CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS
Main Deck => Discussion for Registered Members Only => Topic started by: Sforza on October 08, 2012, 06:47:03 AM
-
As usual, read from the bottom because this is a cleaned up shoutbox log. Posting this because I personally think further discussion on the topic can be had, and it'd be pretty interesting.
anetode: it's distortion figures are low enough to suggest considerable latitude in eq. on the other hand.
DaveBSC: Didn't try EQ no, I was using my old CD transport. It's possible that I would've liked the 007 more with some EQ, I don't know how well it responds to that.
electropop: Now a rabid dawg modded HD800, I'm really tempted... Though I don't really need headphones at home at the moment.
electropop: Still, they were uncannily similar. But from even looking at the graphs, I wouldn't draw such a contrast between the HD700 and HD800..
electropop: You're right about the senn comparison RD, it wasn't fair overall. It was one album, not track, even if I said otherwise. It did have some electronic ambiance set in, but quite one note. You know how those typical audiophile acoustic reference albums are, exactly what you said, limited in FR. Basically those sharp plucks accentuated a la grado and people are gasming..
anetode: though if hi-fi man ever has a jade successor built to better specs
anetode: unfortunately i don't think that the sage stax engineers really care much about competition over the low end. they have their own philosophy
anetode: that's the apparent consensus, though, as you said, further development of the two techs might overcome those preconceptions
rhythmdevils: But I think orthos will always have better bass potential and stats better speed/air/treble abilities
anetode: forgoing audiophile etiquette, dave, have you tried eq? i think that in a comparison of bass quality at even fr between an ortho and a stat that stas can easily hold their own
rhythmdevils: I think if companies keep working on the two tech's they will converge, orthos gaining more air and speed, and stats gaining more impact. Not sure if it will happen though
DaveBSC: In most traditional audiophile qualities the 007 is the superior headphone. In a bass fight team ortho is going to win against team estat, I don't think I'm shocking anyone here.
DaveBSC: I think it's more of a matter of playing to the 007's strengths. Acoustic bass from well recorded albums? Yes, absolutely. Everything is there, unlike say an open AKG or Audio-Technica. Palm muted down-tuned guitars and electric bass from moderate at best, dynamically compressed recordings? No, that's not an 007 strength.
rhythmdevils: Isn't it more than FR though Dave? Is'nt it partly because of the airy nature of stats that aren't as good at conveying impact?
DaveBSC: I'm not saying it's bass deficient, but it has some roll off in the bass that is inherent to it. It's in the FR measurements, it's not like I'm making it up. Whether what it does have is enough is up to the individual, but it's not a "flat" headphone.
rhythmdevils: I think the bassheads are pretty harmless because IME they are more aware of what they actually want, they know they like coloration. I totally agree with your thoughts on the treblehead stage MF, I've come to the same conclusion though you worded it really well. But the real crazy thing IMO is asserting that because something like the SA5000 is detailed and clear sounding, it is neutral. There's no awareness of personal preference there. Which is partly why everything gets so crazy, because everyone thinks their preferences are some kind of divine truth
catscratch: oh, i agree that the 007 CAN sound dull, and it's not a great low-volume phone. It doesn't HAVE to sound dull though. Really quite far from it. It's too transparent for its own good and is a pain in the ass to system match properly as a result. But that's going to be the case for ANYTHING this transparent.
DaveBSC: This is just my opinion, but I don't think the 007 renders palm mutes or heavy electric bass guitar with anything like the amount of realism that the Paradox does.
MuppetFace: I love the Paradox, but "stomps" the SR-007? Naaaah. LOL. It's cool though. The chat box is too chaotic right now. I need to get back to work.
DaveBSC: I absolutely loved it with my jazz albums. With metal, I think the Paradox stomps all over it.
DaveBSC: The 007 does improve at higher volumes, I will definitely agree with that. Sub 70dB I found it a bit boring. Despite being a bit dark on top I did not find it to be forgiving of average to poor recordings
catscratch: i've heard the 007 sound too polite with the bh, and not polite with a bh, all from a source swap... and it's my favotie metal phone... mind you, i like the 007 for everything
RudeWolf: They have forgotten what "good" sounds for the most part.
DaveBSC: And that's with a KGSSHV, not some SRM-323
catscratch: people just odn't know what neutral sounds like for the most part
DaveBSC: It depends on the genre. With suitable source material, the 007 is fantastic. It's not a heavy metal headphone.
catscratch: elwhere, too
catscratch: also the moar treble = moar neutral thing is still true on hf to a pretty good extent
catscratch: all in the source... amp as well of course but source matters with the 007 as much as anything
MuppetFace: I honestly don't know what to think when someone says the SR-007 is deficient in bass.
anetode: at low-to-medium volumes, yeah, it fades on the very low end
RudeWolf: Actually one of the things I enjoy with headphones bass wise is the ability to go very low with minimal distortion. At least compared to many mainstream speakers.
DaveBSC: The Paradox is largely flat and it seems to take any genre you can throw at it in stride. If the music is inherently bassy it plays right along. The 007 doesn't.
anetode: really? i think the 007s are my favorite high-volume cans because they come alive and offer up ample slam without any harshness
anetode: & again, delineate between "deluded" and "inexperienced"
DaveBSC: the bass IS shelved on those, don't kid yourself
DaveBSC: I found the 007 to lack impact with aggressive genres
anetode: but i agree on the common mistakes of first impressions, neutral headphones don't impress like treble peaks or bass bumps
MuppetFace: They're deluded when they start talking about well balanced headphones being deficient because of a lack of bloated bass, yes. I have no qualms with people liking bassy headphones. I like the Edition 9 for what it is. The DX1000 and D7000 are okay. The TH900 is exceptional, but bassy. However saying neutral headphones are boring is just asinine in my opinion, and means more than anything that one is listening to their headphones more than their music. If something is bassy, it comes through beautifully on a pair of Stax as such. Again that's my opinion, and who knows, I could just be talking out of my ass as usual.
anetode: personally, i found the stock t50rp boring because of a mid-forward sound sig. i'd take a bit of a smile eq over that
anetode: so bassheads are only deluded when they make headphone recommendations i would say that might be true if they were aware of what they were missing with good, even full-range headphones
MuppetFace: Anyway, my original point wasn't even about bass or treble or bass versus treble or orgasms. It was about the ideology of "neutral = boring" and how people listen to headphones like Stax or the Paradox, the best headphones out there IMO, and say "needs moar bass!"
MuppetFace: Dave brought up a good point: headphones aren't going to reproduce the full-bodied throb of speakers, that literal physicality that one gets. Having a bloated bass in headphones isn't going to reproduce that sensual, orgasmic quality. It's only going to muddy everything and turn it into a mess.
MuppetFace: I'm well aware of the hypnotic and transcendent effects of rhythms and their cultural precedent. I'm not saying bassheads are deluded. I'm saying that people who use that to justify terrible headphones are deluded.
anetode: it's not that bassheads are deluded, they just don't care. they know what they like
anetode: bass-heavy is accessible, an almost instinctual drive to worship rhythm. it depends on what you're trying to get out of music
MuppetFace: I'm just speaking from my own perspective. Honestly, it's all part of the head-fi game.
MuppetFace: After you've cut yourself so many times, you start to like it. You don't really feel the pain like you did on fresh skin.
anetode: oh sure, blame it on zee germans
MuppetFace: My point was that, to me, mistaking treble tilt for neutrality and detail is more readily understandable, less of a leap in logic though no less incorrect. However the basshead fantasy of tapping into music's soul through bloated, all-consuming bass seems a more severe delusion to my way of thinking.
MuppetFace: Oh, I know about the BS with the K701, though I wasn't around / registered on HF at the time. Like I was saying, the treble tilt phenomena is definitely part of the old guard before HF's explosion, though now it's become a hallmark of the new "audiophile" consumer category, mostly lead by the Germans.
rhythmdevils: It was literally "moar treble = moar neutral". It's much more balanced now. The bassheads are for the most part aware of their preferences so it's pretty different IMO
rhythmdevils: MF I don't think you got a good enough taste of the extreme treble bias on HF from 2006-2008 or 09. No one understood that emphasized treble gives more sense of clarity. The K701 was commonly thought of as the most neutral headphone and even the HD600 was rolled off and bassy
DaveBSC: The ES10 utterly, utterly fails with acoustic music. Such a one note headphone that its hilarious.
MuppetFace: I've been collecting vinyl since college. I guess I got into it through that: turntables, pre-amps, cartridges. I started researching headphones because I couldn't have speakers with roommates around. Then I just sort of got into collecting headphones for some reason.
rhythmdevils: When did you get reeled into HF muppet?
MuppetFace: Though the D7100 is shaping up to be my new arch nemesis (granted, I didn't actually buy one...). It can't even do acoustic music well LOL.
MuppetFace: Also my arch nemesis, the K550...
MuppetFace: The Ed. 10 actually sounds pretty amazing with acoustic music out of a simple DAP.
Analixus: Though if you hear a phone at a public show the ambient should be loud enough to force you to crank the volume and the HD700 should be spotlit pretty well.
rhythmdevils: You could use a frickin Gilmore lite and still wind up thining the HD700 was better with a test like that. I'm sure there's some souless audiophile recording that makes the ED10 sound great
purrin: That track makes the SRH1440 sound decent.
purrin: Otherwise may as well play Patricia Barber Modern Cool Track #7 on everything.
Analixus: I bet the amp is colored. A few things I read seemed to suggest there would be some sort of synergized tuning. Senn also isn't going to setup their gear to point out flaws but hide them. Plus low volume listening can make the capabilities of a transducer sound moe similar than they truly are.
purrin: This is why I always have a bag a tricks. A set of recordings which are marginal an will reveal flaws in less than ideal systems.
purrin: You can't tell jack with acoustic music. Very limited bandwidth. In fact, the HD700 would probably make some kinds of acoustic music sound better. I'm sure Senn did this for the exact same reasons why the MegaBuck audiophile companies refused Anax's playlist. I heard $200K systems just fall apart when real music was put through them.
MuppetFace: Yeah, the HD700 handles well recorded acoustic music well enough. Sounds a little lifeless compared to the HD800 (midrange sounds flat to my ears). But hell, well recorded acoustic music sounds pretty amazing on the Edition 10 even.
rhythmdevils: Actually there's a 4th problem, that acoustic music often has such limited frequency response.
MuppetFace: If he listened to the HD700 and HD800 side-by-side and didn't hear much difference however, I am curious as to how much Senn's new amp could be playing a role in that. On some amps the difference between the two is less apparent (usually poor synergistic matches for the HD800). Which would be hilarious if Senn's new amp wasn't a very good choice for the HD800.
rhythmdevils: There's 3 things wrong with this listening test. 1. only one recording. You could find a recording that would sound good on any headphone. 2. a good recording, you're better off with a mediocre or bad one for testing a headphone 3. a recording you don't know makes it even more meaningless
MuppetFace: I'm curious as to how much the new Sennheiser flagship amp "tames" the HD700. Also whether Sennheiser's own amp can really bring out the strengths of the HD800. Would be funny if it blunted its capabilities.
rhythmdevils: electropop, you answered your own question. You can't judge a headphone with an acoustic recording (probably a great recording too) that you're not familiar with come on. Absolutely meaningless.
electropop: Managed to compare HD700 to a HD800, albeit with relatively simple acoustic music with which I'm not familiar.. They were plugged to the new Sennheiser flagship dac/amp. I can't wrap my head around the fact that the HD800, with apparent weaknesses, is on the booty board, while HD700 is flamed to hell by everyone here. They performed more on a similar level than not.
RudeWolf: In other news- been poking around my Dynalo for the last two days. Found out that at the last step of JT it goes all bonkers with output stage currents jumping all aver the place. Had a nasty suspicion that it might be self inducing at ultrasonic freq. In the end it turned out that the last step On the JT opens the input completely so I soldered a 4x2,2k resistor snake from input to ground. All good now.
MuppetFace: So... I've accepted a new teaching position. I'm going to be moving to a whole 'nother state. I'm really excited, but also nervous. Maybe even scared shitless a bit.
MuppetFace: Listening to the new Flying Lotus album with the Stax 4070. Plenty of impact.
DaveBSC: Could be. A lot of speakers have a boost in the lower mid-bass or use port tuning as a stand in for deep bass, and trying to recapture that would lead to excessively bassy headphones.
MuppetFace: I think that some people are trying to reclaim that sense of speaker impact by boosting the bass.
DaveBSC: When you are used to a subwoofer that is several dB higher than the main signal, or a car stereo with the bass at +5, a balanced headphone like the Paradox will sound weak, when actually its bass is full and balanced and extremely well textured.
DaveBSC: I think the subwoofer has a lot to do with it to. The vast majority of speakers are bass light, they begin rolling heavily anywhere from 60-30Hz. When you add a subwoofer, you are in charge of the level vs. the main signal, and most people have no idea how to integrate one.
MuppetFace: The treble head might say "oh this headphone lacks detail." Which is easier to disprove by pointing to coloration falsely emphasizing detail; when someone says "this is boring" it's a matter of opinion, and harder to counter because someone can invoke bullshit about "the soul of music" and the like.
MuppetFace: However here's why I say "moar bass" is more of a distortion relative to treble tilt: those who love trebly headphone are less likely to consider a proper balanced headphone (ie. Paradox) problematic. They're more likely in my experience to not miss that "bite" (as they call it). The bass-case on the other hand is more likely to say the Paradox is boring, and seems to offer more resistance to listening to good headphones. So not only do they like a distorted headphone, they actively *dislike* that which is properly tuned. It's the presence of a double action, not just the sin of omission.
MuppetFace: It's definitely another side of the same underlying problem: marketing. Wish fulfillment. Drift.
MuppetFace: What treble tilt does is allow these newbies a chance to "play audiophile" and act like they're going from Beats to high fidelity by buying, say, an HD700.
MuppetFace: I'm not so sure "moar bass" is more recent, but I do think it's a function of head-fi's growing appeal. "Moar bass" is more a function of the "average consumer" or person coming in from popular marketing like Beats and other celebrity headphones. Treble tilt, on the other hand, is more of the old elitist audiophile stuff. BUT I also think the treble tilt emphasis is new as well. Look back a few years, and you'll see an exponential increase in trebly headphones.
Tari: The discussion on the "History of the K1000" thread is getting really interesting. [link]
http://www.head-fi.org/t/57805/history-of-the-akg-k1000/30#post_8755962
rhythmdevils: If youre aware of that than you are ahead of the pack!
electropop: I'd still take an upward tilt rather than downward one...
-
Anyway. What I don't like about the prevailing attitude on other audio forums is that people seem to have gotten so used to the idea of buying "colored" headphones that I've had arguments with people that truly believed speakers and amplifiers which had neutral frequency response don't exist.
Another is the trend towards giving equal importance to everyone's preferences even if they like treble and insist that their gear is more "neutral" with no objective basis whatsoever behind this conclusion, since even the word neutral has become a subjective term.
-
Random scribblings:
What is the purpose of a headphone, objectively speaking? To act as a vector for music, getting it from the source to your ears. How well a headphone fulfills that purpose determines how good a headphone is, objectively speaking. I know some head-fiers bristle at the notion of "good" as a non-relative term, but I'm not really talking about preference here, and that is what trips up people I think: conflating their own preference with an objective ground. So, in simplest terms, the "best" headphone is the headphone that gets out of the way most.
Personally, we all have different preferences, and neutrality might not be what is, for me, the most effective way of rendering music. By this I mean: neutrality can become a distraction for some people. It can actually get in the way paradoxically and become a "coloration" in that sense. Neutrality is, however, a good baseline in that we can assume that for a lot of people a more neutral headphone (relative to a more colored one) is going to be less distracting, less painful, and more listenable. I can recognize that while I may find lots of bass or a peaky treble desirable, this is my preference.
Therein lies the problem. Head-fiers can err in numerous ways.
Do we accept that there are objective standards?
-> If no: fall into absolute relativism, a contradiction. Meaningful conversation ultimately impossible.
-> If yes: do we recognize the "correct" standard?
-> -> If no: mistake something like treble tilt for being neutral. Support shitty headphones
-> -> If yes: argue with morons and get frustrated. Come to changstar.
Do we accept the validity of subjective experience?
-> If no: fall into absolute authoritarianism and jerk off to nwavguy.
-> If yes: do we recognize preferences being separate from objective standards?
-> -> If no: claim neutrality "fails to capture the soul of the music." Support shitty headphones.
-> -> If yes: argue with morons and get frustrated. Come to changstar.
A few other points:
Some people may say "well yes Romy, but aren't headphones really about enjoyment? Shouldn't the standard be how enjoyable they are rather than something like 'transmitting music?'"
On a personal level this works just fine, but as soon as you start trying to have discourse with others about it, it quickly breaks down and our words fall into the gulf of intersubjectivity. Enjoyment can come from anything for anyone. Someone can find sticking fireworks up their ass enjoyable or fun or exciting. What makes a headphone a headphone, a device distinct from any other fetish object, is precisely its unique purpose in transmitting music. At the risk of getting too Platonic, how "real" a headphone is depends on how well it fulfills this unique task as a headphone. In other words, the less effectively a headphone is able to transmit music, the more it becomes indistinguishable from a paperweight or just a lump of plastic.
Ultimately, it's all about trying to fulfill some need we have. I say trying, because audiophilia is really about the pursuit itself and abortive attempts at finding satisfaction, rather than any end point. The "journey" we hear about so often. It's all about keeping enjoyment at bay, the promise of a device that doesn't actually exist that can help us to better experience our music, that mythical 'real' audio experience, the soul of music and religious state of ecstatic enjoyment.
We never can obtain this, precisely because we need to continually engage in the pursuit itself to construct our sense of identity within the context of head-fi. Alighting on the shores of infinity, the journey that never ends, the well-worn audiophile chieftain imparts his or her sacred wisdom about interconnects and room treatments. Through the journey we can choose many roles: the connoisseur, the big spender, the scientist or expert, even the audio messiah.
This is precisely what businesses capitalize on, and why they don't need to make a good product necessarily: it's never going to be "the" product, never going to be "it" for the individual in the constant state of desire. As soon as desire is fulfilled it is no longer desire.
-
So, either way one has to argue with morons to come to changstar. p:8
-
Random scribblings:
What is the purpose of a headphone, objectively speaking? To act as a vector for music, getting it from the source to your ears. How well a headphone fulfills that purpose determines how good a headphone is, objectively speaking. I know some head-fiers bristle at the notion of "good" as a non-relative term, but I'm not really talking about preference here, and that is what trips up people I think: conflating their own preference with an objective ground. So, in simplest terms, the "best" headphone is the headphone that gets out of the way most.
The problem here is that there is a relative part of the equation which is a person's own HRTF (which should admittedly mostly matter in the treble) which gets conflated with a preference for a perceived peak or dip in some part of the spectrum.
Do we accept that there are subjective preferences?
-> If no: fall into absolute authoritarianism and jerk off to nwavguy.
Trying to setup a test such as to make the claim that different gear is indeed perceived as different falsifiable and free of expectation bias is not the same thing as saying someone can't have a preference for some coloration or another.
-
So, either way one has to argue with morons to come to changstar. p:8
I think the arguing with morons, or rather the frustration from doing so, is a reason for many people coming to changstar.
-
The problem here is that there is a relative part of the equation which is a person's own HRTF (which should admittedly mostly matter in the treble) which gets conflated with a preference for a perceived peak or dip in some part of the spectrum.
Trying to setup a test such as to make the claim that different gear is indeed perceived as different falsifiable and free of expectation bias is not the same thing as saying someone can't have a preference for some coloration or another.
On the first point: there's variation in biological and psychoacoustic qualities from person to person, and that would certainly play a role in how offensive someone might find the treble of a particular headphone compared to the next, which is why I define transparency more in terms of how distracting or problematic a pair of headphones sounds to the individual, which isn't a fixed target. However I think it's still meaningful to speak of general trends in that people seem to generally prefer headphones that measure better.
On the second point: I should clarify this a bit. By "denying subjective experience" I didn't mean that someone is denying the existence of subjectivity, but rather denying the objectivity of perceived difference, ie. the mantra "all amps sound the same" (which is itself a misappropriation of what nwavguy actually said if I'm not mistaken; I haven't read his blog in ages however). This would be more akin to magnifying a single standard to encompass all difference.
-
The simplest way to say this is probably that everyone has their own preferences when comparing a flawed headphone vs another but the purist will always look for pure neutrality. Neutrality/transparency when everything comes together is after all the Holy Grail and is the reason why most people stick around ausio forums getting obsessed for years in the first place.
-
As regards the mentioning of NwAvGuy: as an 'objectivist', I don't know anyone who discounts subjective impressions. I absolutely believe that the overwhelming majority hears what they say they hear: arguing otherwise would be silly.
I just strongly disagree on why they hear it. :)p3
-
As regards the mentioning of NwAvGuy: as an 'objectivist', I don't know anyone who discounts subjective impressions. I absolutely believe that the overwhelming majority hears what they say they hear: arguing otherwise would be silly.
I just strongly disagree on why they hear it. :)p3
I don't think anyone here is claiming subjectivity doesn't exist or that people aren't actually hearing what they claim. The point is whether or not subjectively hearing differences between amps is granted or denied an objective corollary. It has more to do with the value of the subjective.
-
I think it's pretty simple.
The hard data tells you what differences actually exists.
Your experience tells you what you actually like.
-
The simplest way to say this is probably that everyone has their own preferences when comparing a flawed headphone vs another but the purist will always look for pure neutrality. Neutrality/transparency when everything comes together is after all the Holy Grail and is the reason why most people stick around ausio forums getting obsessed for years in the first place.
Quite the fact, some people that are personally nice are coarse with regards to their consideration of 'neutral' and/or 'agreeable' when you don't (always) agree with them. Thankfully this forum doesn't have that.
Besides, when I think about it I know my perception and the way I process the sensory impressions are both humanly flawed thus to me it doesn't make sense to have a dogmatic regard towards what anyone regards as 'neutral'. I am just content the compromises that are the K500 and HD250 II are pleasing enough for me to stop useless consuming.
-
It's difficult to conceive of objective and subjective as opposing paradigms when they share the same basis. What gets me about head-fi circle jerks is that so many choose to "accept" one and disregard the other. Because, staunch objectivist or whatever, how are you going to choose to disregard what you hear? Alternately, how do you stick your head in the ground and ignore the value of the scientific method in discriminating between electroacoustic transducers?
Unfortunately in order to get anywhere you have to pretty much accept both perceptual relativism and engineering, despite their apparent incongruities. It's still fair to call out shitty headphones even though there are people out there far enough from the mean to like spotlit treble or overshadowing bass. So a relativistic/still sane approach could be to say, "yes I respect your preference for this monstrosity, nonetheless these measurements demonstrate that they need to be packaged with a printed warning and not sold to kids or expectant mothers".
-
Again, no sane objectivist suggests that we should disregard what we hear, merely that we should see it in context.
I'll give an example: I was pretty sure, a long while ago, that I could hear differences in soundstaging between the different digital filters on my DACMagic. Under controlled conditions, I can't distinguish between them. I didn't find those things very difficult to reconcile.
-
On the first point: there's variation in biological and psychoacoustic qualities from person to person, and that would certainly play a role in how offensive someone might find the treble of a particular headphone compared to the next, which is why I define transparency more in terms of how distracting or problematic a pair of headphones sounds to the individual, which isn't a fixed target. However I think it's still meaningful to speak of general trends in that people seem to generally prefer headphones that measure better.
Specifically, measure more linear in bass and have little ringing in CSDs as well as low distortion - these criteria could be considered fully objective in the sense that more is always worse.
:)p3
Where the ringing is most audible is probably subjective. Higher end frequency response is also somewhat hit and miss - flat sounding is best, but what consitutes that varies, since it involves actual person's hearing. For comparison purposes, the method of averaging multiple different couplers that is practiced by purrin is probably the best - the other useful result are the "positioning" measurements for headphones - these do differ at times. Tyll provides those, but there aren't enough annotations, e.g. pictures of positioning on the head/coupler.
The subjectivity is why I condone the use of equalizers and ITD/ILD simulators, such as crossfeed, personally tuned. Certain audiofools would probably want my head.
:)p8
On the second point: I should clarify this a bit. By "denying subjective experience" I didn't mean that someone is denying the existence of subjectivity, but rather denying the objectivity of perceived difference, ie. the mantra "all amps sound the same" (which is itself a misappropriation of what nwavguy actually said if I'm not mistaken; I haven't read his blog in ages however). This would be more akin to magnifying a single standard to encompass all difference.
Yes, that's really misread. All properly designed amps sound the same. There are other qualifiers such that certain headphones are more sensitive than others to non zero output impedance or (rarely) current requirements, as well as lack of power which may lead to clipping.
There are enough misdesigned amplifiers (incl. DAPs) that are sold at high prices.
Some of them even have very nice reviews... Whether the reason is ignorance or bribery, it's not pretty.
Funny thing about nvawguy's so-called standards is that they're massive overkill for the most part, e.g. -95 dB(A) FS noise floor is usually enough to not be perceivable; linear phase error is also very hard to hear, esp. if it happens at the frequency response edges - even on the order of 30 degrees. 0.05% THD is hard to notice as well, even in the best sensitivity range, especially since most transducers have much more.
His recommendations are for a perfect amplifier - since it can be achieved relatively cheaply, why not do that?
-
facepalm
-
Yes, that's really misread. All properly designed amps sound the same. There are other qualifiers such that certain headphones are more sensitive than others to non zero output impedance or (rarely) current requirements, as well as lack of power which may lead to clipping.
His recommendations are for a perfect amplifier - since it can be achieved relatively cheaply, why not do that?
Wow, there sure are A LOT OF IDIOTS building amps then, huh? Can you explain what "proper" is? Why does Accuphase build two different lines of amplifiers using Class A and A/B topologies? Which one is "proper"? Why do they think their own amps sound different? Bunch or morons there?
Really amazing that there are so many stupid engineers wasting so many resources trying to reach perfection in their circuits, when all they had to do was reach a below audible distortion threshold and they're done! So easy!
-
Class A vs AB is a pissing match. The latter is more efficient, but obviously harder to design without introducing undue amounts of crossover distortion. It's however been done to death so there's not much you can do other than properly implement it and correctly layout the PCB (which is also some hard work). In short: class AB is easier to mess up - also obviously the topology of choice for portable amplifiers.
I haven't heard or measured Accuphase amplifiers - my bet for the two lines is to keep audiophile customers, who have undue hatred of anything that's not class A, happy.
Also these seem to be speaker amplifiers - esp. the high powered ones are still somewhat of an art to keep noise free.
Although there are very few applications that warrant a 1200 W amplifier or even a 100 W/channel one. I especially love the fact that their AAVA "magic" preamp tech is a digital current mode volume control (can be also done in one good IC; or two and you get ADC + DAC package deal) and the use of marketing bling like PTFE/glass laminate for the PCB in some devices. I bet that has a huge effect on sound... not.
There's a fine line between great engineering and non-essential cost. I bet those have 10000% margin on them.
Headphone amplifiers are far easier still, yet there's even more junk around.
It's have not called the people dumb - so many amps are just unduly overly expensive and quite comparable to the limits of measurement, much less hearing.
However, certain popular amplifiers and DACs have serious flaws - mostly exposed by balanced armature IEMs though and not headphones.
(For instance, a score of FiiO get unstable - definitely E9 and E17. Hifiman HM-801 DAP has an amp that has huge amounts of high end rolloff, obviously broken reconstruction filter. Many amplifiers, including certain well regarded portable ones, have in excess of 10 Ohm output impedance causing problems with low impedance headphones and especially BA IEMs.)
-
Alright guys, I think I need to step in any play den mother for a minute.
The last thing this place needs is an objectivist v. subjectivist bullshit thread. It's a tired debate, and frankly no one is going to convince anyone else of anything, and people are going to end up going in circles recycling the same stale arguments ad nauseam.
No one here wants to hear about how "perfect" the O2 is. Save the Gospel of Nwavguy for head-fi's sound science forum.
The point of this thread is the discussion of why some people choose coloration over neutrality, and it's also to a lesser extent about the possibility of "walking the middle ground" and accepting both the legitimacy of objective measurements while still maintaining one's preferences.
This thread isn't about objectivism being superior to subjectivism or how to make a "proper" amp or headphone.
-
All properly designed amps sound the same.
So if one were to DBT an audible difference between the O2 and B22, which would be the improperly designed one?
Edit - Sorry MF. p:/
-
Ok, I'm going to approach this throughout jumping into the old debate, in prefence for MuppetFace's newer one:
If the Beta22 is three-channel you can expect some very nasty interchannel IMD, which might well be audible. Furthermore, a guy on Head-Fi actually ran THD tests on a 2-channel Beta22 and O2 (http://www.head-fi.org/t/588978/look-out-im-using-test-equipment-o2-and-beta22-testing-inside), using an incredibly crappy analyser he had lying around at work (he worked in telecoms) - and I mean crappy (0.25% THD at low frequencies).
The curves produced tracked the analyser's distortion perfectly, apart from in the bass, where much to my surprise the Beta22 rose slightly above the analyser's ridiculously high residual distortion - and this wasn't even done with a load...not saying it's conclusive proof of anything, but based on how the Mini3 came out on the test-bench*, one does wonder...
Again, without getting into the "Great Debate" on the amplifier front, even if you're a subjectivist, one type of subjectivism you should object to, IMHO, is looking for mysterious reasons for differences between amplifiers when you've got huge differences apparent in the measurements. For example, take the Woo Audio amps that Tyll ran some preliminary measurements on in a recent blog post - they measure absolutely deplorably by modern standards, well above the point where you'd expect something to be audible.
Yet, should you suggest to someone that they just *might* like the psychoacoustically pleasing clump of 2nd harmonic the amp dumps all over the signal, you end up with a lot of gibber about articulation and sound-stage air...
If people would acknowledge when they genuinely liked straightforward colouration, the emphasis would shift, even without a "full-objectivist" approach, from magical-mystery-amp-time to seeing what you can do with DSP in the digital domain (answer: a helluva lot).
*Interesting fact: the opamp in the Mini3 that AMB couldn't get working at higher voltages (18V - specified for 3 to 24V) works absolutely fine at those voltages with suitable attention paid to implementation. Analog Devices aren't usually in the habit of flat-out lying when it comes to some of the most vital specs on their datasheets.
-
Again, no sane objectivist suggests that we should disregard what we hear, merely that we should see it in context.
I completely agree with that, but it's a tough sell, what with the "p" word accusations and all. That's where I see relativism come in, even if there's a psychoacoustic effect which suggests a difference where DBT distinguishes none, that effect could still persist even after the test taker is made aware of the null result. Similarly, even if you point out flaws in a headphone's response, the person you're talking to could continue to disregard them, or even claim that the measurements and their consensus interpretation are wrong. The whole "I listen with my ears, not a spectrum analyzer" jibe you see so often at head-fi.
So yes, there needs to be a middle ground in civil discussion, if not in personal beliefs. The middle ground here with regard to amps is that I'm happy sticking to a 727II without thinking that I'm missing out on the LL/BHSE/KGSSHV/T2/Electra and I'm happy that those who own these amps enjoy the pride of ownership of their high quality designs and hear superior performance. They were certainly impressive designs to try at H3, though like Willakan, I'd rather run a thorough back & forth blind test before I commit to consider buying one of them.
-
My problem with objectivism is that it's not based on experience, it's based on a rigid ideology. Objectivists always think they are so scientific, but it's much more like religion than science. Scientists are open minded. Objectivists are not. People here like these headphone measurements not because they just like measurements, or because they don't trust their experience. People here like these headphone measurements because they explain and inform their experience.
Both extremes of objectivism and subjectivism are fucking ridiculous. Objectivists have completely lost touch with the whole point of all of this, and subjectivists have their heads up their asses and need to learn to jerk off in private.
-
Interesting to hear about the B22 since it was designed supposedly strictly as a measurements benchmark amp according to many. I won't mention names in hopes they don't show up here.
-
*Interesting fact: the opamp in the Mini3 that AMB couldn't get working at higher voltages (18V - specified for 3 to 24V) works absolutely fine at those voltages with suitable attention paid to implementation. Analog Devices aren't usually in the habit of flat-out lying when it comes to some of the most vital specs on their datasheets.
what are you going on about here? facts please?
-
Yes, that's really misread. All properly designed amps sound the same. There are other qualifiers such that certain headphones are more sensitive than others to non zero output impedance or (rarely) current requirements, as well as lack of power which may lead to clipping.
This is pretty much true if you define 'properly' as something like 'accurate' but not everyone really has that goal, even if they won't admit it. Saying "properly" tends to piss people off because they either don't want to admit to preferring a coloration or that they might have 'heard' something that doesn't actually exist.
So what. Do you care what other people think about your preferences? Don't bow to peer pressure. Go your own way and be proud of it. Were your senses fooled? It's not a big deal. We're all fooled about something or other because we're all human beings with imperfect brains.
If you don't want to be fooled again look at the data or do some tests of your own. If you do like a certain coloration then objective measurements could help you narrow down your choices.
Yet, should you suggest to someone that they just *might* like the psychoacoustically pleasing clump of 2nd harmonic the amp dumps all over the signal, you end up with a lot of gibber about articulation and sound-stage air...
If people would acknowledge when they genuinely liked straightforward colouration, the emphasis would shift, even without a "full-objectivist" approach, from magical-mystery-amp-time to seeing what you can do with DSP in the digital domain (answer: a helluva lot).
I almost always use crossfeed with my headphones and that does a number to the original signal but given the context of headphones it makes it closer to listening via speakers.
I'm open to the idea that some amps could inherently do something similar, adding to the signal in a way that makes artificial two channel stereo sound more natural, especially over headphones since they're so unatural to begin with. If we can figure out exactly what it is then it wouldn't be hard to implement it with a DSP or possibly even an active filter with $5-10 worth of parts.
I want everything to be dead accurate except for the colorations I specifically add. Headphones will never meet that criteria but fortunatly it's pretty cheap to achieve with the electronics. I think it takes more variables out of the chain and keeps it simpler.
-
Yes, that's really misread. All properly designed amps sound the same. There are other qualifiers such that certain headphones are more sensitive than others to non zero output impedance or (rarely) current requirements, as well as lack of power which may lead to clipping.
This is pretty much true if you define 'properly' as something like 'accurate' but not everyone really has that goal, even if they won't admit it.
The idea is to get them to admit it and identify why they like it. Should cut out lots of misinformation and make for easier buying decisions.
For example, I like my Audiotrak Prodigy Cube DAC with a "cheap" amp section of OPA2134 + 3x JRC4580 (all on stabilized boosted +/-10 V), good DAC section of TI Tenor, mostly because it has lots of current for those current hungry low impedance IEMs and avoids a score of other bad decisions.
(except this: one output sports a current limiting ferrite for no real reason, thus has 8 Ohm output impedance - the other output is near 0 Ohm.)
Measures and sounds very well, much better than our cheap scope and has a suprisingly nice potentiometer with only very tiny amount of channel imbalance at the low end.
The best part that will definitely tick some people off: it costs $125 and does much better than more expensive FiiO stuff while having equivalent driving power, meaning enough to drive those low efficiency Hifiman orthos.
Saying "properly" tends to piss people off because they either don't want to admit to preferring a coloration or that they might have 'heard' something that doesn't actually exist.
So what. Do you care what other people think about your preferences? Don't bow to peer pressure. Go your own way and be proud of it. Were your senses fooled? It's not a big deal. We're all fooled about something or other because we're all human beings with imperfect brains.
Yes. :)p6 It's funny that it pisses people off when someone challenges what they hear, yet not that many were ticked off by Pepsi/Coke DBTs. It's when you define your value by the value of your equipment when things go the wrong way.
If you don't want to be fooled again look at the data or do some tests of your own. If you do like a certain coloration then objective measurements could help you narrow down your choices.
Exactly. However, few manufacturers provide enough data for amplifiers - fewer still, for headphones and IEMs. Everyone gets to guess or run trial and error.
That's why the service that Tyll, purrin and HeadRoom provide is so valuable.
I almost always use crossfeed with my headphones and that does a number to the original signal but given the context of headphones it makes it closer to listening via speakers.
I'm open to the idea that some amps could inherently do something similar, adding to the signal in a way that makes artificial two channel stereo sound more natural, especially over headphones since they're so unatural to begin with. If we can figure out exactly what it is then it wouldn't be hard to implement it with a DSP or possibly even an active filter with $5-10 worth of parts.
I want everything to be dead accurate except for the colorations I specifically add. Headphones will never meet that criteria but fortunatly it's pretty cheap to achieve with the electronics. I think it takes more variables out of the chain and keeps it simpler.
Same here, with the addition of flat-sounding personalized equalization (to make the playback truly binaural) and a small amount of reverberation. I'm also planning to experiment with actual HRIR recordings - if I manage to get in touch with the right sound engineer that has the access to the anechoic chamber, a speaker tossing robot (I can help build it if necessary), in-ear microphone capsules and lots of time.
I'm pretty sure though $5-$10 is not enough. It's barely enough for a good passive crossfeed alone, much less an accurate enough parametric equalizer.
I am waiting on rev. 2 of a certain http://cubieboard.org/ (http://cubieboard.org/) which will be about $50 + li-ion battery + cost of CS4272 DAC/ADC (if builtin ones are not up to snuff) + cost of reasonable opamps + case + cheap screen + lots of work. Likely end result around $100-$150 of an ADC/DSP/DAC/amp combo - on par with FiiO E17, but with stable amplifier section and maybe a tiny bit larger. Hopefully this project will pan out and that better than, say, Digizoid Zo 2, which only has very basic DSP.
Maybe I'll toss in a bunch of free DAP software too.
(If you need to know why I wait - rev. 1 doesn't have li-ion controller and doesn't have I2S available, which prevents the easy use of a different DAC/ADC.)
-
Something else I've just thought of. Maybe some people just find stuff like the O2 or the Benchmark too clean.
Kinda like the way they broadcast sports these days with crazy fast exposure times but no corresponding increase in frame rate so there's no motion blur at all. Most people don't mind it but it just about makes my eyes bleed.
-
That could be part of it - and part of what puts people off from some DACs for being "too clinical"
For another example, the new Hobbit movie has a much higher frame rate than normal films - and some people have reported it looking more "fake" as a result - how does crisper, cleaner, clearer translate to "fake"? For one thing, you're seeing prosthetics/makeup work through a much clearer lens which can make it seem more fake. But some early viewers have reported everything looking more fake. It could just be they are used to their movies with just a little more blur and the cleanliness of it all puts them off.
I don't think this accounts for everything but it certainly seems like a piece of the puzzle.
-
super high framerates can look fake because our eyes do not usually see that many frames per second in the real world. The eyes skip around while our head spins while looking at things making looking at things in real life skip some frames if you get what I mean.
-
Personally I can't stand the "smooth motion" effect that TVs have. Film should be 24fps, video 30fps. When you see film at video speed, it looks like somebody's home movie footage.
-
Shows what I know about cameras/video. Analogy busted.
-
Yeah, that's exactly what I meant by lack of coloration becoming a coloration. Like deafening silence. It can become a distraction and sound artificial for those who are used to music being presented in a certain way.
I think a large part of it has to do with habituation. After listening to the D7100 for a week and nothing else, I got used to it, and it almost didn't seem quite as bad. As soon as I listened to the SR-007mk1 and the Paradox however I came to my senses. I think Marv's term for it is "sanity check." Personally I liken it to cleansing one's pallet when wine tasting.
When that's the only reference point one has however, then there is no pallet cleansing, and I think someone who lived with the D7100 long enough would find the Paradox arresting. However I think before long even the most tortured ears could in theory start to return to normal. The body heals itself and is always attempting to move toward equilibrium.
There is a definite emphasis on multiplicity (though it's not true multiplicity I would argue) of perspectives on head-fi: ie. the "we all hear differently" mantra. I think it's not so much a matter of our hearing differently from a biological perspective as it is a difference of personal tastes which leads to different habits. These listening habits can then, in turn, give us a different perspective which causes a parallax effect despite our looking at the same object with similar eyes. I think our expectations and preferences can filter what we hear in a Kantian sense, but also that our listening habits and choices can physically differentiate hearing by causing tolerances to build up, or, in the worst case, damage to accrue.
Which brings me to a rather interesting question: can people be taught or conditioned to "hear correctly?" I think this question would be incredibly controversial on head-fi and ruffle feathers. However let's use the example of a guy who listens to the Grado SR325is. He thinks this sounds correct and that something like the HD600 is bassy and dark and just way too colored. Could this individual in theory be trained to hear otherwise? There are many implications underlying this:
-Say he has hearing damage from the Grados. If his hearing can restore itself, even slightly, might his Grados seem harsher to him?
-The judgement of the HD600 as more colored than the Grados is an error with an objective ground. Could he learn to recognize this mistake and realize the Grados were more wildly colored? He doesn't have to give up liking the Grados; he can still enjoy them despite acknowledging they have a definite coloration.
In this case, the line between one's taste and one's hearing is a bit blurry. Often times "you have damaged hearing" has been used by individuals attempting to validate their own tastes in the face of disagreement. It feels a little cheap to employ. At the same time, one wonders: do some people like headphones like the SR325is because they have hearing damage? Or do some people have hearing damage because they like headphones like the SR325is? It's the old chicken and egg conundrum.
I think it's a little of both. However I feel there is a remainder within individuals that can't be explained away, an innate difference in tastes which just exists for one reason or another in certain individuals. This can go on to influence their behavior in a certain way, which can in turn cause their hearing to genuinely be effected and their tolerances to develop uniquely to others. In other words: we start out with differing tastes, but we should in theory be able to recognize when something is neutral and when something isn't. That assessment is free of value judgement, and one doesn't have to necessarily prefer one to the other. However given our unique tastes, we develop listening habits which can impact our perspective and lead certain individuals to conflate or misjudge neutrality and coloration. It's the parallax shift: our starting point of reference changes, and so the potion of what we're looking at changes.
-
*Interesting fact: the opamp in the Mini3 that AMB couldn't get working at higher voltages (18V - specified for 3 to 24V) works absolutely fine at those voltages with suitable attention paid to implementation. Analog Devices aren't usually in the habit of flat-out lying when it comes to some of the most vital specs on their datasheets.
C'mon man, let's take this shit somewhere else. Let's just say there have been a few complaints (and I've NEVER received complaints worthy enough of reaching me until now.) I've been patient so far. You've been warned.
For the record:
- I actually know AMB / Ti Kan in person (he doesn't hide who he is).
- You didn't have to insinuate that Ti said AD is lying.
- AMB board layouts (implementation) are actually very good.
- Stop being an armchair quarterback or parroting Nwavguy's shit. Board layouts are tough, even if you are good at it. Murphy's law comes into play a lot. Don't try to make claims or misconstrue others' design decisions without fully understanding them. The mini3 is a much smaller board than the O2. There could be a lack of board space for an extra cap in the feedback loop, or maybe Ti had other reasons for running the the AD opamp at max bandwidth.
- If you want to play the "nwavguy is god game", FWIW, the O2 layout is actually kind of shitty. PS cap right next to almost touching the regulator heat sink for example. Wasted board space, etc. Again, I'd like to see nwavguy make an amp as good as the mini3 with the same exact form-factor as the mini3. You know why he hasn't? Because he fucking can't. nwavguy cheated on this "portable" amp by making it not portable to get the performance he needed. It's funny how no one ever points out how the extra battery / voltage (and hence real-estate needed) helps ALOT on the O2 performance-wise. As car as lame car analogies that nwaguy is so fond of, it's like doubling the displacement of a motor.
Don't bother replying. As I've said, you've been warned.
-
poo walk the plank2
-
willakan,
you're full of shit. half-truths and intellectual dishonesty don't fly here. walk the plank2
-
WTF just happened here?
-
I'm dying to see what Justin will manage with two 9 volts. Build quality wise he already is setting a high standard.
-
The fuck I am replying to this, before your condescension melts a hole through my monitor (rest assured that anything below that seems condescending is just me being pissed off).
I've been away from the computer for a couple of days, and it seems my absence of a reply has led to the immediate assumption that I'm making shit up.
You've got your facts wrong:
Here's a quote from AMB himself, not taken out of context:
"Also, we have determined early on that, despite the datasheet's claim of 24V rating, the AD8397 is not stable at such voltages. It gets too hot and triggers parasitic or outright oscillations that would also cause chip-death."
Context: http://www.amb.org/forum/somebody-isnt-happy-t1094-10.html
That looks remarkably like AMB suggesting that AD is lying/being misleading, to the uninitiated. I've already said that I'm inclined to believe that this is not the case, as AD is a large company whose products go through a great deal of testing, and the voltage range is a fundamental spec. I could stop here and consider my comment vindicated...
((((((Open brackets: disregard this section if it makes you angry.
The icing on the cake:
In my private email exchanges with NwAvGuy, he stated that he had personally tested the opamp Ti used and found that it worked perfectly fine at the voltages he claimed it didn't work properly at without any other precautions other than those you would normally take with a very fast opamp. I didn't disclose that information due to the tendency for people to froth at the mouth every time NwAvGuy is mentioned.
Presumably NwAvGuy is lying/trolling/eating babies/insane, despite every major claim he's made as far as technology/performance is concerned that's been tested being vindicated...seriously, feel free to hate the guy and everything he's done, but facts will be facts...
Close brackets.)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Everything else you said is irrelevant (aside from demonstrating the obsessive urge to make everything faintly 'objectivist' about NwAvGuy and his amp). I understand that you seem to feel like (at least in this post) that you're some enlightened individual protecting TWOO AUDIO against hordes of bigoted assholes (myself obviously included), but you might want to check your facts before you go on a power trip. I actually excluded mentioning my personal exchange with NwAvGuy from my post SPECIFICALLY NOT TO PISS PEOPLE OFF, trusting that people would know/check what AMB has actually said before going mental - in hindsight, perhaps that was a mistake...
This is particularly ironic in the light of the earlier comments about 'objectivism' being about zealotry...then the fucking lynch-mob arrive...
I'm quite happy to be very polite/respect everyone's beliefs/have a civil debate, but then I get this shit! What happened to 'not being Head-Fi?'
BTW: Feel free to remove your negative karma, in light of your scrupulous open-mindedness over here...don't worry, not holding my breath...
-
The fuck I am replying to this, before your condescension melts a hole through my monitor (rest assured that anything below that seems condescending is just me being pissed off).
I've been away from the computer for a couple of days, and it seems my absence of a reply has led to the immediate assumption that I'm making shit up.
You've got your facts wrong:
Here's a quote from AMB himself, not taken out of context:
"Also, we have determined early on that, despite the datasheet's claim of 24V rating, the AD8397 is not stable at such voltages. It gets too hot and triggers parasitic or outright oscillations that would also cause chip-death."
Context: http://www.amb.org/forum/somebody-isnt-happy-t1094-10.html
That looks remarkably like AMB suggesting that AD is lying/being misleading, to the uninitiated. I've already said that I'm inclined to believe that this is not the case, as AD is a large company whose products go through a great deal of testing, and the voltage range is a fundamental spec. I could stop here and consider my comment vindicated...
((((((Open brackets: disregard this section if it makes you angry.
The icing on the cake:
In my private email exchanges with NwAvGuy, he stated that he had personally tested the opamp Ti used and found that it worked perfectly fine at the voltages he claimed it didn't work properly at without any other precautions other than those you would normally take with a very fast opamp. I didn't disclose that information due to the tendency for people to froth at the mouth every time NwAvGuy is mentioned.
Presumably NwAvGuy is lying/trolling/eating babies/insane, despite every major claim he's made as far as technology/performance is concerned that's been tested being vindicated...seriously, feel free to hate the guy and everything he's done, but facts will be facts...
Close brackets.)))))))))))))))))))))))))))))
Everything else you said is irrelevant (aside from demonstrating the obsessive urge to make everything faintly 'objectivist' about NwAvGuy and his amp). I understand that you seem to feel like (at least in this post) that you're some enlightened individual protecting TWOO AUDIO against hordes of bigoted assholes (myself obviously included), but you might want to check your facts before you go on a power trip. I actually excluded mentioning my personal exchange with NwAvGuy from my post SPECIFICALLY NOT TO PISS PEOPLE OFF, trusting that people would know/check what AMB has actually said before going mental - in hindsight, perhaps that was a mistake...
This is particularly ironic in the light of the earlier comments about 'objectivism' being about zealotry...then the fucking lynch-mob arrive...
I'm quite happy to be very polite/respect everyone's beliefs/have a civil debate, but then I get this shit! What happened to 'not being Head-Fi?'
BTW: Feel free to remove your negative karma, in light of your scrupulous open-mindedness over here...don't worry, not holding my breath...
you still don't fucking get it. your comments are laced with toxicity and twisted facts, and in no way are they vindicated. you're going to get called out on it. you're taking this quote out of context and reading into it - delusional thinking. no, it's not all about NW, but your crusade against AMB and Ti at every opportunity is an obsession for you, and then you gave the gall to whine about a so called lynch mob? you're an asshole and have zero to contribute here.
-
Ti flat-out said here that the opamp used doesn't work properly at the voltages it is specified at. He has repeatedly said that, in testing, the opamp was unstable at higher voltages - would you like me to go quote-hunting? He explicitly states here that the claims of AD are not correct.
Please, explain in what way that quote is out of context. I fail to see how you could arrive at a reading of " despite the datasheet's claim of 24V rating, the AD8397 is not stable at such voltages" that does not suggest that the datasheet's claims are wrong. Feel free to enlighten me...
The evidence (you know, the datasheet compiled by professional engineers with state of the art instrumentation) would suggest that it does work at those voltages. That, to my mind, should cast some aspersions on the quality of at least that individual design.
I have absolutely no crusade against Ti. I just call stuff out when I see it. I think this was a pretty clear call, as the individual involved has actually stated that he holds the opinions which I implied that he held. I feel very similar about AudioGd, Burson, ect...the 'crusade' is a product of your own 'delusional' imagination.
Seriously, you're reading stuff into my posts that isn't even there half the time. I write something that has nothing to do with the O2, and I get purrin ranting about the O2's PCB design, and now I'm orchestrating a mass BS campaign against AMB through a mix of malice and idiocy, because I pointed out that he was making unreasonable claims about the opamp he was using, which should raise alarm bells, IMHO.
But yeah. I'm obviously an asshole who hates everybody - just check my previous posts before this thread (40 out of 42ish). Nothing but bile right?
-
This much drama is only allowed when your fiance turns out to be your twin sister who was separated from you at birth by an evil stepfather with designs on the family fortune who's been long thought dead but was recently found to be alive and plotting against your marriage with your own subconscious.
On an unrelated note I watched a soap opera for the first time ever this morning.
-
This much drama is only allowed when your fiance turns out to be your twin sister who was separated from you at birth by an evil stepfather with designs on the family fortune who's been long thought dead but was recently found to be alive and plotting against your marriage with your own subconscious.
Damn right. I'm just pissed off at exactly how my comments were taken...
-
Ti never said AD was lying. He simply stated that despite AD's datasheet saying one thing, his testing in his implementation ended up with another. Ti is pretty dry in his writing style. If you've ever played with enough op-amps, you'll realize that a few of them can be touchy and not not exactly super stable at gain=1 - especially under higher voltages despite their datasheets stating so. It happens for various reasons (unit to unit variation, date and place of manufacture, ambient temperature, midicholorians in the air, etc.)
That's great nwavguy had no issue. These kind of inconsistencies or murphy's law happens all the time. (BTW I don't appreciate having to repeat myself here.) Let the designers argue among themselves about it.
Beside, my point was to please take Nwavguy's axe somewhere else. There's no place for it here. This is not nwavguy's platform nor a platform for heresay. What do you not understand? Please take this to www.Head-Fi.org (http://www.Head-Fi.org) or www.nwavguy.com (http://www.nwavguy.com)
THREAD LOCKED.
(http://www.hoax-slayer.com/images/parrot.jpg) (http://www.decadeawards.com/assets/images/1_70052-z.jpg)