[MrMateoHead]

*****Update
 
Deliberately went to bass heavy recordings and known clipped recordings. Listened at High Volumes.
 
You can see, obviously, that there is a thinner mesh on the Velours vs. Pleather.
 
Definitely pleather seems more damped - perhaps even less "efficient" than the velours. I find that I cannot hear the "static" in Florence and the Machine as clearly with the pleathers. Instead, the vocal energy is a bit more intense in the upper registers and the treble peak does seem a bit narrower on some tracks. I would say that the bass is a bit warmer, but with less decay, while the treble seems a little brighter or just peakier.
 
If I had to take a shot in the dark, I would say the velours manage a somewhat more consistent response than the pleathers do. Certainly the treble detail is more revealing of bad recordings in the mid-range. At the same time, the Treble actually seems a bit more tame to my ears (and I am even EQing). Also, the bass was a little different - on soundtracks and the like the layering of sound was a bit more obvious and the decay longer. I would say a bit more fatiguing at volume overall.
 
Then again I could be making this all up and really just thinking I hear something different.

 

[jerg]

Quote:

*****Update
 
Deliberately went to bass heavy recordings and known clipped recordings. Listened at High Volumes.
 
You can see, obviously, that there is a thinner mesh on the Velours vs. Pleather.
 
Definitely pleather seems more damped - perhaps even less "efficient" than the velours. I find that I cannot hear the "static" in Florence and the Machine as clearly with the pleathers. Instead, the vocal energy is a bit more intense in the upper registers and the treble peak does seem a bit narrower on some tracks. I would say that the bass is a bit warmer, but with less decay, while the treble seems a little brighter or just peakier.
 
If I had to take a shot in the dark, I would say the velours manage a somewhat more consistent response than the pleathers do. Certainly the treble detail is more revealing of bad recordings in the mid-range. At the same time, the Treble actually seems a bit more tame to my ears (and I am even EQing). Also, the bass was a little different - on soundtracks and the like the layering of sound was a bit more obvious and the decay longer.
 
Then again I could be making this all up and really just thinking I hear something different.

The pleathers are way less damped IMO...that's the whole point behind me modding them, is to introduce damping to the pleathers so their midrange clears up.

 

[bcpk]

OMG

Finally a product I can buy in europe 0_o  http://www.thomann.de/gb/lake_people_g103p_phoneamp.htm

I never really felt the need to upgrade my amp, even though I am using the hud-mx1 integrated amp from audinst. It sounds really good, but now I am curious.
How much of a step up would this amp be vs the integrated amp of the hud-mx1 (vor the he-400)?

Try the Aune T1 from Rockgrotto (UK)

 

[ninjames]

Quote:

 
Do you direct those insults to yourself?  Or, to the headphones and pads? 

 
I was just trying to seek a bit of clarity in the event I encounter this same situation. 

 
Thank you.

Yelling at inanimate objects has yielded great results in the past!

 

[Marleybob217]

Quote:

Try the Aune T1 from Rockgrotto (UK)

That looks like a dac and amp. I am quite satisfied with the dac of the audinst hud-mx1.
 
The integrated amp of the hud-mx1 is quite good too. Outperformed the fiio e9 by quite a margin.

 

[FlySweep]

OMG
 
Finally a product I can buy in europe 0_o  http://www.thomann.de/gb/lake_people_g103p_phoneamp.htm
 
I never really felt the need to upgrade my amp, even though I am using the hud-mx1 integrated amp from audinst. It sounds really good, but now I am curious.
How much of a step up would this amp be vs the integrated amp of the hud-mx1 (vor the he-400)?

 
That's tough to for me to quantify.  I owned the mx-1 a long time ago.. a very nice little DAC/amp/SPDIF converter.  The DAC section was impressive to me.. the amp section?  Less so: I found it unnaturally bright & harsh at times (I had for over 6 months too).  I'd be very comfortable saying the G109 is a significant step up over the mx-1's amp section.  Well worth the difference in price, IMO.  The G109 can dabble in competition with amps that cost close to a $1000.  For as great as the mx-1 is, it can't come close to that kind of performance.
 
I haven't heard the mx-1 in a long time, though.. and certainly not with the HE-400.. so, again, I can't definitively say how much better the HE-400.. a relatively efficient ortho that takes a noticeable step up in performance even when used with portable amps.. will sound with the G109 vs the mx-1.  The G109 is terrific for driving efficient & inefficient phones, though.

 

[MattTCG]

^^ Is that the g109-s or g109-p?

 

[FlySweep]

Originally Posted by MattTCG /img/forum/go_quote.gif

^^ Is that the g109-s or g109-p?

 
I have the G109-S.  The only differences between the G109-S & the G109-P is that the P has both balanced & single ended output & has a relay switch (like the Schiit amps).  The rest of the circuitry is the same between both amps, as far as I know.  I didn't need balanced output & I'm careful when I plug/unplug my headphones (i.e. turn volume all the way down, unplug phones, then power off amp after use), so I didn't feel it was necessary to pay the premium for the P.

 

[STEALTH714]

Trying to be somewhat objective here 

.  Received the J$ Beyer pads from Wayne (1st class service, thank u very much).  Been burning in the 400's with some (A......Hem) restrained AC/DC (read that as 12 o'clock on the Schiit M&M stack).  Working without a net (nylon stocking).  Cans are sounding outstanding thus far.  More info coming comping to the 650 HD's.  Stay Tuned.....always

 

[wje]

Quote:

Trying to be somewhat objective here 

.  Received the J$ Beyer pads from Wayne (1st class service, thank u very much).  Been burning in the 400's with some (A......Hem) restrained AC/DC (read that as 12 o'clock on the Schiit M&M stack).  Working without a net (nylon stocking).  Cans are sounding outstanding thus far.  More info coming comping to the 650 HD's.  Stay Tuned.....always

 
Don't forget to review Jerg's other thread and possibly use a few spots of tape on the underside of the pads.  Apparently, the tape works like magic pixie dust and can provide better definition in the sub-bass region as well some other possible frequency improvements, and finally, provide you with a "happy ending." 

 

[Fearless1]

Quote:

*****Update
 
Deliberately went to bass heavy recordings and known clipped recordings. Listened at High Volumes.
 
You can see, obviously, that there is a thinner mesh on the Velours vs. Pleather.
 
Definitely pleather seems more damped - perhaps even less "efficient" than the velours. I find that I cannot hear the "static" in Florence and the Machine as clearly with the pleathers. Instead, the vocal energy is a bit more intense in the upper registers and the treble peak does seem a bit narrower on some tracks. I would say that the bass is a bit warmer, but with less decay, while the treble seems a little brighter or just peakier.
 
If I had to take a shot in the dark, I would say the velours manage a somewhat more consistent response than the pleathers do. Certainly the treble detail is more revealing of bad recordings in the mid-range. At the same time, the Treble actually seems a bit more tame to my ears (and I am even EQing). Also, the bass was a little different - on soundtracks and the like the layering of sound was a bit more obvious and the decay longer. I would say a bit more fatiguing at volume overall.
 
Then again I could be making this all up and really just thinking I hear something different.

Yeah.................thanks for your contribution.  We all needed to know what the stock pads sound like through your ears........

 

[Marleybob217]

Quote:

 
That's tough to for me to quantify.  I owned the mx-1 a long time ago.. a very nice little DAC/amp/SPDIF converter.  The DAC section was impressive to me.. the amp section?  Less so: I found it unnaturally bright & harsh at times (I had for over 6 months too).  I'd be very comfortable saying the G109 is a significant step up over the mx-1's amp section.  Well worth the difference in price, IMO.  The G109 can dabble in competition with amps that cost close to a $1000.  For as great as the mx-1 is, it can't come close to that kind of performance.
 
I haven't heard the mx-1 in a long time, though.. and certainly not with the HE-400.. so, again, I can't definitively say how much better the HE-400.. a relatively efficient ortho that takes a noticeable step up in performance even when used with portable amps.. will sound with the G109 vs the mx-1.  The G109 is terrific for driving efficient & inefficient phones, though.

Thanks for the input FlySweep!
 
I don't have any problem with accepting that the g109 is better than the integrated amp of the hud-mx1, however I has no money for that!
The G103 is significantly cheaper, about 750 euros cheaper.
 
You know what? When I have the money I'll buy the G103, I can very easily return it anyway.
 
Other contenders would be the magni or 02, but those will have to travel overseas and pass through customs. this wouldn't make them much cheaper.
The integrated amp of the hud-mx1 is indeed slightly bright, but it's also very clear (not because of the brightness). It's very clean and clear sounding throughout the spectrum, atleast compared to the e9.
 
I've had the hud-mx1 vs e9 discussion before, and most people seemed to really like the HE-400 with the e9. I don't and it almost made me think my e9 was faulty.

 

[wje]

Quote:

Other contenders would be the magni or 02, but those will have to travel overseas and pass through customs. this wouldn't make them much cheaper.
The integrated amp of the hud-mx1 is indeed slightly bright, but it's also very clear (not because of the brightness). It's very clean and clear sounding throughout the spectrum, atleast compared to the e9.

 
The main thing that gets me all worked up regarding the Objective 2 amp is the panel jacks.  I like the desktop version of this amp where appropriate RCA connectors are added to the back of the case and a 1/4" panel jack can be installed on the front panel for convenience.  To me, it just seems awkward having all those ghetto cables, connected to adapters to bring them down to 3.5mm plugs, so they can be used to fit into the front panel on the O2.
 
Yes.  As a matter of fact, those are my true feelings.
 
Do you know if the HUD-MX1 offers the capability of swapping out the op-amp?  If so, this might open up the possibilites of going for a more neutral, or warmer sound that isn't so bright.

 

[MattTCG]

^^ I share your feelings about the o2 Wayne. It seems to sit somewhere between portable and desktop. But ultimately tries harder to be a mobile solution. It just doesn't work for me. I borrowed one for a week to have a chance to hear what all the hype was about. It just didn't do it for me or my ears. 

 

[Marleybob217]

Quote:

 
The main thing that gets me all worked up regarding the Objective 2 amp is the panel jacks.  I like the desktop version of this amp where appropriate RCA connectors are added to the back of the case and a 1/4" panel jack can be installed on the front panel for convenience.  To me, it just seems awkward having all those ghetto cables, connected to adapters to bring them down to 3.5mm plugs, so they can be used to fit into the front panel on the O2.
 
Yes.  As a matter of fact, those are my true feelings.
 
Do you know if the HUD-MX1 offers the capability of swapping out the op-amp?  If so, this might open up the possibilites of going for a more neutral, or warmer sound that isn't so bright.

Yes I know about the opamp switching, but I believe nwavguy stated that opamp switching makes barely any difference.
Do you have any experience in opamp roling?
 
Oh and I don't really mind the brightness of the hud-mx1. It's not nearly as bad as some may say, and some people like a little extra brightness.
 
And I sooo agree with the panel of the 02! So ugly! Who wants an input on the front, so much cable clutter!