I’ll tell you why…because when you get speakers in a decent listening position and you actually get some of the proper effects of width, depth and height in the soundstage listening to all the music behind and between your eyeballs just isn’t fun anymore. 
5 Likes
I’m going to get murderlized here…
With HPs the music is in your head, and if you’re lucky it’s one inch or maybe even two inches outside of your head.
With speakers your head is in the music and when you do it right you’re sitting in the space the music was recorded in.
3 Likes
Thanks, that explains why I liked the Mojo with speakers.
Can you explain why you thought the Mojo was probably better with headphones?
5 Likes
I mean, i get what your saying with the in your head stuff? But have you never had your headphones on and there was a sound and you thought it was coming from outside, souch so you look out the windiw? Like a thunder sound or sirens?
6 Likes
@PaisleyUnderground The X had more detail more nuance better separation and like everyone has said, it’s just a hair’s width kind of thing but where they differed most was how they presented spacial queues and room information. And the Evo at least on my chain at that time (things change as you change gea right?) presents the music in a more crescent shape to the listener. L/R channels are closer to you and the center image is further away and that seems to “envelop” you in the music.
The way I listen I tend to be very keen on room size, shape, height. Overall dimentions. For example when a recording hits you with a percussion sound that you know is on the left but there’s a hint of the decay on the right. I pick up a lot of dimentionaily with that.
HPs can’t do that because they are just left and right but in a two channel you get to hear both L&R and something happens in that crossover that simply adds to the dimentionality. Even on a grand HP like the HD800 where they are roomier, you get a sense of space but not in that enveloping way.
Since I don’t get the same experience in a HP rig everything the X did was a benefit on a HP chain, where I felt it couldn’t compete in a 2 CH because the stage presentation was more oval than crescent which suited HPs.
and yeah @Souldriver I get that but the recording has to be the source of that sound, not something the HP does natively.
Maybe that’s why the 3.1 and 3.2 HPs have such a following, because they introduce some of that crossover effect to the listener? I’ve never heard one so I can’t say.
The other thing Mojo’s capture well is the proportionality of the stage and the singer. You never get that twelve foot high stage or the twenty five foot head singing. They are very lifelike in the way the present the scale of the stage and the singer.
5 Likes
Sure, but his point stands, with adequately setup speakers, the image is very much in front of you, often behind the speakers and doesn’t seem constrained by them.
I don’t hear that with headphones even with binaural recordings.
That’s not to say headphones are inferior, they are just different, headphone rarely have crossovers (so they can’t fuck that up), there is no room, and they tend to have much better extension at the top, than any single driver speaker in the speaker world. Before you get into cost.
But I’ll admit, if I had the space, and could practically do it, speakers would be my first choice.
5 Likes
I think you hit on two things here. By space, it doesn’t need to be a large space. You can do a great 2 CH system in a smallish room, but you have to plan accordingly for it and the speakers must be right for the room. So when you say space, it means just a space not a particular sized space. I say this simply to not discourage people.
The practicality however is more important. I’ve got a small room, but it’s mine and it’s used solely for the system and my desk so I’m able to set the room specifically for audio which is of utmost importance in a 2-CH system.
More on the practicality standpoint, I have one seat in the perfect spot. I don’t have to worry about a sofa, a coffee table, a large screen TV, this is simply a small 12x10 room with a 2-CH system in it and 7 separate acoustic panels, really 9 but I’ve got two stacked on top of each other.
Not a practical solution for many and I’ve only got one seat, but then again this is for me. No one else gives a shit about my system. lol
3 Likes
Practicality spans a broad range of issues, honestly I could free up a small room, but in practice I’d often be disturbing my Wife if I actually used the system.
2 Likes
I wonder if “audiophiles” are a higher rate of single/divorced. 
3 Likes
This is very true. Moving between the two this weekend and having “headphones people” listen to speakers and see how weird it sounded to them, sometimes moving closer to the speakers to get more of a HP presentation (and also canceling some of the effects of my untreated room) only strengthened this thought for me.
3 Likes
So pretending to be naive to the other pieces of this, would using a dsp that has a crossover option alleviate this to an extent. I am sure things like how it decays across space and other nuances are really the bigger bulk of this, but would it be something that makes headphoneing more enjoyable to you?
I also wonder if the Evo, being possibly less shielded/quiet/whatever has some channel cross talk and it gives that impression where the X is more isolated. Can it even work that way? I am not sure but just spitballing.
@dB_Cooper have you ever heard the Atrium, it did the stage queues very very well and is one aspect i miss from it. Not that it will convert you or make you purchase one, but it may be an enjoyable listen for you.
1 Like
There is a device, the Smyth Realizer, that does/tries to do this.
I’ve never heard one, but the issue is that every ones HRTF is unique, and approximations to that, can greatly change perception. You get away with it in games because the visual cues improve perception.
There are some recordings, usually small bands in small venues, that sound terrible on headphones, but work really well on speakers. One of my favorites is Sunday at the Village Vanguard with the Bill Evans trio.
It’s actually really very well recorded. But it’s the absolute worst example of sound plastered to the earcups, even some simple crossfeed makes it a much better experience on headphones.
A lot of material is just not mastered for headphones at all.
3 Likes
Actually the EVO is more shielded with aluminum walls and paper rfi and copper sheet between as shielding. Transformers have a sound and I think it’s all due to the power section of the X and the EVO just being different hence they sound different even thought the analog and digital portions are almost identical from a component standpoint and they differ simply in board design.
The whole idea for the X was trying to make the manufacturing and parts list cheaper and he wound up creating a design that was cleaner and had traits people liked.
@Souldriver I enjoy my HPs it’s just that what I listen and when I listed are not a deep or critical listening, I’m just blasting so EDM or deep in funk or some shit like that. Just listening to music.
On a different subject…In testing the Sonore opticalRendu I’ve gone back a couple of times and used the USB and it’s simply flat compared to the AES from the Alpha USB DDC. I just don’t know how those new USB only DACs Ben is selling now are doing. Granted what I’m hearing is a lot of the DDC but still, this is a different DAC in a different league with a recloker and AES.
4 Likes
Well said and, I believe, accurate. I believe the EVO Pro was intended to be basically the best he could do at the time, and it is my understanding the problems continuing with that design were related to sourcing the chassis and the overall construction costs, which led to the “X” (i.e., extruded chassis) version. As to the sonic differences, a couple of analogies might be; in the bass, the comparison between older speakers with a single large woofer (EVO Pro) vs. a more modern design using several smaller woofers in a vertical array (X SE), and in the upper frequencies between a preamp with nice NOS 6922 tubes (EVO Pro) vs. a quite good solid state preamp. My preferences revolve more around tonal qualities and drive, with any thinness being a deal-breaker. Good staging is important but not my primary evaluator. As long as it is mostly believable, with good front to back depth, then I am ok. I did have an early Lampi DAC that I perceived as presenting a somewhat more diffuse, larger than life sort of image that I never came to appreciate.
3 Likes
@dB_Cooper , i will bet cash money that the MOJO X SE if you get a chance to swap it in place of your MOjO EVO will not perform/characterize the same. I listened to your system w/ the EVO in place and listened to multiple systems in my home with the X-SE version and i don’t care what BEN says, there is absolutely a difference between those 2 DAC’s and when he messes with them further the differences get even more exaggerated. I’m betting $$$ your system will sound fatiguing and overly revealing w/ the skinny MOJO. I may be way off and wrong, 
(but i think i’m spot on) have @Camus ship it up to you so you can try it.
3 Likes
Would rather buy @Camus lunch since I still owe him but I know it’s not the best of times so shipping it will be. I will run it up to @Souldriver though unless someone else wants in on the way up.
2 Likes
I feel terrible we have held onto it this long. I can drive it up to you if need be week of August 5th
1 Like
I will bet money he will still like his Evo better.
I would be real interested to hear the fully loaded X and Evo next to each other. I dont know what i would prefer but if it were the evo i would take that as a win and save the money.
1 Like
@Souldriver Just to be clear, it’s because of the speakers he is using, they need taming a bit, same as when i had it on my Charney’s w/ the Lowther drivers. The X was too much of a good thing, it did wonders w/ my other speakers, really brought a vivid character trait and “POP” out, all but those single drivers, it was just too much.
2 Likes
You don’t owe me lunch! Appreciate you understanding, I would drive up your way if I could!
Umm, someone fell madly in love with it 
@Souldriver for what it’s worth in my humble set up there was no preference for using it with speakers over headphones. It was more which system was convenient for the time of day. Felt equally capable in both speaker and headphone use.
As for the speaker type, for sure that plays a role as would other components which is why we often stress synergy.
I have to jot down my impressions so they are somewhat coherent, for now I share one thing I noticed:
I will be the sole contrarian in the feelings towards the bass, compared to my other DACs it was not as present comparatively. To the point I was wanting more mid-bass and sub-bass. This confused the hell out of me given what others have shared so far, who have tried the NC/Z-Chip model. Also compared to my experience with the Mojo X+, off memory that version had bass very much present.
2 Likes