Separate names with a comma.
Get the Cayin iHA-6! Just as good for half the price.
Thanks but I am from Singapore. The one I saw was less than 800 Euros and is local set. Damn.
Have you tried the LCD2C with THX 789 and Liquid Platinum? Kind of interested in those 2 as well.
I bought my brand new Taurus for 800 Euros. I consider this a bargain.
I haven't tried the THX789 but I heard it is a good medium level neutral, technical and powerful SS amp. IMO the CMA600i, Taurus and probably the Liquid Platinum all are on a higher level.
I owned the Liquid Platinum. It is a very nice sounding amp with liquid mids but I preferred the CMA600i as it has a thicker and more pleasing sound signature with better extension both to low-end and treble.
The Taurus improves all CMA600i's qualities to my experience.
The HD800S is a great headphone and I regret selling mine. They may not have the deepest bass but the sound is clean, dynamic and open sounding to say the least.
Yeah it's all good Yeah I know what you mean they're so tough to choose between! If someone said I could only choose one, I'd have to punch them in the face Haha. I see the the Verum and LCD-2C as like how the 600 and HD650 were(before the 650 had the 5k peak) the Verum is like the sensible brother who is talented and the 2C is the brother who's also sensible and talented but likes get drunk and rock out. Yeah the 2C is weird it doesn't sound overly wide in stage perception but just sounds overall huge, just a big sound for lack of better term.
Have you tried the Aeon Open? I had them not long ago and found them so compressed and lacking ddynamics. Seemed like they were going for a Sennheiser 650 type sound but failed imo.
Yeah actually I compared it with the 2C somewhere in this thread. It has a nice thick tonality. I agree with it trying to be a planar HD650. Try using it with a small ensemble or a solo vocal. Pretty nice. But it does lack dynamics and over technicalities. And very little air. Sold it
Same experience here with the AFO. Much prefer the 2C.
The AFO has a nice tone for sure. It reminds of the AQ Nighthawk in the sense the mid bass bloom hides a lot of the peaks and imperfections in the upper end.
LCD-2C isn't free from peaks though it could do with less 1k shout and a smoother treble.
Sonically AFO is a better headphone than the NH, but indeed they are close in tonality. Both warm and dark and lush. NH even more so. Before the 2C NH was my daily driver.
LCD2C is pretty much flat until 1Khz when it starts to dip. I can't see a peak there. 2C treble is very held back. Detailed but not pronounced at all. Bit on the dark side.
I can appreciate different types of sound. But not blindly. I do consider other things (value, look, comfort, build, reliability, brand equity, etc) in exchange of the sound a phone brings to the table.
AFO to me should be around $600 new. The 2C is priced just nicely at $800.
The peak at 1k is the dominate aspect of the 2C and while it's not excessive it is very noticeable and gives the 2C a rough spot. The treble is a bit rollercoaster ish which gives the treble a bit of grain, again nothing too bad.
I didn't find the NH that lush, very thin, very weird in the treble and no upper mids made worse by the mid bass bloat. The technical ability of the NH's when it comes to distortion and resolve was a really good, better than the AFO in my opinion.
The issue is it takes a lot of experienced ears to hear past the FR to see what it's capable of so many people ended up judging it on it's FR and not it's technical capability. I'm one of the few who actually liked the NH as I'm a sucker for clean sub bass and I do enjoy headphones that have some warmth to them but Skylars tuning preference for the NHs is bizarre. I would've personally preferred Skylar to use a Chinese Biocellose like the Eikon with the same 300ohm impedance because inherently lower ohm biocellulose all seem to carry that rough treble. Skylar tried to hide this behind the mid bass but the more you adjust the more you hear into the upper Frequencies.
I have recently purchased a Mojo for my travellings when I need some sort of an emergency solution for a few days away from my home system. Nothing really satisfied me under the price point of Mojo even though I tried quite a few options. Mojo seems to be the least expensive but still acceptable solution. (I used to own one when it was released.)
The reason I am writing this post is because I got curious how Mojo only would stack up against my current desktop system using my favourite headphone under £1500 the LCD2C.
Mojo is £400 new, decent specimens can be found at £300 secondhand. My home system at this point is a Chord Qutest with the Taurus MKII. This would be £2800 new, could be found under £2000 if someone is crafty enough.
Like all coins, this comparison has two sides as well. On the one side the Mojo for its price stands up very well against the more expensive system. However the more expensive system simply washes Mojo away as expected.
So, what are the differences and is it worth the price? Let's go step by step.
The differences are immediately audible and obvious. While Mojo is doing a great job, it is loud enough and I'd say the sound is enjoyable, it obviously lacks the qualities of the more expensive system. What are those qualities? Perhaps the most obvious one is bass delivery. Bass on Mojo sounds lean, weak and recessed in comparison. With the desktop combo bass firms up, both quality and quantity jumps up quite a few steps. Mids are surprisingly similar, however Mojo's mids sound a bit 'simple' in comparison. Not as professionally rendered as on Qutest+Taurus. There is more life and more space on the desktop combo.
How about treble? Pretty much the same story as it is with bass. Mojo offers a nice enough treble but the above mentioned combo just extends further, has more air, balance and lifelikeness.
Above all these differences, the above mentioned desktop combo also offers more space, more detail and a blacker background.
Back to the second part of our question, is the £1600-2400 extra money worth it? Well, that is the most subjective question ever asked. There is no clear answer for that. It basically depends on your budget and your hearing. What do you consider as 'acceptable financial loss? £10, £100, £1000'? How refined and experienced your hearing is? You might have an idea what you want, but nobody will be able to really tell you if its is worth it unless you audition yourself.
There are no financial limits in this hobby. Financially the limit is your imagination and multiply it by 10. Do higher-end gear sound better? Does it worth it? Well, there is always room for further improvements. The more you spend though, the smaller the improvements will be. Whether this relatively small improvement is worth for you only depends on your ears and budget.
I would say owning a home system which cost twice as your monthly income is justifiable and perhaps the fine line. Owning a portable system that cost half/one of your monthly salary is also justifiable. Of course, there might be variations here depending on user preference and other variables.
What I am trying to say with this post is, there is always higher. Finding the sweet spot is the clue. The sweet spot of sound quality, price/budget and your hearing abilities. It does take some experimental years to find out, but if you are persistent enough, you will get there. In the meantime, enjoy the journey.
'Only believe your own ears' is the main rule.
I have to disagree with you on that. It's not about total monthly income, it's about what you can honestly afford. I personally would say that twice your monthly disposable income would be more appropriate.
Too many times have I seen people sucked into this, and other hobbies, and end up buying kit that costs considerably more than their means would allow. This often leads to debt which can be very difficult to get out of.
My advice to anybody in this hobby is to keep it real - never spend what you cannot afford. High end is not what it's cracked up to be and quite frankly you can get astoundingly good gear at a small fraction of the price of high end.
That's all true and would never want anyone to get into debt. That's not the way forward.
However if someone was saving up and upgrading step by step, year by year, owning a system that is twice the monthly income and offer a high level of daily enjoyment is more than justifiable in my eyes.
But again, it is hard to give financial advise as it hugely depends on individual circumstances.
Not a fan of Chord gear in general. I always find it rather thin sounding. I would take an SDAC over the Hugo 2 for example.
I've not heard their latest gear though. I did think the Mojo was better value than the Hugo line. Mojo sounds a bit too compressed sounding for my liking, similar to the LCD-2F and Aeon Flow
were everything is almost playing at the same volume with no sense if dynamics. I did find Mojo extended well at both ends but the bass while extended again sounded compressed.
I've got an SDA and Liquid Spark I use as a system in my bedroom and I think it easily best a lot of multi thousand quid systems I've bought over the years, very dynamic and impactful little with good bass weight. The Liquid Spark adds a bit of sweetness to the mids which is rare for a SS amp, not too much though.