C&C BH Portable Headphone Amp (80 Hours from a Single Charge!) [Buyer Review] - Page 28

No, I re-edited it because I'm tired and don't know what I'm doing. I'm gonna get off head-fi lol

 

EDIT (lol): Rather, I deleted it because I thought HAD posted in the proper thread but I'm a dummy

Edited by Apo0th3karY - 2/2/13 at 12:09am

Still feel the C&C BH has its place as a portable/pocketable amp, but the e12 as mentioned do look really nice. Meh more money to use at a point, that I rather wanna use on the Mad Dog next.

 

Btw just got mysef a china made tube amp the Bravo Audio Ocean, a little powerhorse. When the source has 100% volume stx dac into amp it is to loud at 8o clock for my DT880 250ohm.

 

Side by side my little BH

Edited by Leonarfd - 2/2/13 at 2:11am

That looks cool!

 

I figure I'll have the BH more out and about, and paired with a clip+, so being more portable is a good thing for me

The BH amp via LOD with my new Momentums sounds a lot better than paired with my W4`s. Still don`t like the switches but straight up very nice indeed. :-)

 

Edit: Output 2 with LF on, highly enjoyable with these phones.

Edited by Sinth - 2/2/13 at 5:34am

Thanks for the update! Looks great!

 

No, I've been looking at an array of portable amps including the BH and E12. As usual though, aside form the article, I constantly hear differing opinions on these amps.

Different opinions on just the BH? Or are you talking about the BH vs the E12?

Oh, don't get me wrong. If E12 didn't exist, BH would be my favorite sub-$200 portable amp. It's right underneath O2 for very good reason.

 

And considering my amp is now roughly 2 years old, that's even more impressive.

 

If it's purely from a portable point of view, then I'd pair the BH with an iPod Nano and be done with it any day. E12 is very unwieldy in a pocket (I tried taking the amp out, yeah).

I found something interesting about the Sound Field switch in a review of the XO2 model. A least it is some more information.

From what was described earlier I was wondering if it actually IS a true crossfeed or simply an effect. There are different versions of the crossfeed circuit, and the small cable and boxes i use from FredFred make the whole seem more cohesive, things are still separated but at the same time it creates a middle area, so essentially it sounds like you are listening to speakers. Only way i can tell is if i can listen for myself I suppose..

 

The following red text is from here.

 

from page 3 of that link. the bold text review

 

" Next is the SF switch. This one stands for Sound Field or Space Field?? Anyway, its meant to increase sound stage. This switch is not as beautiful as the LF. This one is half half depending on the track. Sometimes it makes the sound too thin. The way it does this, as others do, is to curve the frequency to a more V-shaped structure. The aspect needing complementing however is that even though this V-curve is applied, the amount of curving is minimal compared to the space it creates. On some tracks, I prefer this switch on because the disadvantages it provides are almost unnoticeable but still creating that much more space and air. This one is going to be a hear to believe. It just sounds more alive and livelier. Dark sounding cans should benefit a lot with this switch on. Of course combining this with the LF switch would result in so many possibilities but most importantly, do take note that both switches are just a flick away and you do not have to scroll through menu options or something. "

Edited by nick n - 2/4/13 at 6:56pm

I don't think what the SF switch does is crossfeed.

 

Crossfeed mixes left and right channels, and it essentially destroys soundstage width in order to create a more centered image.

 

The SF switch in C&C BH boosts treble slightly and pushes left and right sounds further apart. It's basically the inverse of crossfeed.

It does create more depth also. I find it boosts mids rather than highs. The LF switch boosts highs slightly though.

Well, if by "depth", you mean "push things further away", then yeah, I agree.

But "depth" to me means how things are laid out in front, and the BH doesn't really layer things in front with the SF switch from what I can hear. The LF switch is the one that does the layering.

 

But none of those switches does what crossfeed does. If you have an old Beatles recording, then it's easy to test. Just play back the recording and listen to the left and right channels individually (just place the left or right cup close to your ears) and see if you hear the same thing in both channels.

Oh I agree, I tried listening for the cross feed and its not there.
But yeah, it does widen the channels giving it the illusion of cross feed .

But crossfeed doesn't widen the channels. That's what I've been trying to say.

 

What crossfeed does is actually detrimental to the width of soundstage. It tries to converge the left and right channels, so at the end, you have everything layered up in the middle rather than to the two sides.

 

It's like an in-between of mono and stereo sound.

 

If you want to experience it, Foobar has some crossfeed plugins that you can use. If you're on a Mac, you can use Fidelia's built-in Headphone FX feature.

 

What the SF switch does is the exact opposite of what crossfeed would do.

Well I did promise a comparison to my headstage arrow 4G and here it is.

Packaging nod goes to the BH. little bag, binders and cables.
Build and form factor: this is goes to the 4g by a hair, BH is shorter but the 4g is almost 1/2 as thick. Jack on the 4g are tighter. Jack on the 4g are farther apart for easier access. Both have 2 headphone jacks but the 4g has 2 inputs, one on both ends. Volume knob is better on the BH even though it sticks out a bit I like the functionality of it better.
Adjustability: headstage arrow is the winner here. BH has the LF and SF and both work well. They add things that you wanted added but also sometimes they also add more that what you asked for, I.e. increase is treble instead of just bass. Gain works well and having the 2 headphone outs that do different things is nice. The 4g has 3 gain switches, 3 bass settings and 3 treble settings and with these extra setting they also do their job better. Want a little more bass, just click, a touch more treble just click. The 2 headphone outs on the 4g as far as I can tell have the same output (really have tested the difference much)

Sound: the BH may be the more powerfull amp but I only do IEMs so really couldn't tell you sure on driving hard to power stuff. Things on the BH are very tight down low, good sub bass and mids are punchy, I find the highs are sometime too much and there is no way to back them down on the amp. It has very good detail and some the highs work even better than the 4g (like my x10s) because they needed a little help up there. But the 4g just does everything better, bass impact is tighter and more lush, everything in the mids and treble is more defined and cleaner which is the signature I would go back to with the 4g, cleaner. Even the sound stage on the 4g I would call better and more accurate. I have included my full review of the 4g below. The BH I will still be using probably as much as my 4g because it is that good of an amp and when I want to have some fun the SF switch is always a blast to listen to. The main thing in this comparison is that BH is 1/3 the price of the 4g so I did not except it to beat it but it has excellent sound quality and for some music (older less detailed recordings) or IEMs that may be a little flat up top, the BH can really make them shine.

http://www.head-fi.org/t/475499/headstage-arrow-he-reviews-impressions-perceptions-sensations/2460#post_9123723
Edited by zerocoolhifi - 2/2/13 at 10:58pm