Monoprice Monolith THX 887 Balance Headphone Amp: New Champ?

[Willhelm_Scream]

I have always felt that expensive cables were a waste and that differences between headphone cables were small too for anyone to notice unless you were an audiophile or had the "golden ears". Unless you have a cheap or poorly made cable.

However, my thinking was altered a while ago. I use a DAP by Sony called the NW-ZX300. It has balanced headphone output and I was told that the balanced output was a lot "better". I bought a KK cable (4.4mm to 2 X 3.5mm) for under $100.00. I used the low gain setting and even volume matched I preferred it over the SE output. For some reason a few months later I bought a Sukira cable for about $165.00. The Sukira is stiff and a pain in the butt, but when compared back and forth, it does sound noticably better. I know this is not scientific, but I was surprised at the audible difference.

I will still NEVER buy a $500.00 cable, but there are definitely differences, however slight.

I always assumed there would be no difference between cables, but I'll admit I have never tested it. It just seems counterintuitive to me. Out of all the audiophile myths I actually think it is much more likely that tube amps add "pleasant distortion" than the idea that expensive cables sound better (I'm pretty much agnostic on this one until I actually test it). I find it hard to test things though, because it is so difficult to volume match. The other day I decided to compare the DAC in an old cheap android phone to the dac in my topping. I'm almost positive the dac in the topping sounds way better, but I still don't want to draw any conclusions, because I couldn't match the volumes. The phone required me to put the thx on the third gain setting to be able to hear it right, so in order to compare them I had to flip that switch and turn the nob up every time, and I still wasn't sure if I reached the exact volume.

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

Oh yes only €2399

I know I know. But just look at that thing. If only THX could have made the 789 look like that for the same price.

 

[VintageFlanker]

I think it is a little myopic to assume that the thx 789 is the endpoint, and nothing will ever beat it. Technology is going to still keep progressing just like it always does.

It is not the Endpoint, measurements-wise. There are, and will be, better performing units on the bench. The point is about audibility. Once your unit comes with a dead flat FR, no noise, no audible distortion, etc it is transparent enough... You won't be able distinguish it from another transparent gear IMHO. Technology will keep progressing, but to improve price/performance ratio. Audibility thresholds won't progress.

 

[JJB70]

It is not the Endpoint, measurements-wise. There are, and will be, better performing units on the bench. The point is about audibility. Once your unit comes with a dead flat FR, no noise, no audible distortion, etc it is transparent enough... You won't be able distinguish it from another transparent gear IMHO. Technology will keep progressing, but to improve price/performance ratio. Audibility thresholds won't progress.

Then you get into the scenario we have with DACs, a commoditised component which reached technological maturity years ago being wrapped in all sorts of mysticism to support high end sales and people feeling a need to upgrade when a new model which has slightly better measurements which make no difference to audible performance is released.

 

[VintageFlanker]

Then you get into the scenario we have with DACs, a commoditised component which reached technological maturity years ago being wrapped in all sorts of mysticism to support high end sales and people feeling a need to upgrade when a new model which has slightly better measurements which make no difference to audible performance is released.

Indeed. I remember a French retailer, saying on YouTube, that DAC/CDPs had the same progress in performance/technology as computers in the last 20 years.

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

It is not the Endpoint, measurements-wise. There are, and will be, better performing units on the bench. The point is about audibility. Once your unit comes with a dead flat FR, no noise, no audible distortion, etc it is transparent enough... You won't be able distinguish it from another transparent gear IMHO. Technology will keep progressing, but to improve price/performance ratio. Audibility thresholds won't progress.

Yeah, I understand what you meant and I think that's false. The idea that the thx 789 has reached an endpoint in "audible" amp technology, and that everything past it will just be improvements that can only be discerned by a machine is wrong. It might be true if the only thing that makes an amp is its THD+N score, but that is just plain false for obvious reasons.
I guess it doesn't only have to do with technological progress too. For instance, it is a relatively popular opinion that tubes sound better than solid state, but solid state is usually considered more technologically advanced. So the amp of the future might not necessarily be an improvement on solid state, but perhaps something different altogether.

 

[Julf]

It might be true if the only thing that makes an amp is its THD+N score, but that is just plain false for obvious reasons.

Please tell us more, preferably with evidence, references and research...

 

[VintageFlanker]

The idea that the thx 789 has reached an endpoint in "audible" amp technology, and that everything past it will just be improvements that can only be discerned by a machine is wrong.

but that is just plain false for obvious reasons.

What @Julf said. Please tell us more about how this is wrong and what are the obvious reasons?

For instance, it is a relatively popular opinion that tubes sound better than solid state

Sure thing. In that case, popular opinion is scientifically wrong, once solid state is objectively more transparent. And transparency is the only objective way to define what's better in Audio reproduction. Everything else coming to personal preference (meaning: subjectivism).

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

Please tell us more, preferably with evidence, references and research...

What about "science" and "research" that proves thd+n score is the only important aspect of an amplifier? Can you link to that?

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

What @Julf said. Please tell us more about how this is wrong and what are the obvious reasons?

Sure thing. In that case, popular opinion is scientifically wrong, once solid state is objectively more transparent. And transparency is the only objective way to define what's better in Audio reproduction. Everything else coming to personal preference (meaning: subjectivism).

There is no such thing as a science that says what is better in audio reproduction. Also the idea that "transparency" is the only objective way to define better audio reproduction is a subjective opinion, and there is no way to prove that thd+n score = transparency.

 

[JJB70]

A lot of technology reaches a point where although further improvement is possible, such improvements are basically irrelevant for one reason or another. It may be that such improvement has no practical use, or it may not even be usable for various reasons. In fact, from an engineering point of view I'd question whether pushing performance beyond what is useful or usable is actually an improvement as in my own field I'd be criticised for adding cost for no practical benefit. This is true of audio equipment, especially for headphone amplifiers and DACs where you really don't need to pay much to achieve transparency beyond which for sure you can get improved measured performance but which is inaudible.

 

[VintageFlanker]

there is no way to prove that thd+n score = transparency.

Nobody said that. There is plenty of (audible) factors in measurements other than SINAD. I suggest you read this excellent post from @flipflop.

Please tell us more about how this is wrong and what are the obvious reasons?

Sorry, if I may ask again.

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

Nobody said that. There is plenty of (audible) factors in measurements other than SINAD. I suggest you read this excellent post from @flipflop.


Sorry, if I may ask again.

"Please tell us more about how this is wrong and what are the obvious reasons?" Where "this"=
"if the only thing that makes an amp is its THD+N score, but that is just plain false for obvious reasons"

You just admitted yourself that this is false.

 

[VintageFlanker]

"Please tell us more about how this is wrong and what are the obvious reasons?" Where "this"=
"if the only thing that makes an amp is its THD+N score, but that is just plain false for obvious reasons"

You just admitted yourself that this is false.

You get that point. Because we agreed in the first place. SINAD is not indeed the only way to evaluate SQ... But I'm still wondering:

The idea that the thx 789 has reached an endpoint in "audible" amp technology, and that everything past it will just be improvements that can only be discerned by a machine is wrong.

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

Well, there are plenty of people who think stuff like this: https://raalrequisite.com/about/ or Stax flagship headphones + one of their electrostatic amps, sound better than say an hd800 + thx 789. Are they wrong? I don't know. But I would like to try some of these new techs out for myself to see how they sound, and it might be awhile before you can get something like this for the price of the thx 789. I like my 789, but I don't think it's the end. And even THX is the end for solid state + planar headphones setups, then I want to start seeing electrostatic get cheaper.

 

[yummy]

It is not the Endpoint, measurements-wise. There are, and will be, better performing units on the bench. The point is about audibility.

i think you should skip this hobby

no transducers can go below -60db distortion in audio range

why bother at all

 

[VintageFlanker]

i think you should skip this hobby
no transducers can go below -60db distortion in audio range

Why not quoting me entirety, then?

It is not the Endpoint, measurements-wise. There are, and will be, better performing units on the bench. The point is about audibility. Once your unit comes with a dead flat FR, no noise, no audible distortion, etc it is transparent enough...

 

[Willhelm_Scream]

I think most of the parts of a system that actually make a difference to the sound (like the headphones) are tough to measure, and even if you do look at measurements, the measurements themselves don't tell you whether a person will actually like the sound of one set of headphones vs. another. Then when you take into account the fact that most differences between engineered DACS are inaudible (and the fact that me and many other people cannot even tell the difference between the sound of a 20K dac vs a $30 dac) and the fact that amps have gotten to the point where any measured differences are going to be inaudible, the most important aspects of the hobby are currently all subjective. Therefore it is almost impossible to have a conversation about this stuff without taking into account the subjective.

For me, now that I have an amp that measures really well, the next step is going to be adding different sounding headphones to my collection, and comparing them. Or perhaps auditioning all of the really expensive headphones, and saving up to by whichever one I like the best. I'd also like to see how these new weird ribbon headphones sound, and how electrostatic headphones and amps sound to me, and whether those are worth it. I'd also like to see current amp/dac tech get more portable. It seems like portable amps have gone out of vogue for the past few years, but I'd like to have something portable that sounds better than the topping nx4 dsd.

 

[VintageFlanker]

For me, now that I have an amp that measures really well, the next step is going to be adding different sounding headphones to my collection, and comparing them.

You said it all.

 

[Tks]

Well, there are plenty of people who think stuff like this: https://raalrequisite.com/about/ or Stax flagship headphones + one of their electrostatic amps, sound better than say an hd800 + thx 789. Are they wrong? I don't know. But I would like to try some of these new techs out for myself to see how they sound, and it might be awhile before you can get something like this for the price of the thx 789. I like my 789, but I don't think it's the end. And even THX is the end for solid state + planar headphones setups, then I want to start seeing electrostatic get cheaper.

Just wanted to interject for a moment. No one here is concerned with "what sounds better" simply because of the endless semantic and philosophical argumentation that can be brought up arguing "better" endlessly.

The whole point of this place is for people to see how devices perform when fidelity is the primary concern. No one cares what you think is better (in the same way no one cares that you like more bass, or more even harmonic distortion, or more treble, or more whatever), the whole gist is preserving fidelity of the chain of audio transmission as best you can without the introduction of byproducts like noise or distortion. So when people talk about "better" here, we don't care for anyones' preference in how they prefer their sound, -better- here means simply better performance metrics with respect to fidelity only. Naturally things like power level are preferable to have in abundance and things like build quality go without saying.

So when you reference a comparison between HD800's (which aren't even that good of a headphone, the only good thing about them is half decent distortion metrics, and comfort/size that really drive the bulk of opinions about "soundstage" and other such things) to the Raal, you're arguing a point this place doesn't aim to deliberate when reviews are presented. The only deliberation possible here is why a device performs good or bad, what design flaws exist that cause it such, and the economic and psychological factors in how some devices can exist when in any other industry they would be doomed to failure in the market.

Second, your 789 actually is the end because its at a point where you simply will not be hearing any distortion coming through, so for the sake of powering headphones, and preserving fidelity, for an amp.. the 789 is the end, and others have already been the end anyway in many of the metrics that are tested for (not just THD+N that you arbitrarily wanted to single out for no good reason when you know that's not the only metric being tested).

Now if your goal isn't preservation of fidelity through the audio device chain, then for you there can never be an end, because your end isn't defined. The end for most people here is audibility. And the only reason anything is entertained after that, is due to the psychological factors of being offered product choice that conforms with other factors of preference like input selections, build quality, provenance of brands, and things of that nature. And to see engineering and technical prowess being flexed to see just how far things can be pushed.

EDIT: Typos from mobile auto corrects.