After getting my Seinnheiser HD600, what's next?

[Charismatic 0]

My 2 cents:

 

For me, the reason why I came up with that order is simply because how the signal path travels, as shown below:

 

Source -> Amp -> Headphone

 

It's the domino effect, if the first stage falter, the second stage will go as well and so on.

 

 

 

However, I do wish to put in something else. I somehow seem to think that different stages affects different aspects of the music.

 

The source comprise of the transport and the DAC. The role of the DAC is to get the digital bits of 1010 from the diss and then convert it to analog signals, hence DAC Digital Analog Converter. Thus the source will provide detail, accuracy, timing, tonality or in fact, whatever bits of sound that has been recorded. This is the first place where everything can go wrong.

 

This signal is then passed on to the amplifier. The role of the amplifier is to simply amplify the input signals. It get crappy signals, it delivers crappy signals. Pracitcal amplifiers tend to affect the transients, the attacks, the loudness, the brightness of sound but at times, a poorly designed amp will also affect the pitch, the tones etc. This is the second place where things can go wrong.

 

The headphones usually affect the brightness, the extension of bass and treble, soundstage, imaging etc. I prefer to thnk that the latter two have to do with the design and build of the amps, i.e. the physical properties.

 

An example that relates to the early topic, if you want to hear a clear, high treble, you must first have the source that has a wide bandwidth, as an early roll-off would definitely affect the treble, likewise on the bass. Then you must have an amp that's capable as well. Finally, you would have the headphones that able to reproduce the sonic effects. However, if the source has an early roll-off, you wouldn't hear the trebles, unless you have an amp that has a frequency response curve that's biased on the highs or if you use an equaliser.

 

Another thing about that sequence of source-amp-headphone is that you may spend less on upgrading equipment. A story I've liked to use is that :

 

The source is the foundation of the building, no matter how good you can build the windows, the roof, the walls, a shaky foundation will eventually pull the whole building down. Get the roots right and the tree will grow.

 

okay, enough of the blabbering. Sorry for being so long-winded. All the above are just my humble opinions and just for everyone's info, the previous path I took was : Headphone -> Amp -> Source. Now that I know its demerits, I would always tell everyone to follow the Source->Amp->Headphone.

hi Northern Oak,

 

Good analysis...i don't know u but u should be from engineering background, right?

 

Just that the IC between cdp and amp and the hp cable between amp and hp need to be considered in the flow also...they do affect the signals.

[Mackie 0]

Hi evil-zen and Guyferd:

 

I don't wanna preach but I hope to avert a very serious mistake and misconception in audiophillia. Please bear with me.

 

In sound engineering, all schematics and designs are drawn from input to output; very clearly stating the priority of the signal path....as highlighted by Northern Oak. For the record, I was part of the dept. which handles engineering/design/audition of Kenwood AV amps more than a decade ago before my switch to finance.

 

Abiding the old saying "garbage in, garbage out" will help one to avert mistakes and in some cases, disaster in sytem building.

 

If one were to discount cds, the transport of a cd player is the first link that will determine the sound. How else do U think there are separates system comprising of a transport and an outboard dac converter? Even in standalone cdps, the various transport models (of the same brand) give different standards of reliability and sound quality.

 

Coming to your point of speakers giving a big change in sound then elsewhere in the link, I agree....on the change, what about improvement? If there is too, will the change be more significant if the source were to be changed? I mostly concur on this point.

 

In the case of evil-zen's point of DT770 having a strong bass, how can this bass be presented if the source ie cd or cdp are lacking in this aspect? Basically, the source info has to be available and prevalent before amps and cans can amplify the signal to create the resultant sound. With drops in resolution and details on the front end, no amps or speakers or cans are able to replenish this loss.

 

In the case of Guyferd's contentment with mp3 as a source, I can't argue with that because of this rule of thumb that I hold true: As an example, if a person cannot hear the sonic difference of a mini-compo and audiophile system, I will always recommend the listener to buy the mini-compo instead. It doesn't make sense to spend more money on something he couldn't appreciate. Such is the law of economics.

As for the reversal in order as mentioned in your post, I've to disagree. Whether one has taken the route of source-amp-cans, reversed or jumbled up, there're differences. These are time, money and stress.

 

In a given budget of say $1000, the most efficient and economical way is to allocate the monies in this order of priority: source > amp > cans/speakers. The reason being having a good source and least expensive cans/speakers will produce better sound than the reverse. As time goes on when one's standards is heightened, the time taken to go for another upgrade is normally shorter in the reversed config than the first because your ears are asking for more details which the second system with inferior source cannot produce. Also, setting up a system fom back to front is not only prone to upgrades but also error and thus, stress. This also equates to more expenditure when corrective attempts followed suit.

 

Generally, all cans/speakers carry a certain amount of sonic signature and this is what that's being heard....not necessary more details or resolution. Figure this, a pauper can dress like a king and look like a king at first glance. Give it a little time and his real identity shall be revealed.......denotes back to front analogy. Dress up a king in beggars' clothing and he will appear as a pauper first. But the eloquence and intellect can never be masked for long......denotes front to back analogy. In these 2 analogies, which is faster to correct the pauper or the king to appear as the real king? The answer is most obvious.

 

On an interim period, I partnered my Marantz CD6000ose with a setup comprising of MF A3CR preamp, Krell KSA-150 power amp, Behringer DSP8024 parametric eq and Dynaudio Acoustics PPM2 speakers. All who came noticed the cdp as the weakest link after auditions despite of having what I think is a good and high end rig....except for the source. After changing the cdp to a MF A3CD (24/92 upsampling), accolades and praises followed suit. Will changing the speakers instead of the 6000ose help? No way. The reason being a higher-end equiptment will reveal more....all the strong and weak elements in my system, hence the shortcoming of the cdp. This is a real life lesson to be learnt and if one wishes to experience this, come over and I will demonstrate the difference of a system having a poorer and better source. Please do note that 6000ose is an excellent cdp for the price but in a high-end system, its weakness would be revealed in an unforgiving way than a budget-mid range system.

 

I hope my tone wasn't too serious and if I did, please excuse me. It's meant to be for a good cause.

Edited May 1, 2003 by Mackie

[Northern Oak 0]

Good analysis...i don't know u but u should be from engineering background, right?

 

Just that the IC between cdp and amp and the hp cable between amp and hp need to be considered in the flow also...they do affect the signals.

Yup, I'm an electronics engineer/Integrated Circuit designer, with my main forte in amplifier understanding and design. Of course, it's not only audio amps but all sorts.

 

Regarding the ICs, I agree that they do play a part but going into ICs would make the whole situation more complicated, so I guess I would advise one to fix the BIG THREE before playing with IC. Actually, the IC is rather important becos' looking at the chain of effect: CD -> Source-> IC -> Amp -> Headphone Cable -> Headphone, IC could "color" your music at an early stage.

[evil-zen 0]

yes mackie, i do agree that if you have $1000, the priorities will be from source,amp,headphones. Lets leave out interconnects and tweaks here and focus mainly on source and headphones ok? The reason being because headphones are mini speakers that can achieve plenty with little money.

 

But what Northern Oak said was Components that will make the biggest impact on sonic performance. Thus if going by his analogy, one would reasonably spend S$120 on headphones, $200 on amp and $680 on source. But i doubt it would sound better if compared with a $300 headphones, $200 amp and and $500 on source. A cheaper sony v6 will never be able to compare to a AKG 501. What i'm thinking here is that, if you have a limited amt of money, first you should get a set of better headphones. Only when you got yourself a good set of headphones that you like then should you consider thinking about better amps and sources. A pair of grados and sennheiser will sound forward(grados) and laidback(senns) no matter what amp/source is in the chain. One should find a pair of phones that you like before looking for other partners up the chain.

 

Only until you get a good set of headphones should you start thinking about higher end sources that limits your phones. Sources cost way more than headphones. Comparing speakers and headphones, headphones are nearer to your ears, cheaper and more efficent than speakers. Headphones that costs 3 digits will sound better than speakers costing 4 digits. Therefore it is not unreasonable to spend more on sources when using headphones.

 

When I first bought my AKG 501, it sounds way better than a cheaper pair of senns that i used to have. Now that I'm satisfied with it, i'm looking forward to upgrade my sources in the near future. Summarising what i said in case i make it too confusing, I agree with Mackie that in terms of cash, more should be spent on sources in the long run. But as I said previously on Northern Oak's comment, you should get at least a pair of headphones with a sound signature that you like before thinking about getting better/more expensive sources.

Edited May 1, 2003 by evil-zen

[Blues 0]

yeap. That;s what I was trying to say also.

For me, I get beyer dt770 coz I love the bass impact. Then I was looking to improve its sound. I purchased obh-11se. the soundstage is extended, warmer sounding. Now that I am looking for the best sound, I am gonna move on to cd player..

This is the typical upgrade path for audio noobs like us who grow up on mp3s...

you can't force us to buy cd player in the first place, because all we will answer you ," My mp3(128) kbps sounds fine out of my altec lansing. Why should I get $600 dollars cd player? To me, they are not different."

=This is the type of people who wear streetstyle, and all those junk also=(very typical of audio noobs)

But when a newbie purchase v6 and he was impressed by the bass.. he will say to himself "man.. I want to hear more of these things.. I love my cans". Then he will go to get a budget amp, that's when the meta42 , cmoy, cha47 comes in. Ok.. and their next response is " wow! I am impressed.. now my v6 is clearer.. more soundstage."

After a few months, they are stuck because all their mp3s are in 128 kbps bitrates.. then they say, ok.. no matter what, I want to experience pure audio bliss. They begin their search for budget cd player components, this is when the marantz cd4000, 6000, etc come in.

 

My point is, for audio noobs like myself, the most sensible choice is to go and get the cans that have the desirable sonic qualities ( eg: bassy, open, closed, laid back, forward, smooth and warm, etc) . Then next, if we're satisfied, then we go for the amp, cd and so.

In this case, headpones make the first, biggest impact. Because, it carries the final sonic signature. No matter how good your source is (eg: good bass, warm, suitable for rock), but if you give it AKG k501, which is shy on bass and not suitable for rock, it will never sound like rock headphones. Not even if you put in creek obh-11se which is warm sounding.

[evil-zen 0]

hehe i like my rock with AKG 501 for a large soundstage and not too much mind-bending bass. Although sometimes the bass is really too soft for me.

[ablaze 0]

in my personal experience, each time I changed an item in my rig..it was always changing the headphones that I felt gave me the most difference in what I was hearing. perhaps its different with speakers. but for me changing headphones provided much more "wow" than say..changing from a hi-quality mp3 to an uncompressed CD.

[Blues 0]

ablaze: that's because we are listening to high quality ripped mp3s.. talk about 192 kbps lame encoded.. lol

The quality is at least 80-85 percent of the real cd. So the gap is closer.Hence, our source is quite already. Then, when we change the headphones, the difference is very detectable

That's why some people go as far as running art di/o out of their cmputer, as they feel it can rival cd qualities( budget- mid end), definately not in the class of those 5-6 thousands cd players.

[Northern Oak 0]

After reading what evil-zen has said, I do agree that it should have been Components of Importance on Sonic Features instead of Biggest Impact and if there's limited resources, then one would usually get the headphone first, becos' that's what I did as well.

 

However, I do find that doing so has it's demerits because then it has spun me into a web of upgrades. What I'm trying to bring forth is that by going the source-amp-cans route, it will save us less upgrade fees.

 

Evil-Zen:

Since you have the AKG K501 previously and presuming you used a PCDP, like me, did you ever notice that there's no depth in the K501? It can give you a wide soundstage but it stretches the depth vertically, making what's at the back like it's on top. Transparency was non-existent as well.

 

Using the same source and amp, I've tried it on the D66SL as well, same thing happened. I guessed pretty much that trying other cans would give me the same results. When I got my Marantz CD17MkIII, I took a listen, even when it's fresh outta the box and guess what? The K501 has depth and transparency that was lacking all along. When I put on the D66SL, the same depth and transparency was there as well, albeit in a lesser way. When I get my DT880, I will try the same experiment to see if the PCDP and the Marantz sound different.

 

No harsh tones meant, evil-zen, just hope that it will help others and save money for them.

Edited May 1, 2003 by Northern Oak

[Charismatic 0]

ablaze: that's because we are listening to high quality ripped mp3s.. talk about 192 kbps lame encoded.. lol

The quality is at least 80-85 percent of the real cd. So the gap is closer.Hence, our source is quite already. Then, when we change the headphones, the difference is very detectable

That's why some people go as far as running art di/o out of their cmputer, as they feel it can rival cd qualities( budget- mid end), definately not in the class of those 5-6 thousands cd players.

oh 192kbps. I used to encoded with 320kbps(rip from CD). Still found something amiss...like some depth(i don't know how to explain) is not there as compare to CD. Now i spend less time on listening to MP3 through PC at office. Instead i got a pcdp(Sony D777) and listen from there.

[ablaze 0]

lossless audio is the key! no compression of the sound. half the hdd space of .wav files. perfect compromise

 

typically 1gig of hdd space will fit about 3 complete CDs

[evil-zen 0]

yea i agree the 501 have large soundstage but no depth out of a pcdp. but i have an okay denon cd deck now and only lacking an amp which should arrive very soon now.

 

Saving money maybe? But i guess most people go by our way (pcdp + headphones). After getting a pair of phones that suits them, they will look for amps and sources instead of climbing higher and higher to reach those r10s and run them out of a pcdp!

[Northern Oak 0]

Evil-Zen, I guess you will be very happy with your K501 cause the depth and transparency I heard was astounding.

 

I went the same (PCDP+upgrade headphone)route too but I hope I put a stop to it with the Marantz.

Edited May 1, 2003 by Northern Oak

[Rameish 0]

Okay here's my 2c.

 

You need a good source format first, then a good playback unit. Then you need a matching amplifier that would compliment the source playback unit. You can only appreciate a good amp if your source is capable of showing what the amp wan do. And you will appreciate a good headphone more if both the source and amp are up to scratch and have synergy.

 

Let me put it this way: If you spent about S$1,000 you probably be able to get a new Rotel RCD-1070 CD Player. This player is very detailed and can be described as a little on the bright side. Mate it with a Creek OBH-11SE (warm) and use a Grado SR-325 (a little bright) and you'll get good level of resolution with a somewhat balanced sound.

 

You then take a Marantx CD-6000 OSE mate it with the same Creek and switched to Beyer DT-990 and you're going to get an overly warm sound.

 

Use the same Rotel with X-Cans and a Beyer DT-831 or Grado and you're in for an earbleed.

 

Is it's more than just where to spend money. It's the need to identify the weakest link and work from there looking for synergy in the future system.

 

The reason we can get away with cheaper CDP nowadays is becaue the "bar has been raised over the years". However, the more you spend on the front end the better it gets downstream.

 

There is absolutly no way to judge a good can if either your source or amp is not up to the job. You will think "oh it's too bright or too bassy" then sell the headphone - wrong move. You havn't heard the headphone at it's best. So do yourself a favour and sort out your source before you change you amp or headphones.

 

 

 

 

[Blues 0]

wow.. ablaze, you must be in possession of 120 gb of ibm harddisk don't you?

lol! I am on laptop.. 30 gb only nia..

not enough space to extract all in wav format..