Amp/DAC For sennheiser HD 600?

[creatip123]

 

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.

 

 

Ah, 'chances'. So there is a chance that they will notice? 

 

Reading it all back, it may very well have strayed, and I too got a part in it. Perhaps take it from the top.

 

The possibility of 'some people can hear it, while others can't' exist. It's not an absolute fact, and it's not applicable on each and every cases. I think up to this point, it's agreeable. This was the original point I was trying to make. From here on, it got strayed a bit.

 

Now whether if the guy who can hear it wanna spend his money on that difference, that's a whole different thing. If say I can hear a difference between amp A and B, and provable by repeated success of proper ABX tests, that doesn't automatically means I'm willing to shell out 10x more to get the pricier one. Vice versa, realistically speaking, I don't think everyone who bought the pricier one can definitely hear any differences. It's their money after all, they can spend it all they want for whatever reasons.

 

Perhaps the keyword is 'deemed worth it', and of course got the cash stack to back it up. Everyone who bought the pricier one deemed it worth the price, that's for sure. As to whether their reasons make sense or not, or are they just delusional, or even got too much money and don't know how to spend it, that's entirely up to them. 

 

And of course 'deemed worth it' condition changes depending on other factors, but mostly depending on the wallet size. I can hear a difference between Fiio E6 and the $4000 Alo Studio Six, but I don't deem it worth the extra $3980, mainly because I don't have the wallet to back it up. If, for example, in the future my income is like 100 grand/month, I might change my mind, and deemed it worth the extra price. 

[BoredErica]

 

-

I want to pull people who claim to be able to hear differences and make them sit in my room and have them take my blind test.

The possibility of 'some people can hear it, while others can't' exist. It's not an absolute fact, and it's not applicable on each and every cases. I think up to this point, it's agreeable. This was the original point I was trying to make. From here on, it got strayed a bit.

 

Now whether if the guy who can hear it wanna spend his money on that difference, that's a whole different thing. If say I can hear a difference between amp A and B, and provable by repeated success of proper ABX tests, that doesn't automatically means I'm willing to shell out 10x more to get the pricier one. Vice versa, realistically speaking, I don't think everyone who bought the pricier one can definitely hear any differences. It's their money after all, they can spend it all they want for whatever reasons.

 

Perhaps the keyword is 'deemed worth it', and of course got the cash stack to back it up. Everyone who bought the pricier one deemed it worth the price, that's for sure. As to whether their reasons make sense or not, or are they just delusional, or even got too much money and don't know how to spend it, that's entirely up to them. 

 

And of course 'deemed worth it' condition changes depending on other factors, but mostly depending on the wallet size. I can hear a difference between Fiio E6 and the $4000 Alo Studio Six, but I don't deem it worth the extra $3980, mainly because I don't have the wallet to back it up. If, for example, in the future my income is like 100 grand/month, I might change my mind, and deemed it worth the extra price. 

Sure, if some rich guy can pass a blind test between two amps (and is unwilling to find a way to try get such a sound with other methods) and it shows the guy can hear a difference and prefers the more expensive option, maybe he should go for the more expensive option. But that really has very little to do with the people posting threads on LTT asking for help. And that was also a lot of 'if's. Generally there is a much higher chance such a person is just a classic Head-fi member.

 

It is obvious that whether a person decides to buy something, be it for a good reason or for a bad reason, that it's up to them. But their reasons for doing so shows what type of person they are. To me the reasons matter. If the rich guy was my friend and he wanted to splurge, I would understand. But if the rich guy friend did it because of Head-fi-type reasons, I'm going to have to find new friends.

[xtroria]

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

Great spirits have always encounter violent oppositions from mediocore mind

[creatip123]

 

 

I want to pull people who claim to be able to hear differences and make them sit in my room and have them take my blind test.

Sure, if some rich guy can pass a blind test between two amps (and is unwilling to find a way to try get such a sound with other methods) and it shows the guy can hear a difference and prefers the more expensive option, maybe he should go for the more expensive option. But that really has very little to do with the people posting threads on LTT asking for help. And that was also a lot of 'if's. Generally there is a much higher chance such a person is just a classic Head-fi member.

 

 

Emmm to which I wrote in previous post: 

 

 

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.

 

I wrote above that I can hear the difference between E6 and the Alo Studio Six (which is obvious, considering the level gap, and the fact that E6 uses tiny battery), but I'd be crazy to recommend the Studio Six to a guy asking about buying his first amp. 

[SSL]

Reading it all back, it may very well have strayed, and I too got a part in it.

 

My original comment was about people who imagine a difference, or exaggerate one that is there, and then confirm their bias by pointing out that "not everyone can hear a difference". Why does this confirm their bias? Because if someone claims "there is no difference" they can easily reject that claim by reasoning that the person was incapable of hearing a difference in the first place.

 

Of course, sometimes a difference is there to be heard. To that end, the other point I tried to make was the distinction between:

• A 1% difference is worth a premium
• A 1% difference is significant

Tacking "to some people" on that second phrase is inappropriate. It's equivocating subjective valuation with objective magnitude. Like the analogy I made with a house with a 1% larger floor plan, or a building that is 101 stories instead of 100, while someone may choose to place a subjective value on such a small difference, it does not change the objective degree of that difference.

 

Audio reproduction does not exist in a vacuum, it is not magic, it is not all relative to personal perception.

 

The ultimate goal of high fidelity - by definition! - is getting as close to the original as possible. An amp that is 1% closer to that goal is always 1% closer to that goal no matter how much someone may subjectively value the importance of having that extra 1%. That's the difference between the person who owns a $4000 pool cue because they think it's a cool thing to own and the person who thinks it helps them play a better game of pool.

[creatip123]

My original comment was about people who imagine a difference, or exaggerate one that is there, and then confirm their bias by pointing out that "not everyone can hear a difference". Why does this confirm their bias? Because if someone claims "there is no difference" they can easily reject that claim by reasoning that the person was incapable of hearing a difference in the first place.

 

Of course, sometimes a difference is there to be heard. To that end, the other point I tried to make was the distinction between:

• A 1% difference is worth a premium
• A 1% difference is significant

Tacking "to some people" on that second phrase is inappropriate. It's equivocating subjective valuation with objective magnitude. Like the analogy I made with a house with a 1% larger floor plan, or a building that is 101 stories instead of 100, while someone may choose to place a subjective value on such a small difference, it does not change the objective degree of that difference.

 

Audio reproduction does not exist in a vacuum, it is not magic, it is not all relative to personal perception.

 

The ultimate goal of high fidelity - by definition! - is getting as close to the original as possible. An amp that is 1% closer to that goal is always 1% closer to that goal no matter how much someone may subjectively value the importance of having that extra 1%. That's the difference between the person who owns a $4000 pool cue because they think it's a cool thing to own and the person who thinks it helps them play a better game of pool.

 

I see what you mean. Well, here's my take (on the issue):

 

Everybody is free to claim anything they like. I could claim I originally came from Mars, if I want. Consequently, other people are free to choose whether they want to believe the claim or not. Now if I want my claim to hold more credibility to it, then the burden of proof falls upon me. Or if I'm trying to 'convert' other people to believe my claim, they can ask for some degree of proofs. It's kinda like a game of bluff and calling bluff. 

 

Now proofs are proofs, no more, no less. Like say I claim amp A is better than B, and I claim I can hear the difference, the burden of proof falls upon me. If I can proof it with proper and legit tests (like ABX), then I got my proof there, and that's that. What other people wanna think or do with that proof is entirely their prerogative rights. If after that I say, 'see, I've proven that A is better than B, therefore it's totally worth it to spend another 4 grand for amp A, and you must agree, because you've seen the proof', now this is out of context. 'Worth it' is in subjective frame, and I can't force this to others. I may deem it worth it, but others might not, and vice versa. This is probably where people F-ed up, that is after they present the proofs, they start to force their subjective opinion on others. I can persuade (maybe as in a salesman's context), but I can't force. 

[SSL]

I see what you mean. Well, here's my take (on the issue):

 

Everybody is free to claim anything they like. I could claim I originally came from Mars, if I want. Consequently, other people are free to choose whether they want to believe the claim or not. Now if I want my claim to hold more credibility to it, then the burden of proof falls upon me. Or if I'm trying to 'convert' other people to believe my claim, they can ask for some degree of proofs. It's kinda like a game of bluff and calling bluff. 

 

Now proofs are proofs, no more, no less. Like say I claim amp A is better than B, and I claim I can hear the difference, the burden of proof falls upon me. If I can proof it with proper and legit tests (like ABX), then I got my proof there, and that's that. What other people wanna think or do with that proof is entirely their prerogative rights. If after that I say, 'see, I've proven that A is better than B, therefore it's totally worth it to spend another 4 grand for amp A, and you must agree, because you've seen the proof', now this is out of context. 'Worth it' is in subjective frame, and I can't force this to others. I may deem it worth it, but others might not, and vice versa. This is probably where people F-ed up, that is after they present the proofs, they start to force their subjective opinion on others. I can persuade (maybe as in a salesman's context), but I can't force. 

 

Sure, I agree with that. Unfortunately, this happens all the time; small differences revealed in a blind test are blown out of proportion because people hear what they want to.

[BoredErica]

There's too little poop flinging here for this to be a LTT thread. What is going on here?!

[SSL]

There's too little poop flinging here for this to be a LTT thread. What is going on here?!

 

Nothing stopping you.

[SSL]

@creatip123 You should read Tyll's review of the Pono, he actually says some similar things to what you are. In particular:

 

A subtle thing is objectively small, but can have potent subjective effects.

 

And the converse is also true. Let's say you go for a hike in the beautiful back-country and a small piece of grass gets caught in your sock. It just barely touches your ankle, but you can feel it poking you. You look for it, but it's so small you can't see it and you can't get rid of it. If you're not very good with your sense of non-attachement, this tiny blade of grass might make you nuts by the end of the day and significantly degrade your hiking experience.

 

My point here is that two things are at play: the objective mechanism, and the subjective experience. They are not tightly coupled like gears in an engine; they are related and dependent only insofar as you will or allow them to be. This is an important concept and I've written about it more fully here.

[creatip123]

@creatip123 You should read Tyll's review of the Pono, he actually says some similar things to what you are. In particular:

 

 

That about nails it. It's a philosophical thinking, 'things are the way they're perceived', something like 'I think, therefore I am' kinda stuffs.

 

One single thing or fact can be perceived very differently, depending on who's doing it (the perceiving). 

 

I love Heineken. But if I give a can to a 5 years old kid, most likely he/she will spit it out, because of the bitter taste. Now if say Wallmart or something is having a sale, a dozen cans of Heineken for $15. For me it's hell yeah!! For that 5 years old kid, hell no!! Who's the right and who's the wrong here? 

[angst92]

My 2p, the schiit vali's warm and soft sound signature suits the hd 600 series very well. It doesn't give you the greatest clarity but thats not what its designed for, its for easy relaxing listening not analytical listening. So if thats what your after go for that.

[ym1453]

I think that is an amazing article that you can take a lot of stuff from

1) the blind test which while most likely won't show the same results for everyone show that some can hear a difference between sources and amps

2) the general understanding audio is subjective and the products that take place in improving your experience are all offering subjective differences that we all precive differently and when stacked up equal a different experience to every individual in a different way.

This article is great for many other reasons and tyll is one of my favorite writers regarding audio I urge you to read his articles and this one in prticular

Also if what I just wrote make absolutely no sense I am after a big party and pretty drunk so sorry in advance

[ShearMe]

I think that is an amazing article that you can take a lot of stuff from

1) the blind test which while most likely won't show the same results for everyone show that some can hear a difference between sources and amps

2) the general understanding audio is subjective and the products that take place in improving your experience are all offering subjective differences that we all precive differently and when stacked up equal a different experience to every individual in a different way.

This article is great for many other reasons and tyll is one of my favorite writers regarding audio I urge you to read his articles and this one in prticular

Also if what I just wrote make absolutely no sense I am after a big party and pretty drunk so sorry in advance

1) possibility hearing the differences between sources was never in question, just the degree of difference.

 

2) Audio preferences ARE subjective, which is why you should NOT choose products based off subjective reviews. If you subjectively like a certain sound, then you should choose products which objectively provide you with what you're looking for.

[SSL]

I think that is an amazing article that you can take a lot of stuff from

1) the blind test which while most likely won't show the same results for everyone show that some can hear a difference between sources and amps

2) the general understanding audio is subjective and the products that take place in improving your experience are all offering subjective differences that we all precive differently and when stacked up equal a different experience to every individual in a different way.

This article is great for many other reasons and tyll is one of my favorite writers regarding audio I urge you to read his articles and this one in prticular

 

There were a few problems I had with it. In particular:

 

...the Pono Player was delivering exactly what it promised: a deep connection with the music.

 

Yet:

 

I could identify them correctly four out of five times. I need to add that it was usually only after I had sat with my forehead on the table for 5-10 minutes flicking the switch between sources. I could do it, but it's not easy.

 

What? Sounds like Tyll is having his cake and eating it, too. How does the Pono provide "a deep connection with the music" yet prove so similar to an iPad that it took as much as 15 minutes to pick it out in a side-by-side test? I guess that's how long he takes to establish that "deep connection".

 

The analogy I quoted above (grass in sock) is also dumb. I doubt anyone would take 5-10 minutes to determine that there is something poking them in the ankle. He's equivocating the physically small with the perceptually subtle.

 

And finally:

 

...blacker between the notes...

 

:rolleyes:

[ym1453]

There were a few problems I had with it. In particular:

Yet:

What? Sounds like Tyll is having his cake and eating it, too. How does the Pono provide "a deep connection with the music" yet prove so similar to an iPad that it took as much as 15 minutes to pick it out in a side-by-side test? I guess that's how long he takes to establish that "deep connection".

The analogy I quoted above (grass in sock) is also dumb. I doubt anyone would take 5-10 minutes to determine that there is something poking them in the ankle. He's equivocating the physically small with the perceptually subtle.

And finally:

:rolleyes:

Well the comment I wrote last night wasn't the most thought out so sorry about that.

Regarding the article I never thought it was perfect and it does raise some questions when it comes to how long it took him to pick each source.

with that in mind I still think that the fact he mentioned how hard it was for him to get it right is part of the point that the differences between devices were very small and when stacked out tighter creates in the long term a better connection to the music and a better experience whether that is true or not is set for each individual to determine for himself.

What I thought was amazing about this article was more the dedication and hard work that tyll put in here rather than his conclusion that is subjective and this hard work is not something I see from any audio reviewer.

[ym1453]

1) possibility hearing the differences between sources was never in question, just the degree of difference.

2) Audio preferences ARE subjective, which is why you should NOT choose products based off subjective reviews. If you subjectively like a certain sound, then you should choose products which objectively provide you with what you're looking for.

I agree with you I gave the article for other reasons than to say "if tyll likes it than I will like it as well".

I gave the article as an example cause I think it approved and encountered many of the questions roses in this thread.

[SSL]

\with that in mind I still think that the fact he mentioned how hard it was for him to get it right is part of the point that the differences between devices were very small and when stacked out tighter creates in the long term a better connection to the music and a better experience whether that is true or not is set for each individual to determine for himself.

 

Blithely repeating "subjective" and "for each individual to determine" ignores involuntary bias. Sometimes it isn't possible for an individual to determine. As explained in this paper (summarized here under "long term listening"), barely audible differences do not tend to emerge over time. Tyll's claim that these objectively miniscule details can have an emergent effect on the overall long-term experience seems like a post hoc rationalization for his initial, sighted listening experience and how it conflicted with the difficulty of identifying the Pono in blind testing.

[DWN]

I sped read the thread. Did anyone suggest FLAC or did everyone just go apesh1t over amps and cans?

[SSL]

I sped read the thread. Did anyone suggest FLAC or did everyone just go apesh1t over amps and cans?

 

No.

[Ultragunner]

so in the end, the TL;DR is we don't need an AMP for the HD600? 

 

I do plan to upgrade to them soon while I'm rocking the FiiO E10k 

[ym1453]

Get the headphone first if it ain't loud enough consider an amp.

If you actually want to see if you can see a difference get the amp from a place with good return policy and try a blind test with a friend.

[creatip123]

so in the end, the TL;DR is we don't need an AMP for the HD600? 

 

I do plan to upgrade to them soon while I'm rocking the FiiO E10k 

 

People tend to look at this from a different/wrong angle altogether.

 

Does it need an amp? Yes. Without an amp, 99% of headphones won't give a good sound, due to lack of voltage, current, and consequently, power. Fortunately, all audio devices that got headphone out already got their own built-in amps. 

Seems like a word game, doesn't it? Not quite. Now that you already know the fact, the question changes, from 'do I need an amp for HD600?' to 'does my existing device's built-in amp adequate for HD600, or do I need an additional amp?'. The difference between the two questions is, now we're bringing the existing system's spec into the equation. 

 

Questions like this 'do I need an additional amp with my X headphone?' must be seen as case per case, with the existing system kept in the equation. For example, I got a cheap mobo, with VIA onboard sound. It's good, but doesn't have high enough voltage (or power, to be short) to drive my HE400 to normal enjoyment level of loudness. So can I say that HE-400 definitely can't be run straight off of onboards? Not an absolute fact. I know for sure there are other kind of onboards that are more powerful than my VIA onboard, like those in gaming oriented mobos. There's a big chance those onboards can drive my HE400 to normal enjoyment level.

[SSL]

so in the end, the TL;DR is we don't need an AMP for the HD600? 

 

I do plan to upgrade to them soon while I'm rocking the FiiO E10k 

 

The point I've been trying to make is that there will not be a significant difference in sound from upgrading the source, unless the source it terrible to begin with.