Autechre Autechre - Oversteps (WARP210) [The MegaThread]

  On 4/2/2010 at 6:44 AM, extridium said:

  On 4/1/2010 at 10:36 PM, bardamu said:

yeah, the glitchy melody of known(1) is soooooooo beautiful! as are many of the other intersecting melodies. re complexity/simplicity... i think beauty is its own justification

 

that glitchy thingy is certainly beautiful and it's taking away the "midi" feel of this track. I really think it's a great track, but the first time i heard this track, i thought it was some kind of cheapo "general midi" based fuck up. now i can understand it's place on the album. i love it.

 

i also love the end of the track and how it's dissolving into pt2ph8 (also a very nice track)

i don't understand this trend of saying that something has a "midi feel" to it - of course it does, since the vast majority of electronic based music is sequenced with MIDI.

He might be talking about the general MIDI soundset.

  On 4/2/2010 at 1:00 PM, Mesh Gear Fox said:

yeah often total noobz say MIDI to refer to cheap, dated wavetable synths built into soundcards.

yeah, my thoughts too

  On 4/2/2010 at 2:39 PM, oscillik said:

  On 4/2/2010 at 1:00 PM, Mesh Gear Fox said:

yeah often total noobz say MIDI to refer to cheap, dated wavetable synths built into soundcards.

yeah, my thoughts too

lol...no noob over here, but it just sounds like that...it's just a comparison. Nothing else. And i think the "strange" high pitched quark wich arrived after some time

breaks it totally! i think it's brilliant!

  On 4/2/2010 at 12:32 PM, futureimage said:

He might be talking about the general MIDI soundset.

i am indeed referring to the general midi wavetable...and maybe i should not use the word cheapo. but to me, it's just not a great sounding wavetable. that strange sound is totally breaking that "cheap" sound...i love it!!!

sry for the broken english btw

  On 3/31/2010 at 2:13 PM, mcbpete said:

  On 3/29/2010 at 4:52 PM, kelvanE said:

thanks so amplifiers somehow improve sound quality and not just amplify i guess. i'll have to get one.

I've never got this either, are headphone amps like £300 speaker cables, like they're meant to be all fancy pants and make things sound brilliant but just make things louder ?

I know this is OT, but basically it comes down to impedance. If you have a headphone with 32 Ohm - 50 Ohm impedance (most consumer phones or portable phones, and some high-quality stuff like Grados), generally it's going to sound fine out of portable gear or a laptop. It doesn't take much juice to drive those.

However, if you have professional/audiophile 150 Ohm, 200 Ohm, 300 Ohm, 600 Ohm, etc, headphones, they won't really be driven to their full potential out of portable gear. You'd have to crank up the volume level on something like an ipod to get something listenable volume-wise, and even then the sound quality won't necessarily be ideal (muddy, muffled, too much bass, weak bass, whatever).

An amp (coming from a clean line-out on whatever source you have so that you're not reamping from the original headphone jack) basically provides enough juice to drive more picky, pro-quality headphones. It's not about raising the volume, it's about providing enough juice to drive the headphones fully (at lower volume, even). It's basically just providing a high-quality output stage to cleanly drive high-end gear.

So whether amping is beneficial really depends on the headphones. There are other factors that come into play, and the above isn't entirely accurate, but it's close enough to get an idea.

Edit: speaker cables, on the other hand, are snake-oil, pure and simple.

  On 4/2/2010 at 7:11 PM, baph said:

  On 3/31/2010 at 2:13 PM, mcbpete said:

  On 3/29/2010 at 4:52 PM, kelvanE said:

thanks so amplifiers somehow improve sound quality and not just amplify i guess. i'll have to get one.

I've never got this either, are headphone amps like £300 speaker cables, like they're meant to be all fancy pants and make things sound brilliant but just make things louder ?

 

I know this is OT, but basically it comes down to impedance. If you have a headphone with 32 Ohm - 50 Ohm impedance (most consumer phones or portable phones, and some high-quality stuff like Grados), generally it's going to sound fine out of portable gear or a laptop. It doesn't take much juice to drive those.

 

However, if you have professional/audiophile 150 Ohm, 200 Ohm, 300 Ohm, 600 Ohm, etc, headphones, they won't really be driven to their full potential out of portable gear. You'd have to crank up the volume level on something like an ipod to get something listenable volume-wise, and even then the sound quality won't necessarily be ideal (muddy, muffled, too much bass, weak bass, whatever).

 

An amp (coming from a clean line-out on whatever source you have so that you're not reamping from the original headphone jack) basically provides enough juice to drive more picky, pro-quality headphones. It's not about raising the volume, it's about providing enough juice to drive the headphones fully (at lower volume, even). It's basically just providing a high-quality output stage to cleanly drive high-end gear.

 

So whether amping is beneficial really depends on the headphones. There are other factors that come into play, and the above isn't entirely accurate, but it's close enough to get an idea.

 

Edit: speaker cables, on the other hand, are snake-oil, pure and simple.

thanks. my headphones i currently have 32 ohms impedance. the ones i'm looking at (Denon AH-D2000) have 25 ohms impedance. Even the HIGHEST QUALITY Denon headphones --- the Denon AH-D7000 for $999 --- have 25 ohms impedance.

so my question (how long will this off-topic discussion be tolerated?) is: do only some "audiophile" headphones have high impedance??

thanks for your description tho...

  On 4/3/2010 at 1:49 AM, kelvanE said:

  On 4/2/2010 at 7:11 PM, baph said:

  On 3/31/2010 at 2:13 PM, mcbpete said:

  On 3/29/2010 at 4:52 PM, kelvanE said:

thanks so amplifiers somehow improve sound quality and not just amplify i guess. i'll have to get one.

I've never got this either, are headphone amps like £300 speaker cables, like they're meant to be all fancy pants and make things sound brilliant but just make things louder ?

 

I know this is OT, but basically it comes down to impedance. If you have a headphone with 32 Ohm - 50 Ohm impedance (most consumer phones or portable phones, and some high-quality stuff like Grados), generally it's going to sound fine out of portable gear or a laptop. It doesn't take much juice to drive those.

 

However, if you have professional/audiophile 150 Ohm, 200 Ohm, 300 Ohm, 600 Ohm, etc, headphones, they won't really be driven to their full potential out of portable gear. You'd have to crank up the volume level on something like an ipod to get something listenable volume-wise, and even then the sound quality won't necessarily be ideal (muddy, muffled, too much bass, weak bass, whatever).

 

An amp (coming from a clean line-out on whatever source you have so that you're not reamping from the original headphone jack) basically provides enough juice to drive more picky, pro-quality headphones. It's not about raising the volume, it's about providing enough juice to drive the headphones fully (at lower volume, even). It's basically just providing a high-quality output stage to cleanly drive high-end gear.

 

So whether amping is beneficial really depends on the headphones. There are other factors that come into play, and the above isn't entirely accurate, but it's close enough to get an idea.

 

Edit: speaker cables, on the other hand, are snake-oil, pure and simple.

 

thanks. my headphones i currently have 32 ohms impedance. the ones i'm looking at (Denon AH-D2000) have 25 ohms impedance. Even the HIGHEST QUALITY Denon headphones --- the Denon AH-D7000 for $999 --- have 25 ohms impedance.

 

so my question (how long will this off-topic discussion be tolerated?) is: do only some "audiophile" headphones have high impedance??

 

thanks for your description tho...

Yeah, the Denon's are supposedly in a bit of a grey area; they're low-impedance, but also have a lot of driver mass and supposedly benefit a good deal from amping.

So basically, yeah, only some audiophile headphones have high impedance, but there are other issues that factor into "sensitivity" of headphones.

But maybe even more basically: generally, if something's geared to be driven from high quality sources like receivers(back in the old days, these had high-quality headphone outs; over the years this has stopped being the case, which is one of the main reasons the headamp market got started) or studio equipment, they'll need a powerful headphone out, and hence (unless you have some great vintage studio gear) a headphone amp.

If a headphone's geared for portable use, generally it's going to be low impedance and easy to drive from portable sources.

I have a pair of Grado HF2s, which I think definitely count as audiophile phones. They're only 32 ohm, and they sound really great out of an iPod. That said, if I switch to my Apogee Duet (studio gear, but not vintage), they sound a lot better. Part of that is because it's a cleaner source, but they're also driven with a bit more authority because of the better headphone-out stage. It's not a night and day difference with the HF2s, but there's still a non-negligible improvement. That said, because the Grados are easy to drive, I get a lot of enjoyment out of them straight from my ipod.

I also have a pair of 300 Ohm Sennheiser HD650s. I can plug them into the iPod, but to get to a normal listening level, I have to dial the iPod volume way up. It sounds ok, but also really dark and distant. When I plug them into the Duet, they're a lot tighter sounding and much less dark/muddy, and a listenable volume is only a few notches up from 0. I've heard the HD650s once out of a really good dedicated headamp (unlike the Duet) and they sounded better; more balanced, clearer and still less dark.

The HD650s scale a ridiculous amount, but that's their intended function. The Grados and HD595s don't; you can max them out with amplification at a more reasonable price-point (although you can always get a cleaner source). That's their intended function.

I'd imagine the Denons are similar to the Grados and HD595s; they'll benefit noticeably from being driven better, but you won't need to plunk down some ridiculous audiophile-snob cash to get them to sound great.

(Sorry for OT.)

Uh, oversteps.

^ lol

thanks for that detailed description.

I was trying to avoid thinking about how I owe much more in taxes than I have in the bank. It helped.

I also apparently deleted a whole paragraph about HD-595s while making an aborted edit attempt, so the apperance of HD595s later in that fucking essay doesn't make any sense. But you get the idea.

I'm basically going to give my entire life a right now, and go listen to oversteps and inevitably fall asleep during Krylon.

  On 4/3/2010 at 3:13 AM, baph said:

  On 4/3/2010 at 1:49 AM, kelvanE said:

  On 4/2/2010 at 7:11 PM, baph said:

  On 3/31/2010 at 2:13 PM, mcbpete said:

  On 3/29/2010 at 4:52 PM, kelvanE said:

thanks so amplifiers somehow improve sound quality and not just amplify i guess. i'll have to get one.

I've never got this either, are headphone amps like £300 speaker cables, like they're meant to be all fancy pants and make things sound brilliant but just make things louder ?

 

I know this is OT, but basically it comes down to impedance. If you have a headphone with 32 Ohm - 50 Ohm impedance (most consumer phones or portable phones, and some high-quality stuff like Grados), generally it's going to sound fine out of portable gear or a laptop. It doesn't take much juice to drive those.

 

However, if you have professional/audiophile 150 Ohm, 200 Ohm, 300 Ohm, 600 Ohm, etc, headphones, they won't really be driven to their full potential out of portable gear. You'd have to crank up the volume level on something like an ipod to get something listenable volume-wise, and even then the sound quality won't necessarily be ideal (muddy, muffled, too much bass, weak bass, whatever).

 

An amp (coming from a clean line-out on whatever source you have so that you're not reamping from the original headphone jack) basically provides enough juice to drive more picky, pro-quality headphones. It's not about raising the volume, it's about providing enough juice to drive the headphones fully (at lower volume, even). It's basically just providing a high-quality output stage to cleanly drive high-end gear.

 

So whether amping is beneficial really depends on the headphones. There are other factors that come into play, and the above isn't entirely accurate, but it's close enough to get an idea.

 

Edit: speaker cables, on the other hand, are snake-oil, pure and simple.

 

thanks. my headphones i currently have 32 ohms impedance. the ones i'm looking at (Denon AH-D2000) have 25 ohms impedance. Even the HIGHEST QUALITY Denon headphones --- the Denon AH-D7000 for $999 --- have 25 ohms impedance.

 

so my question (how long will this off-topic discussion be tolerated?) is: do only some "audiophile" headphones have high impedance??

 

thanks for your description tho...

 

Yeah, the Denon's are supposedly in a bit of a grey area; they're low-impedance, but also have a lot of driver mass and supposedly benefit a good deal from amping.

 

So basically, yeah, only some audiophile headphones have high impedance, but there are other issues that factor into "sensitivity" of headphones.

 

But maybe even more basically: generally, if something's geared to be driven from high quality sources like receivers(back in the old days, these had high-quality headphone outs; over the years this has stopped being the case, which is one of the main reasons the headamp market got started) or studio equipment, they'll need a powerful headphone out, and hence (unless you have some great vintage studio gear) a headphone amp.

 

If a headphone's geared for portable use, generally it's going to be low impedance and easy to drive from portable sources.

 

I have a pair of Grado HF2s, which I think definitely count as audiophile phones. They're only 32 ohm, and they sound really great out of an iPod. That said, if I switch to my Apogee Duet (studio gear, but not vintage), they sound a lot better. Part of that is because it's a cleaner source, but they're also driven with a bit more authority because of the better headphone-out stage. It's not a night and day difference with the HF2s, but there's still a non-negligible improvement. That said, because the Grados are easy to drive, I get a lot of enjoyment out of them straight from my ipod.

 

I also have a pair of 300 Ohm Sennheiser HD650s. I can plug them into the iPod, but to get to a normal listening level, I have to dial the iPod volume way up. It sounds ok, but also really dark and distant. When I plug them into the Duet, they're a lot tighter sounding and much less dark/muddy, and a listenable volume is only a few notches up from 0. I've heard the HD650s once out of a really good dedicated headamp (unlike the Duet) and they sounded better; more balanced, clearer and still less dark.

 

The HD650s scale a ridiculous amount, but that's their intended function. The Grados and HD595s don't; you can max them out with amplification at a more reasonable price-point (although you can always get a cleaner source). That's their intended function.

 

I'd imagine the Denons are similar to the Grados and HD595s; they'll benefit noticeably from being driven better, but you won't need to plunk down some ridiculous audiophile-snob cash to get them to sound great.

 

(Sorry for OT.)

 

Uh, oversteps.

(woehoe.....oversteps)

  On 3/31/2010 at 5:02 PM, futureimage said:

  On 3/30/2010 at 12:31 AM, AlanMcB said:

Has anyone else not received their copy of oversteps in the post yet from bleep?

I've been waiting for a week since it's release and I'm starting to get worried.

Should I contact them about it or should I be patient?

I'm still waiting for my vinyl boxed set thing. I contacted Bleep and they told me to contact them again tomorrow (Thursday 1st) as it's 14 days after they dispatched the Oversteps packages. You should probably do the same tomorrow. If people are getting them in America, then we should already have them by now...

lol I actually contacted bleep on Thursday but no response yet.

  On 4/3/2010 at 12:48 PM, AlanMcB said:

  On 3/31/2010 at 5:02 PM, futureimage said:

  On 3/30/2010 at 12:31 AM, AlanMcB said:

Has anyone else not received their copy of oversteps in the post yet from bleep?

I've been waiting for a week since it's release and I'm starting to get worried.

Should I contact them about it or should I be patient?

I'm still waiting for my vinyl boxed set thing. I contacted Bleep and they told me to contact them again tomorrow (Thursday 1st) as it's 14 days after they dispatched the Oversteps packages. You should probably do the same tomorrow. If people are getting them in America, then we should already have them by now...

 

lol I actually contacted bleep on Thursday but no response yet.

well yeah, it's bank holiday weekend. usually takes bleep 24 hours to respond, but you won't get a response until Tuesday at the very earliest now

  On 4/3/2010 at 3:44 PM, oscillik said:

  On 4/3/2010 at 12:48 PM, AlanMcB said:

  On 3/31/2010 at 5:02 PM, futureimage said:

  On 3/30/2010 at 12:31 AM, AlanMcB said:

Has anyone else not received their copy of oversteps in the post yet from bleep?

I've been waiting for a week since it's release and I'm starting to get worried.

Should I contact them about it or should I be patient?

I'm still waiting for my vinyl boxed set thing. I contacted Bleep and they told me to contact them again tomorrow (Thursday 1st) as it's 14 days after they dispatched the Oversteps packages. You should probably do the same tomorrow. If people are getting them in America, then we should already have them by now...

lol I actually contacted bleep on Thursday but no response yet.

well yeah, it's bank holiday weekend. usually takes bleep 24 hours to respond, but you won't get a response until Tuesday at the very earliest now

Yeah, I think I managed to contact them minutes before they were set to go home.

  On 4/3/2010 at 3:13 AM, baph said:

  On 4/3/2010 at 1:49 AM, kelvanE said:

  On 4/2/2010 at 7:11 PM, baph said:

  On 3/31/2010 at 2:13 PM, mcbpete said:

  On 3/29/2010 at 4:52 PM, kelvanE said:

thanks so amplifiers somehow improve sound quality and not just amplify i guess. i'll have to get one.

I've never got this either, are headphone amps like £300 speaker cables, like they're meant to be all fancy pants and make things sound brilliant but just make things louder ?

 

I know this is OT, but basically it comes down to impedance. If you have a headphone with 32 Ohm - 50 Ohm impedance (most consumer phones or portable phones, and some high-quality stuff like Grados), generally it's going to sound fine out of portable gear or a laptop. It doesn't take much juice to drive those.

 

 

Edit: speaker cables, on the other hand, are snake-oil, pure and simple.

 

thanks. my headphones i currently have 32 ohms impedance. the ones i'm looking at (Denon AH-D2000) have 25 ohms impedance. Even the HIGHEST QUALITY Denon headphones --- the Denon AH-D7000 for $999 --- have 25 ohms impedance.

 

so my question (how long will this off-topic discussion be tolerated?) is: do only some "audiophile" headphones have high impedance??

 

thanks for your description tho...

 

Yeah, the Denon's are supposedly in a bit of a grey area; they're low-impedance, but also have a lot of driver mass and supposedly benefit a good deal from amping.

 

So basically, yeah, only some audiophile headphones have high impedance, but there are other issues that factor into "sensitivity" of headphones.

 

 

(Sorry for OT.)

 

Uh, oversteps.

I'd recommend an external DAC instead of an amp for improving low-impedance phones. Even my cheap Hot Audio USB DAC greatly improved the clarity and detail for my HD555 vs having them plugged into the laptop's onboard sound. I now have HD650s and an amp, but the DAC + HD555 served me very well for years, and I'd still say that setup is 80% as good as the HD650 + amp, which cost about 5x more.

  On 4/5/2010 at 2:04 AM, Mesh Gear Fox said:

known(1) was an allmusic track pick

For what it's worth, that track has appeared in more than one of my dreams, whereas I don't think anything else from Oversteps has yet made an appearance. I suppose there's something to be said for that, more than the usual praise of stuff that 'it's catchy' or 'it's got a good beat' - the latter of which can usually translate as 'it's unimaginatively rigid and repetitive'.

r ess keeps growing on me. i really want to say that d sho qub // treale // yuop // known(1) is my favorite, but r ess IS A SNEAKY FELLER

d sho qub was an early favorite, but now, it stands as almost my LEAST favorite track. While all the other tracks have 'clicked' on a deeper level for me, this remains a bit cheesy. Can someone enlighten me as to what they love about the qub?

  On 4/7/2010 at 12:00 AM, Marked x 0ne said:

d sho qub was an early favorite, but now, it stands as almost my LEAST favorite track. While all the other tracks have 'clicked' on a deeper level for me, this remains a bit cheesy. Can someone enlighten me as to what they love about the qub?

it sounds like a rave interrupted by a meteor

d-sho qub = depeche mode on acid

  On 4/7/2010 at 12:54 AM, bacteriatastic said:

  On 4/7/2010 at 12:00 AM, Marked x 0ne said:

d sho qub was an early favorite, but now, it stands as almost my LEAST favorite track. While all the other tracks have 'clicked' on a deeper level for me, this remains a bit cheesy. Can someone enlighten me as to what they love about the qub?

 

it sounds like a rave interrupted by a meteor

obviously never heard actual rave music

  On 4/7/2010 at 2:32 AM, oscillik said:

  On 4/7/2010 at 12:54 AM, bacteriatastic said:

  On 4/7/2010 at 12:00 AM, Marked x 0ne said:

d sho qub was an early favorite, but now, it stands as almost my LEAST favorite track. While all the other tracks have 'clicked' on a deeper level for me, this remains a bit cheesy. Can someone enlighten me as to what they love about the qub?

 

it sounds like a rave interrupted by a meteor

obviously never heard actual rave music

oh well

  On 4/7/2010 at 5:27 AM, ieafs said:

  On 4/7/2010 at 2:32 AM, oscillik said:

  On 4/7/2010 at 12:54 AM, bacteriatastic said:

  On 4/7/2010 at 12:00 AM, Marked x 0ne said:

d sho qub was an early favorite, but now, it stands as almost my LEAST favorite track. While all the other tracks have 'clicked' on a deeper level for me, this remains a bit cheesy. Can someone enlighten me as to what they love about the qub?

 

it sounds like a rave interrupted by a meteor

obviously never heard actual rave music

729 posts and all of them somehow... infuriating.

T O N I G H T ! ! ! Autechre Live in "De Melkweg" Amsterdam!!! I AM THERE!!!! :emotawesomepm9: