Audio-gd Phoenix balanced headphone amp.

[punk_guy182]

Actually kingwa based the design on his Phoenix head-phone amp from the C3 pre-amp.
Pricklely Peete has said many times that the Phoenix functions very well and even better in preamp mode.

 

[SP Wild]

Some quick impressions having the Phoenix for a couple of days now.
 
I tried something different and instead of jumping into straight AB with the Lehmann, I just listened to the Phoenix as it burned in.  I paired it to the Reference 7 in balanced mode and quickly made a pair of 2 metre ACSS cables with cheap four conductor insulated microphone cable from local electronics store...because 1 metre was too short.  For this comparo I fixed the the Bryston BDA-1 dac, I needed to buy a tiny torx bit and it turned out the fuse was blown.  I get to hear the Bryston balanced...it too is a true balanced design...I saw the four symmetrical and tiny SMD full discrete output stages of all the phases and single ended was not summed.
 
Without an AB to confirm, I suspected a few things about the Phoenix when using my memory of the Lehmann amp.
 
Perceived Negatives (More to these negatives a later)
1.  The treble was a bit dark.
2.  The amp is not as quick as the Lehmann
3.  The bass was not as impactful or as tight as the Lehmann
 
Perceived Postives
1.  Despite being darker it had more detail than the Lehmann
2.  Staging and seperation and imaging was better than the Lehmann
3.  Midrange was more realistic
4.  Overall more organic
 
I liked how the Phoenix surprised me in that I never thought it would supersede my tube amp.  Everything that I love about tubes, midrange smoothness, soundstaging, imaging and separation was better on the Phoenix.  Better still the Phoenix didn't have that definitive softening of transients that my tube amps have when I AB with the Lehmann.
 
I have been complaining of a little brightness with my LCD2s when I paired the Reference 7 to the Lehmann amp.  And lately for musical listening...I fell back on my Cayin tube amp in SET operation.  I considered the possibility of a tubed NOS dac...as I have come to enjoy NOS dacs and tubes.  With the Phoenix in the mix....I never felt the need for my tube setup or a NOS dac.  I feel I am "there" with tonality. 
 
Is this the result of pure class A?  Perhaps its the no opamps, purely discreet output?  Or maybe Kingwa is freakin psychic and new to voice it how I like it...or perhaps he voices things like how I tend to like things?  Still...the Phoenix claims to be a "wire with gain" with utter neutrality...yet the Black cube lays the same claim, but they're polar opposites.
 
The common perception of "neutrality" and "wire with gain" seems to be one of leaness and analytical in signature...for which the Lehmann BCL would fit this description a little better than the Phoenix.  I felt the Lehmann was more analytical because I heard dramatic differences between the Bryston and Ref 7 dacs...I guess the way the BCL was voiced doubled up on how the Bryston was voiced and the differences were staggering.
 
Moreover it seems like the Bryston ran more optimally balanced as the number one complaint of an uncontrolled and loose sub bass was not at all noticeable balanced into the Phoenix.  Moreover my complaint the Bryston was too lean in the mids and not realistic enough was nullified by the Phoenixes mid range portrayal.  I would have been 100 percent satisfied with the Bryston and Phoenix combo.  Fortunately the Ref 7 retained an advantage over the Bryston...however that advantage it enjoyed which was so vast with the Lehmann amp was no where near as dramatic as the Phoenix tended to bring the two dacs closer to performance.
 
Which lead me to suspect that the Lehmann amp must therefore be more resolving than the Phoenix, and so I listed all the negatives as above.  Without a direct comparison...I felt the Lehmann was ahead in key technical benchmarks such as speed, dynamics and clarity.
 
However when it came time to carry out the actual AB comparisons I was relieved.  Switching from the Phoenix to the Lehmann showed the Lehmanns limitations...it could not resolve the soundstage, detailing and seperation of the midrange as effectively as the Phoenix.  The Phoenix was on par with the speed of the Lehmann, bass was just as dynamic tight and impactful and treble was just as extended and present with equal amplitudes.  In other words bass and treble amplitudes were the same, transients were the same.  Impact and dynamic were actually much better on the Phoenix due to the blacker background and more power.
 
So the ONLY difference that was notable enough to skew my perceptions was the one of midrange resolution.  The increased data, information or "bandwidth" in the midrange, as a result of more detail, soundstage, imaging and separation data draws your poor bandwidth limited attention span away from the treble and bass and into the mids.  The sensation that it was slower was due entirely to the lesser treble to midrange data ratio.  That is the brighter Lehmann seemed quicker...merely by being brighter and not at all faster.
 
Having said that, I guess the Lehmann is a lot more capable than most members give it credit for.  However when directly compared to the Phoenix, the information relay to my ears is of a much lower bandwidth than the Phoenix.  The Phoenix relays more data and information to my transducers and I can perceive this extra information easily and most of this information - 90 percent or so of the extra data is coming from the midrange alone.  The key difference is a more realistic stage, separation, layering and imaging...the sound being 3 dimensional and tonally orientated correctly towards the mids. 
 
My headphone experience has never been more true to life.  I don't see the relevance of tubes and NOS dacs...the Phoenix amp can give me all this with the DS Bryston DAC...and it gets better with the Reference 7 in the mix.  It has dawned on me that "synergy" is more important than "topology".

 

[vilasn]

Nice impressions.
 
Thanks.
 
Quote:

Some quick impressions having the Phoenix for a couple of days now.
 
I tried something different and instead of jumping into straight AB with the Lehmann, I just listened to the Phoenix as it burned in.  I paired it to the Reference 7 in balanced mode and quickly made a pair of 2 metre ACSS cables with cheap four conductor insulated microphone cable from local electronics store...because 1 metre was too short.  For this comparo I fixed the the Bryston BDA-1 dac, I needed to buy a tiny torx bit and it turned out the fuse was blown.  I get to hear the Bryston balanced...it too is a true balanced design...I saw the four symmetrical and tiny SMD full discrete output stages of all the phases and single ended was not summed.
 
Without an AB to confirm, I suspected a few things about the Phoenix when using my memory of the Lehmann amp.
 
Perceived Negatives (More to these negatives a later)
1.  The treble was a bit dark.
2.  The amp is not as quick as the Lehmann
3.  The bass was not as impactful or as tight as the Lehmann
 
Perceived Postives
1.  Despite being darker it had more detail than the Lehmann
2.  Staging and seperation and imaging was better than the Lehmann
3.  Midrange was more realistic
4.  Overall more organic
 
I liked how the Phoenix surprised me in that I never thought it would supersede my tube amp.  Everything that I love about tubes, midrange smoothness, soundstaging, imaging and separation was better on the Phoenix.  Better still the Phoenix didn't have that definitive softening of transients that my tube amps have when I AB with the Lehmann.
 
I have been complaining of a little brightness with my LCD2s when I paired the Reference 7 to the Lehmann amp.  And lately for musical listening...I fell back on my Cayin tube amp in SET operation.  I considered the possibility of a tubed NOS dac...as I have come to enjoy NOS dacs and tubes.  With the Phoenix in the mix....I never felt the need for my tube setup or a NOS dac.  I feel I am "there" with tonality. 
 
Is this the result of pure class A?  Perhaps its the no opamps, purely discreet output?  Or maybe Kingwa is freakin psychic and new to voice it how I like it...or perhaps he voices things like how I tend to like things?  Still...the Phoenix claims to be a "wire with gain" with utter neutrality...yet the Black cube lays the same claim, but they're polar opposites.
 
The common perception of "neutrality" and "wire with gain" seems to be one of leaness and analytical in signature...for which the Lehmann BCL would fit this description a little better than the Phoenix.  I felt the Lehmann was more analytical because I heard dramatic differences between the Bryston and Ref 7 dacs...I guess the way the BCL was voiced doubled up on how the Bryston was voiced and the differences were staggering.
 
Moreover it seems like the Bryston ran more optimally balanced as the number one complaint of an uncontrolled and loose sub bass was not at all noticeable balanced into the Phoenix.  Moreover my complaint the Bryston was too lean in the mids and not realistic enough was nullified by the Phoenixes mid range portrayal.  I would have been 100 percent satisfied with the Bryston and Phoenix combo.  Fortunately the Ref 7 retained an advantage over the Bryston...however that advantage it enjoyed which was so vast with the Lehmann amp was no where near as dramatic as the Phoenix tended to bring the two dacs closer to performance.
 
Which lead me to suspect that the Lehmann amp must therefore be more resolving than the Phoenix, and so I listed all the negatives as above.  Without a direct comparison...I felt the Lehmann was ahead in key technical benchmarks such as speed, dynamics and clarity.
 
However when it came time to carry out the actual AB comparisons I was relieved.  Switching from the Phoenix to the Lehmann showed the Lehmanns limitations...it could not resolve the soundstage, detailing and seperation of the midrange as effectively as the Phoenix.  The Phoenix was on par with the speed of the Lehmann, bass was just as dynamic tight and impactful and treble was just as extended and present with equal amplitudes.  In other words bass and treble amplitudes were the same, transients were the same.  Impact and dynamic were actually much better on the Phoenix due to the blacker background and more power.
 
So the ONLY difference that was notable enough to skew my perceptions was the one of midrange resolution.  The increased data, information or "bandwidth" in the midrange, as a result of more detail, soundstage, imaging and separation data draws your poor bandwidth limited attention span away from the treble and bass and into the mids.  The sensation that it was slower was due entirely to the lesser treble to midrange data ratio.  That is the brighter Lehmann seemed quicker...merely by being brighter and not at all faster.
 
Having said that, I guess the Lehmann is a lot more capable than most members give it credit for.  However when directly compared to the Phoenix, the information relay to my ears is of a much lower bandwidth than the Phoenix.  The Phoenix relays more data and information to my transducers and I can perceive this extra information easily and most of this information - 90 percent or so of the extra data is coming from the midrange alone.  The key difference is a more realistic stage, separation, layering and imaging...the sound being 3 dimensional and tonally orientated correctly towards the mids. 
 
My headphone experience has never been more true to life.  I don't see the relevance of tubes and NOS dacs...the Phoenix amp can give me all this with the DS Bryston DAC...and it gets better with the Reference 7 in the mix.  It has dawned on me that "synergy" is more important than "topology".

 

[SP Wild]

I tried the Phoenix as a pre-amp.  I've never owned a pre-amp before as I've always owned integrateds.  However I developed a love for tube amplification and purchased a tube integrated...which for me is brilliant, I love it.  But I hate the fact that there is no freakin remote I have to move to change volume and inputs.
 
Enter the Phoenix...whose remote capability was the reason to solve all my "problems".  I max out the volume attenuator of the integrated and volume attenuation and input selection duties is taken over by the Phoenix.
 
The Phoenix sounds completely transparent to me in this scenario.  Normally any addition of an electronic component can be heard as a slight veiling of the sound.  I could not hear this at all.  My speakers are a pair of Tannoy Mercury M1 Shadow.  I compared directly to the Reference 7 output, where I connect the 7 single ended into one input of the amp and the 7 ACSS to the Phoenix and single ended preamp output to another of the amps input.  I dial the gain on the Phoenix so that it matches the volume of the Reference 7 direct to the amp.  Now all I had to do was change inputs in the amp to listen for differences.
 
I then connect my HD650s and K701s (my LCD2s are out on loan so the 650s and K701s will do for now) directly to the 4ohm speaker taps of my integrated.  I heard zero differences between the Phoenix as a pre-amp and direct Ref7 direct.  Zilch, nothing, nada.  The Lehmann also has a pre-amp output....but it always sound worse and it always imposes its own signature ontop of the DAC and there is always less clarity than direct from dac.
 
I then connected the speakers up and I hear a difference.  In favour of the Phoenix.  The sound had better depth and layering via the Phoenix pre-amp out than direct from the Reference 7.  Don't ask me how or why, but that is what I heard.  It defies my experience that extra components are worse for quality.  So I theorise that using ACSS as the transmission line between DAC and Phoenix was the key to its better performance than DAC direct to amp.  Perhaps the PCM1704 current stream is undisturbed all the way to the Phoenix, whereby the Phoenix is a more capable IV convertor than the IV convertor in the DAC, which would be required at dac level when using SE or XLR.
 
As I understand it the IV conversion using ACSS to Phoenix is carried out right at the very final stages of the volume control....the volume resistors is the IV convertor, the signal is current amplified from DAC chip to amp, and the IV happens only right before signal exit in the final stage of amplifier gain setting set by the resistors/IV/volume control unit.  There is no extra attenuator in the signal, however there is extra signal conditioning and regulation of the current signal in two stages, first the reference 7 with its monster PSU regulation and then further signal conditioning and regulation in the Phoenix...with its monster PSU, all in the PCM1704s native current domain output.
 
This brings me to wonder about the Wolfson dac chips...they output a voltage signal as its native domain, unlike the PCM1704...................

 

[haloxt]

I tried doing dac9mk3 acss > phoenix xlr > fbi500 (c500 predecessor), and it seemed to sound slightly worse (more full but a little less detail) than dac9mk3 xlr > fbi500. Do you think if I shift the volume around the former setup would sound better than the latter? Just asking for fun , winter is almost over and I won't be using my gear as a room heater soon.

 

[SP Wild]

Quote:

I tried doing dac9mk3 acss > phoenix xlr > fbi500 (c500 predecessor), and it seemed to sound slightly worse (more full but a little less detail) than dac9mk3 xlr > fbi500. Do you think if I shift the volume around the former setup would sound better than the latter? Just asking for fun , winter is almost over and I won't be using my gear as a room heater soon.

I am using a tube integrated, where there is always a carbon attenuator I cannot remove from the chain.  That and the fact that it is a tube amp and my HD650s and K701s are my least resolving headphones, so all bets are off.  YMMV.
 
I know, when I get the LCD2 back, I'll do the same experiment.  This time instead of the tube integrated, I'll pipe the Phoenix pre-amp into the Lehmann headamp and compare direct to DAC.  This will give an accurate and definitive assesments.  Stay tuned.

 

[seaice]

Quote:

I tried doing dac9mk3 acss > phoenix xlr > fbi500 (c500 predecessor), and it seemed to sound slightly worse (more full but a little less detail) than dac9mk3 xlr > fbi500. Do you think if I shift the volume around the former setup would sound better than the latter? Just asking for fun , winter is almost over and I won't be using my gear as a room heater soon.

 
This is really interesting. With Tapco s5 studio monitors I liked the Phoenix as preamp more than direct feeding Ref1 > Tapco S5. I currently use Ref1 > Phoenix > A-g C10 > Focal 1007be and I like it. (Of course, balanced Sennheiser HD800 feeded from the Phoenix is better in most aspects, but to be fair, my room acoustics has not been finalized yet...) So, I am happy with the Phoenix as preamp.
 

 

[Currawong]

Likely impedance matching between components is a factor in these comparisons, as well as the output stages of the different DACs.  I found the Phoenix was less sensitive to what was feeding it.  Likewise, some amps would lose sound quality with the Phoenix in the chain. YMMV.

 

[reiserFS]

That is a excellent impression, thanks SP Wild.
Quote:

Some quick impressions having the Phoenix for a couple of days now.
 
I tried something different and instead of jumping into straight AB with the Lehmann, I just listened to the Phoenix as it burned in.  I paired it to the Reference 7 in balanced mode and quickly made a pair of 2 metre ACSS cables with cheap four conductor insulated microphone cable from local electronics store...because 1 metre was too short.  For this comparo I fixed the the Bryston BDA-1 dac, I needed to buy a tiny torx bit and it turned out the fuse was blown.  I get to hear the Bryston balanced...it too is a true balanced design...I saw the four symmetrical and tiny SMD full discrete output stages of all the phases and single ended was not summed.
 
Without an AB to confirm, I suspected a few things about the Phoenix when using my memory of the Lehmann amp.
 
Perceived Negatives (More to these negatives a later)
1.  The treble was a bit dark.
2.  The amp is not as quick as the Lehmann
3.  The bass was not as impactful or as tight as the Lehmann
 
Perceived Postives
1.  Despite being darker it had more detail than the Lehmann
2.  Staging and seperation and imaging was better than the Lehmann
3.  Midrange was more realistic
4.  Overall more organic
 
I liked how the Phoenix surprised me in that I never thought it would supersede my tube amp.  Everything that I love about tubes, midrange smoothness, soundstaging, imaging and separation was better on the Phoenix.  Better still the Phoenix didn't have that definitive softening of transients that my tube amps have when I AB with the Lehmann.
 
I have been complaining of a little brightness with my LCD2s when I paired the Reference 7 to the Lehmann amp.  And lately for musical listening...I fell back on my Cayin tube amp in SET operation.  I considered the possibility of a tubed NOS dac...as I have come to enjoy NOS dacs and tubes.  With the Phoenix in the mix....I never felt the need for my tube setup or a NOS dac.  I feel I am "there" with tonality. 
 
Is this the result of pure class A?  Perhaps its the no opamps, purely discreet output?  Or maybe Kingwa is freakin psychic and new to voice it how I like it...or perhaps he voices things like how I tend to like things?  Still...the Phoenix claims to be a "wire with gain" with utter neutrality...yet the Black cube lays the same claim, but they're polar opposites.
 
The common perception of "neutrality" and "wire with gain" seems to be one of leaness and analytical in signature...for which the Lehmann BCL would fit this description a little better than the Phoenix.  I felt the Lehmann was more analytical because I heard dramatic differences between the Bryston and Ref 7 dacs...I guess the way the BCL was voiced doubled up on how the Bryston was voiced and the differences were staggering.
 
Moreover it seems like the Bryston ran more optimally balanced as the number one complaint of an uncontrolled and loose sub bass was not at all noticeable balanced into the Phoenix.  Moreover my complaint the Bryston was too lean in the mids and not realistic enough was nullified by the Phoenixes mid range portrayal.  I would have been 100 percent satisfied with the Bryston and Phoenix combo.  Fortunately the Ref 7 retained an advantage over the Bryston...however that advantage it enjoyed which was so vast with the Lehmann amp was no where near as dramatic as the Phoenix tended to bring the two dacs closer to performance.
 
Which lead me to suspect that the Lehmann amp must therefore be more resolving than the Phoenix, and so I listed all the negatives as above.  Without a direct comparison...I felt the Lehmann was ahead in key technical benchmarks such as speed, dynamics and clarity.
 
However when it came time to carry out the actual AB comparisons I was relieved.  Switching from the Phoenix to the Lehmann showed the Lehmanns limitations...it could not resolve the soundstage, detailing and seperation of the midrange as effectively as the Phoenix.  The Phoenix was on par with the speed of the Lehmann, bass was just as dynamic tight and impactful and treble was just as extended and present with equal amplitudes.  In other words bass and treble amplitudes were the same, transients were the same.  Impact and dynamic were actually much better on the Phoenix due to the blacker background and more power.
 
So the ONLY difference that was notable enough to skew my perceptions was the one of midrange resolution.  The increased data, information or "bandwidth" in the midrange, as a result of more detail, soundstage, imaging and separation data draws your poor bandwidth limited attention span away from the treble and bass and into the mids.  The sensation that it was slower was due entirely to the lesser treble to midrange data ratio.  That is the brighter Lehmann seemed quicker...merely by being brighter and not at all faster.
 
Having said that, I guess the Lehmann is a lot more capable than most members give it credit for.  However when directly compared to the Phoenix, the information relay to my ears is of a much lower bandwidth than the Phoenix.  The Phoenix relays more data and information to my transducers and I can perceive this extra information easily and most of this information - 90 percent or so of the extra data is coming from the midrange alone.  The key difference is a more realistic stage, separation, layering and imaging...the sound being 3 dimensional and tonally orientated correctly towards the mids. 
 
My headphone experience has never been more true to life.  I don't see the relevance of tubes and NOS dacs...the Phoenix amp can give me all this with the DS Bryston DAC...and it gets better with the Reference 7 in the mix.  It has dawned on me that "synergy" is more important than "topology".

 

[vrln]

Easily one of the most insightful impressions I´ve read here... The Phoenix is indeed a suprisingly good preamp. The design comes straight from his top of the line preamp that has the power supply in another box, the Phoenix is just smaller etc. If I remember correctly Kingwa actually said once to me that the Phoenix outclasses the ~1k Audio-gd preamp (C39). 
 
Originally I didn´t agree with Skylabs Phoenix review, but now that I´ve heard the Black Cube Linear I can say I agree with the points you raised. It puzzles me how some people think the Audio-gd ACSS line is so clinical. I perceive my rig (even into "hardcore" studio monitors from Genelec) as quite musical and not that ultra-unforgiving. I can admit I´m into an analytical sound though (but not fond of clinical). Suprisingly some have used the words "ruthless and unforgiving" of the musical lineup. Regal felt the two "lines" were the other way round. Who knows...
 
I´ve once asked Kingwa about tube gear, his reply was something along the lines that there´s no point as he can tweak the sound however he wants with transistors too. The entire Audio-gd house sound is, in my experience, definately not clinical. Even the ACSS line has a nice touch of musicality and tubelike smoothness if you ask me (granted I don´t have much experience on tube sound). As Skylab originally mentioned in his review of the Phoenix, it´s an amp a tube lover could easily live with. I can easily agree that the Phoenix is instantly more organic and far smoother than the Benchmark DAC-1 + Lehmann combo I´ve auditioned for a few hours. The Violectric v200, compared to the Phoenix, was a lot more colored (warm and very musical at the expense of detail, made all music sound the same). Phoenix to me, hits a great halfway point between musicality and supreme detail retrieval, and most importantly it has the best soundstage performance I´ve heard.

 

[Currawong]

It's smooth, I believe, because of the low distortion, not any tonal trickery.  I've observed that, since we are so used to hearing some degree of distortion in the treble, which, with amps and DACs with only basic power supplies comes through as a kind of haze, that when we listen with a rig that has a genuinely "black" (noiseless) background it seems as if the gear is "dark".  I like my rig particularly because I can't hear it -- I hear the music and don't feel like I'm listening to the components.

 

[SP Wild]

I can honestly say, in my opinion, even though the Phoenix bridges the performance of the BDA-1 dac to a very nice and acceptable overall tonality a little closer to that of the Reference 7.  I feel that the  Phoenix magnifies the difference in dynamics and quiet pitch black background that I perceive the Reference 7 has over the BDA-1.
 
Somehow I feel that the Lehmann's simple PSU did not allow the advantages of the Reference 7s overkill PSU to shine as highly as when I mate the R7 to the Phoenix...if this kind of makes sense?  What I mean to say is that I really understand and appreciate this "black" background phenomena and the massive amount of dynamic headroom that the Audio GD units exhibit when paired together.  It is very obvious when connecting up my other dacs to the Phoenix, the other dacs don't quite match the 7 in this regard.  Yet when I was on the Lehmann amp...the gap was not as noticeable. 
 
The second thing that is more noticeable, and I believe this might relate to fully balanced operation, is that my balanced dacs going into the Phoenix appear to give me the illusion of a definitive separation of the left and right channels, leading to a more separated sound and less of a centre phantom channel effect, but more depth and greater frontal layering, more precise and stable localisation of instruments and greater width of stage.  I believe some may even find the centre channel a little lacking with better channel separation on some recordings...however I felt the improvements to dimensionality and separation far outweighs any negatives.  My single ended DACs on the other hand, just can't quite match my balanced DAC in this regard.  There does appear to be a better phantom centre channel presence, however it comes at a greater cost of imaging that is a little less precise and more vague, and a sense on congestion in a smaller soundscape with less dimensionality.
 
These observations have been made with my humble HD650 which I balanced the stock cable to a single 4pin XLR Amphenol branded plug.  The HD650 seems to get the most headtime whenever I do not have access to my LCD2s and FWIW I feel that the HD650s transient response improved very little with the aid of a balanced connection and greater amplification drive, if at all...which is contrary to popular opinion, or my previous SE amps had no problems maximising the HD650s speed.  But I feel I cannot deny the advantages of a balanced setup, from source through to cans.  Perhaps it's the elimination of sharing signal grounds with high voltage mains grounds, perhaps it is the common mode noise rejection capability, perhaps a combination of both?  Regardless, I am enjoying my system balanced and do not regret mutilating all my headphone cables to suit.

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

I can honestly say, in my opinion, even though the Phoenix bridges the performance of the BDA-1 dac to a very nice and acceptable overall tonality a little closer to that of the Reference 7.  I feel that the  Phoenix magnifies the difference in dynamics and quiet pitch black background that I perceive the Reference 7 has over the BDA-1.
 
Somehow I feel that the Lehmann's simple PSU did not allow the advantages of the Reference 7s overkill PSU to shine as highly as when I mate the R7 to the Phoenix...if this kind of makes sense?  What I mean to say is that I really understand and appreciate this "black" background phenomena and the massive amount of dynamic headroom that the Audio GD units exhibit when paired together.  It is very obvious when connecting up my other dacs to the Phoenix, the other dacs don't quite match the 7 in this regard.  Yet when I was on the Lehmann amp...the gap was not as noticeable. 
 
The second thing that is more noticeable, and I believe this might relate to fully balanced operation, is that my balanced dacs going into the Phoenix appear to give me the illusion of a definitive separation of the left and right channels, leading to a more separated sound and less of a centre phantom channel effect, but more depth and greater frontal layering, more precise and stable localisation of instruments and greater width of stage.  I believe some may even find the centre channel a little lacking with better channel separation on some recordings...however I felt the improvements to dimensionality and separation far outweighs any negatives.  My single ended DACs on the other hand, just can't quite match my balanced DAC in this regard.  There does appear to be a better phantom centre channel presence, however it comes at a greater cost of imaging that is a little less precise and more vague, and a sense on congestion in a smaller soundscape with less dimensionality.
 
These observations have been made with my humble HD650 which I balanced the stock cable to a single 4pin XLR Amphenol branded plug.  The HD650 seems to get the most headtime whenever I do not have access to my LCD2s and FWIW I feel that the HD650s transient response improved very little with the aid of a balanced connection and greater amplification drive, if at all...which is contrary to popular opinion, or my previous SE amps had no problems maximising the HD650s speed.  But I feel I cannot deny the advantages of a balanced setup, from source through to cans.  Perhaps it's the elimination of sharing signal grounds with high voltage mains grounds, perhaps it is the common mode noise rejection capability, perhaps a combination of both?  Regardless, I am enjoying my system balanced and do not regret mutilating all my headphone cables to suit.

x2
 

 

[SP Wild]

Quote:

Easily one of the most insightful impressions I´ve read here... The Phoenix is indeed a suprisingly good preamp. The design comes straight from his top of the line preamp that has the power supply in another box, the Phoenix is just smaller etc. If I remember correctly Kingwa actually said once to me that the Phoenix outclasses the ~1k Audio-gd preamp (C39). 
 
Originally I didn´t agree with Skylabs Phoenix review, but now that I´ve heard the Black Cube Linear I can say I agree with the points you raised. It puzzles me how some people think the Audio-gd ACSS line is so clinical. I perceive my rig (even into "hardcore" studio monitors from Genelec) as quite musical and not that ultra-unforgiving. I can admit I´m into an analytical sound though (but not fond of clinical). Suprisingly some have used the words "ruthless and unforgiving" of the musical lineup. Regal felt the two "lines" were the other way round. Who knows...
 
I´ve once asked Kingwa about tube gear, his reply was something along the lines that there´s no point as he can tweak the sound however he wants with transistors too. The entire Audio-gd house sound is, in my experience, definately not clinical. Even the ACSS line has a nice touch of musicality and tubelike smoothness if you ask me (granted I don´t have much experience on tube sound). As Skylab originally mentioned in his review of the Phoenix, it´s an amp a tube lover could easily live with. I can easily agree that the Phoenix is instantly more organic and far smoother than the Benchmark DAC-1 + Lehmann combo I´ve auditioned for a few hours. The Violectric v200, compared to the Phoenix, was a lot more colored (warm and very musical at the expense of detail, made all music sound the same). Phoenix to me, hits a great halfway point between musicality and supreme detail retrieval, and most importantly it has the best soundstage performance I´ve heard.

I can kind of understand how some might view the Ref7 as "cold and clinical", I am willing to believe that if these same people were to hear the R7 matched to the Phoenix their opinion would take a 180 degree turn.  Without a doubt, for me, the R7 and the BCL made for a bright pairing...although I personally didn't feel that it was "analytical"...because that midange smoothness and low tone midrange notes were very musical, natural...like in many tube amps.
 
Mated to the Phoenix...I was almost convinced that Kingwa was adding pleasing harmonics to the signature, because of how the guitar images were able to project forward from the soundscape with a pleasing and musical tone...very much what I had believed to be the exclusive domain of tube technology.  I guess with the Lehmann being the only absolute solid state amp in my collection, my experience is very limited with solid state amplifiers...all my amps have a tube or 7 in the circuit...and it was for these midrange qualities which is absent in the BCL and also my Yamaha HT receiver...but it is all there with the Phoenix.
 
But I agree with Currawong....all my tube amps are obviously distorted and smeared.  But the Phoenix has precision transients and I can't hear any of this haze or artificial midrange brightness...which I can hear in the Lehmann as well.  It just sounds more like I am listening to real musicians playing music as opposed to a recording of musicians playing music.  As Currawong noted...the music, as the musicians intended, how they would have heard it as they composed it and performed it.  Real music to me, always sounded dead neutral.  I have no reason to argue that the Reference 7 and Phoenix combo is anything other than neutral.
 
 

 

[SP Wild]

The Phoenix has seen a lot of use and many hours have accumulated.  As with the Ref7, I believe burn-in affects the performance of this unit.  I feel that with regular use, this amp gains extra clarity and definition, I just confirmed this with an AB of the Lehmann.  This time around the Lehmann did not fare so well with the Phoenix.  There is a definite sense of congestion, less dynamics and a leanness/brightness with less micro details, the best analogy would be as if I used a very crude software upsampling algorithm on a digital signal...but the degradations are more pronounced with the Lehmann. 
 
I am listening to a an album called Isla Del Sol by Armik, a recording of an acoustic nylon guitar and it sounds incredible through the LCD2s.  Electric guitars really stand out for me, I have never heard them crunch in their distortions so vividly, coming away from the mix with great clarity and edge.  I have always felt my tube amps shine in this department, but the Phoenix has put them to shame.  Every instrument has so much space, texture and microdynamics around them than I am used to in my other amps and all these little extras add up for a reproduction that has come closest to my time playing with my old band like never before.
 
After exclusive use for many sessions, I could not be happier with this purchase.  All my headphones sound better through this amp.  Even with my infatuation with the novelty and sonics of tube amps I could not come up with anything that my tube amps can accomplish better, with maybe the exception of the human voice.  If I were to take into consideration the retail price of the BCL, it makes more sense to save for the couple hundred more and purchase the Phoenix.  Likewise, had I known about Audio GD before I made my purchases I might have saved a fortune on the long run.  I guess its better late than never and I am happy to be a part of head-fi, for which without I would still be in the wilderness.  I really have little reason to post as often as I used to...for the sake of my wallet this can only be a good thing!