[mopps]

   
Tried a few including TEAC UD 503, Schiit Vali, and Sony PHA-1.

I think all these amps have too high output impedance for the NightHawk’s 24 ohms.
Sony PHA-1: 7-10 ohms, Schiit Vali: 6.5 ohms, TEAC UD-503: nothing found, only „supported headphone impedance: 16 to 600 ohms“, kind of Sennheiser HDVA?
Plus Vali may have some tube coloring and all of them have relatively low power output of some hundred milliwatts in the low-impedance range.
Not the best conditions to arouse the NightHawk, imho.

 

[Robert777]

   
All NightHawks have the same tuning, and we have tight QC for driver matching and conformity with our golden curve.
 
Because NH has a low, flat impedance curve and very linear performance with regard to dynamics and output level, a wider range of amplification pairings is possible. However, I do highly recommend amps with output impedances of 3 ohms or less. In my experience, NH works best with clean, linear, "transparent" amps, and these tend to be solid-state. I have tested some amps that have higher distortion than NightHawk, especially in the midrange, which potentially means that the characteristics of the amp are more dominant than those of the headphone. For this reason, I tend to favor SS over tube with NH, but there are always exceptions. Ultimately, what sounds best to you is best.
 
An amp with a 50 ohm output impedance will be a poor match for NightHawk, and it sounds like that's what you experienced with the HDVA 600. 
 
 
 
My personal favorite pairings at the moment are the Chord Hugo [$$$], Violectric HPA V100 [$$], and AudioQuest DragonFly [$]. But I just received a Moon Neo 430HA [$$$$] and Violectric V281 [$$$], and I expect these should both be stellar, albeit quite pricey.

Such a head-fi dilemma. Saving up for the V281 is the only thing holding me back from purchasing the Nighthawks.

 

[piaudio]

Which headphones do you compare with to conclude it is less resolution?

Hey! It's really cool that these are getting a lot of positive marks from people around here. My impressions of the Nighthawks have been less positive, though. I've listened to these a few times now at my local hi-fi store. My first impression was that they lacked detail and after subsequent listens from several sources, my opinion remains the same--there seems to be a significant lack of resolution and detail with these. Not trying to hate, but if anyone out there is thinking of snagging these without having heard them first be warned: not for treble/detail lovers. 

 

[SearchOfSub]

That's what I'm wondering too. Seems to be a step above HD650 in resolution and also a step above in musicality. It's on same level with Pandora Hope 6 and lacking just a little bit to HD800 - but trumps it in musicality.

 

[joeq70]

That's what I'm wondering too. Seems to be a step above HD650 in resolution and also a step above in musicality. It's on same level with Pandora Hope 6 and lacking just a little bit to HD800 - but trumps it in musicality.

It has less resolution to my ears than most mid-fi and up headphones I've listened to. I've heard most of the popular ones. The few times that that I demoed the Nighthawk, I had on hand HD600, HD800, Symphones Magnum V6, and Grado SR325. The Nighthawks were the least resolving of the bunch. The difference in resolution between it and the HD800 is not small...it is a massive chasm. Don't get me wrong, it is not that the Nighthawk does everything wrong. I just hear a severe graininess in it's sound that I find unlistenable.

 

[JMCIII]

  otherwize the overall sound was terrific. It pulls you in, and you ended up listening longer than I had planned. 
 
 
 

 
If you read my review, then you'll know that this is a quality I think is one of the NightHawks strengths, that they play music in such a natural way as to keep you listening far longer than you'd planned. I know I'd put them on for a song or two and end up listening to the entire album, time after time.
 
As for the "supposed" lack of detail, all I can say is listen closer. The detail is there, in every frequency, it's just not highlighted as some headphones reproduce it, but made more a part of the music (like you'd hear it live). 

 

[piaudio]

I can only say audition in stores is not the ideal, I hate to  spend time trying but getting my friend who works in headphone shop will give the most accurate reviews while work and play at the same atmosphere.

 

[joeq70]

I think all these amps have too high output impedance for the NightHawk’s 24 ohms.
Sony PHA-1: 7-10 ohms, Schiit Vali: 6.5 ohms, TEAC UD-503: nothing found, only „supported headphone impedance: 16 to 600 ohms“, kind of Sennheiser HDVA?
Plus Vali may have some tube coloring and all of them have relatively low power output of some hundred milliwatts in the low-impedance range.
Not the best conditions to arouse the NightHawk, imho.

I would welcome an opportunity to hear the Nighthawk on a synergistic rig someday. While I think it is likely the case that I simply do not care for the Nighthawk's sound and never will, I acknowledge that equipment pairing can have a big impact on a headphone's sound.

 

[KLJTech]

   
If you read my review, then you'll know that this is a quality I think is one of the NightHawks strengths, that they play music in such a natural way as to keep you listening far longer than you'd planned. I know I'd put them on for a song or two and end up listening to the entire album, time after time.
 
As for the "supposed" lack of detail, all I can say is listen closer. The detail is there, in every frequency, it's just not highlighted as some headphones reproduce it, but made more a part of the music (like you'd hear it live). 

 
I'm getting all the detail that I do with my other headphones, it just that the Nighthawks are more comfortable and their tonal balance (after break-in/burn-in time) allow you to listen for hours without listener fatigue. With good recordings, they sound extremely spacious, very realistic detail and have the ability to sound stunning. My oldest son went to college on a music scholarship and he and I both listened to a few of his recordings (recorded about 4 years ago in his music department) of acoustic guitar and cello and we both thought they were spot on with the Nighthawks. My AKG K701's, Grado RS1's and HE-500's sound good, but we thought the NightHawks were truer to the original material. 
 
That's not to say that the NightHawks are the best headphone for everyone as no headphone will please everybody. I do think that listening to them at a store is a bit iffy as you have no idea how long they've been played and most (no all) tube amps probably have too high an output impedance to mate well with the 25 Ohm NH's. In my bedroom, I have a Parasound Zdac and its headphone output is 10 ohms and "to my ears" the NightHawks don't sound nearly as good when played from its headphone amp. I have the same issue if I use lower impedance IEM's with the HP amp built into that DAC. It's like it sucks the life out of them...not so with higher impedance can's. 
 
I know that many here don't believe that burn-in can possibly make any difference, yet this is a headphone that after I listened to it right out of the box, I was certain that I would be returning it (I left the Tidal subscription and cleaning cloths packet unopened) due to what I perceived as rolled off highs. AudioQuest recommends 150 hours, I kept track and did almost twice that amount of time though I seriously doubt the extra time made a big difference. I had a head cold so it was no skin off my nose to go ahead and let them play longer than I had planned. 
 
I don't find the differences of opinion here that surprising, I doubt we would all agree upon the same source gear or speakers so why would we all agree on the same set of headphones? The most important thing is to go with what works best for you and allows you to enjoy your music the most...not what is popular or what pleases others. 

 

[bracko]

I would welcome an opportunity to hear the Nighthawk on a synergistic rig someday. While I think it is likely the case that I simply do not care for the Nighthawk's sound and never will, I acknowledge that equipment pairing can have a big impact on a headphone's sound.

Equipment pairing can have big impact on a headphones sound but I don't believe it can change it to the degree that a bad sounding headphone (in my ears) would, in some kind of magical way, sound more pleasing. The sound signature is the first thing you hear after all.

 

[inthere]

  Equipment pairing can have big impact on a headphones sound but I don't believe it can change it to the degree that a bad sounding headphone (in my ears) would, in some kind of magical way, sound more pleasing. The sound signature is the first thing you hear after all.

 
 Nighthawk has sounded bad, and I mean bad to the point where they sounded like $10 headphones on some of my tube amps. I'm talking audible distortion from 30% volume and up. 
 
Put them on an Audeze Deckard, a Schist Asgard, Magni, Fulla, Cayin C5, Fiio E12, or anything else solid state and you get Nirvana. No distortion or anything even remotely resembling distortion. Crystal clear musical bliss. 
 
Now there may be some non-tube amps that also give the Nighthawk this problem, but I haven't found one yet. I'm sure they're out there though.

 

[JMCIII]

I'm getting all the detail that I do with my other headphones, it just that the Nighthawks are more comfortable and their tonal balance (after break-in/burn-in time) allow you to listen for hours without listener fatigue. With good recordings, they sound extremely spacious, very realistic detail and have the ability to sound stunning. My oldest son went to college on a music scholarship and he and I both listened to a few of his recordings (recorded about 4 years ago in his music department) of acoustic guitar and cello and we both thought they were spot on with the Nighthawks. My AKG K701's, Grado RS1's and HE-500's sound good, but we thought the NightHawks were truer to the original material. 

That's not to say that the NightHawks are the best headphone for everyone as no headphone will please everybody. I do think that listening to them at a store is a bit iffy as you have no idea how long they've been played and most (no all) tube amps probably have too high an output impedance to mate well with the 25 Ohm NH's. In my bedroom, I have a Parasound Zdac and its headphone output is 10 ohms and "to my ears" the NightHawks don't sound nearly as good when played from its headphone amp. I have the same issue if I use lower impedance IEM's with the HP amp built into that DAC. It's like it sucks the life out of them...not so with higher impedance can's. 

I know that many here don't believe that burn-in can possibly make any difference, yet this is a headphone that after I listened to it right out of the box, I was certain that I would be returning it (I left the Tidal subscription and cleaning cloths packet unopened) due to what I perceived as rolled off highs. AudioQuest recommends 150 hours, I kept track and did almost twice that amount of time though I seriously doubt the extra time made a big difference. I had a head cold so it was no skin off my nose to go ahead and let them play longer than I had planned. 

I don't find the differences of opinion here that surprising, I doubt we would all agree upon the same source gear or speakers so why would we all agree on the same set of headphones? The most important thing is to go with what works best for you and allows you to enjoy your music the most...not what is popular or what pleases others. 

I have the Zdac V.2 and I agree. I don't really care for the sound of the two together (though the Parasound is a wonderful DAC). But plug them into my Original Electronics Master and nirvana.

 

[bracko]

   
 Nighthawk has sounded bad, and I mean bad to the point where they sounded like $10 headphones on some of my tube amps. I'm talking audible distortion from 30% volume and up. 
 
Put them on an Audeze Deckard, a Schist Asgard, Magni, Fulla, Cayin C5, Fiio E12, or anything else solid state and you get Nirvana. No distortion or anything even remotely resembling distortion. Crystal clear musical bliss. 
 
Now there may be some non-tube amps that also give the Nighthawk this problem, but I haven't found one yet. I'm sure they're out there though.

Could it be the low damping factor when using it with tube amps? 
It seems the Nighthawks are like Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde 

 

[KLJTech]

I have the Zdac V.2 and I agree. I don't really care for the sound of the two together (though the Parasound is a wonderful DAC). But plug them into my Original Electronics Master and nirvana.

 
I have the first Zdac in a small bedroom system, from what I've read they've left the DAC portion the same yet improved the headphone amp. I do believe (could be wrong) that the output impedance is still 10 Ohms and that simply doesn't work well with some lower impedance headphones and IEM's..which is a shame as the DAC sounds great and I'm a huge Parasound fan. I have two of their Halo amps and they have driven anything I've hooked them up to, including big Magnepans that require a lot of juice to truly sing. 
 
Output impedance can make a huge impact on the sound of your headphones or IEM's. I often use a pair of Klipsch X10's for listening to audiobooks (I find them very comfortable) yet I plugged them into my Zdac and they had no bottom end at all, didn't matter since it was for an audiobook yet if you switch over to music you'd be very disappointed.  

 

[kman1211]

   
 Nighthawk has sounded bad, and I mean bad to the point where they sounded like $10 headphones on some of my tube amps. I'm talking audible distortion from 30% volume and up. 
 
Put them on an Audeze Deckard, a Schist Asgard, Magni, Fulla, Cayin C5, Fiio E12, or anything else solid state and you get Nirvana. No distortion or anything even remotely resembling distortion. Crystal clear musical bliss. 
 
Now there may be some non-tube amps that also give the Nighthawk this problem, but I haven't found one yet. I'm sure they're out there though.

I haven't had the chance to try the Nighthawks on many tube amps, the only ones I tried them on were various hybrids and some more expensive tube amps which I felt all sounded great on the Nighthawks. Some reason I often found the Nighthawks to sound better to me on tubes given they have low enough output impedance for the Nighthawks or are just an oddly good match.
 
I did find comparing the Magni to the Lyr 2 that the Magni sounded more distorted and less clear than the Lyr 2. The Lyr 2 also sounded less clear with the LISST solid state tubes compared to NOS tubes with the Nighthawk. I assume the Nighthawk will also sound good on the Project Ember I or II but never tried that combo. 
 
With the nighthawks it's definitely best to play it safe with low output impedance SS or hybrid gear though.