Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › HeadRoom Micro Amp or Tomohawk?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

HeadRoom Micro Amp or Tomohawk?

post #1 of 9
1/21/07 at 8:35pm
Thread Starter 
I'm quite new to "amping" headphones, and I'd like to give a shot at it. Does anybody here own both and prefer one over the other? I'm looking for a wider soundstage and a more "oomf" bass
Reply
post #2 of 9
1/21/07 at 10:54pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assorted View Post
I'm quite new to "amping" headphones, and I'd like to give a shot at it. Does anybody here own both and prefer one over the other? I'm looking for a wider soundstage and a more "oomf" bass
You may want to really decide how you are going to use the amp.

The Micro Amp isn't something you can just stick into a pants pocket (or even jacket pocket) with a DAP like an iPod. It is pushing the limits of what I consider "portable." Transportable, as in putting it into a bag and taking it to the office and then bringing it home, yes. Walking around without an accessory bag, no.

The Tomahawk is a very, very SMALL portable amp. It truly is designed for traveling and for enjoying music while you are on the go. The battery life is absolutely insane (like 400 hours??), and there is no AC adapter option.

Here are some pictures that show the relative sizes of the Micro Amp and the Hornet (slightly larger than Tomahawk, and also made by RSA):


^ Micro Amp, Hornet, iPod Nano (included for reference)


^ From top to bottom: Hornet, PA2v2, Micro Amp


^ Sideviews, from top to bottom: Hornet, PA2v2, Micro Amp
Reply
post #3 of 9
1/21/07 at 11:26pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by luckybaer View Post
You may want to really decide how you are going to use the amp.

The Micro Amp isn't something you can just stick into a pants pocket (or even jacket pocket) with a DAP like an iPod.
also, don't forget the sack of 9 volt batteries that you'll need to carry with you also -

Tomahawk= 400 hours
Micro= 40 minutes (not really)
Reply
post #4 of 9
1/21/07 at 11:37pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks for the help guys, I needed something more portable
Reply
post #5 of 9
1/22/07 at 9:01am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Assorted View Post
Does anybody here own both and prefer one over the other? I'm looking for a wider soundstage and a more "oomf" bass
Nobody has addressed the primary question -- the SQ!
Size is obvious to anyone.
Reply
post #6 of 9
1/22/07 at 9:13am
I think that the first thing you will want to figure out is how you are going to be using the amp.

The Tomahawk is (per Ray Samuels) optimized to be used with IEM's, while the Micro is perfectly at home driving a variety of cans (full sized or otherwise). Though both amps are portable, the Tomahawk is much moreso.

What kind of headphones are you going to be using with the amp? Do you require something that is extremely portable? I think these questions need to be answered before anyone can reasonably answer your questions.
Reply
post #7 of 9
1/22/07 at 9:26am
Quote:
Originally Posted by silverrain View Post
Nobody has addressed the primary question -- the SQ!
Size is obvious to anyone.
I didn't want to answer that question because the two amps in question are so different in size, battery life, etc. that I wanted to try and find out more about how the OP wanted to use the amp.

Based on his follow-up post, it sounds as though he is seeking a "more portable" device, meaning that he may have shifted away from the Micro Amp.

I have heard that the Tomahawk sounds great, but I have also read that it trails the Hornet in bass. There are also other amp alternatives other than Tomahawk, Hornet and Micro Amp that the OP might wish to investigate: http://166.90.205.111/forums/showthread.php?t=216903
Reply
post #8 of 9
1/22/07 at 9:31am
Quote:
Originally Posted by elrod-tom View Post
I think that the first thing you will want to figure out is how you are going to be using the amp.

The Tomahawk is (per Ray Samuels) optimized to be used with IEM's, while the Micro is perfectly at home driving a variety of cans (full sized or otherwise). Though both amps are portable, the Tomahawk is much moreso.

What kind of headphones are you going to be using with the amp? Do you require something that is extremely portable? I think these questions need to be answered before anyone can reasonably answer your questions.
The Tomakawk I heard drove Sennheiser HD600's perfectly well. While it is being marketed toward IEMs, it would work with a wide range of impedances.

I owned a v.2005 MicroStac. Sonically (including the MicroDAC) it was just ok, imo. The 2006 module upgrades supposedly sound better - dunno. Sizewise, it is a tweener - compact for home use, a bit cumbersome for carrying around all day (even the amp alone is too big for me). If portable use is any consideration at all, I'd go with the Tomahawk on size & battery life alone.
Reply
post #9 of 9
1/22/07 at 10:33pm
FWIW I compared all three. To me the Hornet "M" is the best sounding of the three, it has the most impactful bass, lots of headroom, and it is the most detailed and open of the three. Second place would be the Tomahawk with the the Micro Amp third. For some reason I have never enjoyed its sound (yes i have had the 2005 and later 2006 DM).
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphone Amps (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › HeadRoom Micro Amp or Tomohawk?