• Registered: 2020-04-28
  • Posts: 3

Topic: Babyface Pro FS amp powerful enough for an AKG K-702?

Hi there,

I am posting here this question since I could not find the information anywhere else on the web.

I own a AKG K-702 headphone. I find it very reliable to preview my mixes. This headphone is also well known for being quite unusable without any additional headphones amplifier. Mine is a Presonus HP-4, which is fed by a Roland Quad Capture (2011), my current sound card.

This sound card, despite its satisfying overall sound quality, is indeed unfortunately part of the long list of devices, which don't have amps powerful enough to drive an AKG-702 at its full capacity.

I am wondering if it's also the case for the new Babyface Pro FS... I had an eye on the Babyface Pro (no FS) for a while now, attracted by its specifications and nice features. Then it has been documented that the new FS shares the same headphones amplifier circuitry as the ADI-2 pro. Did I understand well? It would let me think that it can actually drive it (well assuming that the ADI-2 pro can do it of course...). Apart from that, I read somewhere that no USB-powered interface is powerful enough to safely drive this headphone... is the Pro FS an exception?

Even though I am anyway interested, this "feature" would be a game changer for me, as I really want to reduce the circuitry (and possible analog signal degradation) between the sound card output and my ears.

Thanks!

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,880

Re: Babyface Pro FS amp powerful enough for an AKG K-702?

If you look into my updated comparison sheet ( -> https://forum.rme-audio.de/viewtopic.php?id=30592)
or directly into the RME manuals then you can see the difference in max power per channel.

Not only impedance but also efficiency of the drivers in the phone determine the final volume.
Best is to try it out, whether volume is sufficient for you or not.
Tastes / demands for volume are very different.

BBF Pro             : 50 / 70 mW
BBF Pro FS        : 60 / 90 mW
UFX II / +          : 210 mW
BBF Pro FS R BE: 1,5W / 2,9 W (balanced)

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13
  • Registered: 2020-04-28
  • Posts: 3

Re: Babyface Pro FS amp powerful enough for an AKG K-702?

Thanks for your quick and detailed reply!

I noticed indeed that some efforts have been made on the headphones amp (among other things) in this new release, that's clear.

Sure, the best would be to try out... unfortunately I don't have any easy opportunities to do it now... therefore I was hoping that someone in the forum had already experienced that combination.

The impedance of the K-702 is quite low for those type of high-end studio headphones: 62 ohms. That should not be a problem for most interfaces to drive it though, but its low sensitivity makes it more complicated. It's hard to say now (even with detailed figures in mind) whether 60 mW are enough or not (I guess the 90 mW power stands for the low impedance mini-jack output, right?)

So, if anyone has tested it, please say hi! smile

4 Reply by MC

  • MC
  • MC
  • Administrator
  • Offline
  • From: Germany/Thailand
  • Registered: 2007-04-06
  • Posts: 25,440

Re: Babyface Pro FS amp powerful enough for an AKG K-702?

The AKG 702 has medium sensitivity. It should work ok on the big TRS output of the Babyface Pro.

Regards
Matthias Carstens
RME

MC's Website

  • Registered: 2020-04-28
  • Posts: 3

Re: Babyface Pro FS amp powerful enough for an AKG K-702?

Thanks for your feedback. I will then maybe give it a try. Anyway if it happens, I will leave my experience of it here smile

6 Reply by ramses (edited by ramses 2020-04-30 19:11:39)

  • ramses
  • DAW Mastermind
  • Offline
  • From: UTC+1
  • Registered: 2012-10-14
  • Posts: 12,880

Re: Babyface Pro FS amp powerful enough for an AKG K-702?

Thanks for your feedback upfront, wish you the best !

BR Ramses - UFX III, 12Mic, XTC, ADI-2 Pro FS R BE, RayDAT, X10SRi-F, E5-1680v4, Win10Pro22H2, Cub13