@dogwan, I think *you* came closest to saying you dont like the O2 
 
My humble opinion is that the M-stage trumps the O2. For what it's worth I find the O2 too lean and thin. Sure bass is there and I can't fault the highs but the midrange just lacks emotion. No matter how many times I go to the O2, I always end up feeling unsatisfied and go back to the M-stage.
 
It's interesting how closely your impressions mirror many of the impressions I have read of amps like the GS-1 - that the amp was unfailingly accurate to source yet somehow lacking. The objectivists loathe our subjectivist ways, but at the end of the day its all about the individual experience, and I understand where you are coming from. I'm persevering with my own O2, simply because its presentation suits some of my music, not because of the hype or pressure from various fanboy elements to like the thing because its 'cool'. The fanboys will soon move on to the 'next big thing', be it 'The Wire' or a more commercial offering, and suddenly the O2 wont cut the mustard for them - you and I have both seen that pattern repeated here ad nauseam.  There impressions will begin with 'the O2 was good, but .........'  
 
 
 

Quote:

estreeter said:

@dogwan, I think *you* came closest to saying you dont like the O2 

Click to expand...

You're right and I acknowledged that in my last post.
 
Again, I never said I don't like the O2 at all. All I ever said is that I enjoyed other amps more.
 
-Dogwan

Like I said, I think the M-stage probably compares well to the O2. It's the Mini3 comment that really bugged me. 
 
I suppose, i can admit, that with the right pair of headphones, someone might prefer the sound of a mini3. but it runs into limitations pretty quick, and is not nearly as capable as the o2. I don't think it's even half as powerful, by the numbers. (to be fair, it's also half the size, and I do still use mine for mobile use)
 
As far as he EF5 is concerned, it is indeed a coloured, romantic amp. It's also incredibly lacking in detail, blackness, and dynamics in direct comparison to the O2. This is with the best tubes and op-amps. (Tung-Sol, black Gla$$, and LME94440) I can hear things on the O2 that are simply not there on EF5. 
 
As far as drive.. according to NwAvGuy, the HE6 is at the "edge" of O2's capability. ie, it's quite capable. 

Quote:

mikew said:

 
Obviously, they are audible. Because that's what your hearing when comparing the Mini3 to the O2. 
 
Literally, you are hearing distortion. If you like that, then cool, it's all subjective, but do understand what your hearing. 
 
As far as "tube distortion" vs "Solid state distortion".. 
 
well, the 02 has completely inaudible amounts of distortion, therefore is "distortion free" be it 3rd harmonic or any other. 
 
The tubes on the other hand, have audible distortion. So again, your enjoying the distortion. That's ok, but don't kid yourself. 
 
The 02 is basically a perfect wire with gain. It is the "benchmark" of what wire with gain should be. Anything that sounds different is distortion. Period. See the o2 thread were people compare it to the B22, and GS-1 favorably. 
 
If your source is lacking, the 02 certainly will not do you any favors. It will all come though. 
Fact is, most of us are brainwashed by years of distortion and purposly funky frequency response. 

Click to expand...

This is a gross exaggeration.  The Eddie Current BA and my Leckerton UHA6S are both more transparent and resolving than the O2 audibly.  According to your premise it's impossible to have tubes extract more detail and sound more 'wire with gain' than the O2 or other SS amps.  But there it is.  More detail and resolution from more distortion?!?     In most cases I'd agree, but you are painting a universal truth here.
 

Quote:

mikew said:

 
yeah, then there are the people who a/b vs GS-1, and Vioelectric HPA-200 and say there's no significant difference. There's an HPA-200 for sale right now in the f/s forum because the owner did not see the value in comparison.

Click to expand...

I blame the T1 in that case.  I didn't want to say anything in the thread bashing a $1000 phone but the truth is the T1 simply can't resolve better sources.  Both mine and other ears support this as well as measurements.  Not to say the HPA200 is actually better, I haven't heard it w/ the HD800 and sources I know, just one time w/ a poorly modded (closed) LCD2 r.1 that left no favorable impression for obvious reasons.  In his case, it makes sense to stick w/ the O2 but that does not mean it equals the performance of the best amps out there.  IME it doesn't but it's great for the pricepoint and many more expensive amps should be ashamed.
 

Quote:

anaxilus said:

I blame the T1 in that case.  I didn't want to say anything in the thread bashing a $1000 phone but the truth is the T1 simply can't resolve better sources.  Both mine and other ears support this as well as measurements.  Not to say the HPA200 is actually better, I haven't heard it w/ the HD800 and sources I know, just one time w/ a poorly modded (closed) LCD2 r.1 that left no favorable impression for obvious reasons.  In his case, it makes sense to stick w/ the O2 but that does not mean it equals the performance of the best amps out there.  IME it doesn't but it's great for the pricepoint and many more expensive amps should be ashamed.
 

Click to expand...

 
I have both the T1s and HD800s right here (and for more than 2 years actually) and both are fantastic for resolving upstream gear. I think you might confusing the finickiness of the HD800s and requiring a proper upfront synergistic rig for gear resolution. That said, I would slightly rank the HD800s ahead of the T1s in that regard.
 
 

GS-1 is wire to gain style of amp design right? I'm assuming then it will sound very much like an O2. Well if that is the case, the people comparing with the V200 probably haven't done much comparing. I admit, differences are subtle (as they are even among higher priced gear despite what others say). But as someone who's compared these two meticulously, I'm confident in not only saying there are differences, but actually specifying what those differences exactly are (to my ears). I also find that the only way to really compare is consistent A/B testing not just on entire tracks, but actual short segments of them. For example, I tend to A/B different 10 second segments of tracks multiple times. This way all sounds are better remembered for direct comparison.
 
I'll give just two examples. Jamie Woon - Lady Luck, there's a segment with the main chorus where there is a faint male backing vocal somewhere in the distance on the left. It is quite thick and husky, very distant and almost missable. On the V200 this shows up with greater emphasis and weight than with the O2. Like wise, on a track Stateless Matilda - Bonus Track, the little pinches of the guitar in the far distance are ever so slightly more noticeable with the O2. Simply put, better resolution and detail is most probably near impossible if there is no audible noise. If however you mix and match frequencies for musicality or colour then you have to take infractions to other parts of the sound. The V200 loses a marginal amount of high end detail in place of sub bass extension and upper mid push. That upper mid push can however give the illusion of more detail as certain sounds still jump out more. It's an amazingly musical and natural sound, whereas the O2's is more neutral but flat and maybe not always as fun.
 
The best thing about the V200 is it's balance. It adds the slightest hint of colour with absolute minimal affliction and impairment to the rest of the sound sig, and in this sense it's an ingenious design.
 
 
For me, both the T1 and more so the HD800, have vocals that are a touch too peaky or high pitched, the LCD-2's a bit too thick and weighty. Imo the T1's hit the best balance with male vocals, and the LCD-2's with female vocals, but paired with the V200 you get just enough weight added on to the T1's vocals, to find that golden balance. Not with all tracks and recordings mind, but most.
 
 
Also lol at the T1 not being able to resolve better details. As someone who's spent a decent amount of time with the main three top tier (non stratospheric tier) headphones, and owning two of them, I have to completely disagree. I do agree that at times the HD800 can resolve more details, but a (largely artificially) large soundstage will do that. Talking about negative afflictions, imo the HD800's is that vocals don't sound as realistic or sweet as the T1's, or have the weight or thickness of the LCD-2's. There's always a trade off somewhere or another. Either that or specific genre benefits, the HD800's being classical and orchestral. 
 
Also Anaxilus, have you directly A/B'd the O2 with the Eddie Current BA and Leckerton UHA6S?

Quote:

macedonianhero said:

 
I have both the T1s and HD800s right here (and for more than 2 years actually) and both are fantastic for resolving upstream gear. I think you might confusing the finickiness of the HD800s and requiring a proper upfront synergistic rig for gear resolution. That said, I would slightly rank the HD800s ahead of the T1s in that regard.

Click to expand...

I don't see how when the T1 sounds the same on every rig and never match the HD800 that the HD800 is the one being finnicky.  Plus not one measurement of a T1 comes anywhere close to the HD800 or most true ToTL phones.  I wouldn't call it slight either.  Is the WA22 you're most transparent tube amp?  I've only heard the WA5 and I think Woo rates the 5 higher in this regard (transparency)?
 
It could very well be I have never heard, tested or seen the numbers on a solid, proper T1 though we've been through 2 of them and so has Tyll.
 
Our tests:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/583950/shure-srh1840-and-srh1440-unveiled/870#post_8109530
 
Tyll's:
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SennheiserHD800.pdf
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/BeyerdynamicDT880600ohm.pdf
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/BeyerdynamicT1SN3964.pdf
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/BeyerdynamicT1.pdf
 
________________
 
@ Naim
 
I didn't mean the T1 can't resolve detail, only that it perhaps reached its maximum utility in doing so wrt the V200 and O2.  It's certainly better than a HD555.  Once you reach points where you can't tell a difference you need to figure out whether you cant tell a difference or whether there is no difference.  In your case I wouldn't know as I don't have anything but a brief impression w/ the V200.  But I know what the T1's I have heard can and can't do.
 
These are strict technicalities I'm talking about, not signature preferences.  
 
Yes myself and purrin AB'd the BA, two different O2 builds and the Leckerton as well as an old CMOY purrin built.  We posted some pics and impressions in the O2 thread a few weeks ago.  The O2's lost in transparency and resolving power to all of them.  It clearly won in linear power delivery versus the portables which it is superb at.  It's still a great performer, just not the second coming of the Messiah.  All the amps I mentioned are better than most of the amps I've heard  in this regard ranging from the E7, E9, RSA Hornet to the Burson 160, Audeze Isabellina HPA.  So it's not like any of them are slouches.
 

Quote:

anaxilus said:

I don't see how when the T1 sounds the same on every rig and never match the HD800 that the HD800 is the one being finnicky.  Plus not one measurement of a T1 comes anywhere close to the HD800 or most true ToTL phones.  I wouldn't call it slight either.  Is the WA22 you're most transparent tube amp?  I've only heard the WA5 and I think Woo rates the 5 higher in this regard (transparency)?
 
It could very well be I have never heard, tested or seen the numbers on a solid, proper T1 though we've been through 2 of them and so has Tyll.
 
Our tests:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/583950/shure-srh1840-and-srh1440-unveiled/870#post_8109530
 
Tyll's:
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SennheiserHD800.pdf
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/BeyerdynamicDT880600ohm.pdf
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/BeyerdynamicT1SN3964.pdf
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/BeyerdynamicT1.pdf
 
________________
 
@ Naim
 
These are strict technicalities I'm talking about, not signature preferences.  
 
Yes myself and purrin AB'd the BA, two different O2 builds and the Leckerton as well as an old CMOY purrin built.  We posted some pics and impressions in the O2 thread a few weeks ago.  The O2's lost in transparency and resolving power to all of them.  It clearly won in linear power delivery versus the portables which it is superb at.  It's still a great performer, just not the second coming of the Messiah.  All the amps I mentioned are better than most of the amps I've heard  in this regard ranging from the E7, E9, RSA Hornet to the Burson 160, Audeze Isabellina HPA.  So it's not like any of them are slouches.
 

Click to expand...

How does my GS-1 and WA22 sound for amps to trial both? Many including myself hold them in very high regard. Both the T1s and HD800s do a very good job resolving both amps and their sound signatures; or lack thereof. I've also heard both headphones extensively on the Meier Concerto, WA2 (also owned both), B22/Sigma22 and a few other great top flight amps. That said, I've had both headphones here for more than 2 years and have come to know them very well and I stand by my comments. 
 
 
 

Hey Peter.I think this is funny. LMAO resolving a good source. of course you would need a good source to listen to the T1 on instead of a phone playing crappy MP3 files. Some people need some enlightenment. This may be the funniest comment I have read here and the measurements prove this also.  me 

isent the eddie current like 4 grand or something? please
 
For that price, it better sound better, and do the ******* dishes too.

Quote:

mikew said:

isent the eddie current like 4 grand or something? please
 
For that price, it better sound better, and do the ******* dishes too.

Click to expand...

Well, there's a lot of 4K+ gear that probably can't do either lol.
 

Quote:

mikew said:

isent the eddie current like 4 grand or something? please
 
For that price, it better sound better, and do the ******* dishes too.

Click to expand...

 
That's the BA, not the Super 7. I've only heard the Zana Deux...thought it was quite nice.

 Well, NwAvGuy's challenge is only "good" up to 500$ commercial so keep that in mind. I built mine for eighty-five bucks. That said, it roflstomps my EF5.

From someone who is just interested in learning more about how the O2 sounds, I just wish I could find one thread that didn't immediately devolve into objectivist/subjectivist, measurements/experience manhood-measuring contests. If you haven't heard the amps, please consider the possibility that your opinion on the amp is simply not useful to anyone. I find the excellent measurements very interesting, but that just isn't everything to me. I'll have a chance to form my own opinions on an O2 at some point soon, and I am REALLY looking forward to it!! 
 
I'd love to hear more direct comparisons about the O2 versus other amps in direct comparisons if anyone has them! Great thread on two very well-regarded budget headphone amps, OP! 
 
To those discussing matters beyond these two amps: it might be worth considering that the O2 simply is not an excuse for the same graphs vs. ears debate about every other audio item ever made that everyone has already heard a thousand times. Your point is 100% clear, so maybe you could let those of us interested in hearing how these two compare from those who have actually experienced them enjoy the thread dedicated to the purpose in peace. 
 
I hope this doesn't further fan the flames, and if it does, I apologize in advance and will respectfully delete my post. It just gets quite frustrating to dig through the partisan static on both sides to try to find some actual useful information. 
 
[/rant] Back to the comparisons!