Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphone Amps (full-size) › Burson vs Lehmann for HD 800
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Burson vs Lehmann for HD 800 - Page 2

post #16 of 49

How much would hd800s cost alone in AU?

post #17 of 49
Thread Starter 

RRPs:

 

HD 800 $2000 AUD

BCL $1650 AUD

Rhinelander $800 AUD

HA-160D $990 AUD

HA-160 $649 AUD

 

Thanks!

post #18 of 49

the Lehmann costs almost 3x of the ha-160,

 

look inside both amps, tell me what you find,then decide what is overpriced or not

post #19 of 49
If it were up to me personally, for the same price of the bcl+hd800 i would get hd800+woo wa2 and upgrades or if second hand, hd800+woo wa22. Tubes is where its at with the sennheiser hd800. I much prefer a hi end tube amp to the solid states for hd800. I compared the burson to the wa6se in my review but the higher end woos are where the money's at. This is assuming you already have a decent source but if you dont, i thnk bcl synergy with hd800 is good but its ruthlessly revealing of all the bad artifacts without a good dac. The ha160d already is a decejt source in itself so i think the combination is far better value than bcl. If you pair the bcl with a good source however it sounds great. Budget SE source- best i've heard for under1k is the dac19dsp1. I heard the new dsp5 board is amazing. I know its not async usb but if you get an upgraded hiface or a halide bridge with it, it will literally blow anything else out of the water for 1k all in all. I'm assuming that the organic sound is not what yoi're after but i really rccomend you do some research before the purchase. Imo b22 4ch and the woo lineup are far better choices for hd800. The burson is an amazing contender at the 1k mark due to its great dac. The zana deux is also an amazing contender, i would b22 woo wa22 and wa5 and zana in a league above the bcl and burson- which i thnk belong in the same tier. If you are adamant on the fast bcl signature however, its bcl, hd800, halide bridge, dac19 and dont forget your cables- fast and detailed means silver and silver means expensive
post #20 of 49
Thread Starter 

sawindra, I already did look inside both amps and you get more in the Burson (discrete input stage, stepped attenuator).  However, did you see that I mentioned that I am going to get HD 800 + Rhinelander for $2000 AUD or HD 800 + BCL for $2850 AUD?  So if I went with the Burson I would have to sell the Rhinelander.  Any idea what I could get for that new in Australia?

 

stainless824, I believe the more neutral the better to be honest, naturalness through neutrality, and the valve sound (and even more so vinyl) is not my cup of tea.  I actually do have silver interconnects (Nordost Red Dawn), but don't use them that much (was thinking about getting rid of them actually).  I am a believer in cable shielding, gauge etc., and actually believe the Nordost may have a very slightly faster and more detailed sound (but less smooth and bodied sound), perhaps due to their different geometric configuration.  But these differences don't justify the price to me - and don't necessarily lead to better sound.  I hate cable voodoo too.

 

I like the price and DAC functionality of the HA-160D, but if its not as neutral, then I guess its probably not for me.  I believe classical music really benefits from neutrality.

 

Between the Burson and BCL, how would you compare the "air" around instruments, and the separation between different instruments?  Are either of them bright or hard in the treble (this obviously depends on the quality of the source and the source material)?


Edited by BingCrosby1903 - 2/19/11 at 4:00pm
post #21 of 49
Subscribed popcorn.gif

By the way, Mike from headfonia.com has reviewed the HA-160, BCL and Beta. Maybe worth a read.
post #22 of 49
Thread Starter 

Any more things to add?

post #23 of 49

classical music benifits more from soundstage than complete neutrality. Wouldn't you rather hear where each individual instrument is placed in the room? Seeing as the burson and the b22 are neutral enough as it is, why not go for the b22 judging from you music preference? If it were me (on a budget) it would be burson 160d. Then if you got a bit more in your pocket then its the beta22 with a nice balanced DAC. The BCL is aimed more at rock IMO where soundstage isn't a high priority

post #24 of 49

... I noticed you stated that you mainly listen to classical . . .I have the HD650 and have listened to both the BCL and the Burson.  

The BCL is technically adept and very agile . .. very fast . .. very good for metal, rock etc. . . very clean.

The Burson has a terrific grip on the lower mid through to bass region that gives it it's 'warmth' people speak about. . . (please note - this grip is not vice like, it is organic and firm).

To my ears the Burson soundstage is more natually laid out than the BCL.

I listen mainly to Jazz and vocals, world music, classical and Hip Hop.

 

To my ears the Burson not only sounds better, but is more lifelike and emotional in it's impact - especially when the going gets tough. . . Carmina Burana (Orff) sounds amazing and natural and huge through the Burson, and a little light and fleet of foot on the BCL.

 

They are both very impressive, but the Burson is more natural to me, and helps fill out the lower mids/bass end of open style headphones to approach the dynamic slam of dynamic cans.

 

 

hope this opinion helps.

 

Simon


Edited by bfwiat - 1/31/11 at 4:00pm
post #25 of 49
You explained it much better than I did. The Bcl is technically very capable but its kind of lacking 'soul'.
post #26 of 49
Thread Starter 

Sorry I haven't replied for a while - I was away.  Thanks for the replies in the meantime.

 

stainless824 - You have said that the bcl in slightly more neutral than the burson, while the burson has a slightly wider soundstage.  I already heard great instrument separation with bcl + HD 800, and I believe that great neutrality includes an unaltered rendition of the soundstage.

 

bfwiat - I believe you meant that the Burson gives open dynamic headphones like the HD 650s as much slam as closed dynamic cans.  Agile, fast and clean are all words I associate with live classical music, but I also associate texture, "ommph", body and weight, but never "muddiness".  

 

From a technical perspective, the Burson seems to have better SNR and more output power, the other specifications seem similar.

 

I also don't think that it is the role of any piece of high fidelity equipment to provide "soul", that should have been done by the musician in the original performance and then captured by the recording engineer in consultation with the performer.  In that way, I think of hi-fi gear as a precision tool (like a lens) that allows you to "see" or "hear" the music with great realism.  It shouldn't ever be a musical instrument itself though.

post #27 of 49

6moons has an excellent review of the HA-160D. The reviewer, Srajan Ebaen told me through some recent emails that it remains his favorite amp and that it works well with HD-800's. He also said it's DAC is very good.

 

http://www.6moons.com/audioreviews/burson5/1.html

 

Unfortunately I can't give any personal opinions until I get the money to order one :(

post #28 of 49

I agree with you on your thoughts on the role of audio products and the passion and emotion of music.

Everyone hears differently, everyone's ears and head are different shapes (which especially affects headphone listening), and everyone's life experience prompts different emotional responses (especially if the artist/recording captures that). . . . and so, with that proviso out the way . . .

 

The Burson definitely has great oomph with no boom,bloom and muddy gloom . . it's clean rich warm NATURALLY textured lower mids down to bass end is absolutely what I love about the Burson.

I think some people confuse this natural, fast textured warmth as "tube like", for me the difference is that the Burson is in control of it's low end warmth, and indeed, on recordings that are a little off (some 80's pop recordings for instance - Peter Gabriel) the Burson doesn't add warmth, only control and texture.  

For me, the best explanation/demonstration of the controlled rich (not muddy) tone of the Burson shines through on Cello, clarinet, Double Bass, piano and also any percussion.   Listening to the Burson makes these instruments have body, texture and tone, detail throughout the mids and lower mids . . that helps you hear not only what the musicians are playing, but how they are playing their instrument both as an individual and in the context of playing together with other musicians.

As I listen to jazz and world music -  hearing percussion (Djembe, bongo, conga etc) on the Burson is quite awesome, you can hear what part of the musicians hand hit which part of the drum and how hard they hit it . .you can hear how tight the skin is on the drum, you can nearly feel the impact as if it was indeed a live instrument in the room with you, not a recording . . . the Burson has a real knack  of making percussion sound really truly live . . . I think it has excellent Pace Rhythm andTiming as well as a full range of textures and a naturally convincing control  -   invigorating stuff indeed!!

 

 


I also think the soundstage is very good - not overly huge in height perception, but excellent in width and depth.  

It has a very stable and realistic placement of instruments left to right and front to back.  I find that it is also quite interesting that it seems capable of producing a square or rectangular shaped sounding space (as real live music is often performed in) rather than the elliptical or circular sound stage perception I normally find I get on Headphones from other headphone amps.

 

 

May I suggest you organise to listen to the Burson and the BCL for yourself to see how you hear it, but for me, the Burson isn't just technically good, it helps music sound textured,organic and as if the musicians are performing together, yet still has the smaller details of each instrument and musician.

 

all the best in your search for audio bliss.

 

Simon

 

"bfwiat - I believe you meant that the Burson gives open dynamic headphones like the HD 650s as much slam as closed dynamic cans.  Agile, fast and clean are all words I associate with live classical music, but I also associate texture, "ommph", body and weight, but never "muddiness".  

 

From a technical perspective, the Burson seems to have better SNR and more output power, the other specifications seem similar.

 

I also don't think that it is the role of any piece of high fidelity equipment to provide "soul", that should have been done by the musician in the original performance and then captured by the recording engineer in consultation with the performer.  In that way, I think of hi-fi gear as a precision tool (like a lens) that allows you to "see" or "hear" the music with great realism."  


Edited by bfwiat - 1/29/11 at 4:00pm
post #29 of 49
Thread Starter 

Anyone have any more thoughts/inputs about this?  It would be greatly appreciated.  Thanks to those who have commented.

post #30 of 49

I've been using my SPL Auditor with the HD800 since it was released and I'm very very pleased with it.

The Auditor just like the BCL is totally uncolored and drives my headphones with unparalleled energy and clarity.

Have a look at SPLs Website, they nicely discribe the unusual tech they use in the Auditor.

 

If you want your sound to be a little on the warm / analog side, you should rather choose a DAC with such a sound signature, that's what I did.

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) › Burson vs Lehmann for HD 800