Amp/DAC For sennheiser HD 600?

[thedawnarts]

Look for a good AMP/DAC for my HD 600's, my budget is $200. The only thing iv'e been looking at are the Schiit Magni 2 and Modi 2. 

 

I want to hear a noticeable difference!

 

Any suggestions?

 

Thanks!!

 

 

[SSL]

You won't, so don't bother.

[NannerBeans]

If you want to hear a noticeable difference then get better or different headphones instead. You won't with an amp/dac

[Octavialicious]

save ur money

[creatip123]

The deal breaker was the 'noticeable difference'.

 

If any difference will do, there are some devices that give different sounds (not better, just different), such as tube devices. But the differences aren't very big. Very subtle to the point that it may be deemed not worth the extra money by most of the people.

[ym1453]

Well amps/dacs are very debatable some hear a difference and believe they are worth the investment just like a headphone others think they are a waste of money.

I found from my experiences that they do make a difference and The higher end ones even big differences.

But not everyone see the differences in amps and some even find they like the sound of low cost amps more than the ones on expensive amps.

So I recommend you either try them out and see if it makes a difference to you or order it from a place with a good return policy anyway good luck.

[creatip123]

Well amps/dacs are very debatable some hear a difference and believe they are worth the investment just like a headphone others think they are a waste of money.

I found from my experiences that they do make a difference and The higher end ones even big differences.

But not everyone see the differences in amps and some even find they like the sound of low cost amps more than the ones on expensive amps.

So I recommend you either try them out and see if it makes a difference to you or order it from a place with a good return policy anyway good luck.

 

I agree. And in term of differences, different DACs give a bit more margin of differences, than different amps. 

 

I guess people deem it not worth it, because for the upgrade price, if you put the money into upgrading the headphone, you'll get a whole lot more margin of differences. For example, upgrading a $50 amp to a $500 amp vs upgrading a $100 headphone to a $550 headphone. 

 

Maybe if you've 'hit the ceiling', like owning an HD800, or LCD-3, the next best thing is to upgrade the dac/amp....

[SSL]

But not everyone see the differences in amps and some even find they like the sound of low cost amps more than the ones on expensive amps.

 

Maybe. If so, then probably because expensive does not always equate to better in audio where everything is drenched in snake oil.

 

Then, of course, you have to factor in the overactive imagination.

[ym1453]

I agree. And in term of differences, different DACs give a bit more margin of differences, than different amps.

I guess people deem it not worth it, because for the upgrade price, if you put the money into upgrading the headphone, you'll get a whole lot more margin of differences. For example, upgrading a $50 amp to a $500 amp vs upgrading a $100 headphone to a $550 headphone.

Maybe if you've 'hit the ceiling', like owning an HD800, or LCD-3, the next best thing is to upgrade the dac/amp....

Definitely I will not recommend upgrading your amp for less than a very good 700$ and up headphone since I really don't think there are that many apparent improvements.

And yes a headphone is a bigger improvement(much more noticeable) but like you said a guy who has his perfect headphone and want to push it to its limits is in the position in my opinion to get a high class amp.

but not everyone hear the difference so my recommendation to what you should do remain the way it was in my opinion

[ShearMe]

Then, of course, you have to factor in the overactive imagination.

This. It is much easier to tell yourself you hear a difference than to hear the difference, at least between products which don't intentionally try to alter the signal. All this subjectivity crud gets on my nerves when we're talking about hundreds of dollars of hardware.

[Ultragunner]

@OP:What motherboard is on your rig? If it's a high quality mobo then a DAC wouldn't serve much purpose.  Also, how loud do you listen to your headphones? Are you comfortable with your current set up, or you think it could use a bit more power?

 

I can't speak for the HD600 since I don't own a pair, but my DT 880 Pro 250 Ohm really needs an AMP for a satisfying listen level. Although its impedance is less than that of the HD600 (250 vs 300 Ohm), the DT seems to require a bit more power to drive

 

On the other hand, the Schiit Stack (Magni + Modi) is a great package at $200, you probably won't ever need another AMP/DAC (unless they break or sth  ) when you upgrade to higher end headphones

[SSL]

This. It is much easier to tell yourself you hear a difference than to hear the difference, at least between products which don't intentionally try to alter the signal. All this subjectivity crud gets on my nerves when we're talking about hundreds of dollars of hardware.

 

The "some people can't hear a difference" line is what gets me; just people confirming their placebo.

 

I can't speak for the HD600 since I don't own a pair, but my DT 880 Pro 250 Ohm really needs an AMP for a satisfying listen level. Although its impedance is less than that of the HD600 (250 vs 300 Ohm), the DT seems to require a bit more power to drive

 

That's because the amount of power a headphone needs to reach a specific volume is dependent on impedance AND sensitivity. Using only the impedance of a headphone to determine how much power it needs like trying to calculate the horsepower of an engine with only the torque.

[creatip123]

The "some people can't hear a difference" line is what gets me; just people confirming their placebo.

 

Well, actually, like the other 4 senses, hearing differs between each individuals. In a sense like some got 20/20 eyesight till old age, some got myopia since a child. Also like the other 4 senses, hearing can be 'trained', or sharpened, as in sharpened senses. Just like how a master chef can tell right away if a dish (that he's familiar with, no doubt) is lacking salt or not, just by the smell. Or an experienced wine taster can tell immediately which is French red wine, which is Italian (while to me, they all taste the same). Or a more familiar example, shearme is treble sensitive, I believe. So in regards of sensitivity in high notes, his ears are different from some others, me for example. A subtle change in the high notes might be heard by him, but not by me. 

 

If the above premise can be accepted, then it's only natural that the statement 'some people can hear a difference, others can't' is true as well. An easy public example of this, is the Philips Golden Ears Challenge (https://www.goldenears.philips.com), which is basically a series of ABX tests on various audio aspects (pick one that's different out of 3 options). It got 4 levels, from basic, bronze to golden. Not everyone who wants to complete it all the way to the end, have the ability to do so. Some just got stuck middle way, and gave up. I know this from forums about this golden ears challenge. 

 

Other example is of course the simple ABX test itself. What do you call a situation where 2 (or more) guys do the exact same ABX tests, 1 passes the tests, while the others fail, if not 'some people can hear a difference, others can't'? An example of this is my older post: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/314493-does-headphone-wiring-change-the-sound/?p=4280680The files are ready to be downloaded in the link in the post, and ABX tested by anybody who wanna do it. I believe there are some who can hear the differences (pass the ABX test), and those who can't (fail).

 

But....yeah, if you phrase it as 'differences that are so subtle that can't be heard by majority of population, are not really worth the extra money/effort', then I agree. 

[SSL]

Also like the other 4 senses, hearing can be 'trained', or sharpened, as in sharpened senses.

 

I'm well aware.

[BoredErica]

Well, actually, like the other 4 senses, hearing differs between each individuals. In a sense like some got 20/20 eyesight till old age, some got myopia since a child. Also like the other 4 senses, hearing can be 'trained', or sharpened, as in sharpened senses. Just like how a master chef can tell right away if a dish (that he's familiar with, no doubt) is lacking salt or not, just by the smell. Or an experienced wine taster can tell immediately which is French red wine, which is Italian (while to me, they all taste the same). Or a more familiar example, shearme is treble sensitive, I believe. So in regards of sensitivity in high notes, his ears are different from some others, me for example. A subtle change in the high notes might be heard by him, but not by me. 

 

If the above premise can be accepted, then it's only natural that the statement 'some people can hear a difference, others can't' is true as well. 

It's not natural, it's possible. Those are two different things. Senses are not infinitely sensitive. Our senses differ within a small amount. Unless you count in blind people, of course. Compared to the average person, the person with the best eyesight has barely better vision. He might be able to read text on a sign that takes another 20 seconds to run to, but nobody's going to be able to see the difference between atom to atom with the naked eye. Just because a difference exists doesn't mean any human is capable of sensing a difference by themselves.

 

An easy public example of this, is the Philips Golden Ears Challenge (https://www.goldenears.philips.com), which is basically a series of ABX tests on various audio aspects (pick one that's different out of 3 options). It got 4 levels, from basic, bronze to golden. Not everyone who wants to complete it all the way to the end, have the ability to do so. Some just got stuck middle way, and gave up. I know this from forums about this golden ears challenge. 

 

Other example is of course the simple ABX test itself. What do you call a situation where 2 (or more) guys do the exact same ABX tests, 1 passes the tests, while the others fail, if not 'some people can hear a difference, others can't'? An example of this is my older post: http://linustechtips.com/main/topic/314493-does-headphone-wiring-change-the-sound/?p=4280680The files are ready to be downloaded in the link in the post, and ABX tested by anybody who wanna do it. I believe there are some who can hear the differences (pass the ABX test), and those who can't (fail).

 

But....yeah, if you phrase it as 'differences that are so subtle that can't be heard by majority of population, are not really worth the extra money/effort', then I agree. 

Just because there are semi-proper tests done of audio-related stuff that have decent evidence of showing some people can hear something while others can't, doesn't mean some other audio-related thing can be heard by some people while most can't. It's irrelevant, all you're showing is that such a thing can exist, and nobody has ever said it can't.

 

If you have some test result you think we'll disagree with, I suggest bringing it over the HA to have them check it out. You're going to get higher-quality responses over there. Nobody's gonna do that though, and I'm past caring so I'm not going to repost it myself.

[SSL]

 

 

Adding to that, so what if there is a difference? Does that difference really amount to making music more enjoyable or realistic? The gulf between real sound and audio production is so vast that a miniscule improvement only perceptible by 1% of the population is not going to close that gap. Retreating to the argument "it's all subjective" doesn't make it less ridiculous.

[creatip123]

It's not natural, it's possible. Those are two different things. Senses are not infinitely sensitive. Our senses differ within a small amount. Unless you count in blind people, of course. Compared to the average person, the person with the best eyesight has barely better vision. He might be able to read text on a sign that takes another 20 seconds to run to, but nobody's going to be able to see the difference between atom to atom with the naked eye. Just because a difference exists doesn't mean any human is capable of sensing a difference by themselves.

 

Just because there are semi-proper tests done of audio-related stuff that have decent evidence of showing some people can hear something while others can't, doesn't mean some other audio-related thing can be heard by some people while most can't. It's irrelevant, all you're showing is that such a thing can exist, and nobody has ever said it can't.

 

If you have some test result you think we'll disagree with, I suggest bringing it over the HA to have them check it out. You're going to get higher-quality responses over there. Nobody's gonna do that though, and I'm past caring so I'm not going to repost it myself.

 

That's basically what I'm saying tho, that the possibility do exists. The possibility of 'some can hear it, others can't'. Or maybe more relevant, some can perceive it, others might fail (to perceive it). Not to be expanded as an absolute law to justify something like 'I can hear the sound of the spirits. Just because you can't, doesn't mean I can't'. That's a whole different case altogether. 

 

About the eyes, every (normal) human eyes got a fixed focal length, roughly equivalent to a 50mm camera lens. Now this focal length is fixed, so no human can do 'zoom in-zoom out' function with their eyes. It's just the ability of focusing that differ from people to people. 20/20 vision got perfect focusing ability over normal distances. Myopia and presbyopia is the weakened ability of focusing, making it unable to properly focus on the right distance. I remember I got a friend in high school who was wearing a -9 glasses. -9 before 17 years old, that gotta be a bit out of normal. Without glasses, she could only see about 100/9 cm in front of her, about 11cm. Anything beyond is a blur, she said, basically splotches of colors. Perhaps no relevance, I just suddenly remember her when writing this. 

 

So the possibility exists, that's all I'm saying. Not saying that all claims of 'amp A definitely sounds better, you just can't hear it, that's all' are true. There's a possibility that it's true, but possibility is not a fact, and that's that. It's case per case, and test per test. 

 

For example, if I can't hear any differences between A and B, but there's a guy that claims he can, and he proves it by doing a proper ABX tests, with constant success. Repeated over and over, always constant success. All the devices and files examined, and all are legit. What can I say then? Should I keep saying that he's delusional? Because he got proofs, while I don't (that he's delusional). 

 

 

Adding to that, so what if there is a difference? Does that difference really amount to making music more enjoyable or realistic? The gulf between real sound and audio production is so vast that a miniscule improvement only perceptible by 1% of the population is not going to close that gap. Retreating to the argument "it's all subjective" doesn't make it less ridiculous.

 

Subjective is good, as long as it's kept at the 'subjective' frame. Something like, 'I believe that I can perceive a difference between A and B, so to me the difference is real, and to me, A is the better one'. The keyword is 'to me'. If everything can be kept at the proper frame, there'd be no problem. The problem sprung from taking subjective frames into an objective discussion, then things start to get muddied. Something like, if I said Kunis is the prettiest woman in all history, while the other guy said Johansson is the one. We'd go at each other's necks for something that's not debatable from the first place, because it's subjective tastes. 

What I was talking about was the possibility of that 1% population exists. To that 1%, the difference is real, while to the other 99%, it's not real. Then just let it be that way. To that 1% population, buying a $5000 amp might be a logical thing to do (provided they got the money in the first place), while to the other 99% it's not logical, and that's that. No problems at all if everything is left at that. Start having problems when that 1% is trying to force their opinion that a $5000 amp is totally worth it to the 99%, or vice versa, the 99% trying to force their opinion to the 1% of how incredibly stupid they are for buying that $5000 amp. 

 

Bear in mind, I'm not talking about cases where somebody asks for advice. If it's a question, something like, 'would I get a better sound with an expensive amp than my already good amp?', of course always assume he/she is with the majority of the population. If the majority of population can't perceive any differences, then it's always a safe bet that he/she can't. 

[SSL]

 

 

Imagine paying 10x the money for a house with a 1% larger floorplan. Sure there's a difference, sure you could "subjectively" prefer it over a smaller space, but it still looks silly because while it is a difference, it isn't significant whether you can perceive it or not. Either way you're still not in a mansion and never will be.

[creatip123]

Imagine paying 10x the money for a house with a 1% larger floorplan. Sure there's a difference, sure you could "subjectively" prefer it over a smaller space, but it still looks silly because while it is a difference, it isn't significant whether you can perceive it or not. Either way you're still not in a mansion and never will be.

 

That's kinda the condition (was going to say 'problem', but it's just the way it is) with subjectivity. Because it's private perception, people are free to interpret whatever they perceive. Objectively, with measurements and stuffs, there might be just 1% difference between a $500 amp vs a $5000 amp. Subjectively, to people who don't care much, it's far less than 1%. To people who think the world of it, it may be 1000% difference to them (hence it's 'worth it' to them). 

 

It's like the HE400. Because I like it, I'd say it's worth every penny of its $300 price tag. Some of my friends cringed when I mentioned the price. They admit it sounds good, but in their perception, any headphones, no matter how good sounding it is, that are more than $30 are heavily overpriced and I got swindled for buying it at that price. Perception perception....

 

I like to think people who are obsessed with their hobbies are like competition runners. They will do and pay anything in their power to get that extra 0.5 seconds, figuratively speaking. Who are they competing with? Themselves of course. Their obsession and lust, to get 'the best out of the best out of the best'

 

I got a friend who bought a $4000 cue stick (as in pool or billiard). He's not even treating it as a collectible item or something, he's bringing it to pool halls everywhere, playing with it. It's a wooden stick, FGS, essentially an oversized chopstick, or stick a brush head and it becomes a broom. But of course it's not debatable, because in the end it's his money. He deemed it's worth 4 grand, he got the money, so there. As long as he doesn't push his logic of buying a 4 grand chopstick, and we don't push him about how ridiculous he is, we all get along fine. 

[ShearMe]

I got a friend who bought a $4000 cue stick (as in pool or billiard). He's not even treating it as a collectible item or something, he's bringing it to pool halls everywhere, playing with it. It's a wooden stick, FGS, essentially an oversized chopstick, or stick a brush head and it becomes a broom. But of course it's not debatable, because in the end it's his money. He deemed it's worth 4 grand, he got the money, so there. As long as he doesn't push his logic of buying a 4 grand chopstick, and we don't push him about how ridiculous he is, we all get along fine.

American friends make fun of each other's stupid decisions all the time.

[SSL]

Subjectively, to people who don't care much, it's far less than 1%. To people who think the world of it, it may be 1000% difference to them (hence it's 'worth it' to them).

 

And if you changed the $5000 amp out for a $50 amp without telling them, chances are they wouldn't even notice. 1000% difference, my ass.

It's like the HE400. Because I like it, I'd say it's worth every penny of its $300 price tag. Some of my friends cringed when I mentioned the price. They admit it sounds good, but in their perception, any headphones, no matter how good sounding it is, that are more than $30 are heavily overpriced and I got swindled for buying it at that price. Perception perception....

 

I'm talking about amps, not transducers. It's a well known fact that pinning down the objective performance of a headphone or loudspeaker is nearly impossible compared to an amp, which is easy to measure.

 

I got a friend who bought a $4000 cue stick (as in pool or billiard). He's not even treating it as a collectible item or something, he's bringing it to pool halls everywhere, playing with it. It's a wooden stick, FGS, essentially an oversized chopstick, or stick a brush head and it becomes a broom. But of course it's not debatable, because in the end it's his money. He deemed it's worth 4 grand, he got the money, so there. As long as he doesn't push his logic of buying a 4 grand chopstick, and we don't push him about how ridiculous he is, we all get along fine.

 

Is he or the manufacture claiming that the que is worth $4000 because it helps him play a better game of pool? Or is it because it is an art piece made from exotic materials, possibly by a famous designer? If you don't see the distinction here, then there is no point in continuing the conversation.

[BoredErica]

I highly doubt there is 1% of the population that can hear a huge difference between something like an Objective to Benchmark DAC absent of any placebo/etc. That's bordering on supernatural if you ask me. As mentioned we are talking about amps/dacs, not headphones. Accuracy for these are pretty easy to define and objectively measure. If some guy wants to buy a $4000 amp because he can, that's got nothing to do with his hearing ability. Whether some rich guy wants to blow money on random stuff doesn't matter, but if he wants to say the $4000 amp he bought makes a "1000%" difference, he's talking out his ass.

 

People exaggerate things way too much. The only time I would describe an audio upgrade as "night and day" would be like something worse than $10 Skullcandies compared to HD600/800 or a well setup home theater system. And then some people describe some instruments played in a track, saying it sounds just like the real thing, it just means the audiophile doesn't know what the real thing sounds like. But I digress.

 

Is it possible for a tube amp to distort the sound in a way so that somebody likes it much better? Yes, it's conceivable. There is a very funny trend of people thinking the more expensive ones are better though. There are so many parallels with wine tasting here. Now if the same hypothetical rich guy comes in and buys the amp because it may or may not be better, he needs to realize that his reasons for purchasing such amps are totally irrelevant for the vast majority of people seeking help about audio in LTT forums, and even just bringing it up from time to time without a full, proper explanation could potentially mislead others into getting something they don't need or want.

 

 

 

So to reiterate: It's not about luxury, it's not about shitposting rich people who buy things on a whim. It's about whether something makes a difference that is rooted in reality or not and whether such talk is useful to a LTT member asking for help on audio.

[ym1453]

I want to start this comment by saying I dont know many facts about the human hearing and those sort of stuff i speak based on personal experiances around me and my friends experiances and the way I interpet it.

 

as for the conversation of "do they actually hear it or they are just talking out of thier ass" I want to refer you guys to an amazing article in innerfidelity that regardless of this conversation I think many will find informative but for the skae of this conversation I think his blind test system and conclusion are very important http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/pono-player-and-promises-fulfilled 

 

 

I highly doubt there is 1% of the population that can hear a huge difference between something like an Objective to Benchmark DAC absent of any placebo/etc. That's bordering on supernatural if you ask me. As mentioned we are talking about amps/dacs, not headphones. Accuracy for these are pretty easy to define and objectively measure. If some guy wants to buy a $4000 amp because he can, that's got nothing to do with his hearing ability. 

 

 

Now in that regard I have friends who hear fine and cant tell the difference between headphones(when we are speaking about very different headphones to my ears) so if some can hear a difference between headphones and some cant than I do think some can hear a difference between amps\dacs while other cant.

 

Again I dont have any facts standing behind me just eperiances I hear a difference between my headphones when they are amped and when they arent and many other people do and refering to the article up there it proves SOME people do hear a differnce in amps and dacs and I just think its probobly more than 1% and that the people saying they hear a massive difference while they could be exaggerating I dont think they are imagining.

 

Sorry for the bad english/

[SSL]

http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/pono-player-and-promises-fulfilled

 

I've read that already and it has informed my comments up to this point.

 

I dont think they are imagining.

 

Human perception is unreliable whether you think so or not.

[PhantomTates]

I like the HiFimeDIY Sabre USB DAC 2: http://hifimediy.com/DACs/ready-made-dacs/usb-dac2

It's nearly on par with the O2DAC/AMP imo.

Though for a large difference you better look for a different pair of headphones.