cheapest amp for 32 ohm headphones?

[Sadaiyappan]

I purchased sennheiser HD 428. They sound alright. What is the cheapest amp I can get for them that will improve sound the most?

428 HD Headphones Specifications:

* Frequency response: 18Hz-22kHz
* Impedance: 32 ohms
* Sound pressure level (SPL): 110 dB
* Ear coupling: Circumaural
* Transducer principle: Dynamic, closed

 

[darkswordsman17]

Just get a CMOY off of eBay. I can't remember who the sellers to look for are, but there's like 2-3 very reputable ones that offer good prices and great quality.

 

[Baked]

nm

 

[Sadaiyappan]

i bought a cmoy before for HD 457.. it did nothing for them. i don't have that cmoy anymore so i can't test it.. what do you think of Fiios E5?

 

[Sadaiyappan]

I'm liking the e5 because it is also usb powered.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Originally posted by: Sadaiyappan
i bought a cmoy before for HD 457.. it did nothing for them. i don't have that cmoy anymore so i can't test it.. what do you think of Fiios E5?

It will be less than a CMOY.

 

[Sadaiyappan]

Yeah, maybe the guy I bought it from didn't do a good job or maybe he set it so it only worked with really high impedence phones. I'm sure the cmoys on ebay now are of better quality, the one I bought was back in 2003.

 

[frostedflakes]

Just out of curiosity, why are you looking at an amp for 32ohms headphones? Seems kind of pointless, even most portable players should be able to drive those without too much trouble.

edit: Also, the reason CMoy probably did nothing for your HD-457s because they're low impedance as well. You don't need to amp high efficiency headphones to get good sound from them.

 

[Sadaiyappan]

I had an experience with my HD 457. I had them plugged into my creative sound card (I forget the exact model of the sound card) on my desktop rig and they sounded amazing. It was very liquidy sound and the bass was very tight. I never got that kind of sound from my ipod. I no longer have that computer so now I am looking for an amp. That experience I had was the best sound I have ever heard on headphones.

 

[Project86]

I concur with others who say an amp won't do much for you. I tried the 428s and didn't care for them. The older 485s that sell for a similar price sound better to me, as do others in that price range like Goldring DR-100 and Equation Audio RP21.

Can you find something else to use them with, like a surround receiver or some other home audio component? Then you will know if it is your ipod's fault or the 428s.

 

[Tiamat]

sound from the headphones can only be as good as the headphones, the source, and then amplification. Your problem is that your source sucks for sound quality compared to what your headphones can achieve. Frankly, I do not think amplification is really the answer. Replace the source first. My bro has an ipod mini and nothing you do can make the sound output sound acceptable.

 

[JAG87]

An amp for 32 ohms? No amp is needed for any headphone less than 150 ohms. All an amp does is increase the voltage of the signal so you get more volume, period. It can only degrade the source signal, NEVER improve it. Hence it's only necessary if the source volume is not adequate.

Anybody that tells you "get an amp it will improve the sound" has obviously very little knowledge. An amp is nothing more than these. The better they are, the less the sound degrades, but there is no scientific way to demonstrate what people call a quality improvement. It's simply increased volume, which equals increased sound pressure, which equals increased dynamic range, which equals placebo effect.

Like many said if you want better quality, this is the order to follow: get a better source > get better headphones > get a better DAC (if source is digital).

 

[Baked]

Originally posted by: JAG87
An amp for 32 ohms? No amp is needed for any headphone less than 150 ohms. All an amp does is increase the voltage of the signal so you get more volume, period. It can only degrade the source signal, NEVER improve it. Hence it's only necessary if the source volume is not adequate.

Anybody that tells you "get an amp it will improve the sound" has obviously very little knowledge. An amp is nothing more than these. The better they are, the less the sound degrades, but there is no scientific way to demonstrate what people call a quality improvement. It's simply increased volume, which equals increased sound pressure, which equals increased dynamic range, which equals placebo effect.

Like many said if you want better quality, this is the order to follow: get a better source > get better headphones > get a better DAC (if source is digital).

Let me guess, you're not a member of head-fi forums, because everything you said is against head-fi's motto.

 

[Sadaiyappan]

OK will this: X-fi sound card

improve sound on my laptop?

 

[hans030390]

Originally posted by: JAG87
An amp for 32 ohms? No amp is needed for any headphone less than 150 ohms. All an amp does is increase the voltage of the signal so you get more volume, period. It can only degrade the source signal, NEVER improve it. Hence it's only necessary if the source volume is not adequate.

Anybody that tells you "get an amp it will improve the sound" has obviously very little knowledge. An amp is nothing more than these. The better they are, the less the sound degrades, but there is no scientific way to demonstrate what people call a quality improvement. It's simply increased volume, which equals increased sound pressure, which equals increased dynamic range, which equals placebo effect.

Like many said if you want better quality, this is the order to follow: get a better source > get better headphones > get a better DAC (if source is digital).

Ok, so with this theory, all car speakers don't need an extra amp. Since basic speakers can easily be powered by the amp in my headunit, I don't need another amp for higher end component speakres, right? Same for my subwoofer? The all have the same resistance. So then why does this NOT WORK?

Some drivers, headphones or not, just need more power regardless of the resistance.

That said, though, I don't think the OP needs an amp in this case. Maybe if he wanted to get the most out of something like the Denon AH-D2000, but these don't need it.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Originally posted by: JAG87
An amp for 32 ohms? No amp is needed for any headphone less than 150 ohms. All an amp does is increase the voltage of the signal so you get more volume, period. It can only degrade the source signal, NEVER improve it. Hence it's only necessary if the source volume is not adequate.

Anybody that tells you "get an amp it will improve the sound" has obviously very little knowledge. An amp is nothing more than these. The better they are, the less the sound degrades, but there is no scientific way to demonstrate what people call a quality improvement. It's simply increased volume, which equals increased sound pressure, which equals increased dynamic range, which equals placebo effect.

Like many said if you want better quality, this is the order to follow: get a better source > get better headphones > get a better DAC (if source is digital).

Amps are built into just about everything with a headphone jack. But since you're probably meaning dedicated amp we'll go with that. Impedance does not tell you if you need an amp or not. By your logic the AKG K1000 shouldn't need a dedicated amp, as they're 120 ohm, but they're notorious for needing speaker amp levels of power to get driven well. Also take for instance the new Denon's. They have boomy, uncontrolled bass when not given decent amplification, and they're only 25 ohms I think.

You say an amp can't improve the signal, and you point out that you can improve the amp, which is what dedicated amps are intended to do. Tell me, what do you think is probably the better amp, the one with its own regulated power supply or the one built into a the chip that procesess audio, serves as both DAC and ADC, and is built into a motherboard? Not only that, but it is possible for the amp to make it more sonically appealing, which is what people are actually looking for.

There are a ton of factors that play into amp quality that you don't touch on (slew rates, bandwidth, etc), and you completely ignore that some headphones need different types of power. Some are more current hungry, and others voltage. Trying to simplify it to impedance is very naive.

All that being said, I personally am not a huge proponent of dedicated amplification (especially when it comes to cheap ones or ones that tend to have significant shortcomings which most portables do), and find DAPs, receivers, and computers get a lot of undeserved trashtalking, but its not like dedicated components don't make any sense. Personally, I recommend spending more and getting better headphones or maybe a better source (although I feel there's plenty of undeserved source trashtalking as well). There's a lot more to this subject, and I don't mean to derail the thread, just wanted to make a counterpoint.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Originally posted by: Sadaiyappan
OK will this: X-fi sound card

improve sound on my laptop?

What laptop do you have? I generally recommend looking into using higher quality files, Foobar2000, and/or ASIO/WASAPI/kernel streaming. Those are most of the time cheap if not free solutions that can give you noticeably better quality.

Although I don't have personal experience, with their track record and the way that device seems to be targeted at, I would say pass on it. You might look into devices like the E-MU 0202 or 0404 USB.

 

[JAG87]

Originally posted by: Baked
Let me guess, you're not a member of head-fi forums, because everything you said is against head-fi's motto.

I am a member, with the same handle as here.
That doesn't mean I spoon feed myself all the bullshit that comes out of that forum. I re-cabled my HD650 because I wanted a long durable braided cable, not because it sounds better.

Originally posted by: Sadaiyappan
OK will this: X-fi sound card

improve sound on my laptop?

Somewhat. It will be better than on board sound, but if you truly want to get immaculate sound, you need a usb DAC, plus a good quality amplifier, depending how much power the line out of the DAC puts out. Try the DAC first, then get an amp if needed. For high volumes, you will most certainly need it.

Originally posted by: hans030390
Ok, so with this theory, all car speakers don't need an extra amp. Since basic speakers can easily be powered by the amp in my headunit, I don't need another amp for higher end component speakres, right? Same for my subwoofer? The all have the same resistance. So then why does this NOT WORK?

Some drivers, headphones or not, just need more power regardless of the resistance.

That said, though, I don't think the OP needs an amp in this case. Maybe if he wanted to get the most out of something like the Denon AH-D2000, but these don't need it.

WTF?
Speakers NEED amplification (unlike headphones). The amp in your head unit is shit. Grabbing the pre-amped signal from the head unit and using a high grade dedicated amplifier will OBVIOUSLY result in better sound. This is a completely different scenario than using a pre-amp signal to drive headphones. A pre cannot be used to drive speakers, so i dunno where you're going with this.

Originally posted by: darkswordsman17
Amps are built into just about everything with a headphone jack. But since you're probably meaning dedicated amp we'll go with that. Impedance does not tell you if you need an amp or not. By your logic the AKG K1000 shouldn't need a dedicated amp, as they're 120 ohm, but they're notorious for needing speaker amp levels of power to get driven well. Also take for instance the new Denon's. They have boomy, uncontrolled bass when not given decent amplification, and they're only 25 ohms I think.

You say an amp can't improve the signal, and you point out that you can improve the amp, which is what dedicated amps are intended to do. Tell me, what do you think is probably the better amp, the one with its own regulated power supply or the one built into a the chip that procesess audio, serves as both DAC and ADC, and is built into a motherboard? Not only that, but it is possible for the amp to make it more sonically appealing, which is what people are actually looking for.

There are a ton of factors that play into amp quality that you don't touch on (slew rates, bandwidth, etc), and you completely ignore that some headphones need different types of power. Some are more current hungry, and others voltage. Trying to simplify it to impedance is very naive.

All that being said, I personally am not a huge proponent of dedicated amplification (especially when it comes to cheap ones or ones that tend to have significant shortcomings which most portables do), and find DAPs, receivers, and computers get a lot of undeserved trashtalking, but its not like dedicated components don't make any sense. Personally, I recommend spending more and getting better headphones or maybe a better source (although I feel there's plenty of undeserved source trashtalking as well). There's a lot more to this subject, and I don't mean to derail the thread, just wanted to make a counterpoint.

Two things determine if you need an AMP. Impedance and Sensitivity.

Sensitivity (or efficiency in dB per watt) is something that is quite standard across headphones, and with the exception of a few such as the K1000s (thanks for bringing it up), it does not vary much. Almost all headphones are well above 90 dB with some reaching 100 dB.

Resistance on the other hand varies a lot between headphones. A headphone with 32 ohms of resistance will sound a lot louder than one with 300 ohms.

Anyways I don't know why we are jumping hoops, an amped signal will ALWAYS be worse than it's pre-amped signal. That was my original point.

 

[hans030390]

Originally posted by: JAG87
Two things determine if you need an AMP. Impedance and Sensitivity.

Sensitivity (or efficiency in dB per watt) is something that is quite standard across headphones, and with the exception of a few such as the K1000s (thanks for bringing it up), it does not vary much. Almost all headphones are well above 90 dB with some reaching 100 dB.

Resistance on the other hand varies a lot between headphones. A headphone with 32 ohms of resistance will sound a lot louder than one with 300 ohms.

Anyways I don't know why we are jumping hoops, an amped signal will ALWAYS be worse than it's pre-amped signal. That was my original point.

Right. Impedance and sensitivity. I left that second part out in my previous post, but what I said still stands. You can have two sets of speakers with the same sensitivity and impedance, yet one might benefit more from an amp than another. On one source, speaker A might sound better than B. Throw in a good amp, and B might sound better than A. Having dealt with car audio, I have personally heard such a difference. Some speakers just open up more with a better source, low impedance, high sensitivity, or not. This is at the same volume, too (not a volume reading on the headunit, but just what my ears hear).

The same applies for headphones.

Also, I'll agree that the sound can only degrade through an amp. Still, it's such a minute difference that it's probably impossible for a human to actually hear (unless the amp sucks). Why, then, does this really matter? The pros of "opening up" a sound source greatly outweighs a bit of extra distortion that is likely unnoticeable.

 

[Sadaiyappan]

I have a Dell Vostro 1500 with Sigmatel HD audio

 

[darkswordsman17]

Originally posted by: JAG87

Originally posted by: Baked
Let me guess, you're not a member of head-fi forums, because everything you said is against head-fi's motto.

I am a member, with the same handle as here.
That doesn't mean I spoon feed myself all the bullshit that comes out of that forum. I re-cabled my HD650 because I wanted a long durable braided cable, not because it sounds better.

Originally posted by: Sadaiyappan
OK will this: X-fi sound card

improve sound on my laptop?

Somewhat. It will be better than on board sound, but if you truly want to get immaculate sound, you need a usb DAC, plus a good quality amplifier, depending how much power the line out of the DAC puts out. Try the DAC first, then get an amp if needed. For high volumes, you will most certainly need it.

Originally posted by: hans030390
Ok, so with this theory, all car speakers don't need an extra amp. Since basic speakers can easily be powered by the amp in my headunit, I don't need another amp for higher end component speakres, right? Same for my subwoofer? The all have the same resistance. So then why does this NOT WORK?

Some drivers, headphones or not, just need more power regardless of the resistance.

That said, though, I don't think the OP needs an amp in this case. Maybe if he wanted to get the most out of something like the Denon AH-D2000, but these don't need it.

WTF?
Speakers NEED amplification (unlike headphones). The amp in your head unit is shit. Grabbing the pre-amped signal from the head unit and using a high grade dedicated amplifier will OBVIOUSLY result in better sound. This is a completely different scenario than using a pre-amp signal to drive headphones. A pre cannot be used to drive speakers, so i dunno where you're going with this.

Originally posted by: darkswordsman17
Amps are built into just about everything with a headphone jack. But since you're probably meaning dedicated amp we'll go with that. Impedance does not tell you if you need an amp or not. By your logic the AKG K1000 shouldn't need a dedicated amp, as they're 120 ohm, but they're notorious for needing speaker amp levels of power to get driven well. Also take for instance the new Denon's. They have boomy, uncontrolled bass when not given decent amplification, and they're only 25 ohms I think.

You say an amp can't improve the signal, and you point out that you can improve the amp, which is what dedicated amps are intended to do. Tell me, what do you think is probably the better amp, the one with its own regulated power supply or the one built into a the chip that procesess audio, serves as both DAC and ADC, and is built into a motherboard? Not only that, but it is possible for the amp to make it more sonically appealing, which is what people are actually looking for.

There are a ton of factors that play into amp quality that you don't touch on (slew rates, bandwidth, etc), and you completely ignore that some headphones need different types of power. Some are more current hungry, and others voltage. Trying to simplify it to impedance is very naive.

All that being said, I personally am not a huge proponent of dedicated amplification (especially when it comes to cheap ones or ones that tend to have significant shortcomings which most portables do), and find DAPs, receivers, and computers get a lot of undeserved trashtalking, but its not like dedicated components don't make any sense. Personally, I recommend spending more and getting better headphones or maybe a better source (although I feel there's plenty of undeserved source trashtalking as well). There's a lot more to this subject, and I don't mean to derail the thread, just wanted to make a counterpoint.

Two things determine if you need an AMP. Impedance and Sensitivity.

Sensitivity (or efficiency in dB per watt) is something that is quite standard across headphones, and with the exception of a few such as the K1000s (thanks for bringing it up), it does not vary much. Almost all headphones are well above 90 dB with some reaching 100 dB.

Resistance on the other hand varies a lot between headphones. A headphone with 32 ohms of resistance will sound a lot louder than one with 300 ohms.

Anyways I don't know why we are jumping hoops, an amped signal will ALWAYS be worse than it's pre-amped signal. That was my original point.

I still have to point out that you're saying its not being amped, but it is, just that is often integrated into a multi-purpose chip or else is a low-end op-amp based circuit. Even in the op-amp situation, not all are created equal, so you would be improving the amplification with a dedicated amp. To what degree possibly being measurable/provable, but it being worth it almost entirely subjective.

I also want to re-iterate that even impedance and sensitivity don't tell you how much a given headphone will benefit from an amp. I think the AKG K701 are fairly high sensitivity and low impedance, but it has the same mantra about needing an amp that the 300-ohm Sennheisers do. Also, amp can be "voiced" for a specific headphone. Look into the Audio-Technica ATH-W5000/HA-5000 combo or the ATH-W1000 and Yamamoto HA-02. You can follow the belief that an amp should be "a wire with gain" but there are very few amps that do not change the sound. By and large this is actually a desired result, as long as it makes it more pleasing to listen to, see tube amps and the fact that they are distorting the sound, but for a lot of people it makes it more enjoyable.

 

[darkswordsman17]

Originally posted by: Sadaiyappan
I have a Dell Vostro 1500 with Sigmatel HD audio

Hmm. What quality are your music files (MP3? what bitrate? etc)? What program do you use for playback? Lastly, is a USB, possibly something that uses its own wall-wart device something you could use?

 

[moonboy403]

The reason why we cannot fully tell how a headphone benefits from an amp with only nominal impedance rating and sensitivity is because not all headphone's impedance behave equally across its frequency response.

Take the HD800(rated at 300 Ohms) for instance, the impedance across roughly 100hz to 200hz is over 600 Ohms.

Take the HD650(rated at 300 Ohms), the impedance across roughly 50hz -70hz is about 470 Ohms.

 

[Sadaiyappan]

I use last.fm or imeem, I notice when I download high quality movies they do sound a little better. I could get a DAC if its not too expensive.

 

[ivan2]

Originally posted by: Sadaiyappan
I use last.fm or imeem, I notice when I download high quality movies they do sound a little better. I could get a DAC if its not too expensive.

dont bother, your source is no good.