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.