Qualia 010 = OMG!

[F1GTR]

Originally Posted by luvdunhill

TMI!

[luvdunhill]

Originally Posted by F1GTR

I really need a better job so I can join all the big boys here. I have to make the decision whether to move to Atlanta or Austin in the next 60 days. More money to be made in ATL but Austin suits me so much better. If I want to own an SDS-XLR one day I should probably head east. I'm heading over there this week to check it out and going down to August for the Masters on Saturday and Sunday.

If I can be of any assistance on the Austin end, feel free to contact me.

[purk]

Originally Posted by Dusty Chalk

No. Have you never heard it? Try to find a way at least to hear it first. It's good, and depending on your priorities, perhaps better, but also perhaps not. I know I, for one, prefer the PS-1. I never "got" the Qualia.

Not surprising really b/c the L3000 and PS-1 are very alike. The Qualia is for those who prefer pinpoint imaging and details. I found them to be slightly too cold in tonality and a bit lacking in midrange. If you do have the right fit, the Qualia is pretty tough to beat as I found them to sound much better with a good fit. When I had Mike Qualia for 2 weeks, the Qualia was almost there with my R10s playing SACDs (hint...wamer tone).

[F1GTR]

Originally Posted by luvdunhill

If I can be of any assistance on the Austin end, feel free to contact me.

Thank you! I'll be sending you a PM soon.

[mulveling]

Originally Posted by F1GTR

I really need a better job so I can join all the big boys here. I have to make the decision whether to move to Atlanta or Austin in the next 60 days. More money to be made in ATL but Austin suits me so much better. If I want to own an SDS-XLR one day I should probably head east. I'm heading over there this week to check it out and going down to Augusta for the Masters on Saturday and Sunday.

There may be more money in ATL, but here you will have to fight over good local deals with Purk and me

[Dusty Chalk]

Originally Posted by purk

The Qualia is for those who prefer ...

Yeah, I probably should qualify my statement -- when Juan let me hear his on his system, they did sound pretty damn good. I could definitely hear their strengths, but when I want pinpoint separation (?terminology), I have my HP-2's (although the Qualias would be more comfortable), and then I still have teh rawk.

[hirsch]

Originally Posted by Dusty Chalk

Yeah, I probably should qualify my statement -- when Juan let me hear his on his system, they did sound pretty damn good. I could definitely hear their strengths, but when I want pinpoint separation (?terminology), I have my HP-2's (although the Qualias would be more comfortable), and then I still have teh rawk.

Uh, no. Saying that the HP-2 can do pinpoint imaging like the Qualia is something akin to saying that a Chevette handles like a Corvette. Resolution on any Grado is not anywhere close to the Qualia 010. Pinpoint imaging is where the Qualia lays the smackdown on any electrostatic I've heard also, although the ES1/HE90 is finally getting close enough to make it a contest.

The problem, and one of several reasons that made the Qualia a commercial failure, is that it is a one-person headphone. It's got to be adjusted exactly to the user, and then left alone. If you put a different head in the middle, the odds of it sitting correctly are small. If positioning is even slightly off, you're hearing a distorted version of the sound, not the Qualia itself. Not good in a commercial product.

Add the fragility of the headband to the mix, and you've got a real problem. Sony lost a lot of money on that one. Between finding the fit and breaking headbands, the Qualia I've got is my fourth.

[Dusty Chalk]

I stand by my comments. But will admit they are based on being that "second person" that Hirsch described. (Or rather, on not being the first person.)

And LOL @ "...lays the smackdown..." -- you're using hyperbole again. Too much head-fi and wrestling, methinks.

Also, my comments are based purely on separation -- I don't believe in "headstage" or imaging the way many people on these forums do, except in the case of K1000's.

[hirsch]

Originally Posted by Dusty Chalk

And LOL @ "...lays the smackdown..." -- you're using hyperbole again. Too much head-fi and wrestling, methinks.

Also, my comments are based purely on separation -- I don't believe in "headstage" or imaging the way many people on these forums do, except in the case of K1000's.

Hyperbole? Guilty, but I needed a way to express just how much better the Qualia is in that particular aspect of sound than just about anything else, IME.

I'm curious about your comment about "headstage". I take it as the ability for a headphone to place instruments in a discrete location is space. The space in which those instruments can appear is the "headstage". However, the nature of headphones can sometimes cause discontinuities in the space (the "blob" effect, with concentration of sound at the ears and in the exact center of the head), which is why some people use crossfeed. I've never had issues with the "blob" effect on most high-end gear, which is why I tend to think of the need for crossfeed as a symptom of something else in the system that needs to be fixed.

Biggest "headspace" of any headphone: K-1000, followed by HE90 and Qualia 010. Most precise placement of instruments in that space of any headphone: Qualia 010, followed by HE90 and R10.

[guzziguy]

Originally Posted by hirsch

Hyperbole? Guilty, but I needed a way to express just how much better the Qualia is in that particular aspect of sound than just about anything else, IME.

I'm curious about your comment about "headstage". I take it as the ability for a headphone to place instruments in a discrete location is space. The space in which those instruments can appear is the "headstage". However, the nature of headphones can sometimes cause discontinuities in the space (the "blob" effect, with concentration of sound at the ears and in the exact center of the head), which is why some people use crossfeed. I've never had issues with the "blob" effect on most high-end gear, which is why I tend to think of the need for crossfeed as a symptom of something else in the system that needs to be fixed.

Biggest "headspace" of any headphone: K-1000, followed by HE90 and Qualia 010. Most precise placement of instruments in that space of any headphone: Qualia 010, followed by HE90 and R10.

I took "headspace" to mean that with headphones, unlike live performances and speakers, the soundstage goes from left through your head to right, assuming no blobs. To me, it's almost as if I'm laying just in front of the music group. The sound is left to right and mostly eye (or ear) level and above. With speakers, the sound is left to right and out in front of you, like a live performance.

I do agree with your description that good imaging headphones produce a continuous music stage left to right without any blobs and that too many headphones have blobs.

[Dusty Chalk]

Originally Posted by hirsch

I'm curious about your comment about "headstage".

I take a small amount of umbrage specifically with the term "headstage" because it's a play on the word, "soundstage", which, to me, has a very specific meaning of the abilities of speakers to recreate the space of the original recording. Soundstage is, of course, an illusion, the aural equivalent of stereoscopy. Short of binaural recordings -- which no-one is ever talking about when they're talking about headstage -- this is even more illusory with headphones. It is my humble opinion that most people who hear "headstage" are deluding themselves even more so than usual.*

It's interesting that you talk about placement -- I don't think there's anything wrong with being able to place sound elements anywhere "within" the head -- anywhere between the two driver elements -- that can be done simply with balance. "Headstage" would require either binaural recording or some sort of HRTF (which, again, people usually aren't talking about -- this entire discussion changes if that is indeed part of the discussion).

But that's "placement" -- the ability to place sound elements in the sound field.

Also, that's not "separation" -- the ability to separate sound elements in the sound field, especially those which are close to each other.

But both of these can be accomplished with normal, untreated recordings, whereas to get a soundstage via headphones, one must be listening to a binaural recording, or a regular recording run through a HRTF, or some such.

*Self-delusion is something all of us do all the time to a lesser extent, so I'm not trying to imply that deluding oneself is, in and of itself, bad. The ability to hear a soundstage requires a certain amount of self-delusion, for example -- one must be able to close one's mind's eye to the fact that you aren't actually in the original recording venue.

[hirsch]

Originally Posted by Dusty Chalk

I take a small amount of umbrage specifically with the term "headstage" because it's a play on the word, "soundstage", which, to me, has a very specific meaning of the abilities of speakers to recreate the space of the original recording. Soundstage is, of course, an illusion, the aural equivalent of stereoscopy. Short of binaural recordings -- which no-one is ever talking about when they're talking about headstage -- this is even more illusory with headphones. It is my humble opinion that most people who hear "headstage" are deluding themselves even more so than usual.*

I've never heard a speaker system that was able to recreate the space of an original recordings. Given that much of the music that I listen to is electronic, and is not a "live" (in the sense of real-time, rather than the mortality of the musician) recording, that's probably a good thing. Given some of the places where I've heard concerts that were later released as "live" recordings (I know of at least a dozen, maybe more), I'd say failure to recreate the live event is an even better thing in many cases.

It's interesting that you talk about placement -- I don't think there's anything wrong with being able to place sound elements anywhere "within" the head -- anywhere between the two driver elements -- that can be done simply with balance. "Headstage" would require either binaural recording or some sort of HRTF (which, again, people usually aren't talking about -- this entire discussion changes if that is indeed part of the discussion).

But that's "placement" -- the ability to place sound elements in the sound field.

You say sound field, I say sound stage. You say tomayto, I say tomahto...

In either case, there is an area in which sounds can occur. It should ideally extend beyond the ears. IME a system that simply plays from ear to ear is very limited. In any event, it defines the area in which instruments can appear to be located. Within that space, the instrument can appear to be at a very specific point, or can be diffuse and hard to pin down. When I hear the latter, I fix it.

Also, that's not "separation" -- the ability to separate sound elements in the sound field, especially those which are close to each other.

But both of these can be accomplished with normal, untreated recordings, whereas to get a soundstage via headphones, one must be listening to a binaural recording, or a regular recording run through a HRTF, or some such.

By separation, I think that you're referring to the ability to hear both high and low volumes simultaneously, even if the instruments are near each other in the sound field. Yes...I can live with that, although I fail to see how binaural has anything to do with anything that we're talking about.

*Self-delusion is something all of us do all the time to a lesser extent, so I'm not trying to imply that deluding oneself is, in and of itself, bad. The ability to hear a soundstage requires a certain amount of self-delusion, for example -- one must be able to close one's mind's eye to the fact that you aren't actually in the original recording venue.

Actually, you're using "delusion" in the wrong way, as it implies the possibility of hearing something veridically. We can't, any more than we can see something veridically. We're very familiar with optical illusions. These work because the visual system must simplify input in systemic ways. They are hardwired. There is no way to have an "OIC" moment and see shades of gray in the absence of their context, for example (there are lots of examples of visual illusions on the web). What is less known is that audition works similarly. There is a lot of processing that goes on in the brain prior to hearing a sound.

Here's an interesting experiment. Take a short sound sample (20 sec or so). Cut out a couple of 100 msec gaps per second, leaving the gaps. Take the sound sample, with gaps, and copy it. In the second sample add white noise at the approximate volume of the sample to the gaps. Be sure that the actual audio content is identical, and that the only difference in the samples is the presence of white noise in the gaps. Listen to both and report back. Then check out the work of Daniel Levitin as a good starting point to understanding what just happened.

[Dusty Chalk]

Originally Posted by hirsch

By separation, I think that you're referring to the ability to hear both high and low volumes simultaneously, even if the instruments are near each other in the sound field.

Uh...no. Volume has nothing to do with it.

[Fing]

Apologies for resurrecting an old thread, but I wanted to chime in as an almost satisfied Qualia owner.

I've finally (after almost a year) managed to get a working Supra XLR and balancing these puppies seems to be the way to go imo, since if I had to listen to them single-ended, they'd probably have been flipped by now. Different, impressive, but not worth it.

Balancing them has increased the sense of palpability (dynamism?) as well as fleshing out the overall tone, especially the bass.

The sound just seems to have gotten 'bigger', reflected by the reported experience and mine that placement now doesn't seem quite as crucial to obtaining a good sound.

It's not a completely different headphone by any means. The sound is still a little too fragile sometimes and difficult to like with rock. I had a small period of adjustment where the sound seemed to be too cavernous and tizzy in the treble, but it's probably the adjustment I need to make from the L3000 that I do most of my listening on, as it is bassier than it needs to be. Also playing a selection of tracks had me doubting whether its the headphone or the music as the effect seems to be dependant on the recording.

In fact, I don't think I've ever had a set up where I could discern the quality of a recording so well. The lens into the music is very clear and makes me realise how poor(ly integrated) the vocal miking is, sometimes. For instance, on the first track of Goldfrapp's "Seventh Tree" album, I can hear a faint hissing in the background everytime Alison sings. Also Anna Nalick's vocals sound oddly dead in "Wreck of the Day", as if it has been overly processed. Listening to her acoustic version is a lot better as it sounds more real.

Because of this, it's also not quite as involving as I'm used to. Not huge amounts of foot-tapping as yet.

There are a number of settings on the amp, so I've found that setting it to high voltage output, hard texture and no negative feedback seems to be my preference. These headphones are quite picky.

Does anyone with similar setups have any input tube recommendations? I'm using a pair of 6BK7's that Mikhail likes quite a lot with this amp and I'm finding them to be pretty good. They're supposed to be a fairly 'euphoric' tube but they sound pretty neutral to me.

Also, any recommended balanced cables? I know Dan likes the Black Dragon and Apuresounds v3. I have a Blue Dragon at the moment, which he reckons is the worst. I'm not finding it that mushy, but am prepared to be convinced...

I like music that has refinement, soundstage, detail and a slight euphonic touch - in that order.


Cheers!

[Grand Enigma]

I think www.enigma-audio.com has some fine cables

[Icarium]

Originally Posted by Fing

Apologies for resurrecting an old thread, but I wanted to chime in as an almost satisfied Qualia owner.

I've finally (after almost a year) managed to get a working Supra XLR and balancing these puppies seems to be the way to go imo, since if I had to listen to them single-ended, they'd probably have been flipped by now. Different, impressive, but not worth it.

Balancing them has increased the sense of palpability (dynamism?) as well as fleshing out the overall tone, especially the bass.

The sound just seems to have gotten 'bigger', reflected by the reported experience and mine that placement now doesn't seem quite as crucial to obtaining a good sound.

It's not a completely different headphone by any means. The sound is still a little too fragile sometimes and difficult to like with rock. I had a small period of adjustment where the sound seemed to be too cavernous and tizzy in the treble, but it's probably the adjustment I need to make from the L3000 that I do most of my listening on, as it is bassier than it needs to be. Also playing a selection of tracks had me doubting whether its the headphone or the music as the effect seems to be dependant on the recording.

In fact, I don't think I've ever had a set up where I could discern the quality of a recording so well. The lens into the music is very clear and makes me realise how poor(ly integrated) the vocal miking is, sometimes. For instance, on the first track of Goldfrapp's "Seventh Tree" album, I can hear a faint hissing in the background everytime Alison sings. Also Anna Nalick's vocals sound oddly dead in "Wreck of the Day", as if it has been overly processed. Listening to her acoustic version is a lot better as it sounds more real.

Because of this, it's also not quite as involving as I'm used to. Not huge amounts of foot-tapping as yet.

There are a number of settings on the amp, so I've found that setting it to high voltage output, hard texture and no negative feedback seems to be my preference. These headphones are quite picky.

Does anyone with similar setups have any input tube recommendations? I'm using a pair of 6BK7's that Mikhail likes quite a lot with this amp and I'm finding them to be pretty good. They're supposed to be a fairly 'euphoric' tube but they sound pretty neutral to me.

Also, any recommended balanced cables? I know Dan likes the Black Dragon and Apuresounds v3. I have a Blue Dragon at the moment, which he reckons is the worst. I'm not finding it that mushy, but am prepared to be convinced...

I like music that has refinement, soundstage, detail and a slight euphonic touch - in that order.


Cheers!

I like 2c51s for input and 6bl7 gt/gtas in the output. That was the only complement that I reallyyy liked with the Qualias. They are very solid statey phones. Interesting that you notice such a difference between single ended and balanced with them. I did not notice a huge diff. Me and Craig did some tests at the last meet and he concurred. Of course we both believe that mainly only with hd650s is there a change.

Yeah I usually don't really foot tap with them but its because they mercilessly draw me into the music where I am just in a constant state of awe at the resolution I'm getting. I am so enthralled that I can barely do anything else but listen on edge. It does take me about 15 minutes of listening to really get into the sound though. It's not a relaxing headphone at all. It's brutal.

[hirsch]

The Lemo connectors used in the Qualia 010 can take a maximum of 28 gauge wire, which does limit the options a bit. I wound up using a solid silver cable that I got from Larry at Headphile, and did the termination myself. I had thought that this cable might be too bright (it was brutal on a CD3000 I had heard), but that didn't materialize. It's very clean and fast, but the high end is not out of line. So far, I haven't heard a better cable for the Qualia.

On SDS-XLR, I like Ken-Rad VT-231's on the inputs, and Sylvania VT-231's as outputs. I've tried a lot of other tube combinations, but always find my way back to the 6SN7.

[Icarium]

Yeah I've tried that single ended and I didn't like it very much, but I think we are going for different sorts of sounds.

That combo to me was lush and full but not very resolving with note edges fuzzy... but maybe it's a different story balanced.

[hirsch]

Originally Posted by Icarium

Yeah I've tried that single ended and I didn't like it very much, but I think we are going for different sorts of sounds.

That combo to me was lush and full but not very resolving with note edges fuzzy... but maybe it's a different story balanced.

It surprises me that you found the combo non-resolving. I hear loads of detail (although the Tung Sol round plate is probably the champ in that department). What I miss is "slam". The combo doesn't really have enough punch and definition at the low end. I'm still searching for the right mix that maintains definition but gives me the bottom end I'm looking for. The Tung Sol's get close, but the top end gets congested with those.

[Fing]

Thanks for the recommendations. Unfortunately round-plate Tung Sol's aren't an option, but 2C51's (I have some Bendix 6385's) will be.

I'll have to think a bit more on the cable.

Cheers!