# Objective 2 vs Matrix M-Stage



## jschristian44

Has anyone reviewed both of these?  What are the comparisons/differences?  I tried searching but can only find reviews for each, I'd like a head to head setup?  Thanks!


----------



## PhaedraCorruption

Bump, I would love to know also.


----------



## chrislangley4253

I had both for a period of time.. we did extensive A/B blind testing, including myself, a fellow audiophile and another person. We were very, very careful with the blind testing... and, as it turns out, we couldn't tell the difference between the two amps whatsoever.
   
  In fact, the blind testing was comparing the O2 coming off just my motherboard vs. the Matrix M-Stage and Gamma 2..
   
  However, both of us felt like we got a bit more detail out of the O2, without blind testing and just A/Bing the two amps and both of us felt like the DAC did make a small deference, once again in detail.. and I was able to consistently pick out the DAC in a second blind test, using only the matrix as the amp. 
   
  This left me feeling like the matrix was either on par, or below the O2.. I kept the O2 and sold off the M-stage.
   
  Take my results how you will. The O2 is a great amp and I have no regrets about selling my M-Stage.
   
   
  I guess I should mention that we used high quality FLAC recordings (Open Your Ears (an album made for headphone testing) from HD Tracks and we used foobar2k with WASAPI as the player.


----------



## jschristian44

Amazing, thank you!


----------



## dogwan

I currently have both.
   
  O2 was built recently, completely stock.
   
  My M-stage has had some mods done by me ncluding...
  -recapped in signal path
  -Replaced resistors in signal path
  -Opamp rolled to LME-somthing or other (I'm at work and can't remember)((plus I've tried other opamps))
   
  I keep the M-stage as my bedside rig. The 2 cans I use the M-stage with are stock HD600's and modded Fostex T50rp's. So far I have really only compared the O2 in that setup using an Ipod with a LOD.
   
  My humble opinion is that the M-stage trumps the O2. For what it's worth I find the O2 too lean and thin. Sure bass is there and I can't fault the highs but the midrange just lacks emotion. No matter how many times I go to the O2, I always end up feeling unsatisfied and go back to the M-stage.
   
  Also for what it's worth I have an AMB Labs Mini^3 (stock high performance build) and I also find it far more satisfying than the O2. This comparison was done with all my more portable cans (see profile for inventory list)
   
  I really wanted to like the O2. And have really tried to stay out of the debates on its merits, but have to admit that it just doesn't do it for me. This is the 1st post that I've written my general opinion on it. If I wasn't at work I might expand a little more but don't have the time.
   
  -Dogwan


----------



## jschristian44

That's funny.  Two good reviews going from liking each amp.  My friend Kouzelna said he likes the O2 better, but they can't drive his k702 as well as he'd like.  I really want to try out the M-Stage now.  But for now the O2 is a really nice amp for the money hands down.  But after reading the guy before this post said he likes the Mini 3 better than the O2, I just can't buy into that.  I don't know which post to believe but I really like the O2 and so do 2 other people.  Some day I will compare them both myself, I am sure they both do great.  I am adding a bass boost option to my O2, so that should bring out the bass a little nicer.


----------



## deviusdragger

How can a bass boost option be added to the O2 jsc44?


----------



## estreeter

I can 100% see where dogwan is coming from, and I don't see either amp as the solution for people who want an amp to drive hungry cans, esp when one of the M-Stage's biggest fans (and a reseller) actively points Head-Fiers elsewhere when they are looking for a powerful amp to drive cans like the 70*.


----------



## dogwan

Quote: 





estreeter said:


> I can 100% see where dogwan is coming from, and I don't see either amp as the solution for people who want an amp to drive hungry cans, esp when one of the M-Stage's biggest fans (and a reseller) actively points Head-Fiers elsewhere when they are looking for a powerful amp to drive cans like the 70*.


 

 Thanks for the backup. However, I do have to say that I find the Matrix and O2 both drive the Fostex's well. I just prefer the sound of the Matrix. (unless you were referring the Mini^3 which is not quite up to it).
   
  Caveat: I don't have any extended experience with better amps...yet. I do have a tube based ASL-MG head OTL amp that works very well with my Senn's and Beyers, but not so well with the Fostex or AKG's.


----------



## francisdemarte

My setup is like chrislangley4253's I also have the same source, the AMB Gamma2.
   
  I have the O2 in bone stock build and a self built Lovely Cube (which is also another Lehmann BCL clone like the M-Stage)
   
  Stock for stock the M-Stage/LC is a bit warmer. When I swap the O2's opamp into the LC they sound nearly identical to me.
   
  Personally, I prefer the LC a over the O2. It's a nicer desktop size and more tinker friendly. I feel it has a little more oomph, but this maybe due to the fact I'm using a slight larger transformer than the stock M-Stage.
   
  The O2 is awesome for the price, and it's ability to operate over battery power is a nice plus.
   
  I think it really it boils down to the ergonomics, do you like a large desktop amp or a smaller one.


----------



## jschristian44

At DiyAudio a guy is helping me do it.  Once I get it completed, I will do a write up on it here.  This was something I found out after I made yours, sorry .
  
  Quote: 





deviusdragger said:


> How can a bass boost option be added to the O2 jsc44?


----------



## deviusdragger

I did see it on diyaudio. Maybe I can replace that empty charging hole with a bass boost button


----------



## jschristian44

Good idea, I am replacing that hole with a 1/4" headphone input.  I am placing my bass boost probably on the side if I can't fit it anywhere else.  Above the source input it might fit the guy said, I will have to see once all the parts come in.


----------



## MikeW

if you prefer Mini3 over O2, you must like the sound of distortion, non-flat frequency response/coloration, and poor crosstalk.. hey it's a "free" crossfeed. lol, i own both the O2 and Mini3, they are not even comparable, the O2 beats it so bad. I actually built both of them. The mini3 cost me more too.


----------



## dogwan

Quote: 





mikew said:


> if you prefer Mini3 over O2, you must like the sound of distortion, non-flat frequency response/coloration, and poor crosstalk.. hey it's a "free" crossfeed. lol, i own both the O2 and Mini3, they are not even comparable, the O2 beats it so bad. I actually built both of them. The mini3 cost me more too.


 

I guess I must. No arguing with logic like that.
   
  Edit: I thought about this post again this morning and realized why I found it slightly offensive. Taking an opinion and turning it into an "either/or" when it really is a matter of "degrees of" does a disservice to people trying to gather opinions.
   
  Sure the Mini3 may have some of the above mentioned qualities. It may even look worse on a scope. But it is not a bad amp for portable use (in my opinion). And I never said the O2 was a bad amp. It's actually quite good especially for the money. What I was trying to illustrate is that I do find the O2 too sterile sounding to enjoy for long periods of time. Does that mean I enjoy distortion? Not necessarily, it may just be that a hint of distortion adds a little life to the amp. If I may offer the analogy of tube vs. SS. Most tube gear can be found to have measurable distortion far and above SS gear. But lots of people enjoy the sound of tube more than SS. If you look at only the measurements then you might reach the conclusion that tubes are bad and people that like them like distortion. The reality of the situation is that tubes distort at different levels of harmonics than SS (odd vs. even). That makes them a lot more enjoyable for some people to listen to.
   
  Or maybe it's all due to the fact that I'm a vinyl lover and the O2 combined with digital music either on the go or as a bedside amp is just too much sterility for these aging ears (analog has been in my life longer than digital).
   
  Back to the OP's question; my vote is for the Matrix over the O2. That being said, they both have their merits.
   
  -Dogwan


----------



## deviusdragger

Audio is just such a general area to audition, especially with such a broad range of ears. I just received my O2 amp and tried it out today with my hd650's and my god do they sound beautiful. Not that my zo2 couldnt push them, but i just wanted something for the desk to use, and this for sure will be used for that. Slow cheetah or wet sand by the red hot chili peppers sounded beautiful!!! like i was there in the recording studio with them.


----------



## francisdemarte

The "sound of distortion, non-flat frequency response/coloration, and poor crosstalk" are just not audible to many of us, just to test equipment.
   
  Dogwan is simply using his ears and equipment to form an opinion instead of staring at a datasheet.
   
  Not saying that the Mini3 is perfect, just that there's no crime in liking the sound of one piece of equipment over another, just preference.


----------



## MikeW

> The "sound of distortion, non-flat frequency response/coloration, and poor crosstalk" are just not audible to many of us, just to test equipment.


 
   
  Obviously, they are audible. Because that's what your hearing when comparing the Mini3 to the O2. 
   
  Literally, you are hearing distortion. If you like that, then cool, it's all subjective, but do understand what your hearing. 
   
  As far as "tube distortion" vs "Solid state distortion".. 
   
  well, the 02 has completely inaudible amounts of distortion, therefore is "distortion free" be it 3rd harmonic or any other. 
   
  The tubes on the other hand, have audible distortion. So again, your enjoying the distortion. That's ok, but don't kid yourself. 
   
  The 02 is basically a perfect wire with gain. It is the "benchmark" of what wire with gain should be. Anything that sounds different is distortion. Period. See the o2 thread were people compare it to the B22, and GS-1 favorably. 
   
  If your source is lacking, the 02 certainly will not do you any favors. It will all come though. 
  Fact is, most of us are brainwashed by years of distortion and purposly funky frequency response.


----------



## dogwan

Quote: 





mikew said:


> Obviously, they are audible. Because that's what your hearing when comparing the Mini3 to the O2.
> 
> Literally, you are hearing distortion. If you like that, then cool, it's all subjective, but do understand what your hearing.
> 
> ...


 

 You know, this is exactly why I've stayed out of the fray over the O2.
   
  I noticed, even before I built one, the propensity of O2 fans to take self-righteous stands against anyone who dares to express that they don't really care for the amp. Whatever the reasons.
   
  I now offer up my closing statement:
  I like vinyl with all its clicks and pops. I like tubes with all their mushy warmth, and I like some of my gear that is known to have some distortion or other artifacts. I like what I like.  I don't like the O2 as much I like the M-stage.
  Out of respect for the designer and his theories I've decided to not tinker with my O2 like I usually do with other gear. I plan on keeping it and using it as is because it does have its place. Take my opinion for what it is, an opinion.
   
  Hopefully I've done the OP the service of responding to his request for an opinion. I think I did a pretty good job of expressing my preference as just my opinion and avoided making definitive statements.
   
  -Dogwan


----------



## francisdemarte

Agreed. I am a huge fan of the O2 for what it is but I don't just understand the fanatical nature of some of the owners and the joy they like to take at bashing other people's opinions. Going to leave it as it is as there are more than enough threads that have went down the drain with this religious war.
   
  Bottom line, the OP is fine with either amp as long has you don't have some extremely demanding headphones such as an HE-6.


----------



## Satellite_6

Oh, but your guys' opinions are so darn amusing. 
   
  I'll compare the ODA to the M-Stage when it's ready. . .


----------



## MikeW

I can see the M-stage being competitive with the O2. But not the mini3.
   
  I've never heard an M-stage so I can't offer a comparison subjective or otherwise. I know the 02 is better then the Mini3, and better then my 500$ /w 300$ worth of accessories EF5. Which will find itself for sale pretty soon. I've also owned a Headroom Hybrid, and Headroom Micro, Jds Cmoy. It's also better then any of those.


----------



## donunus

Quote: 





francisdemarte said:


> Agreed. I am a huge fan of the O2 for what it is but I don't just understand the fanatical nature of some of the owners and the joy they like to take at bashing other people's opinions. Going to leave it as it is as there are more than enough threads that have went down the drain with this religious war.
> 
> Bottom line, the OP is fine with either amp as long has you don't have some extremely demanding headphones such as an HE-6.


 

 This fanatical stuff is due to the owners buying into the hype and feeling that the o2 is what neutral should sound like even though some of them haven't even tried the highest end audiophile amps aimed towards neutrality. As for me, I am also very intrigued at the thought that they are supposedly a wire with gain amp but can't really believe it 100% yet since there are people that have heard a lot of better stuff that say that the O2 is nothing special.


----------



## ClieOS

donunus said:


> This fanatical stuff is due to the owners buying into the hype and feeling that the o2 is what neutral should sound like even though some of them haven't even tried the highest end audiophile amps aimed towards neutrality. As for me, I am also very intrigued at the thought that they are supposedly a wire with gain amp but can't really believe it 100% yet since there are people that have heard a lot of better stuff that say that the O2 is nothing special.




I have heard (and owned a few) portable amps that re more expensive than O2. I won't say O2 is the be-all-end-all of all portable amp, but it is a great sounding amp of its price and compared really well with amp that easiest cost twice its price (assuming a pre-built O2 of around $150). It is a really good sounding amp , though more of a transportable than it is portable. Regardless, it is not a hype for me.


----------



## bellsprout

it's completely true that the "fanatical" O2 supporters will perceive the O2 to be neutral even if it isn't. it's also true in the same way that people who spend $2k on a reference amp will perceive it to be more neutral than a $150 amp, even if it isn't.
   
  at the end of the day, if I had to believe something, I'd rather believe measurements.
   
  and there's still the blind O2 challenge out there
  Quote: 





donunus said:


> This fanatical stuff is due to the owners buying into the hype and feeling that the o2 is what neutral should sound like even though some of them haven't even tried the highest end audiophile amps aimed towards neutrality. As for me, I am also very intrigued at the thought that they are supposedly a wire with gain amp but can't really believe it 100% yet since there are people that have heard a lot of better stuff that say that the O2 is nothing special.


----------



## MikeW

Quote: 





> This fanatical stuff is due to the owners buying into the hype and feeling that the o2 is what neutral should sound like even though some of them haven't even tried the highest end audiophile amps aimed towards neutrality. As for me, I am also very intrigued at the thought that they are supposedly a wire with gain amp but can't really believe it 100% yet since there are people that have heard a lot of better stuff that say that the O2 is nothing special.


 
   
   
  yeah, then there are the people who a/b vs GS-1, and Vioelectric HPA-200 and say there's no significant difference. There's an HPA-200 for sale right now in the f/s forum because the owner did not see the value in comparison. There will be an EF5 there soon, for the same reason.
   
  For someone to even take the time to compare an 85$ amp vs a 1000$ amp, sounds pretty damn special to me. I've been around for awhile, i dident just sign up yesterday. I've heard a few things, my Headroom Hybrid was ~1050$ with the desktop power supply and stepped attenuator upgrades. the o2 is better then it ever was. Im actually a little disapointed, I was hoping the O2 would not be as good as it is. Because, as a hobby, were the heck am i supposed to go from here? I love building amps and tinkering.. but the o2 is pretty much the end of the line. Regardless of rather I want to believe that or not. Numbers don't lie, it is what it is. get over it
   
  As much as I enjoy this hobby, im not an idiot, i can't ignore the hard facts. Guess i could bury my head in the sand.. but i've never really been that type. If you don't like the o2, then you don't like your source, because all the o2 is, is your source with gain.


----------



## mikeaj

Quote: 





bellsprout said:


> it's completely true that the "fanatical" O2 supporters will perceive the O2 to be neutral even if it isn't. it's also true in the same way that people who spend $2k on a reference amp will perceive it to be more neutral than a $150 amp, even if it isn't.
> 
> at the end of the day, if I had to believe something, I'd rather believe measurements.
> 
> and there's still the blind O2 challenge out there


 

  That's pretty much what I would say, except instead of saying that I'd "rather believe measurements," I'd say that I find non-level matched, non-blind comparisons of audio gear (almost all of head-fi listening impressions unfortunately) very difficult to take at face value. At least, if set up properly, the scope and audio analyzer will give you valid data, with which you can draw your own hopefully valid conclusions. Sometimes people draw the wrong conclusions from good data, and sometimes people draw logical conclusions from what's actually bad data; in both cases we end up with bad conclusions.
   
  I don't particularly have an agenda to push with regards to one amp or another.  There are plenty of valid reasons to like one amp over another in my books, and not everybody wants textbook straight-pipe presentations.  I don't either, since I like EQ and crossfeed sometimes (but IMHO alterations at the hardware level are clunkier, more expensive, and less flexible than those at the software level).  It would just be better if more people could see the reality for themselves, whatever it may be, so we can keep the facts straight.  A more-informed consumer base demands better products from manufacturers.


----------



## donunus

Quote: 





mikew said:


> As much as I enjoy this hobby, im not an idiot, i can't ignore the hard facts. Guess i could bury my head in the sand.. but i've never really been that type. If you don't like the o2, then you don't like your source, because all the o2 is, is your source with gain.


 


  I guess I really have to try one now


----------



## francisdemarte

Quote: 





mikew said:


> yeah, then there are the people who a/b vs GS-1, and Vioelectric HPA-200 and say there's no significant difference. There's an HPA-200 for sale right now in the f/s forum because the owner did not see the value in comparison. There will be an EF5 there soon, for the same reason.


 

  
  I also own the EF5 amp. It can have a very colored sound depending on the tube your using, the romantic sound is exactly the reasons why I like it.
  It will also power some more demanding headphones.I keep seeing it in the FS section for around the same price as the M-Stage.
  Just something else the OP can consider.
   
  Heck, maybe MikeW will give you a good deal


----------



## dogwan

Quote: 





mikew said:


> If you don't like the o2, then you don't like your source, because all the o2 is, is your source with gain.


 

 Oh I see, I need to double or even triple my budget for source gear to really appreciate the O2. Maybe I need to take as much out of the signal path as possible, wait while I try plugging my TT straight into the O2.
   
  Ok, sorry for the snarkiness. I know I said my last post was my closing statement. But I'm weak and couldn't resist the bait.
   
  Seriously Mike, I re-read this entire thread and not one person said they "don't like the O2". The closest comment was from me, and I said "I don't like the O2 *as much as the Matrix*".
   
  * As an side note: the "wire with gain" debate has been going on longer than the O2 has been around. See the Passive vs. Active pre-amp arena. Many have gone the passive route and enjoyed the experience. And many others have tried it and gone back to actives. Sometimes just the knowledge of the straight line connection from source to amp contributed to their enjoyment whether or not they actually thought it sounded better. I'm just saying.....


----------



## estreeter

@dogwan, I think *you* came closest to saying you dont like the O2  
   
_My humble opinion is that the M-stage trumps the O2. For what it's worth I find the O2 too lean and thin. Sure bass is there and I can't fault the highs but the midrange just lacks emotion. No matter how many times I go to the O2, I always end up feeling unsatisfied and go back to the M-stage._
   
  It's interesting how closely your impressions mirror many of the impressions I have read of amps like the GS-1 - that the amp was unfailingly accurate to source yet somehow lacking. The objectivists loathe our subjectivist ways, but at the end of the day its all about the individual experience, and I understand where you are coming from. I'm persevering with my own O2, simply because its presentation suits some of my music, not because of the hype or pressure from various fanboy elements to like the thing because its 'cool'. The fanboys will soon move on to the 'next big thing', be it 'The Wire' or a more commercial offering, and suddenly the O2 wont cut the mustard for them - you and I have both seen that pattern repeated here _ad nauseam_.  There impressions will begin with 'the O2 was good, _but_ .........'


----------



## dogwan

Quote: 





estreeter said:


> @dogwan, I think *you* came closest to saying you dont like the O2


 
  You're right and I acknowledged that in my last post.
   
  Again, I never said I don't like the O2 at all. All I ever said is that I enjoyed other amps more.
   
  -Dogwan


----------



## MikeW

Like I said, I think the M-stage probably compares well to the O2. It's the Mini3 comment that really bugged me. 
   
  I suppose, i can admit, that with the right pair of headphones, someone might prefer the sound of a mini3. but it runs into limitations pretty quick, and is not nearly as capable as the o2. I don't think it's even half as powerful, by the numbers. (to be fair, it's also half the size, and I do still use mine for mobile use)
   
  As far as he EF5 is concerned, it is indeed a coloured, romantic amp. It's also incredibly lacking in detail, blackness, and dynamics in direct comparison to the O2. This is with the best tubes and op-amps. (Tung-Sol, black Gla$$, and LME94440) I can hear things on the O2 that are simply not there on EF5. 
   
  As far as drive.. according to NwAvGuy, the HE6 is at the "edge" of O2's capability. ie, it's quite capable.


----------



## Anaxilus

Quote: 





mikew said:


> Obviously, they are audible. Because that's what your hearing when comparing the Mini3 to the O2.
> 
> Literally, you are hearing distortion. If you like that, then cool, it's all subjective, but do understand what your hearing.
> 
> ...


 
  This is a gross exaggeration.  The Eddie Current BA and my Leckerton UHA6S are both more transparent and resolving than the O2 audibly.  According to your premise it's impossible to have tubes extract more detail and sound more 'wire with gain' than the O2 or other SS amps.  But there it is.  More detail and resolution from more distortion?!?  
	

	
	
		
		

		
			





  In most cases I'd agree, but you are painting a universal truth here.


----------



## Anaxilus

Quote: 





mikew said:


> yeah, then there are the people who a/b vs GS-1, and Vioelectric HPA-200 and say there's no significant difference. There's an HPA-200 for sale right now in the f/s forum because the owner did not see the value in comparison.


 

 I blame the T1 in that case.  I didn't want to say anything in the thread bashing a $1000 phone but the truth is the T1 simply can't resolve better sources.  Both mine and other ears support this as well as measurements.  Not to say the HPA200 is actually better, I haven't heard it w/ the HD800 and sources I know, just one time w/ a poorly modded (closed) LCD2 r.1 that left no favorable impression for obvious reasons.  In his case, it makes sense to stick w/ the O2 but that does not mean it equals the performance of the best amps out there.  IME it doesn't but it's great for the pricepoint and many more expensive amps should be ashamed.


----------



## MacedonianHero

Quote: 





anaxilus said:


> I blame the T1 in that case.  I didn't want to say anything in the thread bashing a $1000 phone but the truth is the T1 simply can't resolve better sources.  Both mine and other ears support this as well as measurements.  Not to say the HPA200 is actually better, I haven't heard it w/ the HD800 and sources I know, just one time w/ a poorly modded (closed) LCD2 r.1 that left no favorable impression for obvious reasons.  In his case, it makes sense to stick w/ the O2 but that does not mean it equals the performance of the best amps out there.  IME it doesn't but it's great for the pricepoint and many more expensive amps should be ashamed.


 
   
  I have both the T1s and HD800s right here (and for more than 2 years actually) and both are fantastic for resolving upstream gear. I think you might confusing the finickiness of the HD800s and requiring a proper upfront synergistic rig for gear resolution. That said, I would slightly rank the HD800s ahead of the T1s in that regard.


----------



## Naim.F.C

GS-1 is wire to gain style of amp design right? I'm assuming then it will sound very much like an O2. Well if that is the case, the people comparing with the V200 probably haven't done much comparing. I admit, differences are subtle (as they are even among higher priced gear despite what others say). But as someone who's compared these two meticulously, I'm confident in not only saying there are differences, but actually specifying what those differences exactly are (to my ears). I also find that the only way to really compare is consistent A/B testing not just on entire tracks, but actual short segments of them. For example, I tend to A/B different 10 second segments of tracks multiple times. This way all sounds are better remembered for direct comparison.
   
  I'll give just two examples. Jamie Woon - Lady Luck, there's a segment with the main chorus where there is a faint male backing vocal somewhere in the distance on the left. It is quite thick and husky, very distant and almost missable. On the V200 this shows up with greater emphasis and weight than with the O2. Like wise, on a track Stateless Matilda - Bonus Track, the little pinches of the guitar in the far distance are ever so slightly more noticeable with the O2. Simply put, better resolution and detail is most probably near impossible if there is no audible noise. If however you mix and match frequencies for musicality or colour then you have to take infractions to other parts of the sound. The V200 loses a marginal amount of high end detail in place of sub bass extension and upper mid push. That upper mid push can however give the illusion of more detail as certain sounds still jump out more. It's an amazingly musical and natural sound, whereas the O2's is more neutral but flat and maybe not always as fun.
   
  The best thing about the V200 is it's balance. It adds the slightest hint of colour with absolute minimal affliction and impairment to the rest of the sound sig, and in this sense it's an ingenious design.
   
   
  For me, both the T1 and more so the HD800, have vocals that are a touch too peaky or high pitched, the LCD-2's a bit too thick and weighty. Imo the T1's hit the best balance with male vocals, and the LCD-2's with female vocals, but paired with the V200 you get just enough weight added on to the T1's vocals, to find that golden balance. Not with all tracks and recordings mind, but most.
   
   
  Also lol at the T1 not being able to resolve better details. As someone who's spent a decent amount of time with the main three top tier (non stratospheric tier) headphones, and owning two of them, I have to completely disagree. I do agree that at times the HD800 can resolve more details, but a (largely artificially) large soundstage will do that. Talking about negative afflictions, imo the HD800's is that vocals don't sound as realistic or sweet as the T1's, or have the weight or thickness of the LCD-2's. There's always a trade off somewhere or another. Either that or specific genre benefits, the HD800's being classical and orchestral. 
   
  Also Anaxilus, have you directly A/B'd the O2 with the Eddie Current BA and Leckerton UHA6S?


----------



## Anaxilus

Quote: 





macedonianhero said:


> I have both the T1s and HD800s right here (and for more than 2 years actually) and both are fantastic for resolving upstream gear. I think you might confusing the finickiness of the HD800s and requiring a proper upfront synergistic rig for gear resolution. That said, I would slightly rank the HD800s ahead of the T1s in that regard.


 

 I don't see how when the T1 sounds the same on every rig and never match the HD800 that the HD800 is the one being finnicky.  Plus not one measurement of a T1 comes anywhere close to the HD800 or most true ToTL phones.  I wouldn't call it slight either.  Is the WA22 you're most transparent tube amp?  I've only heard the WA5 and I think Woo rates the 5 higher in this regard (transparency)?
   
  It could very well be I have never heard, tested or seen the numbers on a solid, proper T1 though we've been through 2 of them and so has Tyll.
   
  Our tests:
   
http://www.head-fi.org/t/583950/shure-srh1840-and-srh1440-unveiled/870#post_8109530
   
  Tyll's:
   
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SennheiserHD800.pdf
   
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/BeyerdynamicDT880600ohm.pdf
   
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/BeyerdynamicT1SN3964.pdf
   
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/BeyerdynamicT1.pdf
   
  ________________
   
  @ Naim
   
  I didn't mean the T1 can't resolve detail, only that it perhaps reached its maximum utility in doing so wrt the V200 and O2.  It's certainly better than a HD555.  Once you reach points where you can't tell a difference you need to figure out whether you cant tell a difference or whether there is no difference.  In your case I wouldn't know as I don't have anything but a brief impression w/ the V200.  But I know what the T1's I have heard can and can't do.
   
  These are strict technicalities I'm talking about, not signature preferences.  
   
  Yes myself and purrin AB'd the BA, two different O2 builds and the Leckerton as well as an old CMOY purrin built.  We posted some pics and impressions in the O2 thread a few weeks ago.  The O2's lost in transparency and resolving power to all of them.  It clearly won in linear power delivery versus the portables which it is superb at.  It's still a great performer, just not the second coming of the Messiah.  All the amps I mentioned are better than most of the amps I've heard  in this regard ranging from the E7, E9, RSA Hornet to the Burson 160, Audeze Isabellina HPA.  So it's not like any of them are slouches.


----------



## MacedonianHero

Quote: 





anaxilus said:


> I don't see how when the T1 sounds the same on every rig and never match the HD800 that the HD800 is the one being finnicky.  Plus not one measurement of a T1 comes anywhere close to the HD800 or most true ToTL phones.  I wouldn't call it slight either.  Is the WA22 you're most transparent tube amp?  I've only heard the WA5 and I think Woo rates the 5 higher in this regard (transparency)?
> 
> It could very well be I have never heard, tested or seen the numbers on a solid, proper T1 though we've been through 2 of them and so has Tyll.
> 
> ...


 

 How does my GS-1 and WA22 sound for amps to trial both? Many including myself hold them in very high regard. Both the T1s and HD800s do a very good job resolving both amps and their sound signatures; or lack thereof. I've also heard both headphones extensively on the Meier Concerto, WA2 (also owned both), B22/Sigma22 and a few other great top flight amps. That said, I've had both headphones here for more than 2 years and have come to know them very well and I stand by my comments.


----------



## Frank I

Hey Peter.I think this is funny. LMAO resolving a good source. of course you would need a good source to listen to the T1 on instead of a phone playing crappy MP3 files. Some people need some enlightenment. This may be the funniest comment I have read here and the measurements prove this also.  
	

	
	
		
		

		
		
	


	




me


----------



## MikeW

isent the eddie current like 4 grand or something? please
   
  For that price, it better sound better, and do the ******* dishes too.


----------



## Anaxilus

Quote: 





mikew said:


> isent the eddie current like 4 grand or something? please
> 
> For that price, it better sound better, and do the ******* dishes too.


 

 Well, there's a lot of 4K+ gear that probably can't do either lol.


----------



## MacedonianHero

Quote: 





mikew said:


> isent the eddie current *like 4 grand* or something? please
> 
> For that price, it better sound better, and do the ******* dishes too.


 

  
  That's the BA, not the Super 7. I've only heard the Zana Deux...thought it was quite nice.


----------



## MikeW

Well, NwAvGuy's challenge is only "good" up to 500$ commercial so keep that in mind. I built mine for eighty-five bucks. That said, it roflstomps my EF5.


----------



## Theogenes

From someone who is just interested in learning more about how the O2 sounds, I just wish I could find one thread that didn't immediately devolve into objectivist/subjectivist, measurements/experience manhood-measuring contests. _If you haven't heard the amps, please consider the possibility that your opinion on the amp is simply not useful to anyone_. I find the excellent measurements very interesting, but that just isn't everything to me. I'll have a chance to form my own opinions on an O2 at some point soon, and I am REALLY looking forward to it!! 
   
  I'd love to hear more direct comparisons about the O2 versus other amps in direct comparisons if anyone has them! Great thread on two very well-regarded budget headphone amps, OP! 
   
  To those discussing matters beyond these two amps: it might be worth considering that the O2 simply is not an excuse for the same graphs vs. ears debate about every other audio item ever made that everyone has already heard a thousand times. Your point is 100% clear, so maybe you could let those of us interested in hearing how these two compare from those who have actually experienced them enjoy the thread dedicated to the purpose in peace. 
   
  I hope this doesn't further fan the flames, and if it does, I apologize in advance and will respectfully delete my post. It just gets quite frustrating to dig through the partisan static on both sides to try to find some actual useful information. 
   
  [/rant] Back to the comparisons!


----------



## estreeter

@Theogenes, I think it goes beyond the 'usual' debate - depending on where you sit, Voldemort is either the Messiah or a very naughty boy. I fully expect a 7-figure book and movie deal and a public float by second quarter of 2012.   
	

	
	
		
		

		
			




   
  .


----------



## MikeW

I must report, that i was not totally fair with the EF5. It turns out my interconnects had some kind of short and it was injecting some noise into the amp. I hadent realized or even suspected the interconnects. So my previous comparisons are pretty well invalid at this point. I have to start over... Still, the O2 is incredible for the money!
   
  Im thinking about getting some Orthoydynamic's in the near future, so im not so sure im in that much of a hurry to get rid of EF5. It does, afterall have way more gain then O2(almost twice as much). Might come in handy with HE-5.


----------



## jschristian44

Well I am just going to be driving mainly IEM's and maybe the Thunderpants mod that I make.  The O2 did nicely with them before.  I think I am just going to get the Objective 2 since I don't need to drive high end headphones and I think the O2 does a nice enough job and since I can make them, I can make out like a bandit.


----------



## stv014

Quote: 





jschristian44 said:


> Well I am just going to be driving mainly IEM's and maybe the Thunderpants mod that I make.  The O2 did nicely with them before.  I think I am just going to get the Objective 2 since I don't need to drive high end headphones and I think the O2 does a nice enough job and since I can make them, I can make out like a bandit.


 
   
  I do not think the O2 has any major real (non-placebo) difficulty driving "high end" headphones, except maybe the HE-6 or other similarly extreme ones. IEMs can actually be surprisingly difficult for many amplifiers, because they require the lowest noise floor and output impedance.


----------



## Matt head 777

the LCD-2 is high end phone and according to my listening and talking to the messiah it handles the LCD-2 easily.
   
  I'm very happy with the sound of the system.


----------

