[justin w.]

nice pics 
 

 

 

 

[WalkGood]

 
Quote:

nice pics ...

 Thank you
 

 

[Currawong]

Good review.  I found that the Slim makes the most difference with, say, my RE-ZEROs compared to straight out of my iPhone or an iPod. Out of those, they sound harsh and unlistenable. Out of the Slim all the harshness has gone.  The weirdest great match I had with them was with the Shure SH-440 and SH-840, which I had gathered were, for full-sized headphones, great out of even just an iPod.

 

[Jalo]

Quote:

 
For a while I preferred the P-51 over my original Pico for it's added warmth and fullness in the sound, but at times it was slightly aggressive sounding and I would turn to the Pico.  When I compared the three amps at CanJam 2009 I felt that the Pico Slim added that missing warmth I wanted, while remaining smoother and more refined than my P-51.  
 
I do feel the Slim is very slightly more laid back than the original Pico, but not in a bad way.  I no longer have the original Pico or P-51 for comparisons, but that would have been the only reason to keep them - otherwise they were not as practical for portable use as the Slim.  Until I got the Slim I found I was using my tiny iBasso T3 more than the others even though it wasn't as good, because it was smaller.

HPA, I have been listening to the Slim for about 40 hours now.  I was using the P-51 for a year and a half before I switched to the Protector.   I have been using the Protector for the past year so I haven't listened to the P-51 for a year or so.  So when I received the Slim, I immediately wanted to compare the two.  On the same setup with Ipod Classic and JH13, since I haven't listened to the P51 for awhile I was surprised that the p-51 has quite a bit more air and ambience (or fullness in your words) when it is compare to the slim and actually to the Protector as well.  However, the slim as least to the type of music I listen to-soft rock, vocal, and some classical, it is a little more aggressive than the P51 in a good way.  I really like the PRAT, the quickness, the sharpness, the punchiness of the slim and the way it attacks music.  The Slim also seems to be a little more transparent and detail oriented than the P51, may be that is why you feel the Slim is more refined than the P51.   Contrary to your experience, the P51 is warmer and smoother than the Slim to me.  The P51 has better sound stage, ambience and reverb.  May be I have not spend enough time with the Slim, but it is certainly not laid back to me.  The Slim and the P51 are very different with its own character.  I find myself enjoy both at different times and mood.   I am keeping both.     

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

HPA, I have been listening to the Slim for about 40 hours now.  I was using the P-51 for a year and a half before I switched to the Protector.   I have been using the Protector for the past year so I haven't listened to the P-51 for a year or so.  So when I received the Slim, I immediately wanted to compare the two.  On the same setup with Ipod Classic and JH13, since I haven't listened to the P51 for awhile I was surprised that the p-51 has quite a bit more air and ambience (or fullness in your words) when it is compare to the slim and actually to the Protector as well.  However, the slim as least to the type of music I listen to-soft rock, vocal, and some classical, it is a little more aggressive than the P51 in a good way.  I really like the PRAT, the quickness, the sharpness, the punchiness of the slim and the way it attacks music.  The Slim also seems to be a little more transparent and detail oriented than the P51, may be that is why you feel the Slim is more refined than the P51.   Contrary to your experience, the P51 is warmer and smoother than the Slim to me.  The P51 has better sound stage, ambience and reverb.  May be I have not spend enough time with the Slim, but it is certainly not laid back to me.  The Slim and the P51 are very different with its own character.  I find myself enjoy both at different times and mood.   I am keeping both.     

I just mean the Slim is laid back in the upper mids in comparison to the P-51 and in the highs in comparison to the original Pico; but it does have good dynamics, drive and impact.  Laid back to me doesn't mean it's lacking those, but rather it's just not forcing it's sound on you.  The P-51 did seem to have slightly more air and ambience, depending on the source or phones, but with less transparency and more aggressiveness in those upper mids.  I also felt the P-51 was slightly more forward than the Slim.  With the JH13Pro I thought the P-51 or Protector was a better match because they mate with the JH13Pro mids nicely, but with my ES3X or ES5 I think the Pico Slim is a better match.  Like I said, I think the Slim has a similar warmth to the P-51, while the original Pico was not quite as warm (not to confuse warm with dark, which none of these are).  If I didn't have the Protector I'd still own the P-51, so I agree that having both amps is a good idea.

 

[Nebby]

 
Quote:

Posted my Pico Slim review here --->  http://anythingbutipod.com/2010/10/headamp-pico-slim-portable-amp-review/

Good review, just two small comments: you put "Eliminated features" as a con, but I couldn't find where you detailed the specifics of that. Also, how did you reach your 40-60db thump number? 

 

[WalkGood]

 
Quote:

Good review, just two small comments: you put "Eliminated features" as a con, but I couldn't find where you detailed the specifics of that. Also, how did you reach your 40-60db thump number? 

 
Thanks for the feeback in my origional review I wrote and submitted I had a section on "eliminated features," which must have been edited out by the editor and I didn't notice or he and left that in the "Cons" :/
 
I will quote it here for you:
[size=10pt] [/size]
[size=10pt]Quote: [/size]

[size=10pt] [size=10pt]A big disappointment to me and some others pan or left/right balance, one of the two features that were originally discussed and later canceled is certainly missed. The second feature canceled that I liked and tested was the volume memory feature. This was when you turned the amp off to chat with someone and later repowered, it would start back up at zero volume and slowly increase the volume to where it was originally. I was told that it was later discarded as some people complained that it took too long with full sized headphones, although contrary to what the amp was designed for in my opinion, sensitive iem’s and customs. Of the two, I do wish Justin would have kept the ability to adjust the pan.[/size][/size]

[size=10pt] At this point all I can do is edit the "Cons" section and remove the "Eliminated features" :/[/size]
 
[size=10pt]On the db I quoted I did write it to be "an approximate," this is because I do not have the proper equipment to test it exact, I borrowed a digital sound level meter and the results were a little higher, so between that and a chart of sound presure levels I came up with the approximation. It is possible that the results were higher because of the sensitivity range adjustment, poor DSL meter or how I tested. I rather state a lower amount than higher and it may differ between different amps.[/size]

 

[justin w.]

sorry but I don't really feel this is valid criticism.  Part of Head-Fi & small vendors is (or at least was) that members had some engagement in the product design process or at least knew about products as they were being designed and had the ability to see and hear prototypes.  Your review tells me that I would be better off keeping this process closed and private.  I played around with different things, some didn't work.  The ability to pan is never something that existed, I had wanted to put it in, but in the interest of time, expense, and simplicity, I had to leave it out.  Would you rather not know about it?  You hit on this at another opportunity in your review saying it took 17 months to get the Pico Slim -- despite pre-ordering in December and shipping in April (4-5 months).  I assume you meant you were aware of the existence of the amp 17 months earlier, and are including it as time I kept you waiting.  Again, would you rather I didn't tell anyone about it or show prototypes?  That's how children have to be treated
 
[size=10pt]Quote:[/size]

[size=10pt] [size=10pt]A big disappointment to me and some others pan or left/right balance, one of the two features that were originally discussed and later canceled is certainly missed. The second feature canceled that I liked and tested was the volume memory feature. This was when you turned the amp off to chat with someone and later repowered, it would start back up at zero volume and slowly increase the volume to where it was originally. I was told that it was later discarded as some people complained that it took too long with full sized headphones, although contrary to what the amp was designed for in my opinion, sensitive iem’s and customs. Of the two, I do wish Justin would have kept the ability to adjust the pan.[/size][/size]

 

[Nebby]

I think Justin brings up a good point, he was open with the development process and made a decision during that process that certain features wouldn't be added. As this was done during the development and not after the release of the product I don't see it as a proper "Con". It would be a proper "Con" if the features were removed after the amp was in production...
 
I for one appreciated the open development process along with the feedback requested. Please keep up the openness with future product developments Justin!

 
Quote:

 
[size=10pt]On the db I quoted I did write it to be "an approximate," this is because I do not have the proper equipment to test it exact, I borrowed a digital sound level meter and the results were a little higher, so between that and a chart of sound presure levels I came up with the approximation. It is possible that the results were higher because of the sensitivity range adjustment, poor DSL meter or how I tested. I rather state a lower amount than higher and it may differ between different amps.[/size]

It's nice to provide an estimate, but 40-60db is a very large range to list. Every 3 db = 2x the loudness. Perhaps it would be better to simply measure the pop and list the voltage. Readers then could figure out the loudness that would result with their headphone.

 

[WalkGood]

Note that it was not included in the review and I did edit it out of the “Cons” but calling customers or potential customers “That's how children have to be treated,” is not any way for a professional to behave …
 
I have found the products you make top notch, including the Slim’s build quality and it’s performance in the sweet spot, I believe I relayed that in my review. Furthermore I have found you to be very amicable during our brief meetings and I am happy with my original pico, thus I’m a bit surprised by your reply, am I not entitled to my opinion?
 
BTW I previously corrected the time factor per a readers comment, I must have had a brain fart but it originally stated "Sure that seems like a long time to most people but in the beginning this was a concept that moved to a prototype and finally went into production, so this long wait time should not be the case with normal orders..."
 
Sure I understand you don't like the review, I didn't write it for you ... I bought one and wrote my honest opinions, thanks again for the comments on the pictures.
 
Quote:

sorry but I don't really feel this is valid criticism.  Part of Head-Fi & small vendors is (or at least was) that members had some engagement in the product design process or at least knew about products as they were being designed and had the ability to see and hear prototypes.  Your review tells me that I would be better off keeping this process closed and private.  I played around with different things, some didn't work.  The ability to pan is never something that existed, I had wanted to put it in, but in the interest of time, expense, and simplicity, I had to leave it out.  Would you rather not know about it?  You hit on this at another opportunity in your review saying it took 17 months to get the Pico Slim -- despite pre-ordering in December and shipping in April (4-5 months).  I assume you meant you were aware of the existence of the amp 17 months earlier, and are including it as time I kept you waiting.  Again, would you rather I didn't tell anyone about it or show prototypes?  That's how children have to be treated
 
 

 

[WalkGood]

 
Quote:

  ... ...  It's nice to provide an estimate, but 40-60db is a very large range to list. Every 3 db = 2x the loudness. Perhaps it would be better to simply measure the pop and list the voltage. Readers then could figure out the loudness that would result with their headphone.

[size=11pt]Not an estimate but an approximation based from a test. An easier way to explain this is if you look at decibel levels of common sounds, you’ll note that 40 to 60 dB is similar to a normal conversation and in all honesty the pop is probably above the 60 dB level, I wanted to offer the benefit of my test not being perfect and that the “pop” may vary from amp to amp so I went with a range. The “pop” is actually painful to my ears thus my recommendation not to insert customs before you power the amp, why not try the test yourself and let us know your results … [/size]

 

[Nebby]

I think you should have clarified that's how you reached your 40 to 60 dB figure or at least just mention that the pop sounded loud to you.
 
With my ER-4S (which are less sensitive than your ue11's) I hear the pop but it's not uncomfortably loud. Maybe when I get a chance I'll measure it, 

 

[WalkGood]

[size=11pt]I wrote the review as honest as I could from someone who has nothing to gain or lose and isn't even in the business. Early on I had promised to come back and share it with others that asked my opinion, so I have. If you don’t hear a pop/thump with the ER•4S it’s probably because they’re 100 Ohm iem’s as it’s very faint with my 300 Ohm hd650s but that’s an unfair test based on what it was designed for. Maybe it’s more prevalent with the ER•4P’s which are only 27 Ohms, I don’t know. I believe it’s common knowledge that this amp was being designed for low impedance and highly sensitive iem’s and customs and this is why I tested it with the UE11’s. As with any gear your preformance and opinion may vary ...[/size]
 
Quote:

I think you should have clarified that's how you reached your 40 to 60 dB figure or at least just mention that the pop sounded loud to you.
 
With my ER-4S (which are less sensitive than your ue11's) I hear the pop but it's not uncomfortably loud. Maybe when I get a chance I'll measure it, 

 

[Nebby]

Oh I hear it and do appreciate your effort taken to write the review.

 

[cooperpwc]

WalkGood didn't actually review the Pico Slim as an amplifier but rather as a generic electronic device. Perhaps some comparisons would have helped. ("Scratches more easily than a delonghi kitchen blender"; "Hisses less than a Dirt Devil handvac".)  
 
Those are nice photographs.