TheSloth

What do you think of the Monarchy M24 GE? I posted this elsewhere, but it really belongs here, so:

Congrats tkam. I used to have a pair of 22L's for stereo use and they were very fine indeed.

If you will accept that sonically I agree with you completely, that statement isn't technically true. An analogy that is somewhat usable (but flawed - let's not nit pick!) is the idea the the resolution of a light microscope is (nearly) infinite, as it is an 'analogue' device. It isn't even close - its resolution is determined by the width of one wave of light in the visible spectrum. The maximum resolution of a phono cartrige is defined (technically - again, I agree with you on the sonics but I'm arguing that the difference doesn't lie in what you said) by a combination of frequency response range (i.e. what would be the bit rate in digital and is very limited in even the best cartridges and best pressed LP's compared with 192khz digital sampling) and dynamic range (again, way smaller than 24bit dynamic range, between it's high noise floor (relatively) and point at which it loses tracking). Phono cartridges also have much smaller channel separation, and the recordings are often panned way over to the left and right because they are assuming crosstalk is somwhere around -40dB instead of -90dB on a bad day with a redbook CD. There's no point even geting into distortion figures, as they are worlds apart. I'd still argue that the difference lies elsewhere, and has something to do with the production, encoding and decoding process. There is no reason why 24/192 shouldn't sound better than a LP, except for the fact that I'm not sure we have the technology to encode and decode without losing something that we can't quite measure effectively. Also, a lot more is done with CD's to mess around with the sound, using various methods of compression and other junk to make it sound better on shitty equipment - that wasn't done to the same degree with LP's. On top of that, I think the recording ethos has change, and there is less emphasis on absolute quality in digital, but rather something that works on a range of systems and will come out sounding pretty much the same on all of them. The fact that, even now that red book has been surpassed, DAC's for playing back that 'limited' format get better every year leads me to believe that the differences will even out over time, and that will not require a change in format but rather a change in production, encoding and decoding technology. Remember that the very best LP's had 30-40 years or more of experience with the technology on the part of the recording engineer and production department. As a final point, if LP's are great because they are analogue, then why aren't cassettes just as good? They are analogue, but of course their resolution is way lower than an LP, which is already technically way lower than high bit rate digital.

I'll take that bet. There are forums here that you have not had, and do not have sufficient privileges to view, yet.

Jude has one, so it must be...

Ooh, MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT MOT. BAN HIM! Welcome, and say whatever the hell you like (except making death threats - Reks doesn't like that).

Shouldn't Jude be bound by MOT rules? He is a member of the audio trade, and the product he sells is head-fi.org.

It feels cheaper than the 650, is a little less comfortable in overall shape (though less of a vice) - the oval is less rounded which didn't fit around my ears as well. The angled drivers make an interesting sound stage, but otherwise it's a slightly less refined, more forward sounding 650 to my ears. The 595 is nothing like the 590. I don't believe there are any shared components - it's a completely new design.

Anyone looking for powered monitors should take a look at these: http://cgi.ebay.com/Quad-QPM-1-Active-Monitor-speakers-in-Black-in-Boxes_W0QQitemZ280062239760QQihZ018QQcategoryZ14991QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItem. It seems that QUAD have finally formed an 'industrial' division, and now sell an active 11L under a different name and brand. If they made active 22L's, those would be wonderful. At that price, or even a fair bit more, that's an incredible deal (though the list price is only around $300). How are those 12L's Peter?

How does it compare in terms of intended use with the F-22 Raptor?

Welcome to team Rega! I'm running a P3 over here with a Rega Exact cartridge. Though, I just can't get the alignment right . It seems that in principle the 3 point mounting which fixes the cartridge in a specific position relative to the tonearm should work wonderfully, but in practice at least in my system it really isn't optimal. Makes me really miss my LP12/Ortofon MC15 supreme combination on the other side of the pond...

It's the pretty standard way of doing USB - S/PDIF conversion, but it seems well put together. I wonder what the jitter figures are like.

Do we know anything about the circuit design? Found it.

How about the darth beyer? Do the mods really even out the tonality (i.e. more midrange and less shrieky treble?)?

The quote that was above it. It's a movie quote...

I wish I could but I don't have the new high current supply, and the power consumption of the Balanced Desktop goes way over the +/-240mV ceiling of the 'brick' (my guess is it's chewing through somewhere around 500-600mA). I did do some comparisons between the brick and the Desktop Power Supply in my head-fi module archive thread, and I am guessing that the new wall-wart is closer to the brick than the DPS in performance, but perhaps not. Even if the new supply is no better in quality, simply having much higher current availability should yield more headroom overall, as in my convertible setup I am running the brick at pretty much it's maximum output continuously. Overall, while I think the DPS is a solid upgrade, the other stuff is more important. I use a combination of the Desktop DAC and Max '06 Modules running off the old 'brick' as my primary headphone setup, and think it works extremely well. You can save the $400 and only sacrifice that last ounce of performance, IMO. I used to own a DPS to use with it, but in the end when I wanted the cash for something else, I didn't feel like I was losing a great deal. Sorry Tyll, I guess that isn't helping to sell DPS's, but then again, if you consider that by selling less DPS's you are lowering the price of admission by $400, you might sell more other stuff!

YEAH! Love the avatar, which for everyone who thinks head-fi mods need supervision was inserted some time over the last few hours without my consent! The DAC is really extremely good. I'd say it's strong and weak points are that it's extremely clean sounding. I think some of that 'cleanness' is something to do with the sound of that ?2 opamp they always use as their output stage, and might be better determined leanness. But there is also a real sense of spaciousness in the sound - there is instrument separation without artificiality, and that's just good design. I never tried it with the wall wart supply, and have/had no need to because of the PSU. Though, as the wall wart and PSU supply AC that is rectified inside the unit, I wonder if the PSU might make less of a difference than in a system where the outboard unit feeds the final DC to the amp.

You're right, I just did it in a hurry and built an amp that has both a Desktop and a Home Balanced DAC in it!

So it looks like HD25-1's or 250-250's at this point. It really needs to be something that if any good I can buy two of, so the CD3k idea isn't really much use at this point, even if it is one of the best around.

First impressions: Differences from other HeadRoom amps: No filter switch (treble boost, 3dB from 1.5k or 3k) - no room for one on the board. Power switch on rear panel. No dedicated preamp outputs (though as the headphone outputs are XLR, there is no disadvantage to using those as outputs with the required m/f adapters). No dedicated unbalanced signal path - the unbalanced connectors are fed through the line driver stage which adds some background noise to the signal (more on that later). To get a completely clean signal path for single ended headphones, the balanced inputs need to be used. General usage notes: Particularly when placed directly ontop of the DPS which itself can get somewhat toasty, the amps runs hot - it's not hard to see why they felt that Max Modules would be too unreliable as they put out consideraby more heat. Even when standing in free air outside the convertible, the Max's are too hot to touch. The stepped attenuator has a very different attenuation curve to the pots in the other HR amps. At the low end, the steps are very small, and at the high end the steps are very large. This gives you excellent fine control of the volume, however requires that you optimise the gain setting to keep you in the bottom half of the SA's range. In my use, this means that I tend to have the gain set higher for the same given volume level, relative to what I might think was optimal with a pot. The silly part: The balanced iPod test. This was a real shock. Placebo or not, it sounds darn good. I have been using the iPod as a source a lot recently, fed into my convertible running Max Modules. This Desktop has only the Home Modules, but sounds at least as good and in some ways better than that setup. With 650's, the difference immediately strikes you in the bass response, which is more visceral yet at the same time more defined and tuneful - the fundamental tone is somehow more audible, with less general mud. The down side of the unbalanced signal path is that the line driver does add some background hiss to the signal. Combined with the iPod's low 1V output, the unbalanced input isn't really that great if you are using unbalanced cans, as the noise is at the same level but the gain is 6dB lower and therefore the voume setting 6dB higher. The hiss is not loud, but it's clearly there. Used in the context it's designed for, i.e. with balanced cans, the hiss is inaudible at normal listening levels, and you have to turn the volume up a fair way with a silent background to hear a hint of it. Remember this is a worst case scenario due to the low 1V input from the iPod. A source with a standard 2V output would give you another 6dB of S:N. Would you want to run unbalanced sources through the balanced driver? You are getting a trade-off. You get a small degradation of the original signal, however you also give the amplifier increased control over the headphone, particularly noticeable in the lower frequencies. I'd say in this case it's a wash, and depends on what sonic aspects are most important to you. The serious part: The Home Balanced DAC test. This is really what this amp seems to be designed for - a 1 (or 2) box fully balanced digital source and amp. There's still a big debate about whether there are technically any real benefits from balanced drive, versus for example 3 channel topologies found in some DIY designs. There's no point getting into that debate here, as what is clear is that each situation is unique. In the case of the HeadRoom Module designs, they do take on a greater level of authority when put together as balanced pairs, and when the signal path is as pure as it would be in a purely single ended design, what's there to lose except cash from your wallet? Whether it's a matter of simply having double the power output, reduction of crosstalk or neither of the above, there is a greater sense of presence. It's slightly smoother but yet less laid back at the same time if that's possible. What's odd about this setup is that it seems to have a greater sonic purity to my convertible setup. If this was a single ended comparison, I wouldn't hesitate to say that the Max Modules have a 'purer' sound than the Home Modules which are relatively euphonic, so it's odd to find that the change in drive scheme can clean up the sound the way it does. I'm greatly enjoying having a stepped attenuator, which every time I come back to one I always say is the only way to go. Whatever config, whatever amp, if there's a SA option, get it. I think particularly for balanced drive where there are now 4 channels to match, it's a must. Cosmetic oddities: The front panel looks ever so slightly strange in that the volume control and switches are lower than they would be on a normal Desktop, leaving a lot of empty space above. This was as far as I can tell necessary, as the main board has to be placed on a lower rung to make room for the secondary board that houses the filter caps and DAC board. The switches, in being 4 channel switches are nice and chunky, which I rather like. They feel solid when you flip them. Irrelevant but nice. HeadRoom Desktop w/Max Modules, Max DAC and Stepped Attenuator + DPS: $1895 HeadRoom Balanced Desktop w/Home Modules, Home DAC and Stepped Attenuator + DPS: $2300 est. That's over a $400 difference, and you are giving up dedicated preamp functionality (which these amps do extremely well), as well as a measure of headphone and input flexiblity. It's a real case where people will just have to listen for themselves to see what this balanced thing is all about. If you are convinced that balance drive is the way to go, then the Balanced Desktop it is, but if you aren't so sure, you can get an amp from HeadRoom that has better electronics throughout for $400 less.

Yes but doesn't he die?

That's no Desktop Portable. That's 'The Convertible'! I still intend to make it red some day. If you can bear to go over there, you can read all about it at http://www4.head-fi.org/forums/showthread.php?t=136059 Anyway, I'll post detailed impressions on this when I have some time to put them together. There are however already some obvious differences just in terms of functionality to the Balanced Home I used to own. That case does get quite toasty. Headphones to use are 650's with Balanced Cardas, sources are MBP optical out - Home Balanced DAC, or iPod (balanced via line driver).

And now it has magically fixed itself. HeadRoom have introduced the self-repairing amplifier. Listening to an iPod through balanced headphones is just silly-fun.

Look what I just found! And now the bad news - there is a serious buzzing/grounding issue with the left channel irrespective of power supply or input. This is not a shipping unit, only a prototype.

They actually look good in the specs, though the graph would point to them being very bass heavy. Do they sound that way in real life?