The Apex Glacier

Hey! I got a new 24/96 DAC! That means there are three in my house. Let's talk about this:

It's the Apex Glacier. Only available through Todd the Vinyl Junkie (ttvjaudio.com). It's gotten RAVE reviews around the internet from anyone who's tried it. They say "great portable amp. Sleek. Sweet DAC. Everything you need in a little package!" Well, everything except the ability to drive speakers. That's not why I have it.

I wanted a portable amp that was powerful and not crap to use with my iPod's line out. That's it. It does great. My iPod definitely sounds as good as it possibly can. That isn't saying a lot in my world, where the Wolfson DAC in my older iPod is actually only "adequate".

Pros:
The LIGHT on the front to indicate audio level, going from red to violet. If you know ROYGBIV, that's the volume scale.
Very accurate audio translator.
Rechargable battery - can be used on the go!

Cons:
The DAC is only OK.
It's kinda big for your pocket.
Not as sleek and awesome physically as I expected. Fingerprint magnet.

That's out of the way. I want to tell you what this post is really about: DACs. I have a few in my life and I want to tell you something about them.

The Apex Glacier's DAC is good. It does bring my music to life; but, it's probably about on-par with my Nuforce Icon-2. It doesn't get all the way there, it's just good.
What gets all the way there? My HRT MusicStreamer II+. I proved this by connecting the MusicStreamer to the input jack of the Apex, and did a side-by-side. The HRT blew the Apex out of the water.

SO:

If you want a USB DAC and don't care about the amp, get the HRT MusicStreamer II+. It's cheaper than the Glacier and sounds considerably better.
If you want a portable headphone amp and don't care about the DAC, I'm sure there's got to be something as good as the Apex Glacier without a DAC in it. Don't spend the $450 for it.
If you need both, I guess this is one way to go. It IS easy to stash in my bag, with or without the MusicStreamer. I'll be using it plenty in the future, but with the solid knowledge that I have better things in my possession.

:-)

Headhones: Is the sky the limit?

Over the past two days, I've managed to audition quite a few types of headphones. (My day ended with a great chance to hear the JBL M2 speakers in action, a $20,000 value.) But I'd like to focus on something a little more attainable.

We know I'm a headphone freak. And there are extremely valuable headphones out there. Ones that defy all logic in price.


The first is the Sennheiser HD800, considered by many to be the best headphones in existence. $1500.
The second is the Ultrasone Edition 10, handmade in Bavaria. Limited Edition, surreal sound. $2800.

I will never own headphones this good. I will be lucky if I ever encounter headphones like this. The question here is: How much value do these headphones add?

Can the listening experience TRULY improve over my best headphones, priced at $350 retail?

I've heard some incredible sound from cheap-o headphones from Panasonic, Monoprice, Nuforce, Skullcandy. Under-$20 with a dollar-for-dollar value that is impressive. Bass that shakes. Sound that makes you dance. Yet, it's all still headphone sounding, from the bottom to the top. The sound is good, but even the most expensive pair I own still create a room in my head and sort of blend the music into two ears.
Why would anyone spend $2800 on something that does that when you can buy a whole sound system for that price and get more out of it?

To find out, I auditioned a very valuable headphone at a show recently. The Beyerdynamic T90. CNET says these cans "[measure] up well against headphones that cost $1,000." At $600, these are in reach for people who want sweet speakers. But should we spend our money on speakers?



...maybe.

It's true, there is no sound like my speakers, wired with my amazing Outlaw Audio amp, connected with Audioquest cabling. There is an amazing soundstage there and an impact that can fill a room. Headphones, in my experience, haven't done that yet.

The Beyerdynamic T90's, however, have shown me that there really is something in that ultra-expensive range of headphones.

These headphones created an impressive image of the recording - I hadn't really heard anything like it outside of a studio. Every instrument is separate, unique, and present, and no detail goes unobserved. I could hear deep, deep into the recording; if there was a fly, if someone dropped a penny, I could hear it. It was the same with the tracks I tried with it: classical, pop, rock, jazz. Music was alive, nuanced, but not blended like in the other headphones. MP3s sounded different from FLAC. Everything was on display here, and the music called my attention. This is the closest SOUND to live I can imagine, leaving out soundstage.

In closing, I can imagine spending $2800 on headphones for that sound.

It isn't speakers, but it is truly worth the time spent.

- Flash

Skullcandy

I've spent a lot of my life being down on Skullcandy.

I know I'm a headphone snob, and Skullcandy has the excellent reputation of creating some of the most stylish headphones out there for a premium price. Here, see what I mean:

On the left, the beautiful Kate Upton modeling a pair of swanky red Aviators. On the right, the "budget" priced Hesh 2.0. ($50).

(In fairness, Skullcandy has headphone models cheaper than $50.)
I would tease friends about these things, joking that they traded substance for style. My brief experience with Skullcandy 'phones was ten years ago, and they were tinny and harsh. Everyone at that time seemed to have the Skullcandy earbuds, anyway, so I was going to dislike them for their popularity.
I still have that problem with popular headphones, so I still hated Skullcandy as a brand. Beats once had a chance, due to the high-profile design by Dr. Dre, but Beats fell off the wagon once I heard a pair.

Times change. Apple now bundles a new kind of headphone with their iPod, something far less ear-shattering. Now, it's far more common to see a pair of Beats than anything else. (You usually can't see Gumys anyway.) Every so often, I catch someone with expensive Sennheisers or AKGs in public places.
That's not something you do. Those headphones should be your baby.
They should not be in a place where someone can punch you in the stomach and run off with a life-changing listening experience.

Skullcandy started showing up on popular Hi-Fi audio blogs. I couldn't believe it, so when I saw a display at Target for two of their models, I gave it a shot.

SOLD.

I really spoiled myself, actually. I listened to the Uprock, and it was alright. I didn't dance. It was too open.
I tried out the Hesh 2.0, and couldn't truly believe the difference between the two. The Hesh 2.0 was tight, active, and clean. I rocked out.
I tried out the Sony display next to it. Perhaps Skullcandy planted it there, because the Sony sets were muted and muddy. I put them back, audibly saying, "Gross!" The guy nearby gave me a funny look. The Beats fared better, but the sound is heavy. It overstates the low end, kind of like riding in a car with a trunk-rattling subwoofer. The Skullcandys let the bass keep its punch and let the high end jam on top.

I think it's time to own a pair of Skullcandy headphones. If it sounds this good, I'm ready to be stylish.

  - Flash

Edit: I was lucky enough to get the above Gridlock-design Hesh 2.0 headphones pictured above. Yes, they are sweet. But even more important is that these are SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT from the black model I tried at Best Buy. Here:
- The gridlock has a fabric covered padded band, feeling organic. The black has a rubber headband with no padding or fabric, feeling rugged.
- The gridlock seems to fit nicely around my ears without much extra effort. The black takes a little bit of work to fit my ears inside, and seems to leave a gap between my head and the pad.
- The black, overall, feels like a workhorse.
- The gridlock, overall, feels fun, like a party.

So the black would, in theory, spend its days in my briefcase, and the gridlock for home listening.

Audio Cabling

Hi-Fi Audio Cables.  Garbage, right?  I mean, who on earth can believe that something as simple as the metal connecting between the two posts can make any serious difference?  I mean, sure, on a $100,000 system, where you can hear a flea sneeze, you might hear a slight improvement.  But copper is copper, gauge is gauge, and it's easy to get right.

I preach this 95% of the time.  I won't ever tell you that you should buy nice cable.  I even say this right now: If you have money to spend on speakers, amplifiers, CD players, record players, ANYTHING else in your system, DO NOT WASTE YOUR TIME WITH CABLE.  Don't even think about it.

Based on CNET's articles on cheap cables and the ubiquitous posts saying lamp cord is equal sound-wise to speaker cable, I logged onto Monoprice and bought myself a spool of speaker wire when I got a non-Nuforce-Icon amp.  (The Icon has proprietary cables).  It did the job.  I thought it was good enough.  I left it.
I'm the guy who's never satisfied, though.  I decided, after a stretch of months, that bare wire splayed out under my posts is too inconvenient, that at the very least I want something with bananas on the end.  I started investigating, and wound up with a set of Audioquest Type 4.

It came quicker than expected, and is a thick braided blue cable that reminded me of cables I'd handled in studios. It felt serious.  The silver terminations were NOT bananas, though.  They looked like weapons an orc might handle, or something from the middle eastern nations.  They fit, though.  Also, they came with a polishing cloth that tells you that these cables don't need polishing to keep working.  Great.
I was skeptical, but I went ahead and hooked it up quickly, leaving the old cable wired in for an A/B comparison.  I let half a CD play on the old cable, paused, plugged in the new cable and unhooked the old, and hit play.

WOW. My music came out with a little more impact, a little more focus.  It engaged me.  I couldn't believe it. I wasn't going to take those cables out.  I let them rest.
I later noted that the difference is not as drastic as my amp, or my CD player, or my DAC, or even between 16 and 24 bit.  It's minor.  But it's significant enough to make my jaw drop.

But that's not all.

A few days later, long before the Audioquest cable landed in my lap, I stumbled upon a review comparing it to Flexygy 6 from River Cable.  (I also stumbled upon numerous statements along the lines of "Audioquest type 4 costs" half the price I paid "which makes it a great budget cable" statements.  The review above even mentions that the cable is less expensive and thus inferior.  I didn't experience that.  The River Cable pair costs the same as my Audioquest pair.
Flexygy 6 also has a very tight 30 day return policy.  I think I have a showdown coming, folks.
So I flew in a pair with bananas. These were beautiful cables, but flat.  Flat?  I guess that's OK, but it goes against my sense for hi-def audio.  They feel nice, they come with "certificates" and arbitrary-looking printouts from a Tektronix Scope that both look about the same, but are actually a little different.  Not an obvious picture, nor is it obvious what they are measuring, but the website helps.
I wasted little time running the flat cable through my "custom" rig and weaving it down the same path as the Type 4.  I did the same thing: I ran three tracks through the Type 4, then switched cables and ran 3 tracks through the Flexygy 6.

...nope.  I thought I heard an improvement when I got to the Flexygy 6,  but it was just sharper than the other.  Harsher.  More digital.  The type of sound that, like Pepsi, seems great at the first taste but starts to hurt and make you smack as you finish.  I also thought I heard some noise that wasn't there before.  Yes, noise.  I thought maybe it was a drum nuance I'd missed.
I eventually got fed up after two back-and-forths and hooked both cables up, letting the amp's A/B switch do the work.  That confirmed it: it wasn't a drum nuance.  The drums were less focused.  The sound grew warmer, easier to listen to, clearer with the Type 4, just like it had when I put it in the first time.  The Flexygy 6 diffused my sound and make it a little too bright, considering the digital sources I use regularly.

Here's my bottom line on these: Don't buy new cables.  OK, if you're going to, please try it in your system before committing.  I think the AudioQuest Type 4 cable is worth the money, and I don't think I'm going to pull it out of my speakers anytime soon.  They knock imaging out of the park.  But, as evidenced by reviews of the Flexygy 6, this isn't always the case.

And here is my bottom line overall: SPEAKER CABLES MAKE A DIFFERENCE.  I don't care what the other blogs say.  I've heard it.  It's real.  Don't doubt.

Now, what about interconnects?  Hmmmm...

Sometimes, amps AREN'T perfect.

I am at my wits end with this amp.  It's like someone took a dump on the high end and left it there, so that the high end just...can't...reach...

We'll keep fighting with it.

Nuforce's Podio speaker!

The events are few and far between, but every now and then I want to break out a tiny little speaker to fill a small area with music.  This is good for offices, college study rooms, cars with no radio reception, etc.

Finally, a company has stepped up to produce one that doesn't sound like one transistor clapping!

Nuforce's Podio PS-106

It's tiny, it's rechargable, and it's from the same people who bring you audio equipment worth thousands!  There is little reason to doubt them.  This would cetainly blow my little $6 plastic drivers out of the water.

Heck, this is smaller than nearly every portable I've laid eyes on.  Look at this:

I would like to have one of these on me at all times, you know...just in case.

Dig it!