Yet Another Headphone Question !!

[James Nipper]

I just got an Apple iPod. Cool !!!!!!!

I have had a pair of Sony MDR V6 headphones for years. I like them
pretty good, but would like to know what models I would have to go **up**
to in order to realize an improvement in the sound.

I have seen many references to the Sony 7506 (I think that is the number).
Would this model be an improvement over what I now have?

What other headphones should I consider, say in the $100-150 range?


OR, do I already have the best sound in this price range with my old Sony
MDR V6 ???

I will appreciate any comments and advice !!

--James--

[normanstrong]

> OR, do I already have the best sound in this price range with my
old Sony
> MDR V6 ???

Yes, you do. I have 2 of them. See no reason to attempt an upgrade.

Norm Strong

[SST]

Your new iPod has a relatively low output as do all portable players. My
Nomad Jukebox is by far the loudest portable I have heard to date and is
still not capable of powering an $150 pair of AKG's or Sennheisers without a
headphone amp
(http://www.headphone.com/layout.php?topicID=3&subTopicID=27&productID=00100
10001).

Are you ok with the volume from the iPod with your MDR V6's?



"James Nipper" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> I just got an Apple iPod. Cool !!!!!!!
>
> I have had a pair of Sony MDR V6 headphones for years. I like them
> pretty good, but would like to know what models I would have to go **up**
> to in order to realize an improvement in the sound.
>
> I have seen many references to the Sony 7506 (I think that is the
number).
> Would this model be an improvement over what I now have?
>
> What other headphones should I consider, say in the $100-150 range?
>
>
> OR, do I already have the best sound in this price range with my old Sony
> MDR V6 ???
>
> I will appreciate any comments and advice !!
>
> --James--
>
>
>
>

[James Nipper]

Yes, the volume from the iPod to my MDR V6 is super, more than I need.

Thanks for the comments.

--James--

------------------------------------

Your new iPod has a relatively low output as do all portable players. My
Nomad Jukebox is by far the loudest portable I have heard to date and is
still not capable of powering an $150 pair of AKG's or Sennheisers without a
headphone amp
(http://www.headphone.com/layout.php?topicID=3&subTopicID=27&productID=00100
10001).

Are you ok with the volume from the iPod with your MDR V6's?



"James Nipper" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> I just got an Apple iPod. Cool !!!!!!!
>
> I have had a pair of Sony MDR V6 headphones for years. I like them
> pretty good, but would like to know what models I would have to go **up**
> to in order to realize an improvement in the sound.
>
> I have seen many references to the Sony 7506 (I think that is the
number).
> Would this model be an improvement over what I now have?
>
> What other headphones should I consider, say in the $100-150 range?
>
>
> OR, do I already have the best sound in this price range with my old Sony
> MDR V6 ???
>
> I will appreciate any comments and advice !!
>
> --James--
>
>
>
>

[Arny Krueger]

"James Nipper" > wrote in message


> I just got an Apple iPod. Cool !!!!!!!

I have a NJB3, cooler! But I won't hold your choice against you. ;-)

> I have had a pair of Sony MDR V6 headphones for years. I like
> them pretty good, but would like to know what models I would have to
> go **up** to in order to realize an improvement in the sound.

> I have seen many references to the Sony 7506 (I think that is the
> number). Would this model be an improvement over what I now have?

> What other headphones should I consider, say in the $100-150 range?

For a scosh over $150 you can buy Sennheiser 580s if you shop around. I won
my in an auction on ebay as absolutely new product.

Are Senn 580s better phones than 7506s (which I also own and use)? I decline
to answer. Neither is perfectly sonically accurate but both are very good.

However, 580s do have a more mellow sound and are physically more
comfortable to wear for long periods of time.

Other choices in this price range to consider:

Etymotic ER6

http://www.etymotic.com/

Shure E2

http://www.shure.com/earphones/eseries_e2c.asp

[SST]

I'm surprised. Either the output from the iPod is VERY high (which I doubt)
or the Sony's you have are extremely efficient. My guess is too efficient
for my taste, my phone-amp would blow my ear drums up at level 2 or 3 that
being the case.

I don't have either the iPod or any Sony headphones but I do have a couple
of Sennheisers (HD600), a set of Grados and set of AKG's, neither which play
very loud through portables. Actually the HD600's are not much louder then a
whisper. That's through basically any small portable device (CD Player, MP3
Player, Cassette players included) and my PC. I must power them with a
head-amp of some sorts, mostly I use my pre-amp's which is 10X's louder then
any portable I have ever used.

I have an old set of KOSS portables, not sure of the model number but they
were about $100 almost 10 years ago. They sound nice and are very small and
light (and foldable).

Enjoy.


"James Nipper" > wrote in message
...
> Yes, the volume from the iPod to my MDR V6 is super, more than I need.
>
> Thanks for the comments.
>
> --James--
>
> ------------------------------------
>
> Your new iPod has a relatively low output as do all portable players. My
> Nomad Jukebox is by far the loudest portable I have heard to date and is
> still not capable of powering an $150 pair of AKG's or Sennheisers without
a
> headphone amp
>
(http://www.headphone.com/layout.php?topicID=3&subTopicID=27&productID=00100
> 10001).
>
> Are you ok with the volume from the iPod with your MDR V6's?
>
>
>
> "James Nipper" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> >
> > I just got an Apple iPod. Cool !!!!!!!
> >
> > I have had a pair of Sony MDR V6 headphones for years. I like them
> > pretty good, but would like to know what models I would have to go
**up**
> > to in order to realize an improvement in the sound.
> >
> > I have seen many references to the Sony 7506 (I think that is the
> number).
> > Would this model be an improvement over what I now have?
> >
> > What other headphones should I consider, say in the $100-150 range?
> >
> >
> > OR, do I already have the best sound in this price range with my old
Sony
> > MDR V6 ???
> >
> > I will appreciate any comments and advice !!
> >
> > --James--
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

[SST]

The HD580's are 300Ohm as well as most other Hi-Fi cans. Portable phones are
generally closer to 30 Ohms.

How the hell are you listening to them with your NJB? Or any other portable
for that matter.



"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "James Nipper" > wrote in message
>
>
> > I just got an Apple iPod. Cool !!!!!!!
>
> I have a NJB3, cooler! But I won't hold your choice against you. ;-)
>
> > I have had a pair of Sony MDR V6 headphones for years. I like
> > them pretty good, but would like to know what models I would have to
> > go **up** to in order to realize an improvement in the sound.
>
> > I have seen many references to the Sony 7506 (I think that is the
> > number). Would this model be an improvement over what I now have?
>
> > What other headphones should I consider, say in the $100-150 range?
>
> For a scosh over $150 you can buy Sennheiser 580s if you shop around. I
won
> my in an auction on ebay as absolutely new product.
>
> Are Senn 580s better phones than 7506s (which I also own and use)? I
decline
> to answer. Neither is perfectly sonically accurate but both are very good.
>
> However, 580s do have a more mellow sound and are physically more
> comfortable to wear for long periods of time.
>
> Other choices in this price range to consider:
>
> Etymotic ER6
>
> http://www.etymotic.com/
>
> Shure E2
>
> http://www.shure.com/earphones/eseries_e2c.asp
>
>

[Stephen Worth]

In article >, SST
> wrote:

> Your new iPod has a relatively low output as do all portable players. My
> Nomad Jukebox is by far the loudest portable I have heard to date and is
> still not capable of powering an $150 pair of AKG's or Sennheisers without a
> headphone amp

My iPod pushes my Sennheiser HD 590s fine without a headphone amp.

See ya
Steve

--
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VIP RECORDS: Professional Transfers of Classic 78 rpm Recordings
The best Jazz you've never heard! 20s Dance Bands - British Swing - Opera
FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

[Arny Krueger]

"SST" > wrote in message
. net

> The HD580's are 300 Ohm as well as most other Hi-Fi cans. Portable
> phones are generally closer to 30 Ohms.

So what? Wht matters is how much acoustic energy the headphones make when
hooked up to the equipment in question.

There are a number of people who actually have HD 580s and use them with
portable equipment and report excellent results. I just happen to be one of
them.

> How the hell are you listening to them with your NJB?

The old fashioned way. I plug them into the headphone jack on the NJB3,
place them on my head and listen.

> Or any other portable for that matter.

The 580's work just fine with a variety of portable equipment and PC sound
cards.

I respectfully suggest that you actually try something before you condemn
it. Or at least have the courtesy to believe people who have, and say it
works.

I was just discussing this matter with another HD580 user over in
rec.audio.pro and we shared our amazement that people say they have problems
with them when used with portable equipment.

That 580s don't work with portable equipment is shaping up as one of the big
lies of audio in the 21st century.

[SST]

A little melodramatic?

If you read the thread with a tad more comprehension you would see I was
speaking from experience.

I guess it comes down to personal preference. The lack of drive equates to a
thin, lifeless sound. If this is acceptable to you then enjoy. Its certainly
not for me. I have been an avid listener for very many years and have become
a bit fussy with what is acceptable.

For **** and giggles I will try my HD600's on a variety of portables again
and describe the lack of luster to you. I will need to find or buy a 1/4
inch to micro adapter first (got one somewhere, I'm sure). I will then
borrow a buddy's HeadWize phoneamp and describe what you're missing. I am
friends with a couple of marketing people over at Sennheiser, I'm ask them
for their opinion but I am sure they will agree that the output stage of a
portable is way to low to properly drive a set of 300 Ohm headphones.



"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "SST" > wrote in message
> . net
>
> > The HD580's are 300 Ohm as well as most other Hi-Fi cans. Portable
> > phones are generally closer to 30 Ohms.
>
> So what? Wht matters is how much acoustic energy the headphones make when
> hooked up to the equipment in question.
>
> There are a number of people who actually have HD 580s and use them with
> portable equipment and report excellent results. I just happen to be one
of
> them.
>
> > How the hell are you listening to them with your NJB?
>
> The old fashioned way. I plug them into the headphone jack on the NJB3,
> place them on my head and listen.
>
> > Or any other portable for that matter.
>
> The 580's work just fine with a variety of portable equipment and PC
sound
> cards.
>
> I respectfully suggest that you actually try something before you condemn
> it. Or at least have the courtesy to believe people who have, and say it
> works.
>
> I was just discussing this matter with another HD580 user over in
> rec.audio.pro and we shared our amazement that people say they have
problems
> with them when used with portable equipment.
>
> That 580s don't work with portable equipment is shaping up as one of the
big
> lies of audio in the 21st century.
>
>
>
>

[Arny Krueger]

"SST" > wrote in message
. net

> A little melodramatic?

Well "SST" you're the guy who introduced and keeps adding profanity into
this thread:

"SST" > wrote in message
. net

"How the hell are you listening to them with your NJB?"

> If you read the thread with a tad more comprehension you would see I
> was speaking from experience.

There's not one word of evidence of that in your post. OK, so you can read
the HD580 spec sheet, good for you!

> I guess it comes down to personal preference.

Well dooh!

> The lack of drive equates to a thin, lifeless sound.

If you're deaf enough, I guess so.

>If this is acceptable to you then enjoy.

Somehow I have a hard time equating what I hear from my 580s as being "thin,
lifeless sound".

> Its certainly not for me. I have been an avid listener for
> very many years and have become a bit fussy with what is acceptable.

You are making this 56-year-old who generally likes his music loud scratch
his head. As I just said upthread, I've recently reviewed this with some
other old codgers like me who happen to use 580s with a any of number of
portable players, and we just don't get it. Maybe its the fact that we've
been protecting not intentionally abusing our ears all of our lives that
makes a difference.

> For **** and giggles I will try my HD600's on a variety of portables
> again and describe the lack of luster to you.

If luster is what you want, perhaps Sony 7506s would be more to your liking.
I've got those too. So what?

> I will need to find or buy a 1/4 inch to micro adapter first (got one
somewhere, I'm sure).

How tedious does a person have to be to even mention such a trivial thing as
a 1/4" to 3.5 mm headphone adaptor.

> I will then borrow a buddy's HeadWize phoneamp and describe what
> you're missing.

IMO, that must involve what I would find to be ear-splitting sound levels.


You know "SST" you're not the only guy in this discussion with a headphone
amp. I have one too (Rane) and it can get really loud, but in this
application, I just don't feel the need for it.

> I am friends with a couple of marketing people over
> at Sennheiser, I'm ask them for their opinion but I am sure they will
> agree that the output stage of a portable is way to low to properly
> drive a set of 300 Ohm headphones.

Can we take them at their word when they say:

http://www.sennheiserusa.com/pages/products/headphones/580.htm

"The HD 580 can be connected directly to HiFi systems of the highest
quality, in particular DAT, DCC, and CD players. "

The NJB3 headphone jack puts out 1 volt RMS, which seems to be typical of
most of the DAT and CD players I've worked with lately.

[Stephen Worth]

In article >, SST
> wrote:

> I guess it comes down to personal preference. The lack of drive equates to a
> thin, lifeless sound. If this is acceptable to you then enjoy.

Nothing thin about my HD-590s and my iPod.

See ya
Steve

--
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VIP RECORDS: Professional Transfers of Classic 78 rpm Recordings
The best Jazz you've never heard! 20s Dance Bands - British Swing - Opera
FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

[SST]

compare!


"Stephen Worth" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, SST
> > wrote:
>
> > I guess it comes down to personal preference. The lack of drive equates
to a
> > thin, lifeless sound. If this is acceptable to you then enjoy.
>
> Nothing thin about my HD-590s and my iPod.
>
> See ya
> Steve
>
> --
> *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
> VIP RECORDS: Professional Transfers of Classic 78 rpm Recordings
> The best Jazz you've never heard! 20s Dance Bands - British Swing -
Opera
> FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

[SST]

I hooked up my Sennheiser HD600 directly to a Creative NOMAD Jukebox and a
plain Jane SONY portable CD Player and had a small variety of people
(victims) that passed through my office today to listen.

The unanimous response was it was loud enough to hear at FULL volume, but
certainly not acceptable. At half volume they were as quiet as a whisper.
'... NOT loud enough...' was the agreed upon response from all that
listened. That was about 5 or 6 people ranging from 23 to 51 years old. The
SONY walkman was noticeably lower in volume then the NOMAD at 'maximum'
headphone output.
We then tried a relatively inexpensive pair of Audio Technicia's laying
around the office, Similar to the original posters Sony MDR V6 headphones.
They were definitely louder but were noticeably more distorted then the
Sennheisers.

Finally we tried each headphone in a plain old chepo receiver and the
difference was extreme!! Like night and day was the volume, max for the
portables was about a 3 (from 1 to 10) on the receiver and the audio
dynamics were suddenly apparent. My Home systems headamp is 10X's better
then that (I have nice audio) and not even in the same league as the NOMAD.
Did try the HeadWize today, it wasn't in town but I believe it we be around
tomorrow. Maybe well try it then.

However maybe this is insightful:
Nomad: Maximum Output = 5 mW
Nomad II: Maximum Output = 7 mW
Nomad Jukebox: Maximum Output = 100 mW
Nomad Jukebox C: Maximum Output = 100 mW
Nomad Jukebox 2: Maximum Output = 900 mW
Nomad Jukebox 3: Maximum Output = 900 mW

Archos ONDIO: Maximum Output = 100 mW
Archos Studio Series: Maximum Output = 100 mW

Apple iPod (all models): Maximum Output = 60 mW

Since the NOMAD 2 and 3 seems to be 9 times louder then any other product of
its type, I think you are the exception. Now back to the guy with the much
lower output iPod. I would think your phones are well matched if you say its
loud enough and you may want to try a less efficient HiFi headphone like the
HD 5xx or 6xx model first before buying them.

I don't abuse my ears, I work in the music (sound and audio engineering)
industry. I'm generally not around loud concert halls but rather small
studios which are not loud and abusive.

Oh and since when is 'Hell' profane?


later!


"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "SST" > wrote in message
> . net
>
> > A little melodramatic?
>
> Well "SST" you're the guy who introduced and keeps adding profanity into
> this thread:
>
> "SST" > wrote in message
> . net
>
> "How the hell are you listening to them with your NJB?"
>
> > If you read the thread with a tad more comprehension you would see I
> > was speaking from experience.
>
> There's not one word of evidence of that in your post. OK, so you can read
> the HD580 spec sheet, good for you!
>
> > I guess it comes down to personal preference.
>
> Well dooh!
>
> > The lack of drive equates to a thin, lifeless sound.
>
> If you're deaf enough, I guess so.
>
> >If this is acceptable to you then enjoy.
>
> Somehow I have a hard time equating what I hear from my 580s as being
"thin,
> lifeless sound".
>
> > Its certainly not for me. I have been an avid listener for
> > very many years and have become a bit fussy with what is acceptable.
>
> You are making this 56-year-old who generally likes his music loud scratch
> his head. As I just said upthread, I've recently reviewed this with some
> other old codgers like me who happen to use 580s with a any of number of
> portable players, and we just don't get it. Maybe its the fact that we've
> been protecting not intentionally abusing our ears all of our lives that
> makes a difference.
>
> > For **** and giggles I will try my HD600's on a variety of portables
> > again and describe the lack of luster to you.
>
> If luster is what you want, perhaps Sony 7506s would be more to your
liking.
> I've got those too. So what?
>
> > I will need to find or buy a 1/4 inch to micro adapter first (got one
> somewhere, I'm sure).
>
> How tedious does a person have to be to even mention such a trivial thing
as
> a 1/4" to 3.5 mm headphone adaptor.
>
> > I will then borrow a buddy's HeadWize phoneamp and describe what
> > you're missing.
>
> IMO, that must involve what I would find to be ear-splitting sound levels.
>
>
> You know "SST" you're not the only guy in this discussion with a headphone
> amp. I have one too (Rane) and it can get really loud, but in this
> application, I just don't feel the need for it.
>
> > I am friends with a couple of marketing people over
> > at Sennheiser, I'm ask them for their opinion but I am sure they will
> > agree that the output stage of a portable is way to low to properly
> > drive a set of 300 Ohm headphones.
>
> Can we take them at their word when they say:
>
> http://www.sennheiserusa.com/pages/products/headphones/580.htm
>
> "The HD 580 can be connected directly to HiFi systems of the highest
> quality, in particular DAT, DCC, and CD players. "
>
> The NJB3 headphone jack puts out 1 volt RMS, which seems to be typical of
> most of the DAT and CD players I've worked with lately.
>
>

[Arny Krueger]

"SST" > wrote in message
. net

> I hooked up my Sennheiser HD600 directly to a Creative NOMAD Jukebox
> and a plain Jane SONY portable CD Player and had a small variety of
> people (victims) that passed through my office today to listen.

> The unanimous response was it was loud enough to hear at FULL volume,
> but certainly not acceptable.

Classic example of a badly designed listening test.

I'll bet money that first off, you started your alleged test by regaling
your listeners with 5-minute rant about some old codger on Usenet who is
full of crap about headphone sensitivity.

Secondly, you did your alleged test in a noisy office where people have
probably already experienced some threshold shift due to the environment.

You staged it as a quicky test where people's ears didn't get a chance to
adapt to their new listening environment. I often end up turning the volume
down after I listen for a few dozen seconds to a couple of minutes.

You could have easily picked media that was recorded at abnormally low
levels to shift the results in the desired direction. Later on you admit
that you turned the volume control down to 50% on equipment that is usually
(measurably) essentially distortion-free at 100% volume setting.

You picked different model headphones than the one I used, though they
should be comparable.

You picked a different model of Nomad Jukebox than the one I used, one that
per your own numbers might have 10 times less output than mine.

>At half volume they were as quiet as a
> whisper. '... NOT loud enough...' was the agreed upon response from
> all that listened.

Then you further biased the test by turning down the volume to half.
Apparently in your current state of hysteria, you haven't checked your
facts.

I have.

I've tested a number of personal stereo devices and find that as a rule,
unlike home audio systems and unlike car audio systems, there's no technical
performance penalty to running them at full (100%) volume.

IOW a full-scale digital file can be played at 100% volume control setting
on most personal players, NJB3 included, with ZERO clipping, zero loss of
frequency response, and negligible increase in distortion as compared to
half volume.

>That was about 5 or 6 people ranging from 23 to 51 years old.

I'm surprised you didn't turn the volume down to 10%, as it would have
further biased the test in your favor!

> The SONY walkman was noticeably lower in volume then the
> NOMAD at 'maximum' headphone output.

So?

> We then tried a relatively inexpensive pair of Audio Technicia's
> laying around the office, Similar to the original posters Sony MDR V6
> headphones. They were definitely louder but were noticeably more
> distorted then the Sennheisers.

In all likelihood, a major factor in this evaluation was distortion in the
listener's ears.

> However maybe this is insightful:

These numbers would be helpful if test conditions were stated so that there
was any assurance that they are in fact meaningful numbers. As usual with
your sloppy work, test conditions aren't stated. As will I shortly show,
given your numbers, the test conditions have to be totally unrealistic to
the point of being totally absurd.

> Nomad: Maximum Output = 5 mW
> Nomad II: Maximum Output = 7 mW

I have one of these. I've used it with my 580s and it works fine. Not the
loudest thing in the world, but still a good listen.

> Nomad Jukebox: Maximum Output = 100 mW
> Nomad Jukebox C: Maximum Output = 100 mW
> Nomad Jukebox 2: Maximum Output = 900 mW
> Nomad Jukebox 3: Maximum Output = 900 mW

The Jukebox 3 power output number is sheerest crap. Fact of the matter is
that a Jukebox 3 playing a 1 KHz FS test file puts out a bit less than 1
volt RMS into a high impedance load with the volume set to maximum. I tested
mine last week. Let's use 1 volt because I know its a tad high but makes
easy calculations.

P = E squared/R so the only way to get 900 mW out of a Nomad 3 is to load
it with a ca. 1.1 ohm load. The idea of the headphone jack on a personal
portable driving a 1.1 load is ludicrous in the extreme. So-called low-z
headphones run around 32 ohms (that gives ca. 31 mW) and high-z phones run
around 300 ohms (that gives more like 3.1 mW).

> Archos ONDIO: Maximum Output = 100 mW
> Archos Studio Series: Maximum Output = 100 mW

> Apple iPod (all models): Maximum Output = 60 mW

> Since the NOMAD 2 and 3 seems to be 9 times louder then any other
> product of its type, I think you are the exception.

Come back when you've got some believable numbers. If your numbers were
given in millivolts not milliwatts, at least the NJB3 number would be
semi-believable. However, I don't think you actually know the difference
between milliwatts and millivolts, or you wouldn't have made the big boo-boo
you just posted.

Your typical pair of headphones have sensitivity on the order of 100 dB/mW,
sometimes up to 115 dB/mW. So 1 MW is loud, and 5 mW is right on the edge of
ear damage for phones that a have low-average sensitivity. As a practical
matter, peak listening levels of 110 dB should be a reasonable very high
maximum. 115 dB is too close to the OSHA zero tolerance point to be funny.

>Now back to the
> guy with the much lower output iPod. I would think your phones are
> well matched if you say its loud enough and you may want to try a
> less efficient HiFi headphone like the HD 5xx or 6xx model first
> before buying them.

I would very much favor people trying stuff before they buy stuff,
especially with all the unbelievable trash that is being put out on Usenet,
such as the science fiction numbers listed above.

> I don't abuse my ears, I work in the music (sound and audio
> engineering) industry. I'm generally not around loud concert halls
> but rather small studios which are not loud and abusive.

I thought you worked in an office. Didn't you just say that?

> Oh and since when is 'Hell' profane?

Long time. I'll bet money you use the F-word in front of your mother,
though. You sure seeem to like the S-word. Note, the words I wrote that you
were ranting about beging "melodramatic" had no profanity of any kind. No
old-school profanity, no new-school profanity, just plain old words you hear
in polite conversation. This is your issue, and I'm happy to hoist you up to
writhe in the sun over it.

[Stephen Worth]

In article >, SST
> wrote:

> compare!

To what? It sounds great. I don't have to turn the volume all the way
up to get to normal listening volume. What more do I want from a set of
headphones?

See ya
Steve

--
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VIP RECORDS: Professional Transfers of Classic 78 rpm Recordings
The best Jazz you've never heard! 20s Dance Bands - British Swing - Opera
FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

[SST]

I want more, much more.

Its not about volume as much as its about dynamics and robustness. Your
obviously not an audiophilist, I am.


Enjoy.


"Stephen Worth" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, SST
> > wrote:
>
> > compare!
>
> To what? It sounds great. I don't have to turn the volume all the way
> up to get to normal listening volume. What more do I want from a set of
> headphones?
>
> See ya
> Steve
>
> --
> *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
> VIP RECORDS: Professional Transfers of Classic 78 rpm Recordings
> The best Jazz you've never heard! 20s Dance Bands - British Swing -
Opera
> FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

[SST]

'I'll bet money that first off, you started your alleged test by regaling
your listeners with 5-minute rant about some old codger on Usenet who is
full of crap about headphone sensitivity.'

No not at all, you're not that important.



'Secondly, you.'

Again, no not at all. I have a quiet private office. Not necessary for this
test.



'You could have easily picked media that was recorded at abnormally low
levels to shift the results in the desired direction.'

And again, no. I used The Beatles 'Every Night' and a Steely Dan song I
believe. Also your starting to scare me.



'You picked different model headphones than the one I used, though they
should be comparable.'

Umm, the HD600 are nearly identical to yours and the Audio Technicia's are
plain Jane sounding just like the Sony's. I know my audio already, you
apparently don't. Still scaring me.



You picked a different model of Nomad Jukebox than the one I used, one that
per your own numbers might have 10 times less output than mine.'

YES, your comprehension is getting slightly better. I didn't 'pick' it, I
'have' it and mentioned so, I also mentioned the iPod with has an even
'lower' output. I also concluded that YOU are the rare exception. I don't
think you will find another portable with much more then 100mV. Do you?



'Then you further biased the test by turning down the volume to half.
Apparently in your current state of hysteria, you haven't checked your
facts. > and one and on and on . '

This is where you really start scaring me. My facts are simple and straight.
Don't you understand? The output is VERY QUIET!! Forget about all the
nonsense you are spewing, its meaningless. 100Mv is NOT ENOUGH TO POWER A
300Ohm HEADPHONE.
AT 100% VOLUMN ITS NOT LOUD ENOUGH, what part of this don't you understand.
Senility already? Sad.



'These numbers would be helpful if test conditions were stated so that there
was any assurance that they are in fact meaningful numbers. As usual with
your sloppy work, test conditions aren't stated. As will I shortly show,
given your numbers, the test conditions have to be totally unrealistic to
the point of being totally absurd.'

WHAT? These results are from the manufactures, they are not tests I
conducted. If you spent even a few moments you could find this data all by
yourself. Do you tend to lie to yourself so you can believe something that
is not true? Seems like it. Now I'm not scared anymore just puzzled as to
why I am arguing with you. You are seemingly challenged in some sort of way
I am not.
Oh and 'as usual' I am what? You don't know me. How can you know what is
usual or not about me? You can't!



'I have one of these. I've used it with my 580s and it works fine. Not the
loudest thing in the world, but still a good listen.'

Ok, now you're just an idiot to me now. I'm almost done reading and
replying. I can start to hear your grating voice in my mind, its some cross
between a sidewalk drunk and one of my college professors that took one to
many hits of his own acid.



'. P = E squared/R so .' I'll ask one of our engineers to look over your
rants, If I get the time or don't bore with you first. But the Maximum
output specifications in mW is published by Creative Labs, Archos and Sony.
Its fairly clear and easy to find. Take a look. Like I said (to quote
myself) '. However maybe this is insightful: .'



'I thought you worked in an office. Didn't you just say that?'

We are publishers in the field and also own a small studio with a couple of
audio and video editing suits. So yes, you were correct. I work in an
office. Point?



'Long time. I'll bet money you use the F-word in front of your mother,
though. You sure seeem to like the S-word. Note, the words I wrote that you
were ranting about beging "melodramatic" had no profanity of any kind. No
old-school profanity, no new-school profanity, just plain old words you hear
in polite conversation. This is your issue, and I'm happy to hoist you up to
writhe in the sun over it.'

Is this your witty ending? LOL you're a nerd too? The F-word in front of my
mother? No, she would wash my mouth out with soap and send me to bed with no
supper. I bet you still live with yours. Does she make you PB&J's with the
crusties cut off? Yeah, I live in the real world with real people, not sure
what your world is but I bet its in fantasy land - LOL!!



"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "SST" > wrote in message
> . net
>
> > I hooked up my Sennheiser HD600 directly to a Creative NOMAD Jukebox
> > and a plain Jane SONY portable CD Player and had a small variety of
> > people (victims) that passed through my office today to listen.
>
> > The unanimous response was it was loud enough to hear at FULL volume,
> > but certainly not acceptable.
>
> Classic example of a badly designed listening test.
>
> I'll bet money that first off, you started your alleged test by regaling
> your listeners with 5-minute rant about some old codger on Usenet who is
> full of crap about headphone sensitivity.
>
> Secondly, you did your alleged test in a noisy office where people have
> probably already experienced some threshold shift due to the environment.
>
> You staged it as a quicky test where people's ears didn't get a chance to
> adapt to their new listening environment. I often end up turning the
volume
> down after I listen for a few dozen seconds to a couple of minutes.
>
> You could have easily picked media that was recorded at abnormally low
> levels to shift the results in the desired direction. Later on you admit
> that you turned the volume control down to 50% on equipment that is
usually
> (measurably) essentially distortion-free at 100% volume setting.
>
> You picked different model headphones than the one I used, though they
> should be comparable.
>
> You picked a different model of Nomad Jukebox than the one I used, one
that
> per your own numbers might have 10 times less output than mine.
>
> >At half volume they were as quiet as a
> > whisper. '... NOT loud enough...' was the agreed upon response from
> > all that listened.
>
> Then you further biased the test by turning down the volume to half.
> Apparently in your current state of hysteria, you haven't checked your
> facts.
>
> I have.
>
> I've tested a number of personal stereo devices and find that as a rule,
> unlike home audio systems and unlike car audio systems, there's no
technical
> performance penalty to running them at full (100%) volume.
>
> IOW a full-scale digital file can be played at 100% volume control setting
> on most personal players, NJB3 included, with ZERO clipping, zero loss of
> frequency response, and negligible increase in distortion as compared to
> half volume.
>
> >That was about 5 or 6 people ranging from 23 to 51 years old.
>
> I'm surprised you didn't turn the volume down to 10%, as it would have
> further biased the test in your favor!
>
> > The SONY walkman was noticeably lower in volume then the
> > NOMAD at 'maximum' headphone output.
>
> So?
>
> > We then tried a relatively inexpensive pair of Audio Technicia's
> > laying around the office, Similar to the original posters Sony MDR V6
> > headphones. They were definitely louder but were noticeably more
> > distorted then the Sennheisers.
>
> In all likelihood, a major factor in this evaluation was distortion in the
> listener's ears.
>
> > However maybe this is insightful:
>
> These numbers would be helpful if test conditions were stated so that
there
> was any assurance that they are in fact meaningful numbers. As usual with
> your sloppy work, test conditions aren't stated. As will I shortly show,
> given your numbers, the test conditions have to be totally unrealistic to
> the point of being totally absurd.
>
> > Nomad: Maximum Output = 5 mW
> > Nomad II: Maximum Output = 7 mW
>
> I have one of these. I've used it with my 580s and it works fine. Not the
> loudest thing in the world, but still a good listen.
>
> > Nomad Jukebox: Maximum Output = 100 mW
> > Nomad Jukebox C: Maximum Output = 100 mW
> > Nomad Jukebox 2: Maximum Output = 900 mW
> > Nomad Jukebox 3: Maximum Output = 900 mW
>
> The Jukebox 3 power output number is sheerest crap. Fact of the matter is
> that a Jukebox 3 playing a 1 KHz FS test file puts out a bit less than 1
> volt RMS into a high impedance load with the volume set to maximum. I
tested
> mine last week. Let's use 1 volt because I know its a tad high but makes
> easy calculations.
>
> P = E squared/R so the only way to get 900 mW out of a Nomad 3 is to load
> it with a ca. 1.1 ohm load. The idea of the headphone jack on a personal
> portable driving a 1.1 load is ludicrous in the extreme. So-called low-z
> headphones run around 32 ohms (that gives ca. 31 mW) and high-z phones run
> around 300 ohms (that gives more like 3.1 mW).
>
> > Archos ONDIO: Maximum Output = 100 mW
> > Archos Studio Series: Maximum Output = 100 mW
>
> > Apple iPod (all models): Maximum Output = 60 mW
>
> > Since the NOMAD 2 and 3 seems to be 9 times louder then any other
> > product of its type, I think you are the exception.
>
> Come back when you've got some believable numbers. If your numbers were
> given in millivolts not milliwatts, at least the NJB3 number would be
> semi-believable. However, I don't think you actually know the difference
> between milliwatts and millivolts, or you wouldn't have made the big
boo-boo
> you just posted.
>
> Your typical pair of headphones have sensitivity on the order of 100
dB/mW,
> sometimes up to 115 dB/mW. So 1 MW is loud, and 5 mW is right on the edge
of
> ear damage for phones that a have low-average sensitivity. As a practical
> matter, peak listening levels of 110 dB should be a reasonable very high
> maximum. 115 dB is too close to the OSHA zero tolerance point to be funny.
>
> >Now back to the
> > guy with the much lower output iPod. I would think your phones are
> > well matched if you say its loud enough and you may want to try a
> > less efficient HiFi headphone like the HD 5xx or 6xx model first
> > before buying them.
>
> I would very much favor people trying stuff before they buy stuff,
> especially with all the unbelievable trash that is being put out on
Usenet,
> such as the science fiction numbers listed above.
>
> > I don't abuse my ears, I work in the music (sound and audio
> > engineering) industry. I'm generally not around loud concert halls
> > but rather small studios which are not loud and abusive.
>
> I thought you worked in an office. Didn't you just say that?
>
> > Oh and since when is 'Hell' profane?
>
> Long time. I'll bet money you use the F-word in front of your mother,
> though. You sure seeem to like the S-word. Note, the words I wrote that
you
> were ranting about beging "melodramatic" had no profanity of any kind. No
> old-school profanity, no new-school profanity, just plain old words you
hear
> in polite conversation. This is your issue, and I'm happy to hoist you up
to
> writhe in the sun over it.
>
>
>
>

[Arny Krueger]

"SST" > wrote in message


> I want more, much more.

Good for you, "SST". Is this because you're deaf or because you can't bring
yourself to move your volume control past 12 o'clock?

> It's not about volume as much as its about dynamics and robustness.

Try moving the volume control up to say, 3 o'clock.

> Your obviously not an audiophilist, I am.

"SST", I bravely predict you'd be less full of yourself if you removed your
head from where the sun shines not. You might want to try it some day when
nobody is looking. It would also do wonders for your impression that the
world is tinged with brown.

[Richard D Pierce]

In article >,
SST > wrote:
>I want more, much more.
>
>Its not about volume as much as its about dynamics and robustness. Your
>obviously not an audiophilist, I am.

"Audiophilist" [sic]? Perhaps you failed to properly
"audiophilistine" in the same way you mispelled "You're."

That would seem entirely appropriate to your viewpoint, attitude
and demonstrated expertise.

--
| Dick Pierce |
| Professional Audio Development |
| 1-781/826-4953 Voice and FAX |
| |

[Andrzej Popowski]

Tue, 2 Sep 2003 12:07:41 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
wrote:

>> I will need to find or buy a 1/4 inch to micro adapter first (got one
>somewhere, I'm sure).
>
>How tedious does a person have to be to even mention such a trivial thing as
>a 1/4" to 3.5 mm headphone adaptor.

Hmm.. Does not Sennheiser usually comes with an adapter?

Please look carefully at the plug, it should be a 3.5mm one with 1/4"
adapter on it. :-)



Pozdrowienia,

Andrzej Popowski

[Stephen Worth]

In article >, SST
> wrote:

> Its not about volume as much as its about dynamics and robustness. Your
> obviously not an audiophilist, I am.

Audiophool is more like it!

Have you heard the one about redundant monster cable? You triple wire
your speakers using the most expensive zip cord you can find... then
you sit back in the secure knowledge that the improvement in sound more
than makes up for the big lumps under your rug!

See ya
Steve

--
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VIP RECORDS: Professional Transfers of Classic 78 rpm Recordings
The best Jazz you've never heard! 20s Dance Bands - British Swing - Opera
FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

[Stephen Worth]

In article >, SST
> wrote:

> This is where you really start scaring me. My facts are simple and straight.
> Don't you understand? The output is VERY QUIET!! Forget about all the
> nonsense you are spewing, its meaningless. 100Mv is NOT ENOUGH TO POWER A
> 300Ohm HEADPHONE.

I don't know whether 100Mv is enough to power a 300Ohm headphone. But I
do know that my iPod is powerful enough to power my Sennheiser HD590s.
All the spec numbers in the world don't mean diddly to me when I patch
my Sennheisers into my iPod and listen to music that sounds great. I'm
glad you feel that you get better sound out of cheap headphones. That
will save you a great deal of money.

See ya
Steve

--
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VIP RECORDS: Professional Transfers of Classic 78 rpm Recordings
The best Jazz you've never heard! 20s Dance Bands - British Swing - Opera
FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

[SST]

Volume past high noon? I said all along that its at full volume, that's
100% - a 10 if you like.

The removal of my head from my ass has no meaning here. My head is firmly
planted upon my shoulders which is fully exposed to the light of day.

I am tired of this inept conversation from you. You are obviously clueless
and a bit dim.




"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "SST" > wrote in message
>
>
> > I want more, much more.
>
> Good for you, "SST". Is this because you're deaf or because you can't
bring
> yourself to move your volume control past 12 o'clock?
>
> > It's not about volume as much as its about dynamics and robustness.
>
> Try moving the volume control up to say, 3 o'clock.
>
> > Your obviously not an audiophilist, I am.
>
> "SST", I bravely predict you'd be less full of yourself if you removed
your
> head from where the sun shines not. You might want to try it some day when
> nobody is looking. It would also do wonders for your impression that the
> world is tinged with brown.
>
>
>

[SST]

Umm, whatever.

Although 'Audiophilist' isn't an official word in the English language, its
commonly used here and there.

http://www.jazzdigger.com/b/Bill_Berry/For_Duke_B00005MNTB.htm

http://www.mymusicfix.com/lps/dcc.htm

and many others, look for yourself.



"Richard D Pierce" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> SST > wrote:
> >I want more, much more.
> >
> >Its not about volume as much as its about dynamics and robustness. Your
> >obviously not an audiophilist, I am.
>
> "Audiophilist" [sic]? Perhaps you failed to properly
> "audiophilistine" in the same way you mispelled "You're."
>
> That would seem entirely appropriate to your viewpoint, attitude
> and demonstrated expertise.
>
> --
> | Dick Pierce |
> | Professional Audio Development |
> | 1-781/826-4953 Voice and FAX |
> | |

[SST]

Monster cables are rubbish, good quality 'oxygen free copper' wire from
Radio Shack is fine.

And your iPod isn't loud enough.



"Stephen Worth" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, SST
> > wrote:
>
> > Its not about volume as much as its about dynamics and robustness. Your
> > obviously not an audiophilist, I am.
>
> Audiophool is more like it!
>
> Have you heard the one about redundant monster cable? You triple wire
> your speakers using the most expensive zip cord you can find... then
> you sit back in the secure knowledge that the improvement in sound more
> than makes up for the big lumps under your rug!
>
> See ya
> Steve
>
> --
> *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
> VIP RECORDS: Professional Transfers of Classic 78 rpm Recordings
> The best Jazz you've never heard! 20s Dance Bands - British Swing -
Opera
> FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

[SST]

better sound out of cheap headphones?

who said that?

have you always been this confused?



Oh and I meant mW not Mv - I work too much =)



"Stephen Worth" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, SST
> > wrote:
>
> > This is where you really start scaring me. My facts are simple and
straight.
> > Don't you understand? The output is VERY QUIET!! Forget about all the
> > nonsense you are spewing, its meaningless. 100Mv is NOT ENOUGH TO POWER
A
> > 300Ohm HEADPHONE.
>
> I don't know whether 100Mv is enough to power a 300Ohm headphone. But I
> do know that my iPod is powerful enough to power my Sennheiser HD590s.
> All the spec numbers in the world don't mean diddly to me when I patch
> my Sennheisers into my iPod and listen to music that sounds great. I'm
> glad you feel that you get better sound out of cheap headphones. That
> will save you a great deal of money.
>
> See ya
> Steve
>
> --
> *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
> VIP RECORDS: Professional Transfers of Classic 78 rpm Recordings
> The best Jazz you've never heard! 20s Dance Bands - British Swing -
Opera
> FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

[SST]

no, 1/4 inch only for my HD600's.

but yes, some do.



"Andrzej Popowski" > wrote in message
...
> Tue, 2 Sep 2003 12:07:41 -0400, "Arny Krueger" >
> wrote:
>
> >> I will need to find or buy a 1/4 inch to micro adapter first (got one
> >somewhere, I'm sure).
> >
> >How tedious does a person have to be to even mention such a trivial thing
as
> >a 1/4" to 3.5 mm headphone adaptor.
>
> Hmm.. Does not Sennheiser usually comes with an adapter?
>
> Please look carefully at the plug, it should be a 3.5mm one with 1/4"
> adapter on it. :-)
>
>
>
> Pozdrowienia,
>
> Andrzej Popowski

[Stephen Worth]

In article >, SST
> wrote:

> better sound out of cheap headphones?
>
> who said that?

Didn't you say that in your survey, people preferred the sound of the
cheap headphones (Audio Technica?) to the Sennheisers?

> Oh and I meant mW not Mv - I work too much =)

It's OK, I won't hold it against ya...

See ya
Steve

--
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VIP RECORDS: Professional Transfers of Classic 78 rpm Recordings
The best Jazz you've never heard! 20s Dance Bands - British Swing - Opera
FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

[Richard D Pierce]

In article >,
SST > wrote:
>Umm, whatever.
>
>Although 'Audiophilist' isn't an official word in the English language, its
>commonly used here and there.
>
>http://www.jazzdigger.com/b/Bill_Berry/For_Duke_B00005MNTB.htm
>
>http://www.mymusicfix.com/lps/dcc.htm
>
>and many others, look for yourself.

My goodness, what a most DEFINITIVE set of references you have
provided. And you did it without once having to change crayons!

--
| Dick Pierce |
| Professional Audio Development |
| 1-781/826-4953 Voice and FAX |
| |

[James Nipper]

Say, can't we all just get along , and enjoy sharing our experiences and
knowledge with others ?? Isn't that the true purpose of this list ??

Sure, there are some in this group (as in any group) that know more than
others, but the great equalizer should be that we ALL equally know how to
act like gentlemen.

Please, give this flaming and name-calling a rest. If someone posts
something that seems to be technically incorrect, why don't we preface our
responses with:


I must respectfully disagree with your conclusion, based on
the following facts as I understand them :


Is this too silly to even suggest ??


Now let's enjoy our AUDIO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


--James--

[Andrzej Popowski]

Fri, 05 Sep 2003 01:02:22 GMT, "SST" > piszesz:

>no, 1/4 inch only for my HD600's.
>
>but yes, some do.

Senheiser on its web pages claims, that HD600 and HD580 have adaptors
_to_ 6.3mm (1/4"). Manuals say the same.

Does the plug have a wider ring where the wire is connected?
Hold this ring and try to pull the rest of the plug apart.



Pozdrowienia,

Andrzej Popowski

[SST]

no I did it in about 10 seconds or less on google.

'Professional Audio Development' ???? LOL, so you do porno? Or is it
intercoms for fast-food drive thru windows?



"Richard D Pierce" > wrote in message
...
> In article >,
> SST > wrote:
> >Umm, whatever.
> >
> >Although 'Audiophilist' isn't an official word in the English language,
its
> >commonly used here and there.
> >
> >http://www.jazzdigger.com/b/Bill_Berry/For_Duke_B00005MNTB.htm
> >
> >http://www.mymusicfix.com/lps/dcc.htm
> >
> >and many others, look for yourself.
>
> My goodness, what a most DEFINITIVE set of references you have
> provided. And you did it without once having to change crayons!
>
> --
> | Dick Pierce |
> | Professional Audio Development |
> | 1-781/826-4953 Voice and FAX |
> | |

[SST]

no.


"Stephen Worth" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, SST
> > wrote:
>
> > better sound out of cheap headphones?
> >
> > who said that?
>
> Didn't you say that in your survey, people preferred the sound of the
> cheap headphones (Audio Technica?) to the Sennheisers?
>
> > Oh and I meant mW not Mv - I work too much =)
>
> It's OK, I won't hold it against ya...
>
> See ya
> Steve
>
> --
> *#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
> VIP RECORDS: Professional Transfers of Classic 78 rpm Recordings
> The best Jazz you've never heard! 20s Dance Bands - British Swing -
Opera
> FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

[SST]

yup and the iPod, NOMAD jukebox and most portables don't have enough volume
;)


"James Nipper" > wrote in message
...
>
>
> Say, can't we all just get along , and enjoy sharing our experiences and
> knowledge with others ?? Isn't that the true purpose of this list ??
>
> Sure, there are some in this group (as in any group) that know more than
> others, but the great equalizer should be that we ALL equally know how to
> act like gentlemen.
>
> Please, give this flaming and name-calling a rest. If someone posts
> something that seems to be technically incorrect, why don't we preface our
> responses with:
>
>
> I must respectfully disagree with your conclusion, based
on
> the following facts as I understand them :
>
>
> Is this too silly to even suggest ??
>
>
> Now let's enjoy our AUDIO !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
>
>
> --James--
>
>
>

[SST]

I will.

"Andrzej Popowski" > wrote in message
...
> Fri, 05 Sep 2003 01:02:22 GMT, "SST" > piszesz:
>
> >no, 1/4 inch only for my HD600's.
> >
> >but yes, some do.
>
> Senheiser on its web pages claims, that HD600 and HD580 have adaptors
> _to_ 6.3mm (1/4"). Manuals say the same.
>
> Does the plug have a wider ring where the wire is connected?
> Hold this ring and try to pull the rest of the plug apart.
>
>
>
> Pozdrowienia,
>
> Andrzej Popowski

[Arny Krueger]

"SST" > wrote in message
et
> better sound out of cheap headphones?
>
> who said that?
>
> have you always been this confused?

> Oh and I meant mW not Mv - I work too much =)

Noting "SST" that you never admitted that at least some of the numbers you
quoted for various devices are sheerest science fiction.

Here's two supposedly authoritation numbers from SST:

"Apple iPod (all models): Maximum Output = 60 mW"

"Nomad Jukebox 3: Maximum Output = 900 mW"

I don't have an iPod, but here's someone who does:

http://members.brabant.chello.nl/~m.heijligers/ipod/measurements.html

He says he tested with an 80% amplitude signal, which is about 2 dB below
full scale. IOW you can add 25% to his voltages to find the output of an
iPod with a full scale ( 0 dB) signal. (Voltages are millivolts)

Freq [Hz] 1 3 10 30 100 300 1000
10000
Output Voltage @ 1MOhm 65 88 90 90 90 90 90 90
Output Voltage @ 33Ohm 2 7 22 51 75 80 80 80

This corresponds to a 90 millivolt output with an approximate source
impedance at most frequencies of about 3 ohms.

There's no way that one can get 60 milliwatts out of an iPod! In fact the
maximum power that one can get out of an iPod can be calculated, and it
would be about 3 milliwatts.

As I pointed out before, I've measured the output of a NJB3, and find it to
be about a volt with a full scale audio signal. Again no way can that be 900
milliwatts.

Finally, for the benefit people who find that the headphone jack of their
portable equipment lacks "oomph", I investigated the Radio Shack part number
330-1109 3-Way Headphone Volume Booster. This device runs off of 2 AA cells
and provides 3 headphone jacks. I ran some measurements on it and find that
it has approximately 6 dB gain, 0.003% THD @ 1 KHz full output,
approximately 90 dB SNR and frequency response 20-20 KHz +0, - 0.3 dB. It
sells for the princely sum of $22.95. Here is its instruction manual
http://support.tandy.com/support_audio/doc65/65451.pdf .

The RS 330-1109 3-Way Headphone Volume Booster's maximum output is around 1
volt, much the same as the NJB3. Therefore when used with a NJB3, it
provides gain, but does not extend the NJB3's actual output voltage
capability. A NJB3 can overdrive it and produce nasty clipped sounds. People
who want more loudness might want to investigate how it works with a larger
power supply voltage.

Based on the information I've found about the iPod, there's no way it could
overdrive the RS 330-1109 3-Way Headphone Volume Booster. Therefore it is
unquestionably a useful tool for iPod owners who are seeking both more gain
and also more loudness.

[Stephen Worth]

In article >, Arny Krueger
> wrote:

> Based on the information I've found about the iPod, there's no way it could
> overdrive the RS 330-1109 3-Way Headphone Volume Booster. Therefore it is
> unquestionably a useful tool for iPod owners who are seeking both more gain
> and also more loudness.

As I've said... my 30 gig iPod works fine with my Sennheiser HD590s.
The normal listening volume is below the peak volume setting, and it
sounds great.

See ya
Steve

--
*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*#*
VIP RECORDS: Professional Transfers of Classic 78 rpm Recordings
The best Jazz you've never heard! 20s Dance Bands - British Swing - Opera
FREE MP3s OF COMPLETE SONGS http://www.vintageip.com/records/

[SST]

Did you go to the various websites and see the specifications for yourself?

Obviously not. I didn't make them up, only reprinted them.




"Arny Krueger" > wrote in message
...
> "SST" > wrote in message
> et
> > better sound out of cheap headphones?
> >
> > who said that?
> >
> > have you always been this confused?
>
> > Oh and I meant mW not Mv - I work too much =)
>
> Noting "SST" that you never admitted that at least some of the numbers
you
> quoted for various devices are sheerest science fiction.
>
> Here's two supposedly authoritation numbers from SST:
>
> "Apple iPod (all models): Maximum Output = 60 mW"
>
> "Nomad Jukebox 3: Maximum Output = 900 mW"
>
> I don't have an iPod, but here's someone who does:
>
> http://members.brabant.chello.nl/~m.heijligers/ipod/measurements.html
>
> He says he tested with an 80% amplitude signal, which is about 2 dB below
> full scale. IOW you can add 25% to his voltages to find the output of an
> iPod with a full scale ( 0 dB) signal. (Voltages are millivolts)
>
> Freq [Hz] 1 3 10 30 100 300 1000
> 10000
> Output Voltage @ 1MOhm 65 88 90 90 90 90 90 90
> Output Voltage @ 33Ohm 2 7 22 51 75 80 80 80
>
> This corresponds to a 90 millivolt output with an approximate source
> impedance at most frequencies of about 3 ohms.
>
> There's no way that one can get 60 milliwatts out of an iPod! In fact the
> maximum power that one can get out of an iPod can be calculated, and it
> would be about 3 milliwatts.
>
> As I pointed out before, I've measured the output of a NJB3, and find it
to
> be about a volt with a full scale audio signal. Again no way can that be
900
> milliwatts.
>
> Finally, for the benefit people who find that the headphone jack of their
> portable equipment lacks "oomph", I investigated the Radio Shack part
number
> 330-1109 3-Way Headphone Volume Booster. This device runs off of 2 AA
cells
> and provides 3 headphone jacks. I ran some measurements on it and find
that
> it has approximately 6 dB gain, 0.003% THD @ 1 KHz full output,
> approximately 90 dB SNR and frequency response 20-20 KHz +0, - 0.3 dB. It
> sells for the princely sum of $22.95. Here is its instruction manual
> http://support.tandy.com/support_audio/doc65/65451.pdf .
>
> The RS 330-1109 3-Way Headphone Volume Booster's maximum output is around
1
> volt, much the same as the NJB3. Therefore when used with a NJB3, it
> provides gain, but does not extend the NJB3's actual output voltage
> capability. A NJB3 can overdrive it and produce nasty clipped sounds.
People
> who want more loudness might want to investigate how it works with a
larger
> power supply voltage.
>
> Based on the information I've found about the iPod, there's no way it
could
> overdrive the RS 330-1109 3-Way Headphone Volume Booster. Therefore it is
> unquestionably a useful tool for iPod owners who are seeking both more
gain
> and also more loudness.
>
>
>
>

[Arny Krueger]

"SST" > wrote in message
et

> Did you go to the various websites and see the specifications for
> yourself?

Yes, in many cases there were no numbers whatsoever. And as I show below,
the numbers provided are incomplete and/or unbelievable.

I cited my sources specifically which you obviously did not do.

> Obviously not. I didn't make them up, only reprinted them.

You didn't cite your sources specifically, so who's to know. However, just
because someone prints a spec doesn't mean its right or even reasonable.
Furthermore, I checked www.nomadworld.com and it provides a completely
different number for the NJB3's power output than you did (see below).

I checked out two of your numbers and found that they are terribly bogus.

The Apple iPod site http://www.apple.com/ipod/specs.html says that the iPod
puts out 30 mW per channel, but as I showed in my previous post, independent
measurements say that's impossible. My source says that the iPod only
delivers out 80 millivolts into a 32 ohm load. It would have to deliver 3/8
of an amp to a load to deliver 30 mW at 80 millivolts. It takes 12 volts to
deliver 3/8 of an amp to a 32 ohm load! Apple's specs appear to violate the
laws of physics given the (independently) measured performance of the iPod.

Coming around from another angle, it takes about a volt of output to deliver
30 milliwatts to a 32 ohm load. Frankly, the iPod should have no
difficulties delivering about a volt of audio from a 3.6 volt Lithium Ion
battery. That's essentially what the NJB3 does, and that's essentially what
the RS 330-1109 3-Way Headphone Volume Booster does with 2 AA Alkaline cells
(2.8 volts). However, it's well known that the iPod has perceptibly lower
output than the NJB3, and the independent measurements posted at
http://members.brabant.chello.nl/~m.heijligers/ipod/measurements.html
support that perception, to say the least.

But look again at the fact that a device delivering a volt can only deliver
about 30 milliwatts to a 32 ohm load. How does that fit with your claim that
the NJB3 delivers 900 milliwatts? It doesn't!

http://www.nomadworld.com/products/jukebox3/specs.asp says that the NJB3
delivers 100 milliwatts, which probably means 50 milliwatts per channel.
They don't say what impedance load, but we already know for sure that this
is impossible with typical 32 ohm headphones. But, at least it's the right
order of magnitude.

Show my numbers to an EE. He'll explain Ohm's law to you.