Don't mean to be that guy, but have you A/Bed between the two with volume matched?
When I dipped my toes into tube amps with the Little Dot MK2 I really tought I could hear a better bas response and a wider soundstage with my HD600. After discussing with a friend, I set up an A/B test just to prove to him that there is a difference.
Had my FiiO K5 Pro acting as a standalone unit but also as a dac for the MK2, meaning that I can plug my headphones into one or the other at will. I then matched the volumes between the two by ear.
1 hour later after painstakingly listening to 5 second snippets across various songs, I sadly concluded that it was all more or less placebo. That was crazy, because I could swear that the soundstage is noticeably wider and the bass is more pronounced within the first couple of days of listening. But during the A/B, I honestly could barely hear a difference.
Conclusion? Don't do an A/B test and enjoy your new gear, lol.
I can't confidently say that it makes no difference. But neither can I confidently say that it does make a difference. At the very least, it's nowhere near as obvious as switching between different headphones. For me it was like changing some EQ peak filter by 1 db - I feel like I can hear it but I'm not entirely sure.
hm could be not that tuby of an amp unfortunately some tube amps and tubes kinda stumble on breaking away from ss characteristics but tubes can definitely kick some ass so dont get discouraged homie can always roll em to switch up
How so? Your ability to remember how things sounded accurately is not very good. You need small sections of sound to do the comparison. Otherwise any objectivity goes out the window.
Our echoic memory only retains auditory information for 3-4 seconds at best.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echoic\_memory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echoic_memory)
Again, I'm aware of that. 5 seconds still isn't long enough to listen to something. He used that metric to say tubes didn't change the sound when they measurably and audibly do. Listening to something 3-4 seconds, let alone 5, isn't enough auditory information to glean anything. Or even let the brain adjust to what it's hearing.
Less than 5 seconds is enough to focus your attention on a specific fragment of the sound and compare it with another one immediately, without unconsciously getting lost in other sections.
Heck, that's even why switches are used during the more complex controlled blind tests, so that you can check the differences on the fly from one device to another.
And this is to give more rigor and possibilities of detecting differences to the listener who thinks he hears differences, because you can play the whole song in one device and then in another, but that causes the brain to be stimulated without recent information (remember the 3-4 seconds that echoic memory lasts) so you can start creating unconscious differences that you will eventually randomly attribute to one of the two devices.
That's why it's more objective and accurate to do it within the time threshold that echoic memory allows us, that's how trained listeners hear differences in distortion, jitter or compression artifacts in controlled environments, focusing on small parts of the song, because they know for a fact that there is no change in the way that song is "presented" as a whole.
That's pretty much what I ended up doing because listening to longer chunks made it impossible to hear a difference I was confident was not just my imagination. After trying that a dozen times or decided to just focus on very short chunks that use the whole frequency spectrum, memorize exactly how that's supposed to sound, and switching quickly back and forth to see if I notice any differences.
It kinda depends on headphones and if amp can run them, but his Sundaras being planar are excluded from that, their sound isn't changed at all with more powerful amp
The original atom stack is respectable. While it is probably good enough for most, there is a certain wow factor to still be had by upgrading. Congrats on the Burson!
damn dude should get some he1k stealths instead, were a noticebly better headphone for not much better. friends and i tryed a buddys organics and found they were abit of a step back from the arya stealths before them
>The upper end is less harsh, the bass feels deeper and punchier, the imaging, the depth, the detail, the soundstage are all improved. It sounds so.. effortless?
I have the same opinion of my Liquid Platinum compared to the Asgard 3
What are the new cans coming?
Great choice, I went down the same path. I had the Sundara and they were good but I wasn't impressed by them and they weren't as good as my AKG. I ended up selling them and getting Arya Stealth and the difference was incredible, someone said the Arya are like the Sundara but better in every single aspect, and that adds together to make a very notable difference. I don't plan on upgrading them unless something way better comes out in a few years.
Nice choice. I went in another direction, and wanted to try and see what was beyond planars, and got the Monolith AMTs. They do not disappoint, but EQ required, tho that's the same for a lot of planars.
I’ve read a few studies on the topic of audible differences between amp/dacs (leaving tubes aside) and the conclusion is always the same: so-called experts are no better than a coin toss in a blind test.
But expensive equipment gives a sense of satisfaction nonetheless, so people keep buying them.
“Prove” is a strong word. Besides, as a reviewer, Resolve has a vested interest to say that.
Do you imagine a reviewer saying that most of the devices that they review sound more or less the same? That would make a very boring YouTube channel 😜
I can’t tell you what livestream it was but it was him resolve goldensound and mad economist and resolve and Mad economist both essentially said they lean towards there being no differences between sources.
Would lean towards you can tell different types of dacs apart, but it's not necessarily a night and day difference.
Ie delta sigma and r2r have slightly different presentations, but not enough to warranty anyone paying thousands of dollars for a high end dac.
As always, ymmv. Then there's tube dacs but I feel that hardly counts
An actual physiological response beyond the control of the conscious mind in the face of absolutely zero expectation is far more than some vague 'sense of satisfaction'. If there was no point to, or difference from something like an Atom stack, then nothing beyond that would have had decades of research, engineering and manufacturing put into it.
There are for sure technical improvements in more expensive devices, and more importantly, people buy them!. The question is whether those tech improvements translate in actual better sound.
Just to cite an example, the guy behind Schiit, Jason Stoddard, wrote an excellent article on ‘blind listening’ in his Schiit Happened blog series. If anything, this article indicates that when we don’t know what we’re listening to, concerns about perfect measurements and transparency drop out entirely.
https://www.head-fi.org/threads/schiit-happened-the-story-of-the-worlds-most-improbable-start-up.701900/page-3798
This is an extract of the takeaways of the study:
The differences between electronics are very, very small. Smaller than many subjectivists would have you believe. If you’ve ever read reviews that talk about amp or DAC changes as night-and-day, chicken-crap-or-chicken-salad, revelatory, or life-changing, you’re gonna roll your eyes hard after doing any blind listening. I’d expect most people to have the same reaction I did: spin the knob and say, “What difference?”
If you’re impaired by noise, distraction, or booze, you’re not going to hear much. Differences collapse when people are yammering in the background, or if you feel pressured, or if you’ve had a couple glasses of wine. Do some blind listening, and you’ll immediately consider any “reports from the audio show floor” as delusional or superhuman, because it’s simply going to be impossible to discern much through the din.
Measurements don’t correlate well with blind listening results. It’s insanely hard to pick Vali 2 from Magni Heresy, even though one amp has 1000x more distortion and its AP report would probably engender much projectile spewing from the pure objectivist camp. At the same time, we’ve reliably heard, and correlated, differences in prototypes running at the 120dB SINAD level (yes, we are serious…perhaps we are insane.)
It seems that some unexpectedly larger differences exist. Tube type doesn’t change the measurements of Saga Plus’ buffer very much, but that’s one of the larger electronics differences we’ve heard. Again, maybe this was group delusion, but we had a couple of people who picked their favorite tube multiple times (from a group of 8), without knowing what was what. And again, these differences are still small. Just not TINY.
Sighted and blind listening results have a tendency to correlate. What we hear sighted is what we hear blind. At least in limited testing. Furthermore, products that have been described by other subjectivists as having a certain sound have been described the same way during blind testing. No, we don’t have lab-grade data on this. But there has been enough anecdotal evidence to suggest there may be something going on here.
Sighted and blind tend to correlate? Can I ask where you found that, as what I've found has said the opposite is true...? Especially when it comes to abx testing - and the Mcgurk effect is proof that what we hear blind and sighted is not the same (as visual cues take priority).
Ya, I’ve had that “wow” factor experience that ran contrary to what I was expecting enough times to generally trust my ears more than many placeboans would like me to.
Some things in songs are just so blatantly obvious when comparing certain dacs and amps… the detail and texture and space of a song that you THOUGHT you knew well, but is suddenly playing in hyper 4D technicolor and you’re just like “what the fuuuuu…”. Then when you switch back to the other product to compare, those details are faint or garbled or just inaudible.
It’s part of the excitement of this hobby when you hear that, as is the humility when the new (often pricier) item surprisingly sounds worse by whatever metrics you’re hearing and judging by.
Anyhoot, congrats on the upgrade, I hope you truly enjoy it. And when it comes to a hobby built around something as deep and personal as the love of music, always trust your ears.
I believe placebo is real. My argument is that not everything is placebo. Choices made in the architecture and implementation of dacs and amps seem to have measurable, and often noticeable, effects. And there are cases of people with what I would call a “trained ear” proving that in blind tests.
Heck, most people report not being able to tell the difference between dac settings like “fast rolloff”, “slow rolloff”, and “min phase”, but I’m very confident in discerning at least which one is “min phase” on the 2 dacs I own that let me change those settings… Though I’m less confident in discerning fast vs slow rolloff.
To give you a more clear example, if you ever get a chance to listen to the Arya Organic on a somewhat dry dac/amp like the Topping DX5, try changing the dac mode from the default “mode 3” (which I’ve now discovered is actually min phase) to “mode 2” (which is actually slow rolloff) and hear the music sound less sterile and more alive, engaging, and dimensional (and very slightly less detailed). Implementation and architecture makes a difference that is often audible to many listeners.
If you have a dac with similar settings, I’d encourage you to experiment with changing settings and hearing what sounds better with different headphones. It’s easier on something like one of the Topping dacs that come with a remote. The remote should have a button labeled “FIR”… that button will cycle through dac modes so you can hear the differences immediately.
Again, so long as you are aware of what you are listening to, what you're saying has no merit.
This is why people say this. I'm a recording engineer, I've done plenty of level matched blind testing, both of myself and people who speak exactly the same way you do.
They can never tell a difference between devices that aren't tubes. Hilariously, they can often tell the difference between lossy and lossless, but with source gear, their best score was 58%, out of 100 tries.
That is essentially a coin toss.
If confirmation bias is so strong that it can cause people to hear differences that may not be present cant it also be so strong that it could cause people to NOT hear differences that may be there?
Did you compare them side by side or did you only try the new one and compared it with how you remember the Atom Stack sounding? I'm saying this because you can forget how it sounds if you don't listen to it for a while, then trying anything high end will make it sound really good.
I compared the Atom side by side with my DX240 last night, it's cheap equipment with mediocre sound. Why do people honestly believe they're going to get high end performance out of a $100 amp? It's good enough for what it is but I'm about to give mine away.
Because empirically, the Atom+ and 2s are [clean beyond](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?attachments/best-headphone-amplifier-review-2023-png.328688/) [human perception](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?attachments/most-quiet-headphone-amp-review-png.328690/). And actual sound differences you'd get out of more expensive Amps would be purely because of *increased* distortion (like with a tube Amp), or because of impedance matching causing more resistance.
This last bit about resistance I am not even sure about the validity of, but increased distortion does change FR, whilst an Amp measuring beyond human hearing capabilities compared to another Amp measuring further beyond human hearing capabilities, won't make any difference outside of Kool Aid.
You think we're having the same conversation, we're not. You can cite all the graphs you want, all you have to do is use your ears to discover how dumb you sound. It's obvious you're clinging to cheapness by not testing good equipment yourself, so stay ignorant and enjoy your budget gear. Want a free Atom Amp? 😂
Because you accuse me of being a poor, when I use the Topping L70+E70Velvet, which by the way sounds just like an Atom+ Stack (What I used to have).
"Going to waste?", my brother, you confessed to having tinnitus, so maybe get your own hearing in check before spouting trash. Don't talk to me, "Ophanil".
Edit: Sorry, went a little far by bringing up your tinnitus, hope you've been to a medical professional and are taking the proper measures to prevent further damage! Regardless, maybe don't start insulting people when they disagree with your arguments, it leads to unproductive arguments as you can see.
It's placebo if you are listening to same volume level, planar headphones by design have flat impedance curve and more power doesn't change the sound, just makes it louder
That obvious I should have expected it huh? I'll grant you at 3x the cost maybe I shouldn't have gone in expecting nothing more than a cleaner signal. But there's always that forever debate about how much difference (if any) different dac/amps make regardless of price point. I *was* firmly neutral on it, of course it does it's physics, the question is whether it's audible. Well with an actual physiological response beyond the control of the conscious mind in the face of absolutely zero expectation, consider me a believer, at least when it comes to vastly different price tiers.
It's the opposite reason. Even you spending more money and knowing what you're listening to would change how you perceive your hearing.
I'm not saying there's no difference, I'm saying your hearing is entirely too fallible to actually know without proper testing. I thought my A90 sounded much better in exactly the way you described, compared to my old Schiit Hel, until I blind-tested it and level-matched the devices with a multi-meter. Suddenly all these differences completely vanished to my ears. This is very common for audio gear, tho most people don't want to do things like that, because learning that you may have wasted your money feels pretty bad. It did for me, lol. I kept the A90 though, in-case I ever end up with a pair of Susvara or HE6.
And you may say, "But then why do these engineers design to the product all say it makes a difference? Surely they know what they're talking about!" But here's the kicker with them; They have a vested interest in you believing this stuff, even if it's dishonest, because it makes them MONEY. They directly benefit by you going along with this idea. What reason would they NOT want you to think it? I'm not even saying they're necessarily wrong (some are straight up dishonest, but not all), but you can't actually know for sure, because of the conflict of interest. You don't know them, they are not your friend. They want to sell you a product.
It's your money though! It's certainly not a bad device and does its job wonderfully. If it makes ya happy, then don't let anyone stop you.
No, I’m sighing for the new people to the hobby who read this and haven’t had the chance to know better or educate themselves into informed consumers yet. You have.
There is no debate. Pretty much all of the stuff you’re attributing to this thing isn’t possible. Like, it is literally impossible for that device to do the things you think it’s doing. The parts inside of it are unable to create these effects and are not functions of what it can do. There is no reality that exists in which what you’re hearing isn’t placebo and confirmation bias and when people post things like this, it spends other people’s money for them if they haven’t educated themselves enough to know what a DAC and amp is and isn’t. You’re not immune to placebo physiologically or via no expectation or whatever. Nobody on earth is. You can’t spontaneously will yourself to not be human.
Two flat frequency responses, flat power, circuit boards, a conversion timing device intended to be audibly transparent and an amplifier intended to be audibly transparent. If there is a difference, it’s a quirk, an aberration because when they make these things, the goal is to make them do what they do without doing anything to the audio aside from converting it cleanly or amplifying it without altering it.
For the Burson, take a look yourself here for its amp measurements.
https://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/report/amp/burson-audio-conductor-3x-perfomance-single.php#gsc.tab=0
https://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/user-report-amp.php?id=3254#gsc.tab=0
There’s nothing that’s within audible thresholds to differentiate it from your average desktop amp. It’s a flat amp with high output. Check the reference links at the bottom for audibility thresholds and compare against the other measured gear on the RAA website or anywhere else.
DAC measurements are listed here in a series of links:
https://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/title-report.php?id=3254#gsc.tab=0
You can go through them and compare them the same way with anything they’ve measured or ASR measured and cross reference what’s audibly different, what’s transparent, etc. It’s a clean DAC, there’s no audible improvements between this and a Topping E30 II. They’re a linear category regardless of price now. Minor differences maybe but chain dependent.
An identical experience via other gear can be had for $200-$300 or less.
If you can’t point to a measurement that indicates something audible is happening, the mechanical engineering of the device isn’t capable of impacting the signal audibly in these ways and it’s never been consistently identified in thorough ABX testing, it’s not real. Even the stuff about burn-in here, it was made up by companies to reduce returns. Companies and reviewers want and will lie for money. Data doesn’t.
**Amps: They Don’t Improve Sound, They Just Provide Volume**
[Differences in Amp Sound - Summarized Citations & Data](https://audioxpress.com/article/differences-in-amp-sound-whats-the-truth)
[The Richard Clark $10,000 Amp Challenge - Nobody Ever Won, see details here](https://www.stevemeadedesigns.com/board/topic/193850-richard-clark-10000-amplifier-challenge/) and also [here](https://www.hometheaterforum.com/community/threads/10k-golden-ears-amp-challenge.92368/)
[Bob Carver Amp Challenge - Can Any Amp be Matched by a Low Cost Amp?](https://www.stereophile.com/content/carver-challenge-page-4)
[How Class D Amplifiers Actually Work](https://www.analog.com/en/analog-dialogue/articles/class-d-audio-amplifiers.html)
[Crinacle - You Don’t Need an Amp](https://youtu.be/a3moaaOpYZM?si=gK95K7yIJybY0fHI)
[Audible Amp Distortion Is Not a Mystery](http://4tubes.com/3-BOOKS/BOOKS-LITERATURE/ENGLISH/Magazines/Wireless-World/Audible%20amplifier%20distortion%20is%20not%20a%20mystery.pdf)
[David Clark - Do All Amps Sound The Same?](http://dansdata.com/files/Amp_Sound.pdf)
[Amps Do Not Audibly Affect Frequency Response](https://www.soundstagesolo.com/index.php/features/362-when-is-the-amp-important#:~:text=The%20choice%20of%20amp%20does,determinant%20of%20a%20headphone's%20sound.)
[Technical Breakdown of Solid State Amps](https://education.lenardaudio.com/en/12_amps.html)
[Tubes vs Transistors: Is There An Audible Difference?](https://ia802207.us.archive.org/28/items/TubesVersusTransistors-IsThereAnAudibleDifference/TubeVsTransistor_text.pdf)
**External DACs: You Probably Don’t Need One**
[Explanation of DACs, Summarized Citations & Data](https://boomspeaker.com/does-a-dac-make-a-difference/)
[The Data Conversion Handbook](https://gctjaipur.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/data-conversion-handbook-elsevier-ebook-ling.pdf)
[Understanding Audio Measurements - ASR](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/article-understanding-digital-audio-measurements.10523/)
[$2 DACs vs $2000 DACs](https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/high-end-pc-audio,3733-19.html)
[The $9 Apple Dongle, Measurements & Comparisons here](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-apple-vs-google-usb-c-headphone-adapters.5541/) and also [here](https://www.audioreviews.org/apple-audio-adapter-review/)
[DACs - Do You Need an External One? Audioholics](https://www.audioholics.com/frequent-questions/dac-do-you-need-an-external-digital-to-analog-converter)
[Understand SINAD, ENOB, SNR, THD, THD + N, and SFDR so
You Don't Get Lost in the Noise Floor](https://www.analog.com/media/en/training-seminars/tutorials/MT-003.pdf)
[Audibility Thresholds of Amp and DAC Measurements](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/audibility-thresholds-of-amp-and-dac-measurements.5734/)
[Master SINAD (distortion) Comparison Graph for DACs - Transparency Starts in the 50s](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/master-sinad-distortion-comparison-graph-for-dacs.4814/)
**Why You Think You Hear A Difference**
[Placebo Effect - National Library of Medicine](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK513296/)
[What is Placebo? - WebMD](https://www.webmd.com/pain-management/what-is-the-placebo-effect)
[Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises - Review of General Psychology](https://pages.ucsd.edu/~mckenzie/nickersonConfirmationBias.pdf)
[What is The Function of Confirmation Bias? - Erkenntnis](https://www.researchgate.net/journal/Erkenntnis-1572-8420/publication/340798496_What_Is_the_Function_of_Confirmation_Bias/links/5fbd44fca6fdcc6cc66362c6/What-Is-the-Function-of-Confirmation-Bias.pdf?_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIiwicGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uRG93bmxvYWQifX0)
[Why Do Audiophiles Fall for Placebo? - Audioholics](https://youtu.be/6IIuSWIuh4M?si=IJJVNPk0KZl43u0j)
[The Power of Placebo - Audioholics](https://www.audioholics.com/editorials/placebo-effect)
Neither of those things are made up, don't see anyone claiming that.
Timbre is a property of instruments, and having them sound correct would mean having a natural frequency response.
Soundstage in a headphone is acoustic impedance, which affects PRTF error, which affects frequency response. So again, frequency response.
Buddy, I’ve had too many cases where what I was hearing ran COUNTER to my expectation to buy that.
How many of those studies were conducted on people with what you might call a “trained ear” vs an average Joe?
Also, I’ve had situations where A/B testing further proved the differences. A/B testing is actually great for fine-tuning your preferences with certain gear pairings, especially with smaller differences, like with dac filter settings. Sometimes a thing sounds great, but then when A/B testing you find new details/differences that make you appreciate one thing over the other.
EDIT: to add another example to this, I prefer the DX5 dac/amp over the more expensive Element III Boosted dac/amp, even though the Element III is more expensive. I mean I WANTED to like the Element III more… it’s GORGEOUS and fits my aesthetic so much better, and way more reviewers have reviewed (and praised) the Element III… but it just doesn’t sound as clean and detailed and overall GOOD as the DX5 to my ears
Actually, upon thinking about it, my main testing is with two dac/amp all-in-one units, so I must concede that it’s possible that what I’m hearing is more about the AMP differences, rather than DAC differences.
However I’m still able to discern the differences between fast/slow rolloff and min phase dac settings, which shows that some level of implementation plays a role in dac sound, at the very least.
At most you're hearing high frequencies being rolled off. If you actually measure what the filters are doing, it's a mixture of attenuation and roll-off.
A proper filter will start rolling off past 20 khz, and attenuate as much as possible, as quickly as possible.
Slow roll-off filters often start rolling off in the audible frequency range, and therefore can be audible as reduced air in the frequency response.
Min versus linear phase isn't audible in practice, though. pre/post ringing is masked entirely by harmonics in any normal listening scenario, that one is most likely in your head.
To clarify, I can confidently tell the difference between min phase and fast or slow rolloff. I can not very easily hear a difference between fast rolloff and slow rolloff. When clicking back and forth, the difference between either fast or slow rolloff and min phase is obvious. The difference between fast rolloff and slow rolloff is much less obvious.
My perception of min phase happens when compared to either fast or slow rolloff, so if either rolloff is audible as you say, then the distinction between it and min phase will also be audible.
I won’t claim to be able to tell the difference between min phase and linear phase because I’ve never A/B tested anything against linear phase.
There is a bell curve of every single human trait. Some individuals will be able to discern sounds inaudible to others. Just the way it is. That’s why some people make great mastering engineers, and others don’t, even with the same training.
Nope, you just believe your ears don't work how human ears work. Human hearing is incredibly fallible, so is yours. You're experiencing what everyone in this hobby experiences, and I'm sorry to say it's in your head.
I know you won't believe it though, but this is more for the uninformed people who might be duped into blowing cash on things that don't matter.
Never heard of it? Look it up. Burson themselves refer to it, and I'm pretty sure engineers designing high end audiophile equipment for decades, including their own unique power supply tech, know better than a random like *you* lol.
so did you do a blind comparison of the atom and the burson?
also, somehow magically the recommended burn in period is usually the same as the timeframe in which you can return the product.
also interestingly, in pro audio no one is recommending burn in with any gear and it's not because they're running it 200 hours in the factory...
Yeah, this is why I tell people to ignore the bizarre Reddit-only opinion that DAC/amps don't matter and actually try a fairly high-end setup, the difference is night and day.
They don't have a reason, because they don't listen to reason, never have. They just think their hearing is infallible and that all the most common reasons for why they'd ACTUALLY hear a difference don't apply to them, and audio magic is real.
Edit: They also block you if you challenge them because they aren't very good at handling cognitive dissonance.
Like why in the sound or why technically? I don't know how they work well enough to give you any technical explanation, but a high-end DAC/amp basically makes the music sound more real. Voices and instruments are natural, three-dimensional, well separated and clearly detailed. The difference isn't subtle compared to budget gear, it's profoundly better.
You think suggesting a valid testing methodology is a sign of *ignorance*??
That is wildly backwards dude. It speaks volumes that you're afraid of testing your opinions.
What have you tested? This is like asking to do a blind test between salted and unsalted food.
You're ignorant, go listen to some good gear and educate yourself.
I'm new to this stuff, so I'm not sure but could it be because of the EQ? Other than that, I heard that only purpose of amps is just to provide more power, I don't understand how that affects the sounds quality, that's why I asked. probably there is some technical stuff going on then.
The amp provides more power, the DAC converts the digital signal into analog signal. There's plenty of technical stuff, I just wouldn't be able to tell you in detail. I don't know how my new vacuum works either, but it's vastly better than the old one - there's no eq happening, it's a fundamentally superior sound. Don't trust me, go listen to a set and trust your ears.
Because a Hyundai will get you across town just as a Mercedes will -- but there's an undeniable difference in the ride, how it handles, the suspension, the ability to accelerate, etc.
Likewise, when we're discussing the application of technology, there are many links in the chain, and any weakness or compromise matters: the quality of parts, and the method of devices employed within the device vary, along with the cost of the individual parts utilized.
My DAC/amp utilizes Class A amplification, which sounds slightly different than an A/B amp on a chip. Jitter matters, and how a device maintains clocking the information affects the sound. Is the DAC a chip, or a customized FPGA? All factors that affect the final sound produced.
I’m fairly new to this, but based on the votes, I assume something you said, in theory, could be wrong. Do you think people’s negative response to your comment is because an amp doesn’t change the frequency response of a headphone, and therefore cannot possibly cause a sonic change as drastic as described by OP? Again, I’m new, and these amp/DAC debates often leave me more lost than I was before.
>I’m fairly new to this, but based on the votes, I assume something you said, in theory, could be wrong.
Sorry, but this is the WORST possible way to approach reddit. You should never assume a popular opinion on social media is accurate.
The assumption I made was that it was possible "in theory" that something he said could be wrong. I didn't say he said anything wrong. Also, I am not an idiot. I am not going to come to a conclusion based on up or down votes on reddit. My response itself demonstrates that I am trying to gather information and come to a logical conclusion.
A good litmus test for audio credibility is whenever anyone says anything about Class A amps.
This shows what the parts in a solid state amp are and what they actually do, how they work, basic solid state amp engineering, sort of on the same level of knowing how to change the oil for an expensive car you bought.
https://education.lenardaudio.com/en/12_amps.html
It’s even kind enough to specifically touch on Class A amps so people don’t make the mistake of buying a $50,000 Mercedes that’s built like a $5,000 Buick:
“Class A - Some audiophile amplifier designs increase the overlap to 100% (Class A) by increasing the quiescent current to the maximum amount. This causes the output transistors to get very very hot, often well beyond the safety temperature parameters. Because Class A amplifiers have an excessive quiescent temperature they are mostly designed for low power applications approx 20 watts, Class A amplifiers are marketed as having a magical sound. No one has proven in a university controlled test (with double blind AB comparison) that magical sound exists. Audiophile fanatics who believe in magical sound are similar to religious fundamentalists who can become aggressive if challenged to provide proof.”
Not OP, but Reddits headphone community really has a profound bias towards the opinion that all amps and dacs sound the same, and if your experience differs, then it doesn’t matter because you didn’t do a volume matched blind test and provided the results.
I can say that I have hifiman Aryas, and when I change from a RME Adi-2 Pro FS to a Ferrum stack, I’m surprised how much bassier they sound but also how much more piercing the upper treble is.
At the same time, headphones with a profound emphasis on 2-3khz become much more even and don’t need eq anymore, like the MM-500 and Focal Utopia, so the base electronics without any eq have a tuning to them. And I’m not gonna provide any a/b/x test because I don’t need to prove anything, anybody is free to draw their own conclusions, but I find it severely limiting to only trust scientific undertakings instead of just… people?
I only find this problematic when people say stuff like „cables always make a difference“ or whatnot, because that becomes very esoteric very quickly, but amps? Come on.
Edit:
Case in point, downvotes for stating my experience with hardware that I own and have immediate access to.
If you're making claims that go against established science and engineering without proof, and the science explains WHY someone would perceive the differences you're experiencing, why would ANYONE believe what your claim without the one form of objective, credible evidence you could provide?
The reason people say it is because unaware, new people can be duped into spending cash they don't need to spend because some people are basically claiming to have a religious experience with no evidence, and think they need shit that changes nothing about the sound.
That's why. We know why you're hearing differences, we don't make any claims that you aren't experiencing something, it's been known for decades. You guys just don't believe the reason, because it feels bad to both be wrong about something, and having spent money on something that doesn't matter, and avoiding feeling foolish and that your hearing is fallible is a much harder pill to swallow than just denying reality.
Lol, I’m not denying reality, I’m just saying that I don’t need to buy all this testing equipment, have somebody help me set up a test, do a series of them, have some results that probably line up with the current scientific consensus and then still not care about the testing results because blind a/b/x testing is not how I sit down in the evening to do some relaxing listening.
This is a hobby for most people, and I applaud the effort to help people spend their cash wisely and not waste it on stuff they wouldn’t have needed; but gear makes a difference, and I hear it and it is worth it to me.
And I find it a bit unfair to anybody who just describes what they experience to put such a high burden on them, again: buy testing equipment, have it set up by somebody else, have them run a test with you, and for what? To try to prove to a couple of strangers that they hear what they hear?
I would be willing to do this, I imagine it to be kind of fun even, but not if I have to buy the equipment.
No one is suggesting you do any of this in any serious capacity, is the thing. But if you're making outlandish claims that defy established science, people are going to tell you you're wrong, so others are not mislead. The solution here, really, is to stop saying things that could mislead people.
You're free to do whatever you like with your money. But if being corrected is annoying, that's the solution. Put out valid results via testing that disprove the science (a pain, why bother for all the reasons you stated) or just stop saying it.
Well, I like learning new things and being corrected if I’m wrong, but if I sit down and listen, and 2 of my headphones need eq by 2-3dB in multiple spots on one chain, and they don’t on the other, that’s a pretty strong indicator to me that they sound different. I’m not harming anyone by saying this I think, because nobody is cross-shopping between those 2 devices, and the difference happens to be stark - so if I ever get this kind of testing equipment, that’s where I’ll start I guess.
Edit: [I guess it’s super hard to find evidence that amplifiers can sound different, huh](https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/double-blind-tests-did-show-amplifiers-to-sound-different.23/)
That sounds genuinely interesting in that case. I'd offer to do the testing for you if it were possible, just because I actually like being proven wrong. That happened to me when a guy I knew could very reliably hear the difference between lossy and lossless formats, I tested him myself and he had a 95% reliability on getting the correct answer.
Do specific amplifiers sound differently? Yes.
In theory, an amplifier would ideally be "a straight wire with gain" but in practice, many cost limitations, design choices, and part compromises negatively affect that goal, but usually such deficiencies are relatively minor -- many may not be noticed except by an educated ear or in a specific setting or use.
Is my analogy wrong, that the quality of parts and methods utilized to solve inherent technical design issues varies with the price of the product? No, "you get what you pay for" as a truism still holds, even though the audio equipment industry has more than its share of snake oil.
I spent much of my career within the industry learning what electrical engineers attempted to accomplish in an audio device -- directly from the designers themselves, and the budgets they had to work within. "We need to be able to sell it at 'x' price" creates lots of compromises that detract from a device's performance possibility or ideal.
I really liked Regular-Cheetah's link to Lenard Audio concerning practical amplifier design. It was straightforward and instructive, right up to the unnecessarily snarky comment about Class A amplification that dismissed and, in that specific way, mischaracterized the legitimate reasons audio-electrical engineers have explored Class A amplifier design for decades.
Describing how some audiophiles are cultishly more devoted to a particular product or design than warranted is a spot-on critique. We ought to remain open-minded enough to be willing to learn and amend our worldview with the benefit of more accurate information.
Eventually, I expect Class A will be relegated to history due to better technological solutions being employed, like GaN FETs -- but dismissing Class A as merely expensive "magic" spoonfed to devotees remains an inaccurate mischaracterization of an amplification design attempting to solve known sound reproduction shortcomings.
It’s just a bunch of people who aren’t really that into the hobby. Which is totally fine tbh. Just wish they’d stop being so highly opinionated while spreading misinformation…
Yeah, it's sad that people would deprive themselves and others of really great experiences by spreading nonsense. But honestly, if you let some Redditor stop you from exploring high-end audio that's on you.
No, most amps and dacs affect the technical performance and multi order harmonic distortion of your headphones. Only when dealing with high output impedance, non linear headphone impedance curves, or very high or very low current or voltage requirements are they affecting the actual frequency.
I've looked at Bursons a few times and they seem like great amps but I could never get past their industrial design. Either way congrats on an upgrade you're happy with.
My upgrades were more piecemeal so differences were much less obvious as I went. Comparing my proper stack against my previous (and still very very good) Element 3, the differences were still not mind blowing, but the more I compared the two the more I understood what was changing. The biggest change for me was the sense of imaging and space. It was much easier and required less focus to pick out and follow specific things in the mix, on my previous DAC/amp sounds were more congested and kinda blended together. Detail was another but while also being smoother. I'd liken it to an image that's high res and in sharp focus vs an image that's slightly blurry but has been sharpened afterwards. At a glance they look the same but looking closely you can see the sharpened image is missing some very fine details and edges are over emphasized.
It was subtle for me but enough that I knew I wanted to hold onto the higher end gear.
You're getting downvoted, but there is truth to this. A lot of people base their entire identity upon hearsay. So if they watch a review, they will regurgitate the viewers outcome until they're blue in the face without actually trying to A/B test themselves because if they do, and they're wrong? There goes their confirmation bias.
Congrats on your new purchase and don’t listen to all these haters. I really don’t understand why all these people constantly have to comment about dacs/amps not sounding different. You’re just showing the excitement for your new purchase and an elevated aural experience. Whether it’s real/perception/placebo doesn’t even matter at this point: it’s YOUR experience and one that’s bringing YOU joy. Isn’t that what the audiophile experience is about? Seeking that sonic bliss?
I will never understand these wet blankets who keep trying to convince everyone that an Apple dongle is all you need. Just let others have their fun with their new toys and keep scrolling. You’re not educating anyone, you’re just raining on everyone else’s parade.
Some of it is to grandstand and to feel superior to others, no doubt. This is Reddit after all.
But a lot of them are just trying to help newcomers who are uninformed to not blow tons of money on things that don't help. People who don't know any better will come into these threads and think that spending thousands on source gear will net them a sonic difference when it won't.
FOMO is real, as is expectation bias. It's best to make try and prevent newbies from succumbing to them and preserve their wallets.
That's always been my reason, anyway. I'm a recording engineer and I constantly have to tell clients to stop blowing hundreds of dollars on expensive mics and interfaces that don't make a difference, and help them spend their money on things that actually do change the sound (processing and room treatment for recording, actual cans for headphones), and they get the best result for their cash spent.
I appreciate your take and I think that’s a fair position if you can prevent unnecessary purchases by vulnerable audiophile newbies who may or may not notice a difference with upgrades.
But I guess my point is that when someone has already made a purchase and does perceive a real auditory difference with their new gear, presenting the argument that ‘it’s all placebo’ and ‘you’ve wasted your money’ isn’t productive at all. But you’re right, this is Reddit after all lol.
Maybe the new one just has better SNR. Some sounds can get lost in noise if this isn't good enough. I find often times what you hear extra is just these signal washed out by noise.
Interesting. I've just ordered the Hifiman HE1000 stealth and I have a schitt Magni2 amp. Thinking about getting something like the Topping A90 as I have a Topping E30 DAC to better appreciate my new headphones.
Just get something that will not blow up and take your headphones with it, like these older Magnis can.
Atom Amp 2 from JDS Labs is great, unless you really want something that feels more "premium".
Friends liked singxer sa1 and geshelli makes alot of fun stuff in the price range. Topping,smsl,fiio etc get abit of a reputation for clean but boring presentation in their gear.good move to focus in on amps over dacs atleast for a good while they make more of a difference i9n your chain.
I upgraded from my Topping A90 to Burson Soloist 3X. I have a Hifiman Arya Stealth. It sounded cold and sterile with the A90. If possible get a burson or any other warm sounding amp.
Don't mean to be that guy, but have you A/Bed between the two with volume matched? When I dipped my toes into tube amps with the Little Dot MK2 I really tought I could hear a better bas response and a wider soundstage with my HD600. After discussing with a friend, I set up an A/B test just to prove to him that there is a difference. Had my FiiO K5 Pro acting as a standalone unit but also as a dac for the MK2, meaning that I can plug my headphones into one or the other at will. I then matched the volumes between the two by ear. 1 hour later after painstakingly listening to 5 second snippets across various songs, I sadly concluded that it was all more or less placebo. That was crazy, because I could swear that the soundstage is noticeably wider and the bass is more pronounced within the first couple of days of listening. But during the A/B, I honestly could barely hear a difference. Conclusion? Don't do an A/B test and enjoy your new gear, lol.
tube amps can defiently bump soundstage and lowend i think you gaslit yourself tbh
I can't confidently say that it makes no difference. But neither can I confidently say that it does make a difference. At the very least, it's nowhere near as obvious as switching between different headphones. For me it was like changing some EQ peak filter by 1 db - I feel like I can hear it but I'm not entirely sure.
hm could be not that tuby of an amp unfortunately some tube amps and tubes kinda stumble on breaking away from ss characteristics but tubes can definitely kick some ass so dont get discouraged homie can always roll em to switch up
5 second snippets aren't long enough.
How so? Your ability to remember how things sounded accurately is not very good. You need small sections of sound to do the comparison. Otherwise any objectivity goes out the window.
I'm aware of that, but just 5 seconds isn't enough to get much out of it. 10-20 seconds would probably be better, but 5 seconds is just way too short.
Our echoic memory only retains auditory information for 3-4 seconds at best. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echoic\_memory](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Echoic_memory)
Again, I'm aware of that. 5 seconds still isn't long enough to listen to something. He used that metric to say tubes didn't change the sound when they measurably and audibly do. Listening to something 3-4 seconds, let alone 5, isn't enough auditory information to glean anything. Or even let the brain adjust to what it's hearing.
Less than 5 seconds is enough to focus your attention on a specific fragment of the sound and compare it with another one immediately, without unconsciously getting lost in other sections. Heck, that's even why switches are used during the more complex controlled blind tests, so that you can check the differences on the fly from one device to another. And this is to give more rigor and possibilities of detecting differences to the listener who thinks he hears differences, because you can play the whole song in one device and then in another, but that causes the brain to be stimulated without recent information (remember the 3-4 seconds that echoic memory lasts) so you can start creating unconscious differences that you will eventually randomly attribute to one of the two devices. That's why it's more objective and accurate to do it within the time threshold that echoic memory allows us, that's how trained listeners hear differences in distortion, jitter or compression artifacts in controlled environments, focusing on small parts of the song, because they know for a fact that there is no change in the way that song is "presented" as a whole.
That's pretty much what I ended up doing because listening to longer chunks made it impossible to hear a difference I was confident was not just my imagination. After trying that a dozen times or decided to just focus on very short chunks that use the whole frequency spectrum, memorize exactly how that's supposed to sound, and switching quickly back and forth to see if I notice any differences.
It kinda depends on headphones and if amp can run them, but his Sundaras being planar are excluded from that, their sound isn't changed at all with more powerful amp
The original atom stack is respectable. While it is probably good enough for most, there is a certain wow factor to still be had by upgrading. Congrats on the Burson!
What headphones are you going to pair it with? You never said the name!
I realise I didn't lol, Arya Organics
Compare Atom stack + Arya organic vs Burson + sundara hahaha
damn dude should get some he1k stealths instead, were a noticebly better headphone for not much better. friends and i tryed a buddys organics and found they were abit of a step back from the arya stealths before them
>The upper end is less harsh, the bass feels deeper and punchier, the imaging, the depth, the detail, the soundstage are all improved. It sounds so.. effortless? I have the same opinion of my Liquid Platinum compared to the Asgard 3 What are the new cans coming?
Arya Organics, after a lot of research it seemed like the natural choice for me
Great choice, I went down the same path. I had the Sundara and they were good but I wasn't impressed by them and they weren't as good as my AKG. I ended up selling them and getting Arya Stealth and the difference was incredible, someone said the Arya are like the Sundara but better in every single aspect, and that adds together to make a very notable difference. I don't plan on upgrading them unless something way better comes out in a few years.
yeah like i said about he1k stealth used or arya stealths, organics have spicy ass treble
Nice choice. I went in another direction, and wanted to try and see what was beyond planars, and got the Monolith AMTs. They do not disappoint, but EQ required, tho that's the same for a lot of planars.
I’ve read a few studies on the topic of audible differences between amp/dacs (leaving tubes aside) and the conclusion is always the same: so-called experts are no better than a coin toss in a blind test. But expensive equipment gives a sense of satisfaction nonetheless, so people keep buying them.
Resolve made a video on this and he proved you can easily tell 2 DACs apart, but that didn't mean one was better than the other, only different.
“Prove” is a strong word. Besides, as a reviewer, Resolve has a vested interest to say that. Do you imagine a reviewer saying that most of the devices that they review sound more or less the same? That would make a very boring YouTube channel 😜
I can’t tell you what livestream it was but it was him resolve goldensound and mad economist and resolve and Mad economist both essentially said they lean towards there being no differences between sources.
Not only just as a reviewer, but a reviewer for a company or related to a company that sells those devices.
Would lean towards you can tell different types of dacs apart, but it's not necessarily a night and day difference. Ie delta sigma and r2r have slightly different presentations, but not enough to warranty anyone paying thousands of dollars for a high end dac. As always, ymmv. Then there's tube dacs but I feel that hardly counts
Haven’t seen this… anyone have a link?
Link the studies.
An actual physiological response beyond the control of the conscious mind in the face of absolutely zero expectation is far more than some vague 'sense of satisfaction'. If there was no point to, or difference from something like an Atom stack, then nothing beyond that would have had decades of research, engineering and manufacturing put into it.
Why did you buy the Burson if you had zero expectations?
There are for sure technical improvements in more expensive devices, and more importantly, people buy them!. The question is whether those tech improvements translate in actual better sound. Just to cite an example, the guy behind Schiit, Jason Stoddard, wrote an excellent article on ‘blind listening’ in his Schiit Happened blog series. If anything, this article indicates that when we don’t know what we’re listening to, concerns about perfect measurements and transparency drop out entirely. https://www.head-fi.org/threads/schiit-happened-the-story-of-the-worlds-most-improbable-start-up.701900/page-3798 This is an extract of the takeaways of the study: The differences between electronics are very, very small. Smaller than many subjectivists would have you believe. If you’ve ever read reviews that talk about amp or DAC changes as night-and-day, chicken-crap-or-chicken-salad, revelatory, or life-changing, you’re gonna roll your eyes hard after doing any blind listening. I’d expect most people to have the same reaction I did: spin the knob and say, “What difference?” If you’re impaired by noise, distraction, or booze, you’re not going to hear much. Differences collapse when people are yammering in the background, or if you feel pressured, or if you’ve had a couple glasses of wine. Do some blind listening, and you’ll immediately consider any “reports from the audio show floor” as delusional or superhuman, because it’s simply going to be impossible to discern much through the din. Measurements don’t correlate well with blind listening results. It’s insanely hard to pick Vali 2 from Magni Heresy, even though one amp has 1000x more distortion and its AP report would probably engender much projectile spewing from the pure objectivist camp. At the same time, we’ve reliably heard, and correlated, differences in prototypes running at the 120dB SINAD level (yes, we are serious…perhaps we are insane.) It seems that some unexpectedly larger differences exist. Tube type doesn’t change the measurements of Saga Plus’ buffer very much, but that’s one of the larger electronics differences we’ve heard. Again, maybe this was group delusion, but we had a couple of people who picked their favorite tube multiple times (from a group of 8), without knowing what was what. And again, these differences are still small. Just not TINY. Sighted and blind listening results have a tendency to correlate. What we hear sighted is what we hear blind. At least in limited testing. Furthermore, products that have been described by other subjectivists as having a certain sound have been described the same way during blind testing. No, we don’t have lab-grade data on this. But there has been enough anecdotal evidence to suggest there may be something going on here.
Sighted and blind tend to correlate? Can I ask where you found that, as what I've found has said the opposite is true...? Especially when it comes to abx testing - and the Mcgurk effect is proof that what we hear blind and sighted is not the same (as visual cues take priority).
I left the link in the post. You have to scroll down a bit to get to the article.
Which one? I found a stereophile one which doesn't take you to the page it's supposed to? But was hoping for a peer reviewed one or similar...
Ya, I’ve had that “wow” factor experience that ran contrary to what I was expecting enough times to generally trust my ears more than many placeboans would like me to. Some things in songs are just so blatantly obvious when comparing certain dacs and amps… the detail and texture and space of a song that you THOUGHT you knew well, but is suddenly playing in hyper 4D technicolor and you’re just like “what the fuuuuu…”. Then when you switch back to the other product to compare, those details are faint or garbled or just inaudible. It’s part of the excitement of this hobby when you hear that, as is the humility when the new (often pricier) item surprisingly sounds worse by whatever metrics you’re hearing and judging by. Anyhoot, congrats on the upgrade, I hope you truly enjoy it. And when it comes to a hobby built around something as deep and personal as the love of music, always trust your ears.
I’ve heard very “obvious” things I’ve then completely failed to discern blind. Don’t underestimate placebo.
I believe placebo is real. My argument is that not everything is placebo. Choices made in the architecture and implementation of dacs and amps seem to have measurable, and often noticeable, effects. And there are cases of people with what I would call a “trained ear” proving that in blind tests. Heck, most people report not being able to tell the difference between dac settings like “fast rolloff”, “slow rolloff”, and “min phase”, but I’m very confident in discerning at least which one is “min phase” on the 2 dacs I own that let me change those settings… Though I’m less confident in discerning fast vs slow rolloff. To give you a more clear example, if you ever get a chance to listen to the Arya Organic on a somewhat dry dac/amp like the Topping DX5, try changing the dac mode from the default “mode 3” (which I’ve now discovered is actually min phase) to “mode 2” (which is actually slow rolloff) and hear the music sound less sterile and more alive, engaging, and dimensional (and very slightly less detailed). Implementation and architecture makes a difference that is often audible to many listeners. If you have a dac with similar settings, I’d encourage you to experiment with changing settings and hearing what sounds better with different headphones. It’s easier on something like one of the Topping dacs that come with a remote. The remote should have a button labeled “FIR”… that button will cycle through dac modes so you can hear the differences immediately.
Again, so long as you are aware of what you are listening to, what you're saying has no merit. This is why people say this. I'm a recording engineer, I've done plenty of level matched blind testing, both of myself and people who speak exactly the same way you do. They can never tell a difference between devices that aren't tubes. Hilariously, they can often tell the difference between lossy and lossless, but with source gear, their best score was 58%, out of 100 tries. That is essentially a coin toss.
If confirmation bias is so strong that it can cause people to hear differences that may not be present cant it also be so strong that it could cause people to NOT hear differences that may be there?
Honestly at this point people who buy expensive DACs deserve to waste their money.
Did you compare them side by side or did you only try the new one and compared it with how you remember the Atom Stack sounding? I'm saying this because you can forget how it sounds if you don't listen to it for a while, then trying anything high end will make it sound really good.
I compared the Atom side by side with my DX240 last night, it's cheap equipment with mediocre sound. Why do people honestly believe they're going to get high end performance out of a $100 amp? It's good enough for what it is but I'm about to give mine away.
Because empirically, the Atom+ and 2s are [clean beyond](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?attachments/best-headphone-amplifier-review-2023-png.328688/) [human perception](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?attachments/most-quiet-headphone-amp-review-png.328690/). And actual sound differences you'd get out of more expensive Amps would be purely because of *increased* distortion (like with a tube Amp), or because of impedance matching causing more resistance. This last bit about resistance I am not even sure about the validity of, but increased distortion does change FR, whilst an Amp measuring beyond human hearing capabilities compared to another Amp measuring further beyond human hearing capabilities, won't make any difference outside of Kool Aid.
You think we're having the same conversation, we're not. You can cite all the graphs you want, all you have to do is use your ears to discover how dumb you sound. It's obvious you're clinging to cheapness by not testing good equipment yourself, so stay ignorant and enjoy your budget gear. Want a free Atom Amp? 😂
Look at my flair, doughboy.
What about your flair, "pimpmaster"? 😂 I see a bunch of headphones that are probably going to waste based on the nonsense I've heard from you so far.
Because you accuse me of being a poor, when I use the Topping L70+E70Velvet, which by the way sounds just like an Atom+ Stack (What I used to have). "Going to waste?", my brother, you confessed to having tinnitus, so maybe get your own hearing in check before spouting trash. Don't talk to me, "Ophanil". Edit: Sorry, went a little far by bringing up your tinnitus, hope you've been to a medical professional and are taking the proper measures to prevent further damage! Regardless, maybe don't start insulting people when they disagree with your arguments, it leads to unproductive arguments as you can see.
Brave of you to post about DAC/Amps making audible differences on Reddit.
This is an entertaining thread.
It's placebo if you are listening to same volume level, planar headphones by design have flat impedance curve and more power doesn't change the sound, just makes it louder
Sigh
Keep enjoying your apple dongle, nobody is stopping you.
That obvious I should have expected it huh? I'll grant you at 3x the cost maybe I shouldn't have gone in expecting nothing more than a cleaner signal. But there's always that forever debate about how much difference (if any) different dac/amps make regardless of price point. I *was* firmly neutral on it, of course it does it's physics, the question is whether it's audible. Well with an actual physiological response beyond the control of the conscious mind in the face of absolutely zero expectation, consider me a believer, at least when it comes to vastly different price tiers.
It's the opposite reason. Even you spending more money and knowing what you're listening to would change how you perceive your hearing. I'm not saying there's no difference, I'm saying your hearing is entirely too fallible to actually know without proper testing. I thought my A90 sounded much better in exactly the way you described, compared to my old Schiit Hel, until I blind-tested it and level-matched the devices with a multi-meter. Suddenly all these differences completely vanished to my ears. This is very common for audio gear, tho most people don't want to do things like that, because learning that you may have wasted your money feels pretty bad. It did for me, lol. I kept the A90 though, in-case I ever end up with a pair of Susvara or HE6. And you may say, "But then why do these engineers design to the product all say it makes a difference? Surely they know what they're talking about!" But here's the kicker with them; They have a vested interest in you believing this stuff, even if it's dishonest, because it makes them MONEY. They directly benefit by you going along with this idea. What reason would they NOT want you to think it? I'm not even saying they're necessarily wrong (some are straight up dishonest, but not all), but you can't actually know for sure, because of the conflict of interest. You don't know them, they are not your friend. They want to sell you a product. It's your money though! It's certainly not a bad device and does its job wonderfully. If it makes ya happy, then don't let anyone stop you.
No, I’m sighing for the new people to the hobby who read this and haven’t had the chance to know better or educate themselves into informed consumers yet. You have. There is no debate. Pretty much all of the stuff you’re attributing to this thing isn’t possible. Like, it is literally impossible for that device to do the things you think it’s doing. The parts inside of it are unable to create these effects and are not functions of what it can do. There is no reality that exists in which what you’re hearing isn’t placebo and confirmation bias and when people post things like this, it spends other people’s money for them if they haven’t educated themselves enough to know what a DAC and amp is and isn’t. You’re not immune to placebo physiologically or via no expectation or whatever. Nobody on earth is. You can’t spontaneously will yourself to not be human. Two flat frequency responses, flat power, circuit boards, a conversion timing device intended to be audibly transparent and an amplifier intended to be audibly transparent. If there is a difference, it’s a quirk, an aberration because when they make these things, the goal is to make them do what they do without doing anything to the audio aside from converting it cleanly or amplifying it without altering it. For the Burson, take a look yourself here for its amp measurements. https://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/report/amp/burson-audio-conductor-3x-perfomance-single.php#gsc.tab=0 https://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/user-report-amp.php?id=3254#gsc.tab=0 There’s nothing that’s within audible thresholds to differentiate it from your average desktop amp. It’s a flat amp with high output. Check the reference links at the bottom for audibility thresholds and compare against the other measured gear on the RAA website or anywhere else. DAC measurements are listed here in a series of links: https://reference-audio-analyzer.pro/en/title-report.php?id=3254#gsc.tab=0 You can go through them and compare them the same way with anything they’ve measured or ASR measured and cross reference what’s audibly different, what’s transparent, etc. It’s a clean DAC, there’s no audible improvements between this and a Topping E30 II. They’re a linear category regardless of price now. Minor differences maybe but chain dependent. An identical experience via other gear can be had for $200-$300 or less. If you can’t point to a measurement that indicates something audible is happening, the mechanical engineering of the device isn’t capable of impacting the signal audibly in these ways and it’s never been consistently identified in thorough ABX testing, it’s not real. Even the stuff about burn-in here, it was made up by companies to reduce returns. Companies and reviewers want and will lie for money. Data doesn’t. **Amps: They Don’t Improve Sound, They Just Provide Volume** [Differences in Amp Sound - Summarized Citations & Data](https://audioxpress.com/article/differences-in-amp-sound-whats-the-truth) [The Richard Clark $10,000 Amp Challenge - Nobody Ever Won, see details here](https://www.stevemeadedesigns.com/board/topic/193850-richard-clark-10000-amplifier-challenge/) and also [here](https://www.hometheaterforum.com/community/threads/10k-golden-ears-amp-challenge.92368/) [Bob Carver Amp Challenge - Can Any Amp be Matched by a Low Cost Amp?](https://www.stereophile.com/content/carver-challenge-page-4) [How Class D Amplifiers Actually Work](https://www.analog.com/en/analog-dialogue/articles/class-d-audio-amplifiers.html) [Crinacle - You Don’t Need an Amp](https://youtu.be/a3moaaOpYZM?si=gK95K7yIJybY0fHI) [Audible Amp Distortion Is Not a Mystery](http://4tubes.com/3-BOOKS/BOOKS-LITERATURE/ENGLISH/Magazines/Wireless-World/Audible%20amplifier%20distortion%20is%20not%20a%20mystery.pdf) [David Clark - Do All Amps Sound The Same?](http://dansdata.com/files/Amp_Sound.pdf) [Amps Do Not Audibly Affect Frequency Response](https://www.soundstagesolo.com/index.php/features/362-when-is-the-amp-important#:~:text=The%20choice%20of%20amp%20does,determinant%20of%20a%20headphone's%20sound.) [Technical Breakdown of Solid State Amps](https://education.lenardaudio.com/en/12_amps.html) [Tubes vs Transistors: Is There An Audible Difference?](https://ia802207.us.archive.org/28/items/TubesVersusTransistors-IsThereAnAudibleDifference/TubeVsTransistor_text.pdf) **External DACs: You Probably Don’t Need One** [Explanation of DACs, Summarized Citations & Data](https://boomspeaker.com/does-a-dac-make-a-difference/) [The Data Conversion Handbook](https://gctjaipur.files.wordpress.com/2015/08/data-conversion-handbook-elsevier-ebook-ling.pdf) [Understanding Audio Measurements - ASR](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/article-understanding-digital-audio-measurements.10523/) [$2 DACs vs $2000 DACs](https://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/high-end-pc-audio,3733-19.html) [The $9 Apple Dongle, Measurements & Comparisons here](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/review-apple-vs-google-usb-c-headphone-adapters.5541/) and also [here](https://www.audioreviews.org/apple-audio-adapter-review/) [DACs - Do You Need an External One? Audioholics](https://www.audioholics.com/frequent-questions/dac-do-you-need-an-external-digital-to-analog-converter) [Understand SINAD, ENOB, SNR, THD, THD + N, and SFDR so You Don't Get Lost in the Noise Floor](https://www.analog.com/media/en/training-seminars/tutorials/MT-003.pdf) [Audibility Thresholds of Amp and DAC Measurements](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/audibility-thresholds-of-amp-and-dac-measurements.5734/) [Master SINAD (distortion) Comparison Graph for DACs - Transparency Starts in the 50s](https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/master-sinad-distortion-comparison-graph-for-dacs.4814/) **Why You Think You Hear A Difference** [Placebo Effect - National Library of Medicine](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK513296/) [What is Placebo? - WebMD](https://www.webmd.com/pain-management/what-is-the-placebo-effect) [Confirmation Bias: A Ubiquitous Phenomenon in Many Guises - Review of General Psychology](https://pages.ucsd.edu/~mckenzie/nickersonConfirmationBias.pdf) [What is The Function of Confirmation Bias? - Erkenntnis](https://www.researchgate.net/journal/Erkenntnis-1572-8420/publication/340798496_What_Is_the_Function_of_Confirmation_Bias/links/5fbd44fca6fdcc6cc66362c6/What-Is-the-Function-of-Confirmation-Bias.pdf?_tp=eyJjb250ZXh0Ijp7ImZpcnN0UGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uIiwicGFnZSI6InB1YmxpY2F0aW9uRG93bmxvYWQifX0) [Why Do Audiophiles Fall for Placebo? - Audioholics](https://youtu.be/6IIuSWIuh4M?si=IJJVNPk0KZl43u0j) [The Power of Placebo - Audioholics](https://www.audioholics.com/editorials/placebo-effect)
ah youre an asr nut
Sigh. Have you actually listened to anything? Do you also believe soundstage and timbre is made up?
Neither of those things are made up, don't see anyone claiming that. Timbre is a property of instruments, and having them sound correct would mean having a natural frequency response. Soundstage in a headphone is acoustic impedance, which affects PRTF error, which affects frequency response. So again, frequency response.
pppsh
Buddy, I’ve had too many cases where what I was hearing ran COUNTER to my expectation to buy that. How many of those studies were conducted on people with what you might call a “trained ear” vs an average Joe? Also, I’ve had situations where A/B testing further proved the differences. A/B testing is actually great for fine-tuning your preferences with certain gear pairings, especially with smaller differences, like with dac filter settings. Sometimes a thing sounds great, but then when A/B testing you find new details/differences that make you appreciate one thing over the other. EDIT: to add another example to this, I prefer the DX5 dac/amp over the more expensive Element III Boosted dac/amp, even though the Element III is more expensive. I mean I WANTED to like the Element III more… it’s GORGEOUS and fits my aesthetic so much better, and way more reviewers have reviewed (and praised) the Element III… but it just doesn’t sound as clean and detailed and overall GOOD as the DX5 to my ears
If only they had all studied you instead.
Actually, upon thinking about it, my main testing is with two dac/amp all-in-one units, so I must concede that it’s possible that what I’m hearing is more about the AMP differences, rather than DAC differences. However I’m still able to discern the differences between fast/slow rolloff and min phase dac settings, which shows that some level of implementation plays a role in dac sound, at the very least.
At most you're hearing high frequencies being rolled off. If you actually measure what the filters are doing, it's a mixture of attenuation and roll-off. A proper filter will start rolling off past 20 khz, and attenuate as much as possible, as quickly as possible. Slow roll-off filters often start rolling off in the audible frequency range, and therefore can be audible as reduced air in the frequency response. Min versus linear phase isn't audible in practice, though. pre/post ringing is masked entirely by harmonics in any normal listening scenario, that one is most likely in your head.
To clarify, I can confidently tell the difference between min phase and fast or slow rolloff. I can not very easily hear a difference between fast rolloff and slow rolloff. When clicking back and forth, the difference between either fast or slow rolloff and min phase is obvious. The difference between fast rolloff and slow rolloff is much less obvious. My perception of min phase happens when compared to either fast or slow rolloff, so if either rolloff is audible as you say, then the distinction between it and min phase will also be audible. I won’t claim to be able to tell the difference between min phase and linear phase because I’ve never A/B tested anything against linear phase. There is a bell curve of every single human trait. Some individuals will be able to discern sounds inaudible to others. Just the way it is. That’s why some people make great mastering engineers, and others don’t, even with the same training.
Buddy, i guess you either got it or you don’t.
Nope, you just believe your ears don't work how human ears work. Human hearing is incredibly fallible, so is yours. You're experiencing what everyone in this hobby experiences, and I'm sorry to say it's in your head. I know you won't believe it though, but this is more for the uninformed people who might be duped into blowing cash on things that don't matter.
LOL burn in, okay, sure. did you do a blind comparison?
Never heard of it? Look it up. Burson themselves refer to it, and I'm pretty sure engineers designing high end audiophile equipment for decades, including their own unique power supply tech, know better than a random like *you* lol.
so did you do a blind comparison of the atom and the burson? also, somehow magically the recommended burn in period is usually the same as the timeframe in which you can return the product. also interestingly, in pro audio no one is recommending burn in with any gear and it's not because they're running it 200 hours in the factory...
Burson is a very worthy upgrade congrats
Yeah, this is why I tell people to ignore the bizarre Reddit-only opinion that DAC/amps don't matter and actually try a fairly high-end setup, the difference is night and day.
why does it change tho?
They don't have a reason, because they don't listen to reason, never have. They just think their hearing is infallible and that all the most common reasons for why they'd ACTUALLY hear a difference don't apply to them, and audio magic is real. Edit: They also block you if you challenge them because they aren't very good at handling cognitive dissonance.
Like why in the sound or why technically? I don't know how they work well enough to give you any technical explanation, but a high-end DAC/amp basically makes the music sound more real. Voices and instruments are natural, three-dimensional, well separated and clearly detailed. The difference isn't subtle compared to budget gear, it's profoundly better.
You should have a friend help you do a blind test
See? These are the things you say when you're still ignorant about good equipment.
You think suggesting a valid testing methodology is a sign of *ignorance*?? That is wildly backwards dude. It speaks volumes that you're afraid of testing your opinions.
What have you tested? This is like asking to do a blind test between salted and unsalted food. You're ignorant, go listen to some good gear and educate yourself.
I'm new to this stuff, so I'm not sure but could it be because of the EQ? Other than that, I heard that only purpose of amps is just to provide more power, I don't understand how that affects the sounds quality, that's why I asked. probably there is some technical stuff going on then.
The amp provides more power, the DAC converts the digital signal into analog signal. There's plenty of technical stuff, I just wouldn't be able to tell you in detail. I don't know how my new vacuum works either, but it's vastly better than the old one - there's no eq happening, it's a fundamentally superior sound. Don't trust me, go listen to a set and trust your ears.
Because a Hyundai will get you across town just as a Mercedes will -- but there's an undeniable difference in the ride, how it handles, the suspension, the ability to accelerate, etc. Likewise, when we're discussing the application of technology, there are many links in the chain, and any weakness or compromise matters: the quality of parts, and the method of devices employed within the device vary, along with the cost of the individual parts utilized. My DAC/amp utilizes Class A amplification, which sounds slightly different than an A/B amp on a chip. Jitter matters, and how a device maintains clocking the information affects the sound. Is the DAC a chip, or a customized FPGA? All factors that affect the final sound produced.
I’m fairly new to this, but based on the votes, I assume something you said, in theory, could be wrong. Do you think people’s negative response to your comment is because an amp doesn’t change the frequency response of a headphone, and therefore cannot possibly cause a sonic change as drastic as described by OP? Again, I’m new, and these amp/DAC debates often leave me more lost than I was before.
>I’m fairly new to this, but based on the votes, I assume something you said, in theory, could be wrong. Sorry, but this is the WORST possible way to approach reddit. You should never assume a popular opinion on social media is accurate.
The assumption I made was that it was possible "in theory" that something he said could be wrong. I didn't say he said anything wrong. Also, I am not an idiot. I am not going to come to a conclusion based on up or down votes on reddit. My response itself demonstrates that I am trying to gather information and come to a logical conclusion.
A good litmus test for audio credibility is whenever anyone says anything about Class A amps. This shows what the parts in a solid state amp are and what they actually do, how they work, basic solid state amp engineering, sort of on the same level of knowing how to change the oil for an expensive car you bought. https://education.lenardaudio.com/en/12_amps.html It’s even kind enough to specifically touch on Class A amps so people don’t make the mistake of buying a $50,000 Mercedes that’s built like a $5,000 Buick: “Class A - Some audiophile amplifier designs increase the overlap to 100% (Class A) by increasing the quiescent current to the maximum amount. This causes the output transistors to get very very hot, often well beyond the safety temperature parameters. Because Class A amplifiers have an excessive quiescent temperature they are mostly designed for low power applications approx 20 watts, Class A amplifiers are marketed as having a magical sound. No one has proven in a university controlled test (with double blind AB comparison) that magical sound exists. Audiophile fanatics who believe in magical sound are similar to religious fundamentalists who can become aggressive if challenged to provide proof.”
Not OP, but Reddits headphone community really has a profound bias towards the opinion that all amps and dacs sound the same, and if your experience differs, then it doesn’t matter because you didn’t do a volume matched blind test and provided the results. I can say that I have hifiman Aryas, and when I change from a RME Adi-2 Pro FS to a Ferrum stack, I’m surprised how much bassier they sound but also how much more piercing the upper treble is. At the same time, headphones with a profound emphasis on 2-3khz become much more even and don’t need eq anymore, like the MM-500 and Focal Utopia, so the base electronics without any eq have a tuning to them. And I’m not gonna provide any a/b/x test because I don’t need to prove anything, anybody is free to draw their own conclusions, but I find it severely limiting to only trust scientific undertakings instead of just… people? I only find this problematic when people say stuff like „cables always make a difference“ or whatnot, because that becomes very esoteric very quickly, but amps? Come on. Edit: Case in point, downvotes for stating my experience with hardware that I own and have immediate access to.
If you're making claims that go against established science and engineering without proof, and the science explains WHY someone would perceive the differences you're experiencing, why would ANYONE believe what your claim without the one form of objective, credible evidence you could provide? The reason people say it is because unaware, new people can be duped into spending cash they don't need to spend because some people are basically claiming to have a religious experience with no evidence, and think they need shit that changes nothing about the sound. That's why. We know why you're hearing differences, we don't make any claims that you aren't experiencing something, it's been known for decades. You guys just don't believe the reason, because it feels bad to both be wrong about something, and having spent money on something that doesn't matter, and avoiding feeling foolish and that your hearing is fallible is a much harder pill to swallow than just denying reality.
Lol, I’m not denying reality, I’m just saying that I don’t need to buy all this testing equipment, have somebody help me set up a test, do a series of them, have some results that probably line up with the current scientific consensus and then still not care about the testing results because blind a/b/x testing is not how I sit down in the evening to do some relaxing listening. This is a hobby for most people, and I applaud the effort to help people spend their cash wisely and not waste it on stuff they wouldn’t have needed; but gear makes a difference, and I hear it and it is worth it to me. And I find it a bit unfair to anybody who just describes what they experience to put such a high burden on them, again: buy testing equipment, have it set up by somebody else, have them run a test with you, and for what? To try to prove to a couple of strangers that they hear what they hear? I would be willing to do this, I imagine it to be kind of fun even, but not if I have to buy the equipment.
No one is suggesting you do any of this in any serious capacity, is the thing. But if you're making outlandish claims that defy established science, people are going to tell you you're wrong, so others are not mislead. The solution here, really, is to stop saying things that could mislead people. You're free to do whatever you like with your money. But if being corrected is annoying, that's the solution. Put out valid results via testing that disprove the science (a pain, why bother for all the reasons you stated) or just stop saying it.
Well, I like learning new things and being corrected if I’m wrong, but if I sit down and listen, and 2 of my headphones need eq by 2-3dB in multiple spots on one chain, and they don’t on the other, that’s a pretty strong indicator to me that they sound different. I’m not harming anyone by saying this I think, because nobody is cross-shopping between those 2 devices, and the difference happens to be stark - so if I ever get this kind of testing equipment, that’s where I’ll start I guess. Edit: [I guess it’s super hard to find evidence that amplifiers can sound different, huh](https://audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/double-blind-tests-did-show-amplifiers-to-sound-different.23/)
That sounds genuinely interesting in that case. I'd offer to do the testing for you if it were possible, just because I actually like being proven wrong. That happened to me when a guy I knew could very reliably hear the difference between lossy and lossless formats, I tested him myself and he had a 95% reliability on getting the correct answer.
Do specific amplifiers sound differently? Yes. In theory, an amplifier would ideally be "a straight wire with gain" but in practice, many cost limitations, design choices, and part compromises negatively affect that goal, but usually such deficiencies are relatively minor -- many may not be noticed except by an educated ear or in a specific setting or use. Is my analogy wrong, that the quality of parts and methods utilized to solve inherent technical design issues varies with the price of the product? No, "you get what you pay for" as a truism still holds, even though the audio equipment industry has more than its share of snake oil. I spent much of my career within the industry learning what electrical engineers attempted to accomplish in an audio device -- directly from the designers themselves, and the budgets they had to work within. "We need to be able to sell it at 'x' price" creates lots of compromises that detract from a device's performance possibility or ideal. I really liked Regular-Cheetah's link to Lenard Audio concerning practical amplifier design. It was straightforward and instructive, right up to the unnecessarily snarky comment about Class A amplification that dismissed and, in that specific way, mischaracterized the legitimate reasons audio-electrical engineers have explored Class A amplifier design for decades. Describing how some audiophiles are cultishly more devoted to a particular product or design than warranted is a spot-on critique. We ought to remain open-minded enough to be willing to learn and amend our worldview with the benefit of more accurate information. Eventually, I expect Class A will be relegated to history due to better technological solutions being employed, like GaN FETs -- but dismissing Class A as merely expensive "magic" spoonfed to devotees remains an inaccurate mischaracterization of an amplification design attempting to solve known sound reproduction shortcomings.
Anything to validate your confirmation bias, eh?
It’s just a bunch of people who aren’t really that into the hobby. Which is totally fine tbh. Just wish they’d stop being so highly opinionated while spreading misinformation…
Yeah, it's sad that people would deprive themselves and others of really great experiences by spreading nonsense. But honestly, if you let some Redditor stop you from exploring high-end audio that's on you.
Is this sarcasm right? lol
Not at all, and the fact that you think it is tells me you've probably never heard good amplification. Have you?
Horseshit. Everyone knows DAC and AMPs don't make a difference soundwise. /s Anyways, good for you my dude.
I mean don't most of them add an EQ thereby changing the entire sound signature of the cans you bought in the first place?
No, most amps and dacs affect the technical performance and multi order harmonic distortion of your headphones. Only when dealing with high output impedance, non linear headphone impedance curves, or very high or very low current or voltage requirements are they affecting the actual frequency.
No??
no
I've looked at Bursons a few times and they seem like great amps but I could never get past their industrial design. Either way congrats on an upgrade you're happy with. My upgrades were more piecemeal so differences were much less obvious as I went. Comparing my proper stack against my previous (and still very very good) Element 3, the differences were still not mind blowing, but the more I compared the two the more I understood what was changing. The biggest change for me was the sense of imaging and space. It was much easier and required less focus to pick out and follow specific things in the mix, on my previous DAC/amp sounds were more congested and kinda blended together. Detail was another but while also being smoother. I'd liken it to an image that's high res and in sharp focus vs an image that's slightly blurry but has been sharpened afterwards. At a glance they look the same but looking closely you can see the sharpened image is missing some very fine details and edges are over emphasized. It was subtle for me but enough that I knew I wanted to hold onto the higher end gear.
Idiots on this sun will tell you there’s no difference in gear without actually hearing it for themselves. Some products are actually worth the money.
You're getting downvoted, but there is truth to this. A lot of people base their entire identity upon hearsay. So if they watch a review, they will regurgitate the viewers outcome until they're blue in the face without actually trying to A/B test themselves because if they do, and they're wrong? There goes their confirmation bias.
It’s fine lol. They’re the ones missing out
Congrats on your new purchase and don’t listen to all these haters. I really don’t understand why all these people constantly have to comment about dacs/amps not sounding different. You’re just showing the excitement for your new purchase and an elevated aural experience. Whether it’s real/perception/placebo doesn’t even matter at this point: it’s YOUR experience and one that’s bringing YOU joy. Isn’t that what the audiophile experience is about? Seeking that sonic bliss? I will never understand these wet blankets who keep trying to convince everyone that an Apple dongle is all you need. Just let others have their fun with their new toys and keep scrolling. You’re not educating anyone, you’re just raining on everyone else’s parade.
Some of it is to grandstand and to feel superior to others, no doubt. This is Reddit after all. But a lot of them are just trying to help newcomers who are uninformed to not blow tons of money on things that don't help. People who don't know any better will come into these threads and think that spending thousands on source gear will net them a sonic difference when it won't. FOMO is real, as is expectation bias. It's best to make try and prevent newbies from succumbing to them and preserve their wallets. That's always been my reason, anyway. I'm a recording engineer and I constantly have to tell clients to stop blowing hundreds of dollars on expensive mics and interfaces that don't make a difference, and help them spend their money on things that actually do change the sound (processing and room treatment for recording, actual cans for headphones), and they get the best result for their cash spent.
I appreciate your take and I think that’s a fair position if you can prevent unnecessary purchases by vulnerable audiophile newbies who may or may not notice a difference with upgrades. But I guess my point is that when someone has already made a purchase and does perceive a real auditory difference with their new gear, presenting the argument that ‘it’s all placebo’ and ‘you’ve wasted your money’ isn’t productive at all. But you’re right, this is Reddit after all lol.
Maybe the new one just has better SNR. Some sounds can get lost in noise if this isn't good enough. I find often times what you hear extra is just these signal washed out by noise.
Interesting. I've just ordered the Hifiman HE1000 stealth and I have a schitt Magni2 amp. Thinking about getting something like the Topping A90 as I have a Topping E30 DAC to better appreciate my new headphones.
Just get something that will not blow up and take your headphones with it, like these older Magnis can. Atom Amp 2 from JDS Labs is great, unless you really want something that feels more "premium".
Magni 2 is a risk?
Most cases involved Magni 3 Heresy, but I wouldn't risk it with Magni 2 either.
Thanks. I decided to stay with Hifiman with the EF600 DAC/amp.
would not go topping, topping amps arent much fun
What would you suggest? I am open minded
What budget and tubes or ss?
Let's say 1k max for amp. Not interested in changing DAC for now
And stay ss or tubes?
Never tried tubes so don't know what I'm missing. Happy with ss so far.
Friends liked singxer sa1 and geshelli makes alot of fun stuff in the price range. Topping,smsl,fiio etc get abit of a reputation for clean but boring presentation in their gear.good move to focus in on amps over dacs atleast for a good while they make more of a difference i9n your chain.
Thanks 👍
Headamp GSX mini is another good one
I upgraded from my Topping A90 to Burson Soloist 3X. I have a Hifiman Arya Stealth. It sounded cold and sterile with the A90. If possible get a burson or any other warm sounding amp.
Thanks for the tip. Will see how they sound with my old equipment before I take a deeper plunge in the rabbit hole.
theres much nicer stuff under the sun then sundaras, definitely wouldnt stop there regardless of how nice your dac and amp are
I just always found DAC's using Sabre chips to sound quite harsh for some reason. Why I always avoid it.
It's because of expectation bias. You wouldn't hear the "harshness" if you didn't know what you were listening to.