Headphone Amp? It's Uncanny!

[László]

Love those Holy Sh!t moments. My first was with a pair of 1970's version of planar headphones: Koss ESP 6 electrostatics. They didn't need a dedicated headphone amp since they drew power, a lot, directly from the amplifier speaker terminals. There was just so much more detail in the music.

I still have a pair of Stax electrostatics from the '70s! They were the cat's ass of that era.

I ran them from amplifier speaker terminals, too. They sounded wonderful. When I started using powered monitors 20 years ago, I put them I the storage room. I don't even know if they work after 20 years in a box in the basement.

If you have Thunderbolt on your DAW computer you might consider getting what Laszlo and I have, an early Apollo rackmount unit. They were originally Firewire but run Thunderbolt with add-in cards which brings them up to date so that they're supported with the latest UA software (the only feature that's supported on the most recent Apollo x6/8 but not older units is Dolby Atmos processing). The major advantages over the Twin are 8 analog ins/outs, 4 mic preamps, dual headphone amps, cue feeds & Hi-Z inputs and coax SPDIF in & out. The SPDIF works perfectly re-amping thru the Fractal FM9, actually better than re-amping the FM9 thru USB directly to/from the computer. I got mine earlier this year off the Verb for $1k, mint with TB3 card installed and TB cable included.

I think the Apollo Twin is their desktop models now. It's not a rack mount. My son's traveling unit is like this one. Two mic/line inputs, two sets of outputs.

Incidentally, Logic for about a year has had its own version of Dolby Atmos (dolby-approved) and it works fine on any stereo interface using their headphone algorithm, which btw sounds quite good. I think any rack mount 8-output-plus-stereo-monitor-output Apollo will handle 9.1 Atmos via Logic.

Apollo Twin Mk II | Thunderbolt Audio Interface | Universal Audio

Record with the Apollo Twin Mk II for world-class Apollo A/D and D/A conversion, classic analog tones and cutting-edge features. Learn more.

www.uaudio.com

 

[veinbuster]

It’s probably silly, but I kind of want a setup like this just to hear what my acoustics sound like from the front rather than from the top.

 

[László]

It’s probably silly, but I kind of want a setup like this just to hear what my acoustics sound like from the front rather than from the top.

Honestly, I don't think it's silly. There are lots of reasons to get into recording. It also tends to go build on itself, kind of like guitars.

 

[aamefford]

@László , you’d have loved my headphone rig right before I bailed out of lunatic headphone gear. Headfi is the TGP of the hobby, and “Superbestaudiofriends” is the PRS forum of the hobby. Anyway, Sennheiser HD800S, hand built Cavali Liquid Crimson amp with a NOS seimens tube, Schiit Gingnir digital audio converter and a streamer built off of a raspberry Pi with a a custom digital board strapped to it. I sold that, boutght a nice Fuji digital camera and a couple lenses, a fender GTX 100 and a PRS SE CU22, with a little cash left over. I was just middle of the road with top end gear, but still in kinda deep. Nice core or two deep, not wood library deep so to speak.

All of that to say that it does matter, it does make a difference. After a while though, the difference just wasn’t big enough, and I wanted try out a couple of new to me pastimes. Cheers!

 

[László]

@László , you’d have loved my headphone rig right before I bailed out of lunatic headphone gear. Headfi is the TGP of the hobby, and “Superbestaudiofriends” is the PRS forum of the hobby. Anyway, Sennheiser HD800S, hand built Cavali Liquid Crimson amp with a NOS seimens tube, Schiit Gingnir digital audio converter and a streamer built off of a raspberry Pi with a a custom digital board strapped to it. I sold that, boutght a nice Fuji digital camera and a couple lenses, a fender GTX 100 and a PRS SE CU22, with a little cash left over. I was just middle of the road with top end gear, but still in kinda deep. Nice core or two deep, not wood library deep so to speak.

All of that to say that it does matter, it does make a difference. After a while though, the difference just wasn’t big enough, and I wanted try out a couple of new to me pastimes. Cheers!

That sounds interesting and cool, actually.

Given my livelihood being wrapped up in audio production, small detail stuff takes on added significance. When I'm able to hear more detail, the mixes improve.

If it helps with the audio, and I use it on the stuff I do for a living, I figure it's justifying its existence. I can tell right away that this is something I'll use from here on out. I'd be silly not to, as a person mixing and mastering audio.

 

[aamefford]

Check out this forum. It’s home to scientific and intuition and testing and f-it, I can’t prove it but damnit, I can hear it stuff, reviews of stuff and a lot of the same good natured, thick skinned banter that goes on here. I’m under the same username there, though I haven’t been active in over a year. I’ve kinda moved in over here.

Super Best Audio Friends

The evolution of the original irreverent and irrelevant and non-authoritative site for headphone measurements, i.e. frequency response graphs, CSD waterfall plots, subjective gear reviews. Too objective for subjectivists; too subjective for objectivists

www.superbestaudiofriends.org

 

[László]

Check out this forum. It’s home to scientific and intuition and testing and f-it, I can’t prove it but damnit, I can hear it stuff, reviews of stuff and a lot of the same good natured, thick skinned banter that goes on here. I’m under the same username there, though I haven’t been active in over a year. I’ve kinda moved in over here.

Super Best Audio Friends

The evolution of the original irreverent and irrelevant and non-authoritative site for headphone measurements, i.e. frequency response graphs, CSD waterfall plots, subjective gear reviews. Too objective for subjectivists; too subjective for objectivists

www.superbestaudiofriends.org

Thanks!

 

[GGJJGG]

Soooo…. Out of curiosity, can I use that to amplify my Rockman modules to headphones?

 

[dkilpatrick]

Turns out, headphones can perform to their potential with one of these amps. I had no idea what that potential was. It was very exciting to find out!

All headphone outputs on any piece of gear are little amplifiers. What I didn't realize was how compromised they are!

As I said in my initial post, this is my first experience with a dedicated headphone amp. It reminds me of getting my first Neumann mic in 1991. I had no idea what I'd been missing.

Les, does this simply go between the headphone output of the Apollo and the headphones. Or does it require a different signal path?

 

[László]

Soooo…. Out of curiosity, can I use that to amplify my Rockman modules to headphones?

My guess is it depends on the output level of the modules, and their configuration.

I'm not familiar with the Rockman modules, but if they are guitar preamp modules and don't have power amp and speaker emulation, using a headphone amp just to take the preamp signal would probably sound pretty bad, like plugging the modules directly into a console.

Anyway, let's say they have power amp and speaker emulation. Then it's a matter of determining the output level of the modules, which is probably stated in the manual.

This headphone amp has separate -10 dBv (consumer level such as hi-fi) inputs on RCA jacks, and +4 dBu (pro studio level) inputs on XLR jacks. They're fairly common audio standards and most audio gear will be one or the other.

However, guitar gear may be different! That's why you need to check the specs on the output levels of the modules.

You can switch between inputs. by the way, so you could have, say, your studio interface feeding the +4 inputs and the -10 coming from (for example) consumer hi-fi equipment.

Personally, I'd go with a less expensive headphone amp (or no separate amp if the gear has headphone jacks) for guitar equipment. This amp is made either for studio use or for hi fi listening. Guitar gear really doesn't need anything like it. A waste of money for that purpose, IMHO.

 

[László]

Les, does this simply go between the headphone output of the Apollo and the headphones. Or does it require a different signal path?

No, you wouldn't use the headphone outputs. First of all, they're not line level, they're designed to drive headphones from the internal headphone amp.

The purpose of a separate headphone amp is to avoid using the lower quality output of an internal headphone amp.

Therefore it's meant to be fed by line level outputs of the gear feeding it, at either -10 dBv (consumer level) or +4 dBu (pro level). So you would use either the mix outputs in an Apollo, or its line outputs.

I'm feeding mine from outputs 7-8 of my Apollo (you could use any of the outputs), and assigned those outputs to mirror the mix outputs of the Apollo in the Console app, which is very simple.

If you're feeding a mixing console from the Apollo, you would probably use the console's secondary mix outputs or aux sends instead of plugging it into the headphone amp. That way you'd have the outputs for mixing tracks.

 

[Tucson Thump]

The SPL Phonitor One. It's actually an amp (headphones need power, not just preamp signal). They also make a very expensive one that will control monitors, if you want to drop some serious coin. It's supposed to have super-high quality power supply rails (120V), and be the ne plus ultra.

But this one's already quite a step up, and I have a great monitor controller already. So I'm happy as a clam.


For the amp, the SPL Phonitor One, as per above.

My main sets of cans are Audeze LCD-X, planar cans that I'm seeing in more and more mastering suites/mix rooms, and Beyer DT1770s for when I need to use closed back cans (not to be confused with the DT-770s, why do manufacturers use cryptic names?).

You hit the nail squarely on the head with the top mics/top mic preamps analogy.

Yup, I run my headphone amp and mic pres through the Apollo. I like the converters! And you're so right about analog circuitry making a difference. IMHO UA is very good at analog circuits.

I also run the Apollo's main outputs into a high end analog preamp/controller for the monitors that I bought back in 1994; it's a beautiful piece of gear called a Focusrite Red 4 (not the 'Red 4-pre', which is a computer interface, yet another confusing name), made when Rupert Neve was designing and building Focusrite products in the UK (he was a part owner).

It was made to take the output from a big studio's console to add multiple sources that could be selected, for example, a CD player, analog mastering deck, turntable preamp, video machine, etc.

It has inputs for 7 sources in addition to the Apollo. It sounds quite good. While I don't use all of its inputs at the moment, I've needed them in the past. A nice thing to have. I had a Red 7 mic preamp/compressor that was part of the same series. It sounded amazing and I don't know what I was thinking when I sold it.

"You probably had the hots for an amp or guitar, you idiot."

"Yeah. I don't have whatever I sold it to get any more, either." [shrug]

There's a shot of one of the series on this page: https://www.sweetwater.com/store/detail/Red7--focusrite-red-7/reviews

Do you use the Audeze Reveal+ plugin?

 

[László]

Do you use the Audeze Reveal+ plugin?

No. I downloaded a trial. I was a bit disappointed.

If the object is to make mixes 'sound like a record', seems to me I'd want to simulate mixing in rooms that are actually used to make big time records, and not some random home studio or converted office space, even if it's owned by Some Famous Dude on YouTube.

The virtual rooms modeled for Reveal aren't up to the world class facility level of the rooms the Waves products model. Warren Huart's home studio and the others don't approach world class. Yes, a guy like Huart has great ears and has adjusted to the quirks of his space. That's great for him. I don't want to have to do that.

And they want $200 for it. Which, come on.

I've booked and done work in Record Plant, Wisseloord, Right Track NY, Cutters, Plus XXX, etc. I know what a world class room designed by an acoustician like Russ Berger or John Storyk is supposed to sound like.

The Waves rooms are world class, the plugins have excellent audio quality, and for super-creative stuff I use Dear VR Pro. I also use Sonarworks as a 'flat response' double check. Don't underestimate the Waves stuff simply because it's very inexpensive these days. On accurate headphones with a good headphone amp, it's pretty astounding!

I should mention that if I mix on cans - or check a mix I created with my studio monitors - I start without the plugins mentioned above (except Dear VR Pro, which is its own, different, special purpose thing).

I use the virtual room stuff as a reality check, and I go "into" all three rooms to get a feel for how my mix will do in different spaces and different virtual monitors.

This is anecdotal but here goes: At Wisseloord I used the same Quested near field monitors as the modeled ones on the Waves Abbey Road plugin, and, my goodness, it really sounded familiar! I also used to have B&W monitors very similar to the set that are modeled as mid-fields, and, yeah. It's that B&W sound, just in a better room than the one I had mine in. This level of detail truly surprised me.