• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required as is 20 years of participation in forums (not all true). Come here to have fun, be ready to be teased and not take online life too seriously. We now measure and review equipment for free! Click here for details.

How do people feel about intentionally colored Amps targeted to specific headphones (iFi Zen CAN6xx)?

VMAT4

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2018
Messages
349
Likes
252
Location
South Central Pennsylvania
#22
I bought my HD 6XX to sound like an HD 6XX not an EQed HD 6XX.
 

KeithPhantom

Active Member
Forum Donor
Joined
May 8, 2020
Messages
277
Likes
187
#23
I bought my HD 6XX to sound like an HD 6XX not an EQed HD 6XX.
I agree, but people are introduced to the bad habit of EQ with hardware when in most cases, it can be done cheaper and more efficiently by software. Also, I think there is another bad habit of having multiple headphones when looking for the one which is going to please you, this can create some kind of indecision when choosing and reinforces the hoarding of equipment, but you may prefer what floats your boat.
 

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
6,208
Likes
11,388
Location
The Neverlands
#24
Bass correction is about right though. In the review they don't account for Harman/missing dB-effect/room modes effects in the lows and assume that what comes out of the mic is what one hears. It is the case at average SPL above 90dB but not many listen that loud ;).
They wine about way too much bass but I think everyone knows that on a stock HD650 bass extension (at least not perceived bass extension, that's the whole point) is 20Hz (-3dB) opposite 1kHz.

Given the plot it looks like it is based on a KEMAR HATS. Compensation used was wrong, not suited for headphones.
I mean everyone who has ever analyzed (and even Tyll admitted) the plots may have noticed the slope above 1kHz and all headphones showing a rather sharp 10kHz peak which isn't there. This is caused by the way calibration files are made. My reason not to trust HATS above 5kHz. Below 1kHz it will be hard to 'f up calibration. Only compensation might be slightly different.

Anyway I asked the designer where the 6kHz boost comes from. He is an interesting fellow with a dito background.
 

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
6,208
Likes
11,388
Location
The Neverlands
#25
I agree, but people are introduced to the bad habit of EQ with hardware when in most cases, it can be done cheaper and more efficiently by software.
Software certainly is more flexible. There can be (at least to me) compelling reasons to choose hardware EQ. Otherwise I would have never designed such 'crap'.
Suppose you don't want to introduce a ADC-DSP-DAC loop in your analog system, by choice/conviction, then hardware EQ (parametric) is the only way to compensate for headphone flaws. There are technical ways to do this 'update-able' as well. Using tone controls, while this can be pleasant, like the Loki isn't fitting any accurate compensation.

Also there are quite a few folks owning the excellent HD6** series that wish it had a better bass extension (you will really never know until you heard it) or slightly more presence in the upper treble. For those people, who do not want to go the all digital route, this gives them an option.
Not saying it is 'better' but an option.
 

solderdude

Major Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
6,208
Likes
11,388
Location
The Neverlands
#26
All I can say at the moment is that a lot of thought and experiments/measurements has gone into the design of the 6XXCAN amp.
I am curious to read reviews other than the one at SBAF.
 
Top Bottom