-=Hey Guys=-

I have my 880s and 650s in another room and was wondering if my 701s can be powered by my Woo3, without distortion, if volumes are kept low.

I understand the problems the "3" has with low impedance headphones, but I'm wondering if it's a volume issue, where more power is called for, or it just won't perform at any volume level because the volume control is an attenuator?

Thanks

USG

Replied on head-fi, I hope this is a joke... if not, what the fuck?

Plug K701 into Woo3, dial in desired volume, listen.

Perhaps you need to recable your 701s?

"-=hey guys=-"

Replied on head-fi, I hope this is a joke... if not, what the fuck?

Plug K701 into Woo3, dial in desired volume, listen.

I was really looking for a technical answer.

Grawk once explained why I wasn't going to hear a difference between 16 bit and 24 bit, even though my ears thought I could hear one. Anyone who has listened to Ray's switch box might be able to relate to this on some level. Sometimes it's just hard to tell and sometimes it's just hard to get past your own preconceptions. When that happens, I usually try to find a more technical answer.

Anyway, it was a serious question.

-=USG=-

Perhaps you need to recable your 701s?

"-=hey guys=-"

Do you have -=someone=- in mind to do it?

Do you have -=someone=- in mind to do it?

-=could be=-

-=could be=-

LOL

I've never heard the Woo 3, but since you want technical answers, I guess it doesn't matter too much.

The Woo 3 uses 6AS7/6080 output tubes, which should be able to provide enough current even for the K701. The problem is likely to be the output impedance (maybe somewhere around 100 Ohms?), which is probably too high for the K701.

My guess is that simply turning the volume down won't help too much.

I was really looking for a technical answer.

Grawk once explained why I wasn't going to hear a difference between 16 bit and 24 bit, even though my ears thought I could hear one. Anyone who has listened to Ray's switch box might be able to relate to this on some level. Sometimes it's just hard to tell and sometimes it's just hard to get past your own preconceptions. When that happens, I usually try to find a more technical answer.

Anyway, it was a serious question.

-=USG=-

By having people answer your question before you even try it, don't you think their answers might form some sort of expectation bias?

By having people answer your question before you even try it, don't you think their answers might form some sort of expectation bias?

Hey deepak, how are you doing?

Of course I tried it! I'm a regular T-shirt wearing HeadCaser, so I tried it a lot.....

But trying it a lot does not always give me a definitive answer. I also thought that the 24 bit stuff that Ryan Adams had on the internet sounded better than his 16 bit versions, and to paraphrase grawk, what I heard was nothing more than placebo effect...

So, that's why the question....

What do you think? Can the Woo3 do it at low volumes?

USG

You're not accurately paraphrasing me.

I think there's a lot more in play than the bit depth. Sample rate has a lot more potential to be significant, and it's also possible that there are mastering differences between 44/16 and 96/24 bit versions. Not to mention whatever was done to convert between the two sample rates.

But 16 vs 24 bit is pretty simple. 24 bits is a godsend when recording, and once done, can be effectively translated back down to 16.

You're not accurately paraphrasing me.

I know, but I think the essence of that discussion was that what I was hearing was placebo, no?

USG

I don't remember the discussion in question, but usually I'm pretty clear on the difference probably not being from 24 vs 16 bit, but from other factors.

I don't remember the discussion in question, but usually I'm pretty clear on the difference probably not being from 24 vs 16 bit, but from other factors.

Hi grawk

24 vs 16 is not really an issue for me. At the time, I thought 24 sounded much better than 16, (from the Adams downloads) and you didn't think I could tell the difference, and were probably right, but the point is that I expected the 24 bit to sound better and it did.

Therefore, my qestion.... never mind what I think I hear......

What do you think? At low volumes, 9:00 and under, can the Woo3 do it with 701s without distortion?

I appreciate any info you can provide.

USG

But trying it a lot does not always give me a definitive answer.

Actually, it really does.

This is what is confusing me about your question.

I think USG wants a technical answer to the question

Yeah, he's made that clear. It still doesn't make any sense. He's not saying that there is distortion and asking why... he is asking if there is distortion.

It's like me asking you to prove that I'm floating even though I'm sitting on this comfy couch right now. I just don't get it.

I wish!

Had to google that... a southern american eh? So like everyone else on here?

Had to google that... a southern american eh? So like everyone else on here?

postjack is the only down soufer in this joint.

Actually, it really does.

This is what is confusing me about your question.

Yeah, he's made that clear. It still doesn't make any sense. He's not saying that there is distortion and asking why... he is asking if there is distortion.

It's like me asking you to prove that I'm floating even though I'm sitting on this comfy couch right now. I just don't get it.

Hi J

I'll explain.

When Clark ran his amplifier tests, the golden ears that were assembled were allowed to listen to the various amps and write down their impressions. When they did this, they had definite opinions about about the sound of each amp and could easily describe the differences between them. This all changed when Clark started the ABX testing. Now, the results were nothing more, statistically, than guesses and all the reported differences of sound stage, bottom end, etc. disappeared. If I remember correctly, with all other things being equal, a $219 Pioneer amp was found to sound the same as a $12,000 set of Futterman mono blocks.

This is one reason why I don't completely trust my ears, unless I can quickly A-B back and forth (and even then it's iffy because more than one person has been fooled by Ray's switch box).

So far, one person said that the W3 cannot do it at any volume level because the output impedance is too high.

Do you agree with that assessment?

Eric

The Richard Clark Challenge

David Clark test

Edited September 5, 200817 yr by Upstateguy
to add a link