One of my favourite bands. Now you have me wondering who you are in real life!!! You obviously know me.....

I still have an hd250II here. In fact, I have WAY too many headphones here. Some I bought myself and others from work. No I've retired, they're just mine for pleasure.

I was Funk1969 on Rock-Grotto. I learnt a lot there.

I never knew or created this term "chinchong." Some of my posts and some conversations I was in were not appreciated. Some topics were the kind of topics some people prefer to avoid. So be it.

Derp, sorry, that was someone else.  Aye, so be it.

Did you catch a lot of flak for the chinchong thing on the flowchart? I was under the impression that people didn't get ruffled by that.

I never knew or created this term "chinchong." Some of my posts and some conversations I was in were not appreciated. Some topics were the kind of topics some people prefer to avoid. So be it.

just as the doors are closing here, completed my donation to chang/superbest.
long may we sail the seas together!
 
   

Oooh... kind of wish you started this thread in the new place because the topic deserves a longer life than the few remaining days left here.  Please redirect me if you did create one at SBAF.

I think most of us here can relate.  WRT the hardware, one of my favorite sayings has always been: "You can get to the point of diminishing returns quickly in this hobby - quite a few start out there."  (-Uncle Erik)  It seems almost common knowledge at this point that in the headphone world, something like HD600/650 + Schiit Magni/Modi (or even O2/DAC) is 95% 'there'.  I also think that many people (self included) are in it for the toys and we shouldn't be too ashamed to admit it- as long as you do admit it.  Attempting to go too far beyond the HD600/650 might be viewed as irrational by some; which means that even though you might say "I've had enough" at this point, there's a very good chance that you'll be back.  Personally, I've sort of hit that top end of the interest curve and I'm less inclined to buy new things.  And it's not a bad place to be.  But I'll always keep one eye open to see what's out there and be eager to try things out if it's convenient.  Anyway, enjoy the rest of life and music- we'll be here when you come back.  ;-)

I'm sure they'll be adding those smilies in the new place down the road.

Now you have me wondering who you are in real life!!! You obviously know me.....

I met DF in real life ....

DF knows you from the good ol' RG days.

  .......              ........       



I guess this thread is a perfectly fitting way to send the Changstar ship to Davy Jones' locker.

”May your anchor be tight, your cork be loose, your rum be spiced and your compass be true” ... good luck on the new site.

Gumby can throw the ratio out of whack because of it's value and high performance / dollar. Still, if you've got Gumby, you really should be running an amp that will take advantage of it's capabilities.

As far as the distant break points, put the figures in Excel and interpolate.

My reasoning was as follows:

1] Headphones will be the most colored piece of gear in the audio chain. We can discuss this all day, so we won't. Pick this first for obvious reasons.

2] DACs sound closer to each other than not. Differences between DACs are more easily heard with more resolving gear.

3] Thus don't bother with DACs at the low end or even entry level. Use what you have handy or can get for free from friends (iRiver Soviet iPod, sound card, old HeadRoom BitHead).

4] As an aside, because of #1 and #2, so called "objectivists" claim there are no DAC differences if three or four measurements don't show nonlinear behavior past certain thresholds. Of course this has nothing to do with science since these "objectivists" have not heard any of the gear in question nor have they conducted experiments to support their hypothesis. They demand experiments of high rigor (DBT, 0.01db volume matching, etc.) from those who they disagree with, while accepting less rigorous "experiments" (anecdotes) from those they agree with: "I conducted a blind test of the ODAC and the Benchmark DAC1 and I couldn't tell the difference from my Objective 2 amp, which we all know is nearly perfect and transparent".

5] As we move up to higher fidelity headphones, the immediately weak link seems to be amplifiers. Many headphones, such as high efficiency orthos and moderate efficiency traditional dynamics, love amplifiers that can provide clarity, power, control, dynamics, articulation. There are some exceptions. Grados and certain Audio Technicas, because of their super efficiency, may not sound any better with an amp. These kinds of headphones require extremely resolving amps, not necessarily power. But in general, more power is better, but only if we can maintain resolution, clarity, low distortion, etc.

6] At some point, between roughly $2000-$3000, the source starts to become more important, as important as the amp or even slightly more, just in case. IMO, in the initial or medium stages, source should take a back seat to the amp because an amp's sonic colorations are more obvious.

7] Finally, for some headphones, spending more on amps won't matter after some point. They won't scale. All you will get is something "different" (nothing wrong with that, just be cognizant of it and don't let HF convince you otherwise). Same thing for amps. After some point, DACs won't matter if your amp can't reveal the nuances of what the better DACs are capable of doing. The above, #2 and #5 is why Gary at HF didn't find any distinguishable differences between most of the DACs he auditioned. He used an LCD3 (presumably degraded) and a speaker amp.

8] Another approach is source first. Maybe a small business in a nice small town just north of El Lay made a kick ass DAC (or two) which is universally agreed by everyone as to have an extremely high performance/price ratio. Might be a good idea to start with that.

This needs to be a sticky on the new site