E-MU Teak Review (Headphone)

[SDX-LV]

With all the talk about PEQ corrections, I got seriously interested in https://www.minidsp.com/products/plate-amplifiers/il-dsp-headphone-amp
Looks like miniDSP has the only 100$ headphone amp that can run DSP corrections in hardware. If it is actually good, then I need one, now.

 

[GaryH]

With all the talk about PEQ corrections, I got seriously interested in https://www.minidsp.com/products/plate-amplifiers/il-dsp-headphone-amp
Looks like miniDSP has the only 100$ headphone amp that can run DSP corrections in hardware. If it is actually good, then I need one, now.

No preamp setting, and no app to control the PEQ (everything has to be done via a PC plugin). $10 more gets you something much, much better: https://www.qudelix.com/

 

[PeteL]

No preamp setting, and no app to control the PEQ (everything has to be done via a PC plugin). $10 more gets you something much, much better: https://www.qudelix.com/

Are you sure of that? I guess this depends, Qudelix is first and foremont a Bluetooth Amp, the DSP PEQ is What's included in the Bluetoouth SOC. It is limited to USB audio Class 1 capped at 96KHZ, not Asynchronous. The Mini DSP is a DSD capable Dac, USB audio class 2 to 192kHz, and 32 bits. with DSP performed on a much more powerful platform (XMOS). I'm not saying this is audibly better but on paper it's a more capable DAC for sure.

 

[Robbo99999]

With all the talk about PEQ corrections, I got seriously interested in https://www.minidsp.com/products/plate-amplifiers/il-dsp-headphone-amp
Looks like miniDSP has the only 100$ headphone amp that can run DSP corrections in hardware. If it is actually good, then I need one, now.

Would be a good one to see tested here on ASR at least. I added a suggestion that we test it: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...oducts-you-want-tested-most.10319/post-841351

 

[Tachyon88]

Makes me wonder then if I can take this EQ and successfully apply it to the TR-X00 Ebony. I'm going to try it.

There is Oratory1990 profile too. https://www.dropbox.com/s/ese1vozwwmtf24c/Fostex TH-X00 Ebony.pdf?dl=0

 

[Tachyon88]

I simply have'nt ever listened to headphones (And I've listen to very many), that provide better bass than my TH-X00, So in the end, those distortion levels, subjectively don't matter, they do bass better than the very vast majority. I think all Dynamic drivers show highish distortion in the bass, closed or open, but at least it's there, not rolled off at a 100Hz.

What do you mean by better and what would come in 2nd for you ?

 

[bunkbail]

With all the talk about PEQ corrections, I got seriously interested in https://www.minidsp.com/products/plate-amplifiers/il-dsp-headphone-amp
Looks like miniDSP has the only 100$ headphone amp that can run DSP corrections in hardware. If it is actually good, then I need one, now.

Only 30mW in power (dunno for what load). If you need more juice our forum member @IVX has a similar product that is much more powerful (600mW at 15 Ohms) and capable of handling 7 PEQs. https://e1dashz.wixsite.com/index/pdv2

 

[Acerun]

View attachment 139984

Looks very similar to the teak TH-X00 I measured. Treble extension is excellent. The treble peak is fixable passively after that treble is silky smooth. Cable is garbage and was fixed in the TH-X00, I cut it in half and mounted a new connector. The EMU, at least, has connectors.

Cable is garbage and was fixed in the TH-X00

I think you meant TR

 

[Acerun]

I simply have'nt ever listened to headphones (And I've listen to very many), that provide better bass than my TH-X00, So in the end, those distortion levels, subjectively don't matter, they do bass better than the very vast majority. I think all Dynamic drivers show highish distortion in the bass, closed or open, but at least it's there, not rolled off at a 100Hz.

I definitely bought the TR-

Great review as usual! Based on the measurements I'd slightly give the win to AEON RT

The star of this show is the way the bass delivers slam and tonality.

 

[GaryH]

Are you sure of that? I guess this depends, Qudelix is first and foremont a Bluetooth Amp, the DSP PEQ is What's included in the Bluetoouth SOC. It is limited to USB audio Class 1 capped at 96KHZ, not Asynchronous. The Mini DSP is a DSD capable Dac, USB audio class 2 to 192kHz, and 32 bits. with DSP performed on a much more powerful platform (XMOS). I'm not saying this is audibly better but on paper it's a more capable DAC for sure.

Yes I am sure. The Qudelix 5K is equally as excellent as a wired DAC/amp as it is wireless. The DSP of the IL-DSP only functions with PCM sampling rates at 96 kHz and below (not DSD) anyway, so that's functionally the same as the Qudelix when using PEQ (the whole point of these devices). The IL-DSP has a max power of just 30 mW (max voltage 0.5 Vrms, less than most laptops/cellphones) into 32 ohms whereas the Qudelix provides 85 mW (max 2 Vrms, single-ended 3.5 mm), and 210 mW (max 4 Vrms, balanced 2.5 mm) into 50 ohms. The Qudelix comes with a fantastic, intuitive app with a huge array of customization options in addition to the 20 custom PEQ profiles savable (e.g. choosing among 8 DAC aliasing filters). The IL-DSP in contrast can only save one PEQ profile at a time, only via a PC plugin, and even then the PEQ implementation is faulty, sometimes resulting in digital clipping even with an EQ curve that does not go above 0 dB. There's simply no contest, the Qudelix 5K is by far the better device, without even considering the optional bonus of its (LDAC) Bluetooth capabilities.

 

[solderdude]

Cable is garbage and was fixed in the TH-X00

I think you meant TR

I meant the EMU-teak because it is replaceable but the TR of course is similar in that the cable is replaceable.

 

[Robbo99999]

Yes I am sure. The Qudelix 5K is equally as excellent as a wired DAC/amp as it is wireless. The DSP of the IL-DSP only functions with PCM sampling rates at 96 kHz and below (not DSD) anyway, so that's functionally the same as the Qudelix when using PEQ (the whole point of these devices). The IL-DSP has a max power of just 30 mW (max voltage 0.5 Vrms) into 32 ohms whereas the Qudelix provides 85 mW (max 2 Vrms, single-ended 3.5 mm), and 210 mW (max 4 Vrms, balanced 2.5 mm) into 50 ohms. The Qudelix comes with a fantastic, intuitive app with a huge array of customization options in addition to the 20 custom PEQ profiles savable (e.g. choosing among 8 DAC aliasing filters). The IL-DSP in contrast can only save one PEQ profile at a time, only via a PC plugin, and even then the PEQ implementation is faulty, sometimes resulting in digital clipping even with an EQ curve that does not go above 0 dB. There's simply no contest, the Qudelix 5K is by far the better device, without even considering the optional bonus of its (LDAC) Bluetooth capabilities.

Yeah, I noticed the low power specs when I looked up the IL-DSP yesterday....and that's not even with PEQ applied, where you will lose overhead due to the required negative preamps. That was my biggest concern.

 

[jcebedo11]

Has anyone heard these compared to the Denon AH-D2000? I have the AH-2000 but its over 10 years old. I may need a replacement eventually. If these headphones are close or identical to the Denon, I would definately get these as replacement. The Denons to me are as close as perfection. Its only sometimes a tad bright.

 

[SDX-LV]

No preamp setting, and no app to control the PEQ (everything has to be done via a PC plugin). $10 more gets you something much, much better: https://www.qudelix.com/

Only 30mW in power (dunno for what load). If you need more juice our forum member @IVX has a similar product that is much more powerful (600mW at 15 Ohms) and capable of handling 7 PEQs. https://e1dashz.wixsite.com/index/pdv2

OK I stand corrected - than you for the links!

Qudelix-5K with the LDAC Bluetooth support! is extremely interesting option for a little bit of extra price.
meanwhile
PowerDAC V2.1 has great price, Bass-Treble tone controls! and sufficient PEQ bands + preset memory for all my needs.

Only thing missing is independent measurements I refuse to buy any DAC that was not tested by @amirm . Same as no speakers without Spinorama data (preferably independent).

 

[Jimbob54]

OK I stand corrected - than you for the links!

Qudelix-5K with the LDAC Bluetooth support! is extremely interesting option for a little bit of extra price.
meanwhile
PowerDAC V2.1 has great price, Bass-Treble tone controls! and sufficient PEQ bands + preset memory for all my needs.

Only thing missing is independent measurements I refuse to buy any DAC that was not tested by @amirm . Same as no speakers without Spinorama data (preferably independent).

Qudelix measured on here

 

[PeteL]

What do you mean by better and what would come in 2nd for you ?

I did not say better, I said "more capable dac on paper". For me I would probably prefer the Qudelix too, but as I said, it depends.

 

[SDX-LV]

Qudelix measured on here

Thanks! I missed the https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...qudelix-5k-bluetooth-dac-headphone-amp.17386/ review because Amir did not mention anything about PEQ features and SINAD was clearly disappointing.

I would much rather get something with ~100 SINAD, as it should be feasible even in cheap devices by now. Perhaps PowerDAC V2.1 or miniDSP IL-DSP are better in this regard?

 

[Jimbob54]

Thanks! I missed the https://www.audiosciencereview.com/...qudelix-5k-bluetooth-dac-headphone-amp.17386/ review because Amir did not mention anything about PEQ features and SINAD was clearly disappointing.

I would much rather get something with ~100 SINAD, as it should be feasible even in cheap devices by now. Perhaps PowerDAC V2.1 or miniDSP IL-DSP are better in this regard?

Not sure what the SINAD of the powerdac 2.1 is, perhaps @IVX or @staticV3 can comment. I have the v2 and it's good kit but only for balanced headphones. The v2.1 can do single ended too with adapter.

 

[Robbo99999]

I did not say better, I said "more capable dac on paper". For me I would probably prefer the Qudelix too, but as I said, it depends.

(He's talking about headphones, not DACS, he asked you something different)

 

[PeteL]

(He's talking about headphones, not DACS, he asked you something different)

Oups