Audiophiles?

stillshunter

stillshunter

a man of resolve, a man of conviction
State Convenor - ACT
Group Buy Associate
2015 Sabbatical Fail
Joined
Apr 24, 2014
Location
Walbunja country
Any audiophiles lurking on here?

I'm getting more and more interested in nice sound....and thinking of building myself a nice starter kit to better appreciate the beats.
 
Just remember a chain is only as strong as the weakest link i.e no point spending big bikkies on your amp if your source/DAC etc is crap.

Good thing with audio is that it's a very mature tech area - so the latest ain't necessarily the greatest. Hence you can get very good buys at garage sales etc on older amps etc that will out perform anything new up several price tiers.

What ideally is your source going to be? e.g everything on CD, digital files, LP's etc?

And to save time indicative budget that you'd be happy to spend (up to) to get a 'starter kit' that if you were happy with you'd be content?
 
Oh dear @stillshunter

Cameras
Razors
Audio gear

When does it stop!
 
Ah thankfully the razors/shaving is the soft one too (and really my only one - and thanks to being in here I know I'm not that bad!)........the financial woes that an audio obsession can set you back dwarfs the other two. Better make sure that bank overdraft is pre-approved.
 
Mark1966 said:
Oh dear @stillshunter

Cameras
Razors
Audio gear

When does it stop!
Click to expand...

With audio, it doesn't. Best to get out before you find your own point of diminishing returns. They kick in early and hard with audio gear.

The best advice is above. Spread the quality and spend less. Some 'high end' 70s and 80 gear on ebay can be just as good as today's gear. It may not be as small or blingy, but it will be a fraction of the cost.

Very good hifi can be had for relatively little money. The tech is 'old' and it doesn't evolve anything like PCs and processors. Arguably the iPod created the first big leap over CD, and that took nearly 30 years. Some would argue that's taken music quality backwards. But in reality, that's more often happening in the recording process.

Always remeber the weakest link thing, and dpending on your choice in music, it could be right there at the source. Very few bands left these days that really master a good recording, which will allow your hard earned to hear the difference.
 
Drubbing said:
With audio, it doesn't. Best to get out before you find your own point of diminishing returns. They kick in early and hard with audio gear.

The best advice is above. Spread the quality and spend less. Some 'high end' 70s and 80 gear on ebay can be just as good as today's gear. It may not be as small or blingy, but it will be a fraction of the cost.

Very good hifi can be had for relatively little money. The tech is 'old' and it doesn't evolve anything like PCs and processors. Arguably the iPod created the first big leap over CD, and that took nearly 30 years. Some would argue that's taken music quality backwards. But in reality, that's more often happening in the recording process.

Always remeber the weakest link thing, and dpending on your choice in music, it could be right there at the source. Very few bands left these days that really master a good recording, which will allow your hard earned to hear the difference.
Click to expand...
So modern music really is shit?
And here I was, thinking I was being infantile with my musical preferences from my infancy, yet it turns out, if your assertion is fact, that I'm not living within a bygone era, yet have discernible taste for quality!
Thank you @Drubbing
 
Huge thanks to both @Nick the Knife and @Drubbing , invaluable information.

I am very happy to make my source as old as. I still have some vinyl that I'd love to revisit and not averse to plugging in a CD player. I might lean on you fellas for some advice on what of the old stuff to keep my eye out for. For starters though, and I assume this will make life easier :shrug:, my better half and I do not share musical tastes. Hence, I'm looking to gear my audio towards headphones. Initial thoughts were a DAC/amp hooked to either a hard-drive or simple CD player, but we'll see what you fellas recommend. I assume a receiver is much the same irrespective of whether the input is turntable or CD. Oh boy I've gone out on a limb here....

Budget? Oh well. Again not thousands quite yet. I'm thinking of incremental costs for components. I'm always happy for good decent middle of the road stuff it does not have to have vacuum tubes and gold cables.... But what I've learned from cameras is that it costs more approximating something better than simply saving for that something better. I lost too much time in trading up piece by piece towards a decent camera.
 
I had an advantage of hanging out in a local headphone store. I got to listen to a lot of stuff, and was able to gauge my level of pickiness and covert it to $$. I found i felt hi end stuff was boring. Technical excellence sucked a lot of the fun stuff out of music in a quest for best possible reproduction. It just doesn't fit my taste in music. If I was into classical, I'd probably have mortgaged the house to buy gear.

A receiver is a DAC/amp and aux device in one. Great for HT or if you want to connect lots of stuff. More a jack of most trades, than master of many. If you're going the headphone route, better to focus on a good source, and only look at an amp if the phones require one. Some really good ones only require a decent source.

I would suggest browsing here www.headphones.com.au

I bought all my stuff here, as did PJ, and the owner, Marcus gives zero BS advice, and show people they can spend less to get what they want.
 
Last edited:
I second drubs comments on Marcus. Excellent to deal with and no quibble warranties.
Had a pair of in ear jobbies that failed. As they were no longer being sold he upgraded my replacements.
 
I've got some gear... :)

Your speakers are the most important link in the chain. Not all links are of equal importance. Probably spend as much on speakers as on all other components combined.

I agree to an extent that old gear can be great value for money. The problem is that old speakers perish, and old amps lose their capacitors.

FYI, I have a DAC that I don't really use much anymore that I might consider selling. Cambridge Audio DAC Magic. It's quality. Look it up.
 
One interesting point to think about also - how good is your hearing?

If you can't honestly hear the difference between multiple systems and tell there are any differences, why spend big dollars?
 
My head's spinning from researching....and that's not factoring in source stuff but just looking at OK budget closed headphones. Shure SRH840 and Sennheiser HD598 are top of the list so far but then the like of Brainwavz HM5, AudioTechnica M50 or TAD400 or TAD500, AKG K550 all sound OK.Then again, I am also thinking of sticking with some Beyerdynamic phones as the little DTX 501p on-ears I have pump out a really nice sound and I hear companies can have a signature. But I think you are right @Drubbing I need to hear things for myself to judge. I'm going to have to track down a decent audio store here in Canberra...yeah right, but I'l try....and get in-store and see what I like. Otherwise it'll be like shaving and ending up with a dozen soaps, creams, razors, brushes etc., just so I can decide on the one/s I want/need.
 
Soem research with your ears will help a lot. If you can find any. You won't find the range Headphonic has, to try out. But you should be able to try enough to narrow things down. If you buy from headphonic, you'll get 21 days to exchange them.

I find most Senn's overpriced, but it you like their sound, there's a lot of models. If you get to try a couple, you'll get an idea whether they're your thing.

I much prefers Beyers, and have the DTX501, a DT250 DT100 (my Dad's), and nice portables AT ES700. I've also Alessandro MS1. The DT250 just sounds great with anything.
 
stillshunter said:
80 or 250 ohm?
...and I hear you need an amp for them either way you go.
Click to expand...

Both benefit from amping, but the 80 is far less fussy and doesn't need much. 250ohm needs a lot more power. As for the ohms are better argument, which you've doubtless read - I'm not sold. High ohm phones aren't inherently better, just means you spend more on amplification.
 
Drubbing said:
Both benefit from amping, but the 80 is far less fussy and doesn't need much. 250ohm needs a lot more power. As for the ohms are better argument, which you've doubtless read - I'm not sold. High ohm phones aren't inherently better, just means you spend more on amplification.
Click to expand...
....and so here we see a little of why audiophiles sink so much money into their hobb....obsession. How strong an amp would I need for either 80 or 250 ohm? For example, for USB sources would something like the popular Fiio E7 do - as it does up to 300Ω? That being the case I'd say the 250 is the better value as they are $50 less than their 80Ω sister. Then again my little PMP is reputed to handle most any cans:
"The C2’s amp is powerful enough to drive most any headphone with authority [...] using an additional headphone amp on the C2’s output would be plain silly for most applications (except for driving 600 Ohm phones or unpowered speakers) – there’s really nothing to fix or improve, the C2 sounds great."
Click to expand...
...but then we are talking audiophiles, where a portable system makes you look more like an 80's breakdancer I suspect.

NB: apologies for the specificity of this post. I was going to take this offline, but note previous interest shown in-thread by @vanNek and not sure how many more might be lurking.
 
If you get a decent DAC, then you don't need to spend heaps on an amp, as it only has to be analogue, and the amp doesn't affect audio quality all that much (the DAC has the biggest impact on sound quality on a receiver).

As I said, I don't use mine heaps. It is rated pretty highly, especially considering the price (I paid about $500 for it 5 years ago).
http://www.whathifi.com/cambridge-audio/dacmagic/review
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top