Topping L30 Headphone Amplifier Review

[GoMrPickles]

Regarding the L30 recall, the seller Linsoul has just drop me an email saying that I should make a video "destroying" the amp before they send me a replacement. Anyone got it from them as well? How do you guys managed to "destroy" it? I'm really not confortable on doing that before receiving my replacement unit...

Cell phone video + hammer. Or get creative, and start a thread.

 

[Jose Hidalgo]

Chill bro, I think you got me mixed up with somebody else. First I’m not the one who asked the question and also I’m not fighting at all, just confirming solderdude assertion that you said was not accurate.
not sure who’s fighting, but you said his comment was not accurate, and I think this is demonstrably false.
Measurements show a difference, nobody disputes that, but all below threshold of hearing which was the point you apparently overlooked. So although it measures better, it does not “sound objectively better”.

Also, you inferring "a few people" can hear below audibility levels is the kind of things that could pertain on "superaudiophilelove".

Also, since when blind ABX tests are a taboo on ASR?
Also you don't get to tell me what I can discuss or not anymore after wrongfully attacking me in an aggressive tone. Tu t'es pris pour qui?

Yes, you weren't the one who originally asked the question, but you are the one who made the wrong reply in post #4341 (the one when you wrongly said "It is true and accurate"), and it's you that I was replying to. And now I will say this :

you said his comment was not accurate, and I think this is demonstrably false.

Measurements show a difference, nobody disputes that

Those two comments contradict each other. There's nothing more to say, really.
solderdude himself acknowledged that his comment wasn't perfectly accurate. We both understand why he said what he said, and we both understand that it's not perfectly accurate from a scientific point of view, which is the only one that matters on ASR. If you have a problem with that, I'm sorry but you'll have to deal with it on your own.

We are not on ASR to debate about what can be heard or not. Do you think anybody can hear a difference between SINAD 110 and SINAD 120 ? And yet we spend our lives in this forum analyzing DACs and amps that (for a part of them) play in that category. ASR exists for the following reasons : reviews, measurements, scientific truth and accurate statements. Not because something can be heard or not.

The L30 reaches 126 dB SNR in its 0 dB mode. In the worst possible scenario of the review (-9 dB mode, 50 mV) the SNR drops from 126 dB to 94 dB. And now for the obvious questions :

• Can that difference be heard by human ear ? Most certainly not. I will never say "never", but "most certainly not".
  Or "probably not today". In the future it's perfectly possible. Current technology already allows to improve vision beyond traditional human limits. Hearing can and will follow. But that's not the point here anyway.
• Is that difference significant ? YES ! DEFINITELY YES ! A drop from 126 to 94 is a huge drop. Yes, it's under the worst conditions of the review. Yes, in the real world the difference would be smaller. But that's not the point either. The point is that IT EXISTS. The point is that 0 dB is the optimal L30 mode, the other being slightly worse, as confirmed by the L30 designer himself. PERIOD.

So for the THIRD TIME, the designer of this amp has said himself in this topic that the 0 dB mode with vol knob close to the max gives the best measurable results. So YES, YES, and YES, IT SOUNDS BETTER ! Just like a SINAD 120 amp performs better than a SINAD 110 amp (at least SINAD-wise). Whether a human ear can hear it or not is utterly irrelevant.

There is no interpretation of this. There is no discussion. It's scientific evidence, and I have nothing more to say on that matter. Maybe just acknowledge it and stop discussing for nothing.

PS : I'm not here to be friends with you or say things that you may like in a tone that you may enjoy. I'm here to try to be as accurate as possible, while learning from knowledgeable people like solderdude. Most of us can learn from them... but even them may make inaccurate statements from time to time, and nobody will blame them for that. We're all human. The fact that I gently corrected him FOR ONCE (he would be the one correcting us 99% of the time) doesn't mean that I blame him for anything.

 

[Jose Hidalgo]

just out of curiosity, why would you need third l30

Because I have several rooms and many headphones The third one will be for my home office.

 

[GoMrPickles]

I really don't want to wade into this debate, but for the sake of arguing online: something may *measure* better and *sound* no different. Statistically, one can frame this is as failing to disprove the null hypothesis ("these amps sound the same to my ears"), or demonstrating that they fail to reach a user-defined "practical" difference. We cannot, scientifically, say that something "sounds better" because it "measures better," regardless of how big the measurement difference is. The practical difference is defined by the listener.

 

[ReaderZ]

I really don't want to wade into this debate, but for the sake of arguing online: something may *measure* better and *sound* no different. Statistically, one can frame this is as failing to disprove the null hypothesis ("these amps sound the same to my ears"), or demonstrating that they fail to reach a user-defined "practical" difference. We cannot, scientifically, say that something "sounds better" because it "measures better," regardless of how big the measurement difference is. The practical difference is defined by the listener.

So it will sound more accrurate or have a higher fidelity.

 

[GoMrPickles]

So it will sound more accrurate or have a higher fidelity.

It may *be* more accurate or *have* a higher fidelity, but if the listener can't hear it, it does not *sound* that way *to the listener.* It *sounds the same.*

 

[Jose Hidalgo]

I really don't want to wade into this debate, but for the sake of arguing online: something may *measure* better and *sound* no different. Statistically, one can frame this is as failing to disprove the null hypothesis ("these amps sound the same to my ears"), or demonstrating that they fail to reach a user-defined "practical" difference. We cannot, scientifically, say that something "sounds better" because it "measures better," regardless of how big the measurement difference is. The practical difference is defined by the listener.

Haha, actually that's inaccurate too At least from my point of view :

• "Measures better" is something that applies to anything that can be measured. A F1 "measures better" than a regular car in any speed test.
• "Sounds better" is something that applies specifically to something that produces sound.
• "Sounds better" doesn't mean that a human needs to be able to hear the difference.

A 24bit/192 KHz recording "sounds better" (in the hifiesque sense of the term) than the same recording down-converted to 16bit/44.1 KHz, because the 24bit/192 KHz recording is closer to the original recorded signal. And yet very few people will objectively hear the difference in an ABX test.

Now if you say "sounds better to me", that's different. That introduces an element of subjectivity : the listener.
But I never said "sounds better to somebody". Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I always said "sounds better".

 

[GoMrPickles]

Haha, actually that's inaccurate too At least from my point of view :

• "Measures better" is something that applies to anything that can be measured. A F1 "measures better" than a regular car in any speed test.
• "Sounds better" is something that applies specifically to something that produces sound.
• "Sounds better" doesn't mean that a human needs to be able to hear the difference.

A 24bit/192 KHz recording "sounds better" (in the hifiesque sense of the term) than the same recording down-converted to 16bit/44.1 KHz, because the 24bit/192 KHz recording is closer to the original recorded signal. And yet very few people will objectively hear the difference in an ABX test.

Now if you say "sounds better to me", that's different. That introduces an element of subjectivity : the listener.
But I never said "sounds better to somebody". Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I always said "sounds better".

Yeah, ok, a tree falls in the forest.

 

[Jose Hidalgo]

 

[solderdude]

The L30 reaches 126 dB SNR in its 0 dB mode. In the worst possible scenario of the review (-9 dB mode, 50 mV) the SNR drops from 126 dB to 94 dB

You are mixing 2 values that do not show the same thing.

You are actually trying to tell us that a 9dB difference in gain (or attenuation) is responsible for a 32 dB 'jump' in noise and distortion.
You are basically arguing that when set to L the input signal is 9dB lower (or higher in H setting) would make noise and distortion increase by 23dB.
Hardly something John (nor anyone else) would call 'slightly worse'. That would be massively worse.

Nope... the 126dB is measured at 2V and 94dB at 50mV which is a factor 40 lower and thus the signal is a factor 40 lower as well.
A factor 40 happens to be 32dB.
In other words there is no audible difference and the AP's noise floor is too high for the L30. This means you are looking at a fixed noise floor but signals being 32dB apart in amplitude.
Unless your hearing is far more sensitive than an AP and you are playing all digitally generated music at extremely loud (> 130dB SPL) levels you could actually not even come close to hearing those things.

At 2V also distortion is included which is not the case with the 50mV measurements that only looks at noise.
On top of that any distortion products, even if they were present, would be far below any measurable and audible noise floors.

I also remember John mentioning something that the actual noise floor of the L30 is lower than that of the AP and had to use an amplifier to measure it correctly.

 

[Jose Hidalgo]

You are actually trying to tell us that a 9dB difference in gain (or attenuation) is responsible for a 32 dB 'jump' in noise and distortion.
You are basically arguing that when set to L the input signal is 9dB lower (or higher in H setting) would make noise and distortion increase by 23dB.
Hardly something John (nor anyone else) would call 'slightly worse'. That would be massively worse.

Ah, of course I'm not saying that. Please read me better. I wrote this :

Yes, it's under the worst conditions of the review. Yes, in the real world the difference would be smaller. [...] 0 dB is the optimal L30 mode, the other being slightly worse

So yes, I acknowledged that the 94 dB measurement was under the worst conditions, and that includes 50mV.
Yes, I acknowledged that in reality the difference would be smaller, not 32 dB.
And yes, I acknowledged that the difference makes the 0 dB mode only slightly better.
Of course I did.

My point was proving that both modes are different. Hence one of them sounds better than the other, even if that difference can't be heard. Just like a difference between SINAD 120 and SINAD 121 can't be heard by current human ears. Nothing more to say, really.

 

[solderdude]

Except they do not sound different at all. They just measure slightly worse in H and a bit in L mode compared to M setting BUT all settings perform far better than any audible thresholds so the point is you cannot say the 3 modes SOUND different. They only measure slightly different but below audible thresholds.

You use the words sound and performance interchangeable and they aren't. For something to sound different (be heard) audible limits have to be reached.
Perform or measure different... sure.

 

[Jose Hidalgo]

Like I already said, it's about semantics. It's a common misconception to think that "sounds" necessarily means "sounds to somebody".
Something that produces sound "sounds". Not "sounds to somebody". It just "sounds".
I don't know why we're discussing this, really. Words have meanings.

• "Measures better" is something that applies to anything that can be measured. A F1 "measures better" than a regular car in any speed test.
• "Sounds better" is something that applies specifically to something that produces sound.
• "Sounds better" doesn't mean that a human needs to be able to hear the difference.

A 24bit/192 KHz recording "sounds better" (in the hifiesque sense of the term) than the same recording down-converted to 16bit/44.1 KHz, because the 24bit/192 KHz recording is closer to the original recorded signal. And yet very few people will objectively hear the difference in an ABX test.

Now if you say "sounds better to me", that's different. That introduces an element of subjectivity : the listener.
But I never said "sounds better to somebody". Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think I always said "sounds better".

 

[Veri]

You can't say something "sounds" better when you mean something else. I'm with solderdude on this one

 

[solderdude]

One can say something sounds good, poor, sharp, thin, boomy or whatever other sound signature but does one say: it sounds inaudible or it sounds inaudible different ?

 

[Jose Hidalgo]

You can't say something "sounds" better when you mean something else. I'm with solderdude on this one

Of course you are. You can be with whoever you want, no problem. And most importantly it doesn't change the facts.
When talking about the L30, "better" is not a subjective criteria but an objective one. I'll give you two examples :

• Subjectively better : "Michael Jackson is a better artist that Céline Dion". That's subjective, some will agree and some will disagree.
• Objectively better : "the L30 0dB mode performance is better than the -9/+9 dB modes". That's objective and shouldn't even be discussed. Even if it was by 1 dB, or by 0.1 dB, it shouldn't be discussed.

The performance is better, and since the L30 is a device that produces sound, then we have every right to say that YES, it SOUNDS OBJECTIVELY BETTER, whether anybody can hear it or not. It's just semantics. Words have meanings, and nobody can change them.

What we all mean is that the L30 0 dB mode is only MARGINALLY BETTER than the other ones, and I absolutely agree with that. But marginally better is still... better. Sorry ! You can't argue with that, and you can say it a thousand times if you want. Again, it doesn't change the facts.

I'll put it otherwise : for you two devices "sound the same" when you can't make the difference in an ABX test. But that's wrong. Two devices may sound very different (as shown by measurements), even if they "sound the same" to you. Measurements objectively show whether one device "sounds better" than the other or not. And then you have personal preferences. Many people love tube amps, even though they SOUND OBJECTIVELY WORSE than most solid-state amps. But to those people they "sound better". Emphasis on the "to those people". It's subjective. But we can't apply a subjective criteria when debating about an amp performance, sorry.

 

[solderdude]

But the real question is when one uses the amp on H setting with input 9dB attenuated will that sound (as in regardless who is listening to it) be able to distinguish between that and the M setting ? In other words do they sound the same ?
If one sounds better are they distinguishable in blind tests ? or are they indistinguishable (sound the same) despite the small measurable and considered inaudible differences.

 

[Vini darko]

Insert popcorn gif

 

[artburda]

So it sounds better but at the same time it still sounds the same to every human being
Edit: I forgot the question mark

 

[Jose Hidalgo]

YES ! ABSOLUTELY ! It sounds OBJECTIVELY BETTER, but SUBJECTIVELY THE SAME to most/all human beings.

Maybe only a few people can hear the difference. And maybe nobody can, that's OK too. And maybe future generations of humans will be able to hear the difference (because, evolution). The only thing that matters is that the difference exists and can currently be measured.

We shouldn't limit the use of expressions like "sounds better" only to what some people can or can not hear. That's not a proper way to use words. However if we say "sounds the same to me" or even "sounds the same to everybody" that's perfectly OK, because then we are properly linking the expression to what people can or can not hear.

All L30 modes may "sound the same to everybody", but the 0 dB mode objectively "sounds better", and maybe someday someone will be able to hear the difference. The reality is that it "sounds better". The other reality is that we may not be able to hear it currently.