Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2010 9:02:22 GMT
I removed all last night's posts, I was out of order and have apologised to Alex. Mike. Mike Perhaps I should make something much clearer. I am not completely against well designed valve amplifiers using more appropiate HT rails, that don't come from ebay sellers out to make a quick buck with shoddy designs. Frans has already pointed out and corrected serious design deficiences in Indeed/Bravo. Some time back, I asked Miguel to recommend some very good amplifiers to a friend in Computer Audiophile who owns his own financial business in NYC Geoff was very happy with the Isabella and Isabellini that Miguel recommended. Miguel and I just love to stir each other, and nothing else should be read into such comments. Alex |
|
|
|
Post by PinkFloyd on Sept 18, 2010 9:34:54 GMT
Alex,
My "flavour of the month" amps are not that at all. I listen to a LOT of different amps and when a good one appears then I comment on it.... the Panda is the best I have ever heard and there's no other way of saying it! Next month I may hear an amp that is even better than the Panda and, if so, I'll say so.... sorry if it comes across as "flavour of the month" but I can assure you it is not.
Mike.
|
|
mrarroyo
Been here a while! 
Our man in Miami!
Posts: 1,003
|
Post by mrarroyo on Sept 18, 2010 14:10:56 GMT
No question I prefer valve amps but ... I enjoy SS amps as well. Currently I am testing an inexpensive HLLY TAMP-20 for which I started a separate thread on. At $118 including S&H it is a very nice unit which powers the K1000 and Stax via an SRD7/Pro energizer very well.
I have the latest version of the Isabella and Signature 30.2 using the LFP-V Edition and although still very early in the burn-in process they sound superb.
Back on topic, listening to the V2 with the X10-D and I am as happy as a "pig in mud". Lovely sounding combo!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2010 18:11:15 GMT
Miguel,
I just got an X10-D out of curiosity. never ever considered a buffer. It makes a K701 rumble!! The deep bass is incredible and changed my views on the AKG entirely. The clarity of the headphone is superb anyway, but with the buffer, it has really low bass and a fuller sound. The effect is variable with different CD players but there's no doubt, the change is enormous. (Dynamics have grown as well)
Coupled with the V2 is unbelievable and now, I'm really enjoying the K701 big time with it's fuller sound!!
|
|
mrarroyo
Been here a while!
Our man in Miami!
Posts: 1,003
|
Post by mrarroyo on Sept 18, 2010 19:28:22 GMT
I agree, these two were meant to go together. What is funny is that at one time I had a V3 rig with both the amp/buffer but it did not sound as much fun as the V2 units.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2010 19:39:58 GMT
I agree, these two were meant to go together. What is funny is that at one time I had a V3 rig with both the amp/buffer but it did not sound as much fun as the V2 units. That's interesting. I'll get familiar with its sound on the V2 and the swap in a V1 and a V8. I'm quite curious about the V8 since I changed the valves, it has gained more depth but retains the edgy top with headphones like the K701. Perhaps the buffer will tame it. However, I'll need to become more familiar with it before I start swapping willy nilly. It has made me wonder big time about matching the input which is something that has never occurred to me. It's all very well us all criticising stuff but if we're not feeding the amp a good 'recognised' input, then it won't give it's best. The bass on the K701 has really surprised me. It really kicks in big time with the buffer in line. |
|
|
|
Post by PinkFloyd on Sept 18, 2010 20:45:18 GMT
Ian,
It should have a similar effect with the V8, give it a try.
Mike.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 18, 2010 21:12:10 GMT
Ian, It should have a similar effect with the V8, give it a try. Mike. That's what I think, Mike. Also, out of all of them, imo that's the weakest link, even with a change of valves, it doesn't come up to V2. It's ok with Senns since it does a good job of cutting through the top end but not something like the K701, which has such clarity and preciseness but could just do with a touch of warming up tonally. Previously, I had been using the K701 with a lesser amp, the Presonus HP4, which is 60 ohm output and slightly less edgy sounding with everything. Comparatively, it matched well with the K701, but the V2 with a buffer into them is stunning. The clarity is better but there is much more weight so the V8 is the next one to be buff'd!!  I should have gone this route way back!! |
|
|
|
Post by PinkFloyd on Sept 18, 2010 22:01:05 GMT
Ian, It should have a similar effect with the V8, give it a try. Mike. That's what I think, Mike. Also, out of all of them, imo that's the weakest link, even with a change of valves, it doesn't come up to V2. It's ok with Senns since it does a good job of cutting through the top end but not something like the K701, which has such clarity and preciseness but could just do with a touch of warming up tonally. Previously, I had been using the K701 with a lesser amp, the Presonus HP4, which is 60 ohm output and slightly less edgy sounding with everything. Comparatively, it matched well with the K701, but the V2 with a buffer into them is stunning. The clarity is better but there is much more weight so the V8 is the next one to be buff'd!! I should have gone this route way back!! Ian, I think you are in for a revelation.... I will put another couple of hundred hours on the Panda and will send it over to you this time next week.... Try the buffer with it too  A LOT of people say that a buffer is only useful if you have a crappy CD player.... I disagree...... the X-10D adds weight and presence to most amps / sources I have paired it with.... sod the "technical" arguments against it, my ears tell me it does the business.... end of |
|
|
|
Post by PinkFloyd on Sept 18, 2010 22:05:35 GMT
Ian,
Have you tried the HD-250 ll with the buffer in line?
I still consider the HD-250ll as the best dynamic 'phones ever made.... the HD-600 / K-501 sound like they need some chicken soup to me.... they are pale and lifeless in comparison to the HD-250's
Mike.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2010 8:50:01 GMT
That's what I think, Mike. Also, out of all of them, imo that's the weakest link, even with a change of valves, it doesn't come up to V2. It's ok with Senns since it does a good job of cutting through the top end but not something like the K701, which has such clarity and preciseness but could just do with a touch of warming up tonally. Previously, I had been using the K701 with a lesser amp, the Presonus HP4, which is 60 ohm output and slightly less edgy sounding with everything. Comparatively, it matched well with the K701, but the V2 with a buffer into them is stunning. The clarity is better but there is much more weight so the V8 is the next one to be buff'd!! I should have gone this route way back!! Ian, I think you are in for a revelation.... I will put another couple of hundred hours on the Panda and will send it over to you this time next week.... Try the buffer with it too A LOT of people say that a buffer is only useful if you have a crappy CD player.... I disagree...... the X-10D adds weight and presence to most amps / sources I have paired it with.... sod the "technical" arguments against it, my ears tell me it does the business.... end of That's what I originally though as well Mike. If the CD player is half decent, then there's no need for a buffer. Well, while there's no actual 'need' for it, the sound imo is improved. The K701 in particular absolutely highlights what it does to the tonal balance and the dynamics. Because I'm a numbskull electronically with a (morbid fear of ruining valves) I have to use only my ears which isn't ideal, but it has definitely raised the perceived sound to something that makes the K701 sound absolutely brilliant. The HD250 hovers on your head when bass kicks in. It is thunderous without being overbearing. Sennheiser should never have stopped production of these - I've been using them for years along with the Beyer DT150 (Depending on volume) for playback monitoring/overdubbing. Superb headphone. I had a love/hate relationship with the K701. Depends on mood/music and essentially, the quality of the source. With this buffer, I think it is one of the best headphones I have heard. Interestingly, the HD250 is also top of the pile for me too. I know that some guys don't like the top end response. They find it slightly hard edged, but not for me. I even coupled the K701 with a Cyrus CD player, which is not particularly subtle in the top frequencies and it still sounds great. Take it down to a real cheap CD player like the Cambridge Audio and it really improves it big time. Instead of collecting amps, I may well become a buffer collector!! They really do work. My original thoughts were that it would 'colour' the sound; especially with more valves in the line, but it is more than that with the added dynamic range and as you say, 'presence'. It really engages me with the music in a big way. You're worrying me with the Panda. I'm so fond of my V2 especially, that I kind of try 'not' to hear anything better. I'm biased!! I really love the V2 big time and the addition of the buffer has taken it to another level imo; especially with difficult to drive headphones. If the Panda kicks its ass, I'll be 'hurt'. If the buffer improves it even more, I'll be 'devastated'. ie what was wrong with my ears in the first place? Thing is, you can't always identify what an improvement is until you actually hear it and even then, it can be difficult to identify exactly what it is. Well, in any case, the buffer does the business and it's going on to the V8 today since I've got the day to try it. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2010 9:01:38 GMT
Ian What makes you think that a well designed SS Buffer such as Burson/Audio gd wouldn't do every bit as well , if not better ? It's all about low output impedance and power supply, power supply, power supply. Alex |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2010 9:23:19 GMT
Ian What makes you think that a well designed SS Buffer such as Burson/Audio gd wouldn't do every bit as well , if not better ? It's all about low output impedance and power supply, power supply, power supply. Alex Yes, I've had a look at them Alex. Very tempting. Actually, it was you who put the idea of impedance matching of amp out to headphone to 'tame the shrew' and it has never occurred to me to do the same on the input. The input seems to have a greater effect. You'd also expect the cd player to have a well matched output, but I'm not sure that's the case - at least listening on the X-10D. I may well look into the Burson Audio one as well because I know you've mentioned this one before. I just fancied a dabble on a whim and got a surprise if I'm honest. It's an area that's not really mentioned a great deal. Most people plug in and forget without considering the impedance matching between the source and the amp. The K701 has become a revelation used this way. Instead of using a 'lesser' amp with less sharpness in the treble region, I'm able to attach better stuff without making my ears bleed. I think the type of sound I enjoy is not one where the bass knocks your head off - if anything, a lighter touch but the attack needs to be there for me to enjoy the headphone. If it decays quickly so that the rest comes through more easily and isn't clouded in a bass murk then that's good for me. The treble also needs to be clean for me but not harsh. The HD650 is a little too back for me in the top if I'm honest. The HD600 does better but isn't quite as clean as I'd like. Since getting the K701, I've felt that the treble is fine but on poor recordings or toppy stuff, it has to be turned down. That coupled with a perceived lack of bass gives the impression of a feeble sounding headphone. With the buffer there, it feels about right and there's a nice balance between the two ends. Next, I'll start paying more attention to the mids which is an area that I tend to NOT focus so much on funnily enough. The bass and treble areas are the ones that I seem more sensitive to. If anything, there may be a slight 'nasal' quality in the upper mids. Not certain yet. This is interesting: www.bursonaudio.com/burson_buffer_160.htmThe outputs quoted are all different. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2010 9:31:31 GMT
Ian Careful with those comments about those headphones that most people either love or loathe.It can be a very dangerous area. Alex |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 19, 2010 9:37:34 GMT
Ian Careful with those comments about those headphones that most people either love or loathe.It can be a very dangerous area. Alex Live and let die ........ Well, they're my ears and not everyone elses'. However, there's no getting away from it, the K701 is an excellent headphone that really shows up impedance matching big time. Maybe because it's a very revealing listen. I also previously had a silly problem with mine and never noticed. The donuts inside weren't lined up. Once I saw it and moved them, the sound did actually mellow slightly and boy, have I tried to mellow them since I got them. Pink, green, loud, soft, harsh, blue noise to try a tame it. The buffer has completely done it!! (So I'm not really having a go at the headphone, it's the matching that we all need to take care of as you have always said Alex) Interesting that even Burson talk about Ipods!! Ipods and PCs can play back lossless audio files that are identical to CD quality. But when connected to a high-end system, they always sound flat and lifeless compared to even a cheap $200 CD player! There always seems to be a need to turn up the volume to achieve a similar level of sound. . Why?
The reason is that the Ipod and soundcards were designed to be compact, light weight and energy efficient. Their audio output stages are completely different to any home based audio equipment. The Ipod is powered by a 5V battery and the soundcard runs on 12V, while, a home audio equipment will always run on 24V+. Therefore Ipods and soundcards were never designed to synergise with any of the hi-end amplifiers, so one can only imagine the amount of impedance mismatch between them.
Therefore, although that audio file is lossless, the play-back through an amplifier is certainly not!There aren't that many audio buffers around. I saw one from Yaqin for £100 and again, it's a tube base one. Not too good looking either but if it works ...... www.amazon.co.uk/CD2-6J1-Signal-Upgrade-Buffer-Processor/dp/7500775237/ref=sr_1_1?s=electronics&ie=UTF8&qid=1284897419&sr=1-1 |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2010 18:04:51 GMT
I like the idea of the buffer. Is this likely to be a good option? The circuit board appears to still be available. Mind you, a built up one is $1000 which seems excessive for the parts involved. www.firstwatt.com/b1.htmlSyd |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2010 18:33:35 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2010 18:50:31 GMT
I like the idea of the buffer. Is this likely to be a good option? The circuit board appears to still be available. Mind you, a built up one is $1000 which seems excessive for the parts involved. www.firstwatt.com/b1.htmlSyd The X-10D is a powered device. No controls on it. You simply plug in the source and then link it to the amplifier with phono leads. Those really cheap ones that Frans has highlighted may perhaps not be as nice sounding? Frans, are you suggesting the Bravo as a pre-amp so in effect, double amping? The cross talk etc would then be in the line wouldn't it? I thought the buffer was in line to in effect take the load away from the source and lower the input impedance. Not necessarily 'colour' the sound. Those little units are so cheap that it makes you wonder what the tubes themselves cost. If you bought a 6n3, you'd probably pay more than the cost of those things for the tube on their own!! The Burson Audio one that Alex mentioned looks good to me. I must admit, the buffer has made a difference to the sound, although its effect is variable depending on the source. It's really an improvement with the Cambridge Audio CD players but more subtle I think with some of my other players. |
|
Will
Been here a while!
Ribena abuser!
Member since 2008
Posts: 2,164
|
Post by Will on Sept 21, 2010 19:43:31 GMT
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2010 21:07:58 GMT
I like the idea of the buffer. Is this likely to be a good option? The circuit board appears to still be available. Mind you, a built up one is $1000 which seems excessive for the parts involved. www.firstwatt.com/b1.htmlSyd Those really cheap ones that Frans has highlighted may perhaps not be as nice sounding? Frans, are you suggesting the Bravo as a pre-amp so in effect, double amping? The cross talk etc would then be in the line wouldn't it? I thought the buffer was in line to in effect take the load away from the source and lower the input impedance. Not necessarily 'colour' the sound. . They might very well be not as nice sounding. On the other hand the ones with 2 tubes in it might have a similar schematic but the topology could differ too. The Bravo thingies (unmodded) have crosstalk distortion indeed which won't help the sound + it has quite some amplification (21x = around 30dB). The X10 D only has 1.2x amplification (1.5dB) and has a lot of overall feedback reducing nasties and ensuring a bandwith of minimal 10Hz to 200kHz, better quality all around. The output impedance of the X10d is rather high (10kOhm) and input impedance high (500kOhm) So no... the effect would differ but they both 'inject' tube distortion which has a certain character because of the more natural spread of the harmonics that are created by these buffers. This is the main reason for the sound. The Bravo/Indeed things inducing more distortion then wanted perhaps.  Sources usually are very low-ohmic (max a few hundred Ohms) and have no problems driving high ohmic inputs of power/HP amps so no 'mismatching' there in any case. Smart salesmen indeed tell you impedance matching is important and the reason for it's use and sonic improvements which I believe not to be the case. Just like with the Novo one tells you this sounds different because of the philosophy/topology/choice of parts when it is in fact a 'trick of the trade' limiting the bandwith. Impedance matching is needed for high frequency digital and video or Radio frquency transmission running into the MHz's. (mostly 50 or 75 Ohms) Not so for normal audiogear eventhough vendors would like you to believe it and empty your bankaccount. It is more a matter of matching of voltages in the audio world that's important. Of course this only my technical opinion and those of vendors and users will have other opinions...  All that matters is that it works and you get more enjoyment. Not everyones ears/brain can pick out the same alterations/improvements though |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2010 22:06:20 GMT
Will, Frans, Ian Thanks for all the replies. I started by thinking I would like the X10 partly because of Ian's positive thoughts on it and because I have a weakness for the X Can series, though when I want accurate gutsy sound I use my AK SCHA, its a personal favourite. The Pass device I was thinking of for, if I understood Alex/Ian's conversation, achieving a good match with any front end into any amplifier/HA not to add tube sound. So really I was thinking of both for very different reasons. X10s take a while to get hold of though. Will, the Pass PCB is available to buy from US which was why I was wondering about it. Your URL just gives me more to read I might get one of the valve cheapies just to try it out, though my Indeed didn't stay long, I don't want obvious distortion! I'll read some more at all this stuff, as usual I'm more than half in the dark and have a box or two full of bits that I should really deal with first. Syd |
|
|
|
Post by PinkFloyd on Sept 21, 2010 22:13:03 GMT
Syd,
To answer your PM in public..... I don't have any more X-10D's in stock.
Mike.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 21, 2010 22:16:12 GMT
Thanks Mike, I had been trying to keep my addiction private  |
|
|
|
Post by PinkFloyd on Sept 21, 2010 22:31:20 GMT
Thanks Mike, I had been trying to keep my addiction private High time you were forced out of the closet |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 22, 2010 7:54:32 GMT
Syd, it's just my ears. It may not be right for you. As Frans has said, he reckons they're not that necessary so we all come from different angles.
I've tried it on the X-Can V8 and it's not as marked as on the V2. Basically, the amp totally retains its original sound sig but the buffer (for me at least) just puts a slightly different timbre onto the sound and it seems to be more punchy.
On the V8 - it's less punchy and the amp still retains the hint of glassiness with maybe a little more attack in the bass. It's not dramatic on that one. Moreso on the V2. Perhaps it was designed with a V2 in mind?
The V2 sounds absolutely brilliant through the K701 now which I'm really pleased about because I really like the clarity of that headphone and the addition of the buffer adds just a tad more punch in the bass which enhances the K701 a lot.
In fact, it's changed what I feel about the K701's sound. I've always liked it, but have always had to be careful with the source. It's not as touchy with the buffer.
|
|
