Jump to content
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Nimrodor

Member
  • Content Count

    1,138
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Reputation Activity

  1. Like
    Nimrodor got a reaction from empleat in Imbalanced sound at low volume   
    Cheap potentiometers, like those often used in headphones, tend to have large channel imbalance at low levels since mechanical inaccuracies in the construction have a magnified effect in those sections.
     
    The recommendation that you not use digital volume control generally only applies if you have a good powered analog volume control like the potentiometer on a heapdhone amplifier (and even then, isn't always valid). The impedance mismatch and reduced damping from lowering the volume using an unbuffered series potentiometer like those used on passive headphones are massive compared to any noise contribution that digital volume control could ever produce.
     
    Why digital volume control doesn't matter for anyone who's just plugging their headphones into their computers:
     
  2. Agree
    Nimrodor reacted to Ahoy Hoy in Bose QC 35 II or Sennheiser HD 25 Sound Quality?   
    I own a paid of HD25s and Ive tried the Bose QC.

    They are very different styles of headphones. Very hard to compare the two to one another.


    HD25 are kind of the bees knees when it comes to quality. They are professional headphones. Comfort wise not the best. You defiantly arnt going to forget you have these on


    Bose sound good. Very comfortable. Wireless and noise cancelation. 


    Now the most important thing im going to say
    Active noise cancelation causes headaches. Different headphones designs of ANC have different affects on people. I personally hate the Bose as they give me headaches while my boss loves them. I personally like the Sony version while my boss doesnt like them.
    I recommend before anyone buys active noise cancelation headphones to test them. Since your British Ill give you this tip. Most PC world/Currys have the headphones available to try on in their headphone section. Go to a store try the headphones before you buy.
  3. Informative
    Nimrodor got a reaction from M.R_KING in Takstar PRO82 is it a good headphones or is it a trash??   
    Aliexpress reviews are for the transaction, not the product. Highly reviewed on Ali means that the seller ships the product as described in a reasonable amount of time, not that the product itself is good.
  4. Informative
    Nimrodor got a reaction from lexusgamer05 in Cheap wireless earbuds for exercise and running.   
    They also have the Airdots 2 for the same price:
    https://www.pbtech.co.nz/product/HSTMIX28592/Xiaomi-Mi-AirDots-2-True-Wireless-Earphones---Blac
     
    If you're in no hurry, most Aliexpress sellers ship to NZ for free in ~3 weeks. You can get the Airdots for about half the price there.
  5. Agree
    Nimrodor reacted to spwath in Can you rewire AUX?   
    You cant get a headphone out from an amplifier that doesnt have a headphone out (at least in a good way that makes sense to do)
  6. Agree
    Nimrodor reacted to Derkoli in Graphs - One is marketed by Qobuz as 24 Bit FLAC, the other is from youtube. Without looking at the file names, can you tell which is which?   
    Guys, please remember that a crappy master on FLAC, is 10x worse than a good master on MP3. Mastering is so much more important than file type.
  7. Agree
    Nimrodor reacted to Pixel5 in Is it just me or ANC headphones earpads are much smaller then gaming ones   
    i personally have the MX2 from Sony and didnt have such big problems with their ear cups, they are not designed to be over ear they are designed to be on ear unless you got very small ears.
    the reason for that is that having them on the ear give it a certain distance while with over ear models the distance depends greatly on how big your ear is and how your head is shaped.
     
    for noise cancelling to work right you need very precise timing  as they send out the sounds coming from the outside 180° phase shifted so the sound waves cancel each other out.
    If you dont get that timing right and the ear is too close to the speaker driver you may be able to hear the sound before they cancel each other out so they prefer to make them on ear to avoid this.
    Im very happy with my MX2 while i would really like the MX3 for their USB C port but given the long battery life i rarely need to recharge anyways.
    Before corona i was on business trips constantly so i used them all the time for hours on the plane to get some silence and they were perfect for that.
  8. Informative
    Nimrodor got a reaction from MS-DOS in What is the average frequency spectrum for a smartphone?   
    Notebookcheck includes frequency measurements for the speakers on the phones and laptops they measure. Example:

    from Galaxy S10 article: https://www.notebookcheck.net/Samsung-Galaxy-S10-Smartphone-Review.414549.0.html#toc-emissions.
     
    In general even good phones don't become noticeably loud until above 100Hz.
  9. Agree
    Nimrodor reacted to Derkoli in Sound Cards vs. Expensive Motherboards vs. Cheap MOBOs   
    The difference?
     
    Quite minimal actually.
     
    MOBO audio has come quite far since the day's of the first sound cards. The one huge limitation is output voltage/current (depending upon load impedance)
     
    The reason why we use external AMP's is to get more power. (In the case of solid-state (transistor) amplification amplification it is current amplification. Tubes are voltage amplifiers by design, but thats another discussion)
     
    We also use external gear due to lower noise, which gives us better Dynamic Range and no hissing crap. Most motherboards won't hiss anymore. But coil whine is still a thing with some GPU's, so onboard audio still isn't going to win.
     
    Alot of people also use Soundcards for all the effects that you can get with them. Creative Labs in particular bundles ALOT of software with their soundcards.
     
    Not all headphone jacks will sound the same, Atleast on higher end/more revealing systems.
     
    Cheaper headphones might not actually show the user flaws in the headphone output and the user may not care. Nor may the user actually be able to hear small differences.
     
    With a higher end system, Flaws are more obvious. Especially with studio gear, which by design is supposed to show all flaws and be as transparent as possible.
  10. Informative
    Nimrodor got a reaction from Moonzy in Sound Cards vs. Expensive Motherboards vs. Cheap MOBOs   
    This is true for the resistor ladder DACs that are usually taught in most EE classes, but not in practice. Virtually all modern audio frequency sampling uses a different process which samples at an incredibly high rate then trades time resolution for level resolution. Although switching does occur, it usually happens at a frequency so far above the cutoff of the analog output filter that steps do not appear in the output signal.
    EMI is the most well-known source of noise, but in practice is rarely an issue; it only tends to be significant at high (non-audible) frequencies. The most common audible noise in audio circuits is due to grounding issues.
     
    In state-of-the-art audio amplifiers, noise is usually dominated by quantum effects. (e.g. thermal noise, flicker noise, and shot noise)
    At audio frequencies, parasitic inductance (the main source of differing frequency responses) is rarely significant enough to cause audible differences between capacitors. Though different capacitors may have audible effects in bypass/decoupling and feedback loop applications where ultrasonic performance can affect the performance of other components in the signal path, differences between capacitors placed directly in the signal path are usually due to nonlinearities.
     
    Polarized electrolytic capacitors, for instance, predictably conduct electricity differently depending on the current direction, and tend to produce audible even-order harmonic distortion. In nonpolarized capacitors with high dielectric constants, capacitance may vary with the applied voltage and will be dominated by odd-order harmonic distortion (in the absence of DC bias).
    Surprisingly the inductive contribution to impedance for dynamic drivers tends to be quite low, only becoming significant at higher frequencies. Through most of the audible range, impedance is dominated by a resistive (real) term and a peak due to back-EMF from the physical resonant frequency of the driver.
    The voltage levels on even standard consumer equipment are sufficient for most listening conditions (usually ~1Vrms+ before clipping). It's the current output that is more limited, which often makes low-impedance loads more difficult to drive. For most motherboards the sweet spot is somewhere between 80Ω and 250Ω: above this, the output is voltage limited, below this, output is current limited. In addition, cheap outputs tend to have high output impedances, which cause larger frequency response issues with low impedance than high impedance loads.
     
    Funnily enough, headphone amplifiers are often run in their lowest gain setting, making their main function current buffering rather than voltage amplification.
    It depends whether or not ultrasonic noise is present, and how good the analog circuitry is. Spurious signals above the Nyquist frequency but below the Nyquist rate get aliased into the audible band. The Nyquist sampling theorem only promises perfect signal reproduction assuming an ideal brickwall low pass filter (which doesn't exist in real life) at the Nyquist frequency.

    In practice, the common sample rates (44.1kHz and 48kHz) were selected to give some frequency buffer for real filters, which have a less abrupt transition. ADC's are supposed to have analog antialiasing filters at their inputs to remove the ultrasonic components from the signal before it can be sampled, but these being real filters, they seldom remove all of the noise. In addition, high frequency components can interact with lower frequency ones within analog circuits to produce IMD inside the audible band that cannot be removed by such filters.

    Philosophical objections aside, there are some arguments to be made for recording at higher sample rates purely for the benefit of being able to more effectively filter out noise with digital filtering, should it be significant. The downside is that ADCs tend to perform worse at higher sample rates. Though the uncorrelated noise performance may be recoverable by resampling, distortion cannot. (I'm splitting hairs here: these effects are absolutely measurable but dubiously audible in most well-designed equipment/setups).

    For resistor ladder DACs different sample rates are always measurable and sometimes audible, as resampling the signal to a higher frequency also pushes additional noise and aliasing (and IMD!) into higher ultrasonic frequencies. On Delta-Sigma DACs this is less of an issue as signals are already upsampled internally by design.
  11. Agree
    Nimrodor reacted to ChalkChalkson in This Sounds Too Good to be True - 1950W/(m*K) TIM   
    Nope there is more to it. If all that was going on was the shitty elasticity, you'd see performance very similar to that of a dry mount (which isn't that awful). The physics of pyrolitic carbon is such that is only conducts in one plane (thread where I explained how and why after the floatplane release). Or as figgyc said:
    Since it's in the description of the product I'd assume @AlexTheGreatish was aware. Pretty hyped to see what they are planning with it.
     
    That could work. In the thread I linked earlier we also chatted for a second about thermal compounds that use small fibers of carbon to increase conductivity. Blending would be considerably worse though since it produces flakes. The performance you'd get would essentially be the average of the conductivities in all directions which is to say you put a lot of effort into getting slightly worse graphite. Maybe if you could find a way of getting  ~1-10µm thin strips that are ~100µm long, then suspending them in a silicone rubber of some sort and aligning them to poke up vertically through the use of an electrostatic field....
  12. Agree
    Nimrodor reacted to Enderman in This Sounds Too Good to be True - 1950W/(m*K) TIM   
    ???
    Where the hell did they get those w/mk numbers??
     
    Thermal compounds are no where near 30w/mk
    Most are below 10w/mk (MX4 and NT-H1 are 8.5) with the best ones like Kryonaut being 12w/mk.
     
    At least the liquid metal w/mk is correct.
     
     
     
    The reason graphene thermal pads suck is because they are just a thin sheet of a solid, so you're basically just making the heatsink/CPU surface thicker, you're not filling in the irregular gaps between the two like a liquid would.
    The entire point of a thermal paste is to fill in irregular spaces because neither the CPU nor heatsink are perfectly flat.
     
    If the CPU and heatsink were lapped to near-perfection then yes then graphite pad would work, but then you could simply not use the pad at all and just have the CPU contact the heatsink directly for even less thermal resistance.
  13. Agree
    Nimrodor reacted to Kilrah in Lessen audio Cipping?   
    You need to do the opposite. Dial back the preamp on the PC so that the PC's output is clean, then increase volume on the amps to get what you need.
  14. Informative
    Nimrodor got a reaction from PriitM in No breaks on the hypetrain   
    The "higher impedance headphones require special expensive amplifiers" thing isn't really true. Most audio SoC's will output comparable power into 300Ω and 32Ω. The exceptions are class D/G/H amps, which still aren't terribly common for headphone use yet.
     
    Both tube and solid state amplifiers in almost every topology work better with high impedance headphones than low impedance ones, up to voltage clipping.
     
    Any given amplifier will perform better (lower noise and distortion) into a high impedance load than a low impedance one, up to the maximum voltage output. This is true for both solid state and tube amplifiers. A solid state amplifier will perform better in a high impedance headphone than a low impedance headphone. The only downside is that if the two headphones have equivalent sensitivities, the amplifier may get the low impedance ones louder, provided that the output stage is sufficient.
  15. Agree
    Nimrodor got a reaction from Derkoli in No breaks on the hypetrain   
    The "higher impedance headphones require special expensive amplifiers" thing isn't really true. Most audio SoC's will output comparable power into 300Ω and 32Ω. The exceptions are class D/G/H amps, which still aren't terribly common for headphone use yet.
     
    Both tube and solid state amplifiers in almost every topology work better with high impedance headphones than low impedance ones, up to voltage clipping.
     
    Any given amplifier will perform better (lower noise and distortion) into a high impedance load than a low impedance one, up to the maximum voltage output. This is true for both solid state and tube amplifiers. A solid state amplifier will perform better in a high impedance headphone than a low impedance headphone. The only downside is that if the two headphones have equivalent sensitivities, the amplifier may get the low impedance ones louder, provided that the output stage is sufficient.
  16. Informative
    Nimrodor got a reaction from rice guru in No breaks on the hypetrain   
    The "higher impedance headphones require special expensive amplifiers" thing isn't really true. Most audio SoC's will output comparable power into 300Ω and 32Ω. The exceptions are class D/G/H amps, which still aren't terribly common for headphone use yet.
     
    Both tube and solid state amplifiers in almost every topology work better with high impedance headphones than low impedance ones, up to voltage clipping.
     
    Any given amplifier will perform better (lower noise and distortion) into a high impedance load than a low impedance one, up to the maximum voltage output. This is true for both solid state and tube amplifiers. A solid state amplifier will perform better in a high impedance headphone than a low impedance headphone. The only downside is that if the two headphones have equivalent sensitivities, the amplifier may get the low impedance ones louder, provided that the output stage is sufficient.
  17. Agree
    Nimrodor reacted to rice guru in Should i swap my HyperX Cloud Alphas for a pair of Audio Technicas?   
    If your gaming I really wouldn't reccomend their general audio technica their lack of soundstage and the m50 's lack of soundstage and separation don't really help rather impede your experience. I would reccomend getting akg k371 , DT 770, cooler master MH 751.  If your into open backs PC 37x, hd58x, DT 880 ,dt990 he 4xx are all  options for step ups to what you have now
  18. Agree
    Nimrodor reacted to kokakolia in Does plugging your headphones into the USB port give your better sound quality? The convincing argument.......YES!   
    I just can't shake the feeling of being swindled into marketing snake oil convincing me to buy more stuff. I do acknowledge that some budget phones and laptops have horrible sound output out of their headphone jacks. So buying an external DAC makes absolute sense in that scenario. But I feel like an absolute idiot when buying a $100 USB DAC (Audioquest Dragonfly Black V1.5) and plugging it into my iPhone via an unreliable OTG cable which disconnects... often! The solution promises "better sound", at the expense of draining more battery out of your phone, being very clunky and costing 10 times more than the $9 Apple headphone dongle which performs admirably (as stated by actual sound engineers). In my humble experience, the Dragonfly Black and iPhone dongle sound the same to my ears. Actually, the Dragonfly emits a noticeable "hiss" when driving sensitive earphones. But the Dragonfly has more volume and can drive bigger headphones louder, something the iPhone dongle struggles with. 
     
    So I'm angry at all the folks online who claim that the humble $9 Apple dongle sucks and that you should use a far more expensive ($100+) and clunkier lightning dongle instead. These so-called audio reviewers are no doubt sponsored by all these audio companies trying to unload their "just about average" products at luxury prices. 
  19. Like
    Nimrodor got a reaction from MG240 in Airpods Pro or Bose QC35 II?   
    Rtings has their measurements for the Airpods Pro out: https://www.rtings.com/headphones/reviews/apple/airpods-pro-truly-wireless
     
    vs. Sony WF-1000XM3 ANC Wireless In-Ears
    vs. Sony WH-1000XM3 ANC Wireless Headphones
    vs. Bose QC35 II ANC Wireless Headphones
     
    Sound:
     
    Although the stock frequency response is a bit skewed, the Airpods Pro look like they sound quite good. Bass is recessed but well-extended, and distortion throughout the entire audible range is very low, implying that it should perform well with EQ. There is some slight high treble peakiness in the chart, but this is most likely due to ear canal resonances, making this likely to not be a unique issue in practice. Due to the looser fit than standard in-ears, there is some variation in sound signature depending on how deep they are inserted, but it looks like the feedback loop does a reasonable job of keeping the bass response flat while the semi-in-ear design keeps the treble from varying too significantly. Like all ANC headphones (and in-ears), soundstage is expected to range from nonexistent to abysmal.
     
    Compared the the WH-1000XM3, the XM3 most likely sounds better without EQ while the Airpods Pro could possibly sound better with. The XM3 has a high treble rolloff issue (audible as a rounded-off sound on fast percussive attacks and a subtly muffled quality to some other instruments), but its mild bass boost (following the updated Olive response target nicely) and well-balanced mids make it a good performer out of the box. It also has a nice subtle dip in the mid treble followed by a peak at the mid-high treble transition to reduce listening fatigue while maintaining an impression of good treble response. The Airpods Pro don't have as good tuning out of the box, but their distortion performance is significantly better and their response, while not flat, doesn't have any sharp peaks (no uncontrolled resonances), making it a good platform for digital tuning. Speaking honestly, I love to see tuning like that on the XM3; it's far from perfect, but there's a good reason for each tradeoff that it makes – it says a lot about the priorities of the engineers designing it.
     
    The QC35's tuning sounds excellent aside from its treble performance – a minefield of many small peaks (and corresponding distortion spikes) that at times make recordings sound as if there were a balloon placed between the microphone and performer: subtle, but universally annoying. Bass performance on the QC35 is the best on the list – Bose has their low frequency feedback loop down to near-perfection. Personally, I found the QC35 to be (in some ways) technically better than the XM3, but the XM3 (slightly) more enjoyable to listen to; the many reasonable drawbacks and tradeoffs on the XM3 bothered me less than the one glaring flaw with the QC35. The QC35 is the only ANC headphone here that makes a reasonable pretense of having soundstage, but this comes at the cost of high frequency noise cancelling performance.
     
    I have not listened to the WF-1000XM3, but the dip in the mids accompanied by a sharp spike in distortion at the same frequencies implies that there is a ringing resonance there. The rest of its performance looks reasonable, but that one aspect is a large enough dealbreaker for me that I've never been curious enough to want to try it out.
     
    Comfort:
     
    Strongly subjective. If you like loose-fitting in-ears, the Airpods Pro will likely be comfortable. I'll just say that the QC35 is supremely comfortable for people with normally sized ears and very comfortable for people with large ears (the cups are just small enough to put pressure on larger ears), thanks to its excellent-feeling (and surprisingly deep) pads and very light clamping force. It can heat up over time, which may make them uncomfortable in a warm environment. The WH-XM3 is similar to the QC35 but has a higher (less comfortable) clamping force and weight. Bending the headband outward can make it feel as comfortable as the QC35, at the expense of some stability on the head and a small danger of damaging the headphone if you're not familiar with its construction (The top of the headband contains a metal band and foam; you can bend it outward here to reduce its tension, making sure not to fatigue the "leather" covering too much).
     
    In my experience, the "cabin pressure" ear popping sensation varies a good bit from headphone to headphone; both my best and worst experience have been with two different pairs of WH-1000XM3's. I suspect the Airpods Pro will do a better job than the over-ears, but I don't know for sure, and this experience tends to vary a good amount from user to user.
     
    Noise Cancelling:
     
    The WH-1000XM3 is king. The QC35 still does reasonably well, comparable even, at some of the worst airplane cabin noise frequencies, but does markedly worse with the higher frequencies that might be more commonly encountered on the ground. The wind reduction mode on the QC35 is slightly better than that on the XM3 in my experience, though both still do well in this aspect. On the flipside, in standard noise cancelling mode, the XM3 seems to suffer less wind noise than the QC35; in many cases the convenience of not needing to switch modes when it's not too windy out is an overall win.
     
    Surprisingly, neither of the in-ears appear to perform as well as the over-ears, though the Airpods Pro get close. At most frequencies their performance is even on-par with the QC35; the only drawbacks are the worse treble performance (it looks like the bandwidth on the feedforward microphones is set too high, in some cases quietly repeating outside sounds rather than perfectly cancelling them when the phase cancellation isn't quite right) and worse performance in the lower mids where a good amount of an airplane's cabin hum resides. The WF-1000XM3 appear to trail well behind the rest of the pack, with the notably poor low frequency performance indicating something off with the feedback loop.
     
    None of them are going to provide perfect silence in a noisy environment on their own; ANC headphones are still a long way from being able to do that. They will manage to do a decent job of reducing background noise to make listening to music easier. In-ears with good tips do a better job of doing the former, if that's what you're really looking for (sample comparison here).
     
    Interface:
     
    A lack of real volume control is terrible. The WH-1000XM3 has its gesture controls, but these are finicky enough (especially with them failing spectacularly with large temperature changes) that I usually still end up adjusting volume with my device rather than on the headphones themselves (which sucks, since there's a ~2 second delay). The QC35 with its physical buttons has been my favorite overall. The Airpods are somewhere between the two, using more reliable gestures while still lacking realistic volume control.
     
    The XM3 also requires a fairly long press to turn on and off, while the QC35 and Airpods have more-or-less instant on/off. The hand over ear to temporarily listen to the outside function on the XM3 would be useful if it didn't have such high latency; in practice with all of the above it's usually easier to take them off than to use the transparency modes.
     
    All of them have usable but fairly bad-sounding mics. The QC35 is the only one with good multi-device support. All have high latency.
     
     
    Overall, I'd recommend the same thing as with all other devices: see if you can try them out in a store before making a decision. Words can only help point you in the right direction; the decision will in the end come down to what's the best fit for you.
  20. Agree
    Nimrodor got a reaction from Derkoli in Will the ALC 1220 handle the beyerdynamic DT 770 PRO 250Ω ?   
    ALC1220 is usually somewhere between 1.5-2Vrms 15-20mA maximum output, based on what few measurements exist online (there is no datasheet available). Assuming 250Ω 100dB/V for the DT770 Pro, that means you should get up to around 105dB SPL peak (or ~90dB average listening level with high dynamic range music) without clipping – as long as you don't listen to music super loudly (anything above these levels would be borderline harmful to long-term hearing TBH), you should be fine.
     
    I'll add that my HD650 (300Ω 103dB/V) gets more than loud enough for normal use with an ALC1150, which doesn't have as much output as the ALC1220.
     
    I would not get that amplifier. The schematic says they use 47Ω output resistors, which implies that the op-amps they're using for the headphone outputs aren't ideal for headphone use to begin with.
  21. Informative
    Nimrodor got a reaction from Dipypang in Best High Quality Music Streaming Apps   
    IMO Local files>Youtube>Qobuz>Tidal>Others, but every service has its own pros and cons. Really depends what your priorities are.
     
    For price, Youtube is hands-down the winner.
     
    For pure selection, Youtube also easily wins. There's so much music there (especially from smaller and non-US artists) that simply isn't available on most streaming services.
     
    As far as sound quality goes, it's a bit more complicated. I still lean towards Youtube. Most streaming services have a good portion of their music watermarked in an unpleasantly audible way. Youtube usually has a version that isn't watermarked. The bitrate isn't super high, but the opus codec is very transparent; it's easier to tell the difference between watermarked and unwatermarked than even mid bitrate opus vs lossless. Meanwhile less of Qobuz's library is watermarked, so they come out ahead over Tidal in this respect.
     
    Again, really depends on your priorities. I use local files most of the time and Youtube for everything else.
  22. Funny
    Nimrodor reacted to Necrovarius in AKG K52, ATH M20X, or Corsair HS50   
    I know this might not be the answer you are looking for but, Corsair will be more for a gamer where as AKG and ATH will more for audiophiles, or people looking for music/production sound. Gaming headphones normally increase bass which can muddy up other audio if you are looking for that.
  23. Like
    Nimrodor got a reaction from Loch in Hs60 vs. Hs70   
    Why not the $25 HS50? They're all physically the same headphone; the only thing that's different is the interface.
  24. Agree
    Nimrodor got a reaction from Derkoli in QC20s sound "muddy" with ANC off   
    ANC headphones use a feedback loop to control their frequency response in the low and mid frequencies. If you turn off ANC, you turn off the active tuning that the headphones were designed for.
     
    The QC35's absolutely do it too, just not to the same extent. With the QC20, the microphone and driver are coupled more strongly to your pinnae, which means that the feedback plays an even more important role in the tuning.
  25. Agree
    Nimrodor reacted to rEkmAInc1csBnlM6C85H in Onboard sound Z370 Gaming 7   
    USB headsets have their own built in soundcard/DAC. If you want to take advantage of the on board sound you will need to use 3.5mm.
×