My personal take on this
Until now I haven't posted more than a couple of comments about the Hornet that I felt were necessary in a certain discussion. I did comment in that context the it's the Hornet
I haven't organized my notes, and have purposely deferred doing so until I felt the unit I have is thoroughly burned in, stabilized and matured.
I've put well over 300 hours on it, and as Ray comment here, at 200 hours it just started to develop as I expected it would. It was just my feeling early on, based on burning a fair number of portables with large caps, that a lot more time than expected would be needed.
The Hornet isn't, shouldn't and won't sound like the SR-71. It is a tiny and supremely portable amp that certainly should have and does have a sound that will outshine other amps in its ability to make the complex character of the music heard in portable venues — just as the SR-71's subtleties and wide open air are lost in the inherently noisier environments portables generally function in but breathe effortlessly with nuance and grace in quiet surroundings.
Hey — it would really be tons of fun if Ray could pack in a tiny piggyback circuit and a switch for "switchable sound signatures" … but the Hornet performs beautifully as designed, as a deluxe and masterfully crafted portable amp.
With the huge burn in its had, the Hornet has gotten much smoother at the top and throughout, maintained a nicely extended yet well-controlled bottom end, richer texture and inner detail throughout, a slightly wider and more spacious soundstage, better placement and space around instruments and a slightly warmer, and very "full" sound.
I've done some comparisons with HD650/Equinox cable, HD600/Blue Dragon cable, Senn PXC300 folders (my favorite portable phones), and my venerable K501s. I just did a lot of listening through my iPod 4G 40GB — definitely a limited source but it's the portable I use most. Surprisingly the HD650/Equinox that I like so much with other amps did not do so well with this combo and just seem lackluster and less enjoyable (though this phone/cable sounds great with the Rudistor RP33 & NKK-02). HD600/Blue Dragon sounded much better (though a tad strident on top), the PXC300 sounded surpringly good — thank goodness, since it's about portability — and my K501s also sound really good with the Hornet, even via iPod. I know Ray doesn't care for the 501s but it matches well with the Hornet, and of course the 501s natural ability to reproduce a wide soundstage allows the Hornet (with some recordings) to extend "beyond the ears" so to speak.
That's all for now. I just wrote "off the top of my head" and will post thorough and organized notes sometime soon.
BTW — following are my comments, the pertinent 90% excerpted from the thread mentioned at the top:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Romanee
As was said, it has the rock solid and beautifully crafted look and feel that the SR-71 has, does have a built in charger, will fit in a jeans pocket and a tiny bag whereas the SR-71 will absolutely not fit in a jeans pocket (unless you wear super-baggy farmer jeans) — and the lo-hi-med gain switch will definitely serve you well with the span of phones you noted.
The SR-71 is portable, but considerably bigger than the Hornet. In quiet surroundings (at home.....) it provides the more lucid, airy, spacious, nuanced and elegant sound — but you'll lose much of that in the noisier environs where a portable amp would likely go.
The Hornet's more forward and aggressive sound, faster attack and detail are perfectly suited to cut through ambient noise clutter. I've used it very happily with my Senn PXC300s in midtown Manhattan … on our absurdly noisy streets, subways, buses and chatty offices and it sounds great (of course the noise-reducing circuit helps cut down the background growl so I can hear the music better, but the Hornet presents really enjoyable music around town under very challenging conditions).
Also, the Hornet's tiny volume knob (with a much firmer resistance than the SR-71) may have you wishing for a bigger, more ergonomic one at home — but in transit it's a big plus since once set it won't easily be changed by accidental friction in pocket or bag.
When in a quiet place the Hornet still performs beautifully if less airy and expansive than SR-71. It is a different sound from the SR-71, but with its own pluses as well. Besides more midrange energy and more vocal "presence" and closer-up intimacy, it also has more bass energy and is capable of pushing some incredible bass out of the HF-1s (for example) if the information is present in the recordings and can present bass with more punch than the SR-71 (which has good bass extension but it's less robust or muscular). It's overall sound seems bigger, faster, more muscular and close up with less open air and a bit less spacious dimensionality than its elder sibling. Don't be fooled by the small size and single 9V power … the Hornet is a big sound and will power the big Senns and AKGs, and may really surprise you with the HF-1s.
|
I read that Ray found the descriptive "aggressive" objectionable, but I feel that it is this muscularity of its sound that make it so successful as a portable amp — and it was not meant as a negative trait. Maybe "testosterone" might be preferred? … but it's tough to make that one work in the sentence I used.
