Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › 'Stereophile' review of the Little Dot MKIII
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

'Stereophile' review of the Little Dot MKIII - Page 3

post #31 of 50
We're not talking about the MKII++ (not even sure what that is). Also, this is a OTL tube amp that will not likely do so well with grados.
post #32 of 50
Mark 3 users represent

CHEA CHEA










CHEA CHEA
post #33 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by David.M View Post
Mark 3 users represent

CHEA CHEA










CHEA CHEA
I had one...regret selling it. It used to make my Beyers sing which I also sold, another regret. Dammit!!
post #34 of 50
I owned a MkIV and I thought it was a pretty good entry-level OTL tube amp with high-impedance cans. It was, in no way, in the same class with better amps like Woo and RSA. I sold it but don't regret my time with it. For what they cost, they give a good taste of quality audio but they are what they are: inexpensive amps. And that's pretty much what they sound like, judging by the IV I owned.
post #35 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by CQ DX View Post
Has anyone seen Sam Tellig's 'Stereophile' (page 17) review of the MKIII in the latest May 2010 issue? Very positive praises!
People are still concerned about audio magazines or Stereophile reviews. First, consider that Sam Tellig's comments about the MKIII are in his column, not a review. Sam has a column where he writes about what he choses, and it's not always positve because he writes about what interests him, not what's been assigned to him.

There is a difference between a writer who has a column and someone who has to churn out a product review because it was an assignment.

Second, consider the following. As a reader/consumer of audio equipment, do I want to read about what not to buy, or do I want to read about what to buy?

And third, if you haven't actually listened to any piece of equipment before you bought than you have no complaints. In Latin, "Caveat emptor." That's been around a very long time, sage advice.

Finally, if you have not heard the equipment in the thread, why are you making a comment? Go to Amazon and join the people who review DVD/BD before they are released.

My $0.02
post #36 of 50
i've been a Stereophile subscriber for over a decade. i think it's great that HPs have been getting more coverage in the mag over the last couple of years - most notably from ST and WP.
post #37 of 50
I don't need stereophile to tell me Little Dot kicks ass, well because, Little Dot kicks ass.

Buy one and match up to the an appropriate set of cans and it'll bring a smile to your face.

that's it.

cut. paste. and print.
post #38 of 50
Is Stereophile any good? Is any magazine or journal any good?

The test is really simple. Read and compare. Does it match up or come close to your own experience? Or are the writers in never never land?

I've been reading Stereophile reviews online for years and recently began subscribing to the hardcopy edition. Their views on equipment match mine or at least make sense to me, and that's spot on as far as I'm concerned.

Would I rely on this one source alone to inform a purchase? No, but I consider it a reliable and professional source of information that goes into the mix that eventually helps me to decide. As others in this discussion have said, the wise buyer does his homework before clicking on "pay now."

For those who are knocking this or other mags, I'd say read, first, and weigh them against your experiences. If the writer's aren't even close to where you are, then ignore the mags. However, if they're close, then give them their due.

When I say "close," I don't mean "in agreement with." What I mean is that they present views based on evidence or proof and clearly reveal their own biases and assumptions so that the reader can assess the process and assumptions that have gone into the review. In short, they make it clear where they're coming from and how they reached their conclusions.

As a reader, I can accept, understand, and even appreciate their views even if I don't agree with them. Thus, a writer might say that a set of 'phones is too accurate and he prefers another that's less revealing but warmer, and I'd disagree with what's preferable and chalk up a plus for the 'phones that are more accurate. The point is that all the info is good.
post #39 of 50
I don't think that magazines lie on a technical basis. You can find a somewhat accurate picture of the reviewed product. You must "read between the lines".

i.e. when they say "sure the details is not as good as this specific dearer amp, but for its price there are no complaints and is better than other dearer unspecified amps I've heard before", it means you pay for what you get.

when they say "this product should be partnered with carefully matched other components - particularly musical ones", means this product is not neutral and needs other colored components to bring it back to neutral and this product will actually sound crap otherwise.

If a reviewer genuinely thinks a product is that good - you watch out for the awards, as I'm sure they don't give every product a reward.
post #40 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by tvrboy View Post
Yes, this is a completely stupid policy. I can't see how this magazine can be any help to consumers if everything is simply "great" or "more great." The fact is, a good review is worthless without any bad reviews. The very word "good" requires something else to be "bad." But in Stereophile's world, nothing is. So it's basically just a big glossy catalog for advertisers. That's fine for fantasy reading, but I wouldn't buy a product based on the marketer's blurb for it. That's all a stereophile review is, just a big advertisement. Would you read consumer reports if every product it reviewed was recommended?
it is important for people to know this, many tech and audio sites do this as well
post #41 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by techenvy View Post
it is important for people to know this, many tech and audio sites do this as well
Je should mask Bryston and Totem if they agree that everyone get a good review. I believe Stereophile call's it as they see it. Just ask Bob Carver
post #42 of 50
It's nice to see Stereophile giving more ink to headphones. In the latest issue they review the Little Dot, Music Hall amp, and Grado 60s - all budget equipment! That's impressive for a rag that usually covers equipment that costs more than my VW.

I'm surprised that no one commented on Jim Austin's sidebar in the Grado review regarding headphone impedance (page 96). It seems to go against most of what I read here regarding what makes a 'phone "easy to drive." Sorry to be a bit off-topic, but I expected Head-Fi'ers to be all over that one.
post #43 of 50
ld mkiii is such a great value imo, i kept it over my wa6 because i thought it sounded 80-90% as good, for about 1/3 the price.. i was using hd600's & pico dac with both
post #44 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by AudioHi View Post
I trust reviews from Head-Fi more than the magazines..
All reviews will be bias one way or another since audio performance can be extremely subjective.

I usually cross reference a few reviews, but still need to try out for myself to confirm.
post #45 of 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by koven View Post
ld mkiii is such a great value imo, i kept it over my wa6 because i thought it sounded 80-90% as good, for about 1/3 the price.. i was using hd600's & pico dac with both
I have the MK11 and david told me not to upgrade to the 111 or 1v as diminishg returns were in play. I think Stereophile did a nice job on that review and Sam did not tube roll. The 6H30 matched tubes and the Mullard 4010 made a huge difference. I think the Little Dot amps are the best value in high end audio. People should read that reivew again and read between the lines as he also revied the 400 Music Hall amp and di not state he liked it more he was non commital. Great job IMHO
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) › 'Stereophile' review of the Little Dot MKIII