too if the source level is too low. Typical line level signal is about 2V which is would be way loud for many headphones.
The main function from "audiophile" point of view is that they drive headphones much better than built-in headphone outputs. Portable ones have to make compromises for power consumption and size, but full size class-A amplifiers are clear improvement, how big depends on headphones.
When trying a dedicated amplifier the benefits may not be obvious at first, but once you get accustomed to the sound you may not want to back. At least that happened to me, and I use headphone amplifiers for everything but portable use. For portable players with IEMs I find the benefit so small or non-existent that it is not worth the added bulk.
I have a question about headphone amplifiers and what they are supposed to do. Now many professional sources like manufactures say it amplifies the sound, making it louder. But many "audiophiles" claim that you need it for better quality sound which is independent of loudness, and they use a lot of subjective terms to describe that loudness.
I plugged a 300ohm headphone into the Microsoft zune, which is said to "work best with headphones 32ohms and under".
I tried the device with the stock earbuds, a 50ohm headphone and a 600 ohm headphone.
The earbuds were loud enough at volume 8, the 555 achieves the same kind of loudness (to my ears) at volume 11, and the 300ohm is also loud enough at volume 14. Ofcourse they all sound "different" as they have different frequency responses and different sized drivers etc... But the Hd600 really sounded fine at a high volume setting, I can hear the bass, different voices in the music, the voice separation was clear with each voice clearly heard on its own.
Now I know that it wastes more battery pushing the volume up so high, but still, does an amplifier just amplify the signal? Because the 300ohm headphone sounded fine with the zune.
Does turning up the volume so that you can enjoy the music *waste* battery power? No!!! Your enjoyment is the purpose of the device. If you don't have enough battery life to please you, there are probably options - for example my portable recorder can be powered via its USB port, and there is a cheap device by Everready that will use 2 AA batteries to extend it operating time.
Does an amplifier just amplify the signal? Yes, at least on a good day.
The final arbiter of what is enjoyable to you, is *you*. If you find that your Zune gets loud enough and sounds good with high impedance phones, then ignore those who ponitificate on such things and enjoy!
Alright I might have said "use" instead of "waste".
It's not just what I find enjoyable, but I want to know what is an amplifier scientifically designed to do.
Turning up the volume to match the 300 ohm headphones does not necessarily increase battery consumption. Because the higher impedance headphones place less load on the output circuit, it is possible that there is less battery usage rather than more, It all depends on the efficiency of the headphones and the design of the amplifier circuit.
Good to know, thanks.
The main function from "audiophile" point of view is that they drive headphones much better than built-in headphone outputs.
That's the question, in what sense?
The main function from "audiophile" point of view is that they drive headphones much better than built-in headphone outputs. Portable ones have to make compromises for power consumption and size, but full size class-A amplifiers are clear improvement, how big depends on headphones.
Yes, and the same can be said of "audiophile" fuses and power cables. Do a volume matched blind test comparing the amp built into your portable device to a dedicated headphone amp. Then come back and make your claim.
You know what you'll likely find with regards to "sound quality?" after a volume matched blind test? A dedicated "audiophile" amp does little other than drain your wallet. Some portable devices have a slight bass rolloff (RMAA verified) with low impedance headphones and this can addressed by an amp, but the bass rolloff may be so slight as to be a non-issue.
So many people claim dedicated headphone amps improve the "sound quality" of headphones, but when you ask them to demonstrate it using objective measures or even in a blind test, you end up with a lot of subjective mumbo-jumbo.
When trying a dedicated amplifier the benefits may not be obvious at first, but once you get accustomed to the sound you may not want to back.
Anecdotal subjectivity; not exactly a TOS #8 friendly.
So what does the official specs for the resistance of headphones supported mean anyways? Because I have a sound card and the zune, both were supposed to run headphones not higher than 32ohms, buy both runs 50 and 300 ohm headphones fine if you just turn up the volume. In fact they are more than adequate since I still am short of their maximum volume even for the 300 ohm headphone.
So what does the official specs for the resistance of headphones supported mean anyways? Because I have a sound card and the zune, both were supposed to run headphones not higher than 32ohms, buy both runs 50 and 300 ohm headphones fine if you just turn up the volume. In fact they are more than adequate since I still am short of their maximum volume even for the 300 ohm headphone.
If somebody has told you you shouldn't be using a headphone with an impedance higher than 32 ohms, they are wrong. You can run just about any headphone from any portable player or sound card without ill effect. I've even read discussions where people said the output impedance and headphone impedance should be exactly the same otherwise it leads to amplifier overheating and damage. What rubbish.
The following statement depends on the amp and headphones being used, but I've found that as a general rule of thumb the headphone jack impedance should be lower than the headphone impedance. I base this statement on RMAA tests I've run on a bunch of different eqiupment. If it's not, you can get some interesting deviations from a flat frequency response. Not all these deviations are bad as recently I found a slightly (IMHO) bass anemic headphone sound better on an amp that was boosting the bass (RMAA verified).
Now I know that it wastes more battery pushing the volume up so high, but still, does an amplifier just amplify the signal? Because the 300ohm headphone sounded fine with the zune.
Pio2001 posted at http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f133/headpho...one-abx-429619/ (http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f133/headpho...one-abx-429619/) (referenced from the thread on AV Receivers http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....=73054&hl=) (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=73054&hl=)) some RMAA tests that show a headphone amp having a flatter response curve than some integrated amps with certain headphones attached. OTOH, the maximum variation with the integrated amps was +/- 1.5 dB.
I suspect, then, that there is, in at least some cases, enough of a measurable difference to enable headphone amp makers to claim they do more than just amplify the signal; but not enough of a difference for most people to hear, most of the time (really, Barnum-land: not enough for all people to hear most of the time, and most people to hear all of the time: but Pio2001 could ABX at least the most obvious differences).
Now I know that it wastes more battery pushing the volume up so high, but still, does an amplifier just amplify the signal? Because the 300ohm headphone sounded fine with the zune.
Pio2001 posted at http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f133/headpho...one-abx-429619/ (http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f133/headpho...one-abx-429619/) (referenced from the thread on AV Receivers http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....=73054&hl=) (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=73054&hl=)) some RMAA tests that show a headphone amp having a flatter response curve than some integrated amps with certain headphones attached. OTOH, the maximum variation with the integrated amps was +/- 1.5 dB.
I suspect, then, that there is, in at least some cases, enough of a measurable difference to enable headphone amp makers to claim they do more than just amplify the signal; but not enough of a difference for most people to hear, most of the time (really, Barnum-land: not enough for all people to hear most of the time, and most people to hear all of the time: but Pio2001 could ABX at least the most obvious differences).
Well, I'm not sure how good were the integrated amplifiers used in the test, what are they integrated into? How do they compare to the amplifiers in today's MP3 players like the Ipod and the Zune?
Also, does the flatter response have anything to do with the additional "energy" fed by a high classed amp, or just that the amps were made out of better materials thus having lower distortion? Like less hiss and artifacts?
I can't really understand that report very well.
So what does the official specs for the resistance of headphones supported mean anyways? Because I have a sound card and the zune, both were supposed to run headphones not higher than 32ohms, buy both runs 50 and 300 ohm headphones fine if you just turn up the volume. In fact they are more than adequate since I still am short of their maximum volume even for the 300 ohm headphone.
The following statement depends on the amp and headphones being used, but I've found that as a general rule of thumb the headphone jack impedance should be lower than the headphone impedance.
The Sennheiser HD600 is at 300ohms, the Zune's headphone jack can't possibly have an impedance above that right?
So what does the official specs for the resistance of headphones supported mean anyways? Because I have a sound card and the zune, both were supposed to run headphones not higher than 32ohms, buy both runs 50 and 300 ohm headphones fine if you just turn up the volume. In fact they are more than adequate since I still am short of their maximum volume even for the 300 ohm headphone.
The following statement depends on the amp and headphones being used, but I've found that as a general rule of thumb the headphone jack impedance should be lower than the headphone impedance.
The Sennheiser HD600 is at 300ohms, the Zune's headphone jack can't possibly have an impedance above that right?
Hi HTS. Let me make these points very clear regarding high impedance phones.
1. The
only potential problem with using higher impedance phones on your Zune (or any other player for that matter) is that in theory you may not get enough volume control to achieve desired loudness. If you are still getting plenty of volume range to cover your full music collection then, no matter how high the impedance, there
is no problem.
2. Pushing the volume control higher to achieve the same listening volume on higher impedance phones does
NOT waste power and may very well do the exact opposite! ( That is, reduce the power consumption. ) A typical class B or class AB output stage would use less power to drive a high impedance load at closer to rail to rail level than it would to drive the same power into a lower impedance load. Your pre-existing intuition here is completely wrong (but don't feel bad about it because most people would think the same thing. )
BTW. In the above I'm not making any claims about whether high-Z verus low-Z phones construction gives any intrinsic sonic advantage. I dont know if your low-Z phones sound better or worse than the high-Z ones when both are driven from a suitable amplifier. All I'm saying that if you like the sound of the High-Z ones on a good amplifier then there is no reason not to use them on the Zune (no matter how high is the impedance) as long as you can get enough volume.
So what does the official specs for the resistance of headphones supported mean anyways? Because I have a sound card and the zune, both were supposed to run headphones not higher than 32ohms, buy both runs 50 and 300 ohm headphones fine if you just turn up the volume. In fact they are more than adequate since I still am short of their maximum volume even for the 300 ohm headphone.
The following statement depends on the amp and headphones being used, but I've found that as a general rule of thumb the headphone jack impedance should be lower than the headphone impedance.
The Sennheiser HD600 is at 300ohms, the Zune's headphone jack can't possibly have an impedance above that right?
Hi HTS. Let me make these points very clear regarding high impedance phones.
1. The only potential problem with using higher impedance phones on your Zune (or any other player for that matter) is that in theory you may not get enough volume control to achieve desired loudness. If you are still getting plenty of volume range to cover your full music collection then, no matter how high the impedance, there is no problem.
So the "audiophile" amps sounding a little more neutral vs the integrated amps, is not because of the difference in the headphones' impedance, but because of the amps themselves right? Like a low impedance headphone of 32 ohms will benefit equally from an "audiophile" amp than a 300ohm headphone? So if the Zune sounds a little "off" (I'm not saying that it does) with the high impedance headphones, the problem here is independent of the impedance of the headphone?
Because I did listen to the same headphone on a sound card that can power 600ohm headphones. And it sounded very alike on the zune and on that sound card, in tracks where the bass was bloated, on both sources it was the same. And where the bass was tight and clear, on both sources it was the same.
Thanks for clearing that up!
So if the Zune sounds a little "off" (I'm not saying that it does) with the high impedance headphones, the problem here is independent of the impedance of the headphone?
Because I did listen to the same headphone on a sound card that can power 600ohm headphones. And it sounded very alike on the zune and on that sound card, in tracks where the bass was bloated, on both sources it was the same. And where the bass was tight and clear, on both sources it was the same.
Yeah if the Zune can provide the volume then it can drive the phones. In some sense Hi-Z phones are easier for the device to drive than low-Z. There's just one caveat on this that I should have mentioned above. You do have to be careful that you're not clipping (the voltage) if the phones are too higher impedance. Basically you just need to be sure that at the very loudest transients of your music (or very loudest plus a bit more for testing purposes) that you don't get any noticeable distortion - if you do then it might be clipping. Other than that high impedance phones will generally
reduce the amplifier distortion due to their lower current requirements.
Just to summarize the main issues.
- Low-Z phones place higher current demands on your device while hi-Z phones place higher voltage demands.
- The higher current demand of low-Z phones can increase the distortion levels of your devices output stage. In particular (for devices with AC coupled outputs) low-Z phones might strain the output coupling capacitor a bit which can increase low frequency distortion and impair the low end frequency response.
- The higher voltage demand of hi-Z phones generally doesn't increase distortion levels, except for the caveat mentioned above if the output level gets pushed too close to clipping.
- As Hi-Z phones use less current they may place less drain on your battery (though it's probably too smaller effect to make much noticeable difference).
- Both hi-Z and low-Z phone might (or might not) benefit from a good headphone amplifier, but for different reasons. Typically low-Z phones will benefit most from the amplifier, but generally only where the devices inbuilt amplifier is a bit wimpy on available drive current. Hi-Z phones will usually only benefit from an added amplifier where the existing device is not providing enough output voltage swing and you're suffering from either a lack of volume or from clipping under transient volume extremes.
The Sennheiser HD600 is at 300ohms, the Zune's headphone jack can't possibly have an impedance above that right?
Unless the Zune designers were on some drug they made it, the output impedance is probably a lot closer to 0 than 300. Just to support your listening to a HD600 on a Zune, I listen to a DT880 (250 ohms) connected straight to a Nokia phone.
Even if the impedance of a headphone jack is higher than the headphone, it's not automatically a problem. It is a question of the headphone and the particular amp. Depending on the headphone impedance curve and particular output impedance of the amp, there might be a shift in the frequency response. In layman terms, you might have a boosted or attenuated bass, treble, or whatever else depending on the particular headphone you are using.
I've played with this myself. Sometimes the frequency response change makes the headphone sound "a little off." Sometimes the boost can be somewhat dramatic and you'll hear distortion. At least in one case, I found the altered frequency response to actually be more enjoyable. If you look at Pio2001's test and graph (linked in MichaelW's post) the frequency response of the DT880 is altered a bit depending on the output impedance (not given) of the amps, although my current speculation is the Project amp has the lowest output impedance and the Marantz the highest. The deviations from a flat FR are measurable and maybe blind testable, but I wonder what would happen if somebody had the project box in one room and the Marantz in another and compared the two by walking between rooms. I suspect the time required to move from room to room would blur the audible memory enough so it ended up sounding the same.
Notice they also tested pair of 16 ohm creative IEMs. If somebody showed me that graph, told me nothing else, and asked me to blind test the differences between amps, I'd laugh and walk away. In this case the impedance of the speaker amps is probably (my speculation) quite a bit higher than 16 ohms so my "output impedance of headphone should be higher than headphone jack impedance" rule of thumb falls flat on it's face.
If the output jack impedance is near 0, the frequency response is typically flat or near flat with just about any headphone. It really doesn't take much to have a headphone amp with a low impedance output. Even a Cmoy ($50 on ebay) can do this.
2. Pushing the volume control higher to achieve the same listening volume on higher impedance phones does NOT waste power and may very well do the exact opposite! ( That is, reduce the power consumption. )
No it definitely uses more power at higher volumes. You can verify this easily enough with an ammeter and a regulated powersupply. Of course, the higher impedance of the headphones can also save power too, so its a tradeoff.
A typical class B or class AB output stage ...
Cass AB on a DAP? The battery would be dead in no time
Modern DACs use much more efficient designs then that.
BTW. In the above I'm not making any claims about whether high-Z verus low-Z phones construction gives any intrinsic sonic advantage. I dont know if your low-Z phones sound better or worse than the high-Z ones when both are driven from a suitable amplifier. All I'm saying that if you like the sound of the High-Z ones on a good amplifier then there is no reason not to use them on the Zune (no matter how high is the impedance) as long as you can get enough volume.
Its usually pretty safe to assume that higher == better for a DAP. RMAA tests as a function of impedance are a lot of fun on most devices:
http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/Comparisons...%2048%20Ohm.htm (http://rmaa.elektrokrishna.com/Comparisons/Comparison%20-%20Cowon%20D2%20-%2012%20-%2048%20Ohm.htm)
Note that as the impedance approaches line out, the frequency response approaches being good
Just don't go too high that you get stuck needing an amp!
So the "audiophile" amps sounding a little more neutral vs the integrated amps, is not because of the difference in the headphones' impedance, but because of the amps themselves right?
Its mostly because audiophiles aren't the brightest people when it comes to audio.
Like a low impedance headphone of 32 ohms will benefit equally from an "audiophile" amp than a 300ohm headphone?
No. If you have low impedance headphones, and a DAP with a crappy DAC/Amp, it may have trouble driving them.
In this situation, I'd buy a DAP that didn't have crappy output. But you can also buy an amp too.
So if the Zune sounds a little "off" (I'm not saying that it does) with the high impedance headphones, the problem here is independent of the impedance of the headphone?
It won't sound off with high impedance, but it may sound quieter.
- The higher current demand of low-Z phones can increase the distortion levels of your devices output stage. In particular (for devices with AC coupled outputs) low-Z phones might strain the output coupling capacitor a bit which can increase low frequency distortion and impair the low end frequency response.
Replacing the output coupling capacitors in a device, that suffers from low end roll-off with low impedance phones, like some iPod models do, would be much more portable while having the same quality as a good additional amp. Does anybody have links to sites that document such mods for iPods & Co.?
- The higher current demand of low-Z phones can increase the distortion levels of your devices output stage. In particular (for devices with AC coupled outputs) low-Z phones might strain the output coupling capacitor a bit which can increase low frequency distortion and impair the low end frequency response.
Yes but I suggest you actually perform a volume matched test before running out to get an amplifier. A lot of people use "facts" like the above to justify the purchase and existence of expensive portable amplifiers. Myself, I used the bass rolloff and measurements of an RMAA graph to justify buying a dedicated amplifier for the Denons. Yet, when I actually did a volume matched test using an A/B switch, I found the differences were quite small. In truth, I probably only heard them because I had an A/B switch and could almost instantaneous switch between the internal amp in the PMP and a headphone amp. Had there been even a 2 second gap between the switching, I'm not confident in passing a blind test.
This is why I value volume matched tests. You can use measurements to justify just about any purchase (-80db of stereo crosstalk is better than -77!), but these differences may range from minor to inaudible.
So the "audiophile" amps sounding a little more neutral vs the integrated amps, is not because of the difference in the headphones' impedance, but because of the amps themselves right?
If you are talking about speaker versus many dedicated solid-state (no tubes) headphone amps, the sound differences are typically from a combination of the headphone impedance and speaker amp headphone jack output impedance. As far as the differences between all the dedicated amps on Head-Fi, I'll propose those differences are mostly between the listeners ears.
A typical class B or class AB output stage ...
Cass AB on a DAP? The battery would be dead in no time Modern DACs use much more efficient designs then that.
Hi Mike, do most DAPs use class D output stages to increase efficiency? I wouldn't have thought the current drain of a class A-B stage would have been all that bad when only driving earbuds. Anyway even with a class-D output the power demands should not increase with Hi-Z phones. A class D amplifier should consume no more power when suppling a given output power level to a high impedance load (albeit at a higher volume setting level) than it would to supply the same output power to a low impedance load. Why would the efficiency of a class-D be reduced when driving a higher impedance load? If anything I would have thought it would still be slightly better due to lower I^2_R losses.
Replacing the output coupling capacitors in a device, that suffers from low end roll-off with low impedance phones, like some iPod models do, would be much more portable while having the same quality as a good additional amp. Does anybody have links to sites that document such mods for iPods & Co.?
Hi rpp3ro and odigg. I have to admit that most of my experience (and interest) here is not with DAP's but with sound cards and motherboard audio output stages. Here in RMAA tests I've found that onboard audio in particular can suffer a lot at low frequencies (roll off and added distortion) when low impedance phones are connected.
File Edit Options Buffers YASnippet Tools Help
So many people claim dedicated headphone amps improve the "sound
quality" of headphones, but when you ask them to demonstrate it using
objective measures or even in a blind test, you end up with a lot of
subjective mumbo-jumbo.
I don't see how passing a blind test helps to determine "sound quality", it would only show
that there is audible difference. I have a portable amplifier that sounds tad bright and hence
possible to identify, but to say it is better would still be subjective mumbo-jumbo.
A typical class B or class AB output stage ...
Cass AB on a DAP? The battery would be dead in no time Modern DACs use much more efficient designs then that.
Hi Mike, do most DAPs use class D output stages to increase efficiency? I wouldn't have thought the current drain of a class A-B stage would have been all that bad when only driving earbuds.
SOCs are sold on cost and power consumption more then anything. Even a few mW of added power consumption cannot be tolerated when the entire system is running on << 70-100 mW. On many systems, the amp can use nearly as much power as the CPU core. It makes little sense to spend a fortune on a high end low power CMOS process then throw away the benefits on an inefficient amp.
Anyway even with a class-D output the power demands should not increase with Hi-Z phones. A class D amplifier should consume no more power when suppling a given output power level to a high impedance load (albeit at a higher volume setting level) than it would to supply the same output power to a low impedance load. Why would the efficiency of a class-D be reduced when driving a higher impedance load? If anything I would have thought it would still be slightly better due to lower I^2_R losses.
See the next couple sentences after the ones you quoted in my above post
I don't see how passing a blind test helps to determine "sound quality", it would only show
that there is audible difference. I have a portable amplifier that sounds tad bright and hence
possible to identify, but to say it is better would still be subjective mumbo-jumbo.
Many people claim, as you have in your previous post, that using a dedicated headphone amp improves the "sound quality" when compared to a headphone plugged straight into a headphone jack. That would indicate to me that there is a sonic difference between the two pieces of hardware (a dedicated headphone amp versus a built in headphone jack). If a such a sonic difference exists, it should be verifiable in a volume matched blind test. You made the following claims in your first post.
1. The main function from "audiophile" point of view is that they
drive headphones much better than built-in headphone outputs.
2. Portable ones have to make compromises for power consumption and size, but full size class-A amplifiers are
clear improvement, how big depends on headphones
3. When trying a dedicated amplifier the benefits may not be obvious at first,
but once you get accustomed to the sound you may not want to back.
From my reading of your posts, you made comments alluding to improved "sound quality" when using a headphone amp. This would indicate a sonic difference. According to TOS8 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=3974), the burden falls on you to demonstrate this difference using the terms in TOS8.
Yes, you did not specifically say "sound quality" but I assumed it was implicit. I may have done this in error so let me say you really claimed a difference in "sound quality" rather than an improvement. But you have made a claim to a sonic difference and this such a difference should be verifiable in a blind test.
See the next couple sentences after the ones you quoted in my above post.
No problems Mike. So basically we can summarize that with a high efficiency amplifier design that only the required output power should matter and that the load impedance should be irrelevant.
I don't see how passing a blind test helps to determine "sound quality", it would only show
that there is audible difference. I have a portable amplifier that sounds tad bright and hence
possible to identify, but to say it is better would still be subjective mumbo-jumbo.
One problem here is that the phones themselves will have their own characteristics which are probably imperfect, and you're always going to be hearing the combined response of both the amplifier and phones, so yeah I agree that it's going to be hard to say that one is objectively better and not just personal preference.
At least with an RMAA test which includes the loading of the phones you can try to get a nice flat frequency response and good linearity then just hope that if the phones are well designed then they should sound natural with this excitation.
BTW while we're talking about "subjective mumbo-jumbo" please have a look at this site for a bit of comic relief. I just found this yesterday when I was googling for info on headphone amplifiers and it's really quite
funny.
See here : http://www.rock-grotto.co.uk/opamp.htm (http://www.rock-grotto.co.uk/opamp.htm)
OPA2604 sounded very warm, very laid back and very easy to listen to but slightly veiled in the detail department. "Chocolaty" and "syrupy" though a good easy to listen to Op amp but not my cup of tea as I prefer a greater insight into the mix.
That's just one gem, read the whole review it's hilarious.
BTW. It's so uncanny how his rating of the OpAmps sonic quality correlates almost precisely with their cost in most cases. It’s a classic sighted audiophile type review for sure.
Yes, you did not specifically say "sound quality" but I assumed it was implicit. I may have done this in error so let me say you really claimed a difference in "sound quality" rather than an improvement. But you have made a claim to a sonic difference and this such a difference should be verifiable in a blind test.
You understood me correctly, but because of TOS8 I am not going to defend my position. My point was more that even if someone passes a blind test, it tells nothing about "sound quality" to third parties.
There's ABC/HR, but different people will have different preferences.
BTW while we're talking about "subjective mumbo-jumbo" please have a look at this site for a bit of comic relief. I just found this yesterday when I was googling for info on headphone amplifiers and it's really quite funny.
See here : http://www.rock-grotto.co.uk/opamp.htm (http://www.rock-grotto.co.uk/opamp.htm)
That page is virtually unreadable to my eyes makes about every web design mistake it is possible to make! I think it should be submitted for the "roll of honor" at "web sites that suck (http://www.webpagesthatsuck.com/)".
My point was more that even if someone passes a blind test, it tells nothing about "sound quality" to third parties.
Not at all. It tells you that theres actually a difference in sound quality between using the amp and not using the amp. What else could you possibly want to know?
Well I guess you could want to know that the headphone amp isn't a complete piece of crap thats corrupting the otherwise pristine DAP output, but thats another matter.
Hi rpp3ro and odigg. I have to admit that most of my experience (and interest) here is not with DAP's but with sound cards and motherboard audio output stages. Here in RMAA tests I've found that onboard audio in particular can suffer a lot at low frequencies (roll off and added distortion) when low impedance phones are connected.
I can verify what you have said, at least as far as RMAA measurements are concerned. However, the question of audibility is important for me. I remember the first time I used headphones for a volume matched test comparing my motherboard's built in sound to eqiupment that was reportedly much better. I was surprised to find that the audibility of the bass rolloff was fairly minor and IMHO, entirely forgettable if your goal was simply to listen to music as opposed to music production or something requiring a flat FR. As for THD and IMD distortion, both where well below 1% even loaded with 25 ohm headphones.
Of course, when I was using the dedicated amp, it was full of chocolaty goodness with whipped cream on top.
As always, the results depend on the sound hardware being tested. Some sound cards sound more like 72% cocoa.
I looked at some of the "professional" headphone amps, and they seem to be designed for the purpose of plugging many headphones in at once, where if you just use a jack splitter, the sound would be weak. So it seems the professionals in the business use amps mainly for driving many headphones.
Also, wish I hadn't bought that HT omega sound card for the headphone since headphone amps are mostly a scam, I could have gotten a creative Xfi which supports hardware accleration of sounds in games.
BTW while we're talking about "subjective mumbo-jumbo" please have a look at this site for a bit of comic relief. I just found this yesterday when I was googling for info on headphone amplifiers and it's really quite funny.
See here : http://www.rock-grotto.co.uk/opamp.htm (http://www.rock-grotto.co.uk/opamp.htm)
OPA2604 sounded very warm, very laid back and very easy to listen to but slightly veiled in the detail department. "Chocolaty" and "syrupy" though a good easy to listen to Op amp but not my cup of tea as I prefer a greater insight into the mix.
That's just one gem, read the whole review it's hilarious.
BTW. It's so uncanny how his rating of the OpAmps sonic quality correlates almost precisely with their cost in most cases. It’s a classic sighted audiophile type review for sure.
Yes, it is really pathetic.
A pedantic point that also has real world relevance: The word test implies comparison to a reliable standard. So, what is the reliable standard for so-called tests like these?
In general the standard is someone's perceptions about what a recording or a set of recordings is supposed to sound like. But where do they get their ideas about what the recording is supposed to sound like? It isn't any relevant live performance because in many cases there never was a live performance. And it there was a live performance, there are still as many flavors of that, as there are places to sit or stand (note that sitting or standing usally makes a very audible difference).
In the end, their so-called reliable standard is something that they imagined.
I was told by some headphone collector (not an audiophile), that a headphone amp is needed to deliver the "power" to the high class headphones, because the low bass notes need a lot of power for the driver to shake, and if there isn't enough power then the bass notes get distorted.
So this is independent of the "loudness".
Is this true?
I was told by some headphone collector (not an audiophile), that a headphone amp is needed to deliver the "power" to the high class headphones, because the low bass notes need a lot of power for the driver to shake, and if there isn't enough power then the bass notes get distorted.
So this is independent of the "loudness".
Is this true?
No, it isn't.
I agree that headphone amps can get out of control regarding price and claims of sound quality.
I do, however, own a headphone amp. I use it with one of my squeezeboxes. The headphone jack on the squeezebox (SB3, aka Classic) has some digital hash that can be heard when listening to quieter recordings. It is very annoying. This noise is not present on the line-outs. So, I use my headphone amp connected to the line-outs of the squeezebox. The headphone amp being a portable one (an XM5 from Practical Devices) is very small, so it and my SB3 fit nicely on my bedside table.
I'll use the XM5 with my iPod, but I'm not convinced that there is a significant difference in SQ. I've never done an ABX test to see if I could tell the difference between the two.
The headphone amp being a portable one (an XM5 from Practical Devices) is very small, so it and my SB3 fit nicely on my bedside table.
Maggior, I have been looking at an iBasso to connect a decent pair of phones to a Windows laptop.
I see your XM5 has an internal DAC (presumably USB fed), which would make it a comparable product to the iBasso. Are you in a position to compare them?
But, reading this tread an M-Audio Transit might do all I wand for a lot less money.
I see your XM5 has an internal DAC (presumably USB fed), which would make it a comparable product to the iBasso. Are you in a position to compare them?
I haven't owned either product but I can offer a comparison. Assuming both DACS are decently built there should be no audible differences between them in a volume matched test. And in this day and age it's no magic to build a DAC in a "decent" way. RMAA measurements would be ideal but somebody would have to perform them.
And yes, the Transit should be fine. It measures very well. These are not measurements of a loaded (with headphones) line out, so keep that in mind. The DAC is good, but the performance with headphones is unknown.
RMAA 16/44 (http://www.amb.org/rmaa/m-audio/Transit_loopback_20040914_16b_44k.htm)
RMAA 24/48 (http://www.amb.org/rmaa/m-audio/Transit_loopback_20040914_24b_48k.htm)
The Edirol UA-1EX is another option but I haven't seem RMAA measurements for it.
I haven't owned either product but I can offer a comparison. Assuming both DACS are decently built there should be no audible differences between them in a volume matched test. And in this day and age it's no magic to build a DAC in a "decent" way. RMAA measurements would be ideal but somebody would have to perform them.
While I mostly agree that a DAC is the wrong part of the audio chain to drop much money on (go for speakers) I could instantly ABX my $1000 Benchmark DAC1 against any other DAC in the house. The point is absolute noise level, which RMAA doesn't test. I just have to plug in my Westone UM2 IEMs, which are very sensitive. For example, the Macbook Pro's analog outs have terrible background noise, that almost sounds like a "spaceship bridge" sound effect (humming, hissing, beeping, rattling depending on load). My Sony CD player has a slighter but clearly audible constant hiss without beeping or rattling. Only the DAC1 has a
very faint and homogenous background noise that reminds of a distant waterfall.
The UM2 have a sensitivity 119 dB/mW at 27 ohms. With less sensitive headphones everything sounds about the same, but I have yet to conclude a formal, level-matched comparison.
Edit: Normal listening levels apply to all claims. I do not have to artificially raise volume to unnatural listening levels to hear the noise.
The UM2 have a sensitivity 119 dB/mW at 27 ohms. With less sensible headphones everything sounds about the same, but I have yet to conclude a formal, level-matched comparison.
I wish you'd have pointed this out in the first line of your post just so your first paragraph was seen in context. If the $300 Westone UM2 needs a $1000 DAC for noise free operation, I'm inclined to point my finger at Westone for making a product that is too sensitive, not the noise of individual DACs. By putting this line after your first paragraph I'm more inclined to put the blame on the DACs, not the UM2.
I was told by some headphone collector (not an audiophile), that a headphone amp is needed to deliver the "power" to the high class headphones, because the low bass notes need a lot of power for the driver to shake, and if there isn't enough power then the bass notes get distorted.
Certain "high class" headphones might need a dedicated amp but it's typically not for the reasons many people think about. It seems like a lot of people think of the range of headphones (low end to high end) are like cars. Typically, the more expensive the car the higher grade (octane of gas) it needs for the engine to operate properly (without engine knock). A Formula 1 car requires a special blend of gasoline rarely used in a regular daily driver car. The analogy would state a low end car is a Corolla (regular petrol) and a high end headphone is a F1 car (special petrol).
But this analogy is not correct when you are talking about headphones drivers. If you you are talking only about dynamic drivers (not planar drivers) the headphone drivers all operate the same way. A high end headphone doesn't require some "special petrol" that a low end headphone does not need.
This is compounded by the reality that a lot of the "features" of High End headphones fall more into luxury marketing than technical improvements. Exotic wood cups, fancy cables, sheepskin leather, fancy boxes, and of course the prestige associated with owning a luxury product. But many people assume the "High End" moinker is due to some magic with the headphone driver, not simply because it is a luxury product.
Of course, I should place a caveat here. Manufacturers may assume that if you are prepared to buy a "High Class" headphone you will not be using it with a IPOD Shuffle. So you *may* need some device that can drive the headphone to preferred volumes without distortion or clipping during dynamic swings. An example of such a headphone would be the higher end Sennheisers rated at 300 ohms but with a 600+ ohm impedance (according to Headphone.com) in the lower frequencies.
But you don't need some magical headphone amp for that. Some expensive amps put out in excess of 1W with some massive voltage swing (24v +)which is a total overkill. How much power does a headphone really need to damage your hearing? A lot less than that! Unfortunately the market for sensibly priced and sensibly built headphone amps is squashed and ignored under a never ending struggle to make "better" headphone amps at expensive prices.
If the $300 Westone UM2 needs a $1000 DAC for noise free operation, I'm inclined to point my finger at Westone for making a product that is too sensitive, not the noise of individual DACs. By putting this line after your first paragraph I'm more inclined to put the blame on the DACs, not the UM2.
I don't think anybody is to blame here. First, to me the UM2 are by far the best IEMs money can buy. So I don't feel inclined to educate Westone's engineers that they went wrong. High sensitivity has also advantages like less power consumption. Secondly, you probably don't need a $1000 DAC to drive them properly, but simply one with a matching low power output stage. That does not have to be expensive. However, it can be the
comfort of an expensive DAC/amp package like Benchmark's that all phones from 10-1000 ohms and of any sensitivity work perfectly without further modification.
Of course, I should place a caveat here. Manufacturers may assume that if you are prepared to buy a "High Class" headphone you will not be using it with a IPOD Shuffle. So you *may* need some device that can drive the headphone to preferred volumes without distortion or clipping during dynamic swings. An example of such a headphone would be the higher end Sennheisers rated at 300 ohms but with a 600+ ohm impedance (according to Headphone.com) in the lower frequencies.
How does the Zune and regular sized ipods compare to the Shuffle?
How do I know if it's distorting or clipping? What would it sound like? Is it when you hear a very bloated bass instead of a sharp punch?
What kind of amp will be good for the 300ohm rated sennheiser headphones? Are those cheap fiio ones good enough?
How does the Zune and regular sized ipods compare to the Shuffle?
How do I know if it's distorting or clipping? What would it sound like? Is it when you hear a very bloated bass instead of a sharp punch?
What kind of amp will be good for the 300ohm rated sennheiser headphones? Are those cheap fiio ones good enough?
The "bloated" bass is most likely due to the source or the headphone/speaker. Analog distortion is something you surely have heard before, when you turn up the volume too much on your radio. Clipping is the digital equivalent, it sounds a bit different, maybe like loud pops.
"Regular sized" iPods, by the way, had some interference noise coming out of from the hard drive, so flash-based iPods or music players might (just
might) have that advantage. But with my Classic 80GB, that noise is gone. I experienced it with the iPod photo, if I'm not mistaken. I had a 3G iPod before that.
While I mostly agree that a DAC is the wrong part of the audio chain to drop much money on (go for speakers) I could instantly ABX my $1000 Benchmark DAC1 against any other DAC in the house. The point is absolute noise level, which RMAA doesn't test.
The noise floor test in RMAA when coupled with a proper impedance load should give you that result. Of course, for best results you should also adjust the volume to your desired listening level as well.
I just have to plug in my Westone UM2 IEMs, which are very sensitive. For example, the Macbook Pro's analog outs have terrible background noise, that almost sounds like a "spaceship bridge" sound effect (humming, hissing, beeping, rattling depending on load). My Sony CD player has a slighter but clearly audible constant hiss without beeping or rattling. Only the DAC1 has a very faint and homogenous background noise that reminds of a distant waterfall.
I've also experienced this problem, particularly with laptop DACs as they're poorly isolated and couple all sorts of noise into IEMs. Rather then buying an expensive DAC, a simple resistive impedance adapter to knock down the sensitivity worked very well for me. Some additional EQ is nice to compensate for the frequency change from the added resistance, but not strictly necessary to my ears.
I don't think anybody is to blame here. First, to me the UM2 are by far the best IEMs money can buy. So I don't feel inclined to educate Westone's engineers that they went wrong.
I tend to blame manufactorers who go overboard with sensitivity and choose values that are unreasonable to drive with ordinary hardware. They should add some resistance to the cable and then tune the frequency response of the driver to compensate. But I think having people say they need $1000 DACs to drive them probably helps their sales, so of course they don't do this.
The noise floor test in RMAA when coupled with a proper impedance load should give you that result. Of course, for best results you should also adjust the volume to your desired listening level as well.
You are right. When you can conduct your own test, RMAA is certainly able to provide this information. I rarely see RMAA results on the net, though, from which alone I could conclude wether a device might be suitable for the UM2s. An amp with top rated SNR could still sound terrible with too sensible phones. It would be nice if it was a RMAA standard procedure to test at different output volume settings, in my opinion.
They should add some resistance to the cable and then tune the frequency response of the driver to compensate.
That would indeed be nice, if they were able to keep exactly that sound.
But I think having people say they need $1000 DACs to drive them probably helps their sales, so of course they don't do this.
I'm not sure about this one. Westone isn't that integrated into the audiophile scene. Large shares of their business are hearing aids and stage monitors. But for other well known brands this could be comprehensible.
What kind of amp will be good for the 300ohm rated sennheiser headphones? Are those cheap fiio ones good enough?
When your playback device can drive them sufficiently loud at a volume setting of 75%, a dedicated headphone amp is very likely not going to improve your sound quality at all.
For most common output stages it is easier to drive a 300 ohm load than a 16 ohm load without distortion.
What kind of amp will be good for the 300ohm rated sennheiser headphones? Are those cheap fiio ones good enough?
When your playback device can drive them sufficiently loud at a volume setting of 75%, a dedicated headphone amp is very likely not going to improve your sound quality at all.
For most common output stages it is easier to drive a 300 ohm load than a 16 ohm load without distortion.
http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index....showtopic=73339 (http://www.hydrogenaudio.org/forums/index.php?showtopic=73339)
Thanks.
How does the Zune and regular sized ipods compare to the Shuffle?
The problem with the IPOD Shuffle (the older one at least) is that you won't get all that much volume out of it if you are using a high impedance headphone. So you need a separate amp. I don't know about the Zune but the IPOD seems to have adequate volume for a lot of music. Right now I'm listening to music (classical and rock) using a 250 DT880 connected directly a Nokia 5800 phone. I hear no clipping or distortion and have no reason to believe a dedicated amp is going to give me any improvement in "sound quality." However, with some music that is very quiet I feel the volume is not loud enough. I wouldn't be surprised if the output section of the IPOD was louder than the Nokia.
How do I know if it's distorting or clipping? What would it sound like? Is it when you hear a very bloated bass instead of a sharp punch?
I'm with andy o on this one. In my experience bloated bass is typically the result of a bass enhanced headphone or bass bloated music (e.g. some techno/dance and rap music). Other than a bass boost circuit, the only other amp related bass boost I've seen was when I connected a low impedance bass boosted headphone (25 Denon series) to a high impedance output. This result was a even more boosted bass!
I'm not sure how to explain clipping in a easy to understand manner. I've found it sounds like an image of it. Wikipedia Clipping (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clipping_%28audio%29). On one particular song I have a bass note grows louder than suddenly sounds like it is cut off. andy o said it sounds like a pop and that seems right. This is in the recording itself so it's not because of my hardware.
When your playback device can drive them sufficiently loud at a volume setting of 75%, a dedicated headphone amp is very likely not going to improve your sound quality at all.
I agree with rpp3po on this on.
I'll add on a little bit. How much you need a dedicated amp (assuming you need an amp at all) is highly dependent on the music you listen to and your listening volume. Some people listen to highly dynamic music at loud volumes. You might hear clipping and distortion then.
As already stated, sometimes distortion and clipping are in the recording. A good quality headphone may reveal these flaws with more ease than other headphones.
Don't use this as an excuse to buy an amp though. Do you hear problems with you suspect are not from the particular sound of your headphone?
The headphone amp being a portable one (an XM5 from Practical Devices) is very small, so it and my SB3 fit nicely on my bedside table.
Maggior, I have been looking at an iBasso to connect a decent pair of phones to a Windows laptop.
I see your XM5 has an internal DAC (presumably USB fed), which would make it a comparable product to the iBasso. Are you in a position to compare them?
But, reading this tread an M-Audio Transit might do all I wand for a lot less money.
Hi Labarum -
I recognize your name from the squeezebox forums.
I mispoke in my message - I have the XM3, not the XM5. The XM3 doesn't have a DAC. The XM5 DAC is indeed USB.
If you go over to here (http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f105/updated-2-22-review-13-usb-dac-amp-predator-pico-2-3move-d10-d3-d2-viper-boa-d1-lyrix-microamp-vivid-v1-nuforce-xm5-306883/) you can find a very detailed comarpison of the XM5, the iBasso, and others.
I also discovered something called the NuForce Icon Mobile today which is very reasonably priced. It is included in the comparison as well.
Rich
Sorry!
If you go over to here (http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f105/updated-2-22-review-13-usb-dac-amp-predator-pico-2-3move-d10-d3-d2-viper-boa-d1-lyrix-microamp-vivid-v1-nuforce-xm5-306883/) you can find a very detailed comarpison of the XM5, the iBasso, and others.
I'm sorry (not really) to say this but I think all those reviews are of questionable value. That reviewer hears differences from just about any eqiupment on earth, including cables. In the review he says there are important sonic changes from the amps from burning them in for an excess of 100 hours.
Good luck finding any objective information in that thread.
If you go over to here (http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f105/updated-2-22-review-13-usb-dac-amp-predator-pico-2-3move-d10-d3-d2-viper-boa-d1-lyrix-microamp-vivid-v1-nuforce-xm5-306883/) you can find a very detailed comarpison of the XM5, the iBasso, and others.
I'm sorry (not really) to say this but I think all those reviews are of questionable value. That reviewer hears differences from just about any eqiupment on earth, including cables. In the review he says there are important sonic changes from the amps from burning them in for an excess of 100 hours.
Good luck finding any objective information in that thread.
OK, yes, that particular thread is over the top wrt to SQ description. Search the forums there and you will find some more down to earth reviews that talk about build quality and usability factors.
And I'm an idiot - I own the XM4 from practical devices. I should refrain from posting when I have a squirming infant in my lap :-).