[musickid]

very good point vr. i only had b2 as a marker as to what may be in my imagination.

 

[JaZZ]

is a h2 stanalone mscaler confirmed by chord for the future or just hearsay?

Yes, it has been sort of confirmed by hearsay, although without any release date.

 

[ubs28]

Yes, it has been sort of confirmed by hearsay, although without any release date.

Is it only a mscalar or does it also have Poly features? And any rumours how big it will be? (Seeing how much bulk the Poly adds to the Mojo, a Hugo 2 addon will probably make it a more stationary unit rather than a portable DAC.)

 

[JaZZ]

Speculations and rumors about size and configuration will follow by and by. What's passably certain is that it will be a stationary device to be connected by cables.

 

[jlbrach]

Hello headfiers!

As we expected, yesterday was an amazing day!

We spent all the day enjoying with several configurations and tests using some of the best headphones and equipments in the market.

Of course there is a long highway ahead if you enter in the Dave and Blu2 road but this "street" is not bad at all :-D

Just some disclaimers before starting:

• This is not a review.
• We bought all the equipments.
• No brand or store supported us.
• Our opinions are totally subjective.
• Moon 430HA is on sales forum since some days ago because my lifestyle requires more portable solutions.
• Sorry for my English

ZEUS XRA + AK300 vs ZEUS XRA + Hugo2
You can read my opinions here: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/emp...rmerly-earwerkz.786335/page-698#post-14002727
Just to sum up, Zeus XRA with Hugo2 is amazing compared to AK300 but not perfect because of the hiss.
If you are going to listen rock, house or some "noisy" music in no so quiet environments, Hugo2 is perfect.
But if you love jazz, small bands and enjoy the music at night in the silence of your room, then AK300 (with lower detail, huge stage and zero hiss) will be a better option IMHO.


800s
I have tested these headphones a lot during the last 8 months combined with AK300 + Moon, Hugo2 + Moon and just Hugo2. But I was interested in discovering if my opinions match or not with my friend ones.

He started with AK300 alone through 2.5mm balanced connection. Volumen 80-90 of 130. You can hear them but...

Then he connected 800s to the Moon using 4 pines XLR balanced connection, using AK300 as a DAC with a 2.5mm line out cable to the double XLR balanced input of the Moon. And of course the improvement was huge in all senses. Can you live with this configuration? Of course! Specially if you never test another DAC

Time to change AK300 and plug in the Hugo2 but keeping the Moon and... OMG! what happened?! This is incredible better. Now the music engages you much more. And not only for a more detailed sound. Transparency, clarity, stage,... This is a global and huge improvement.

Finally we tested 800s directly connected to Hugo2 without the Moon.
What was the result? You get all the sound that H2+Moon gives you but with a little extra of transparency. It is no so much. It is necessary to pay attention and choose the right songs but definitely it is there.

So after this first test, my friend and I have the same opinion.

• The improvement from AK300 as a DAC to the Hugo2 as a DAC is huuuuuuugeeee.
• Moon gives you more "power" without taking almost nothing... but in this case with 800s + H2 you don`t need that extra power (in our humble opinion).
• We both prefer the 800s directly to the Hugo2. (notice that I said prefer, no it is better or similar)

FOCAL UTOPIA
Time to jump to the Focal Utopia. My friend has this headphone for several months but in my case just since two weeks.

We decided to focus our tests trying to compare H2 + Moon vs H2 alone and the results were different from what we got with 800s.

• Both of us were not able to discover any change in the sound comparing those configurations.
• 800s seems to be more sensible to the equipment you put in the chain than Focal Utopia.
• Moon demonstrates again to be an amazing transparent amp not changing at all the sound that the Hugo2 creates... but it is not necessary to put it in the chain for Focal Utopia.

AUDEZE LCD-4
Ok headfiers. This is what most of you were waiting for... and we know it

My friend has the LCD-4 for several years ago. In my case it was the second time I tried them. And of course we tried to compare again H2 + Moon vs H2 alone.

So I put the LCD-4 on... Ok, nice touch but heavier than the previous ones. In any case the carbon headband is essential to enjoy them because the weight is distributed and you don't feel them in one point over you head.

First I connected LCD-4 to the Hugo2 alone.
Volumen level: between green and cyan depending on the track in my case, a little more for my friend.

My first impressions:
More sub bass than Utopia.
The stage is more narrow than Utopia but more deep too.
I could't say that LCD-4 are less detailed than Utopia but definitely the sound profile is different.
Bad news for my pocket: you can live with both of them at the same time

Regarding Hugo2, nothing to say. Enough power to listen at insane volumen levels.
Let's see what happened connected to Moon. Low gain and volumen at 50-55.

My friend looked at me and he discovered immediately that expression in my face: F....K !!!!!
Remember what we said regarding 800s? Ok now it was the opposite. Moon clearly was giving to me an extra with the LCD-4. I am not going to say better sound, but an extra that made me enjoy with them definitely more.

So I took out the LCD-4 to check if the opinion of my friend was the same or not.
And again... F....K!!!!

So just to sum up:

• We both prefer the sound of the LCD-4 using H2 + Moon than only using the H2.
• The differences are there, specially with chords and bass.

AUDEZE LCD-X
I have never tested this headphone before. My friend bought it several years ago.
He has the LCD-X with the standard band, not the carbon one... and you notice it a lot.

These are the more easy to drive headphones we tested during all the day.
Red levels using H2 and 30 in low gain using the Moon.

I have to say that I don't like them too much.
I felt them a little bit bright. The stage was right but it was more difficult to me to put every instrument in the right place. Specially with pianos.
So I didn't spend too much time with them.

Conclusions:

• H2 or H2 + Moon... you choose. There is no difference at all.

WHAT SET DO YOU PREFER?
Just for funny we asked ourselves this question and here you have the results:

My friend:

• LCD-4 + H2 + Moon... but the Moon it's mine and he asked me to turn it off early in the morning. He was trying to forget all the day that sound :-D
• Choose 2 headphones: LCD4 and 800s

My turn:

• Utopia + H2.
• Choose 2 headphones: Utopia + 800s... but I hate my friend because I discovered how the LCD-4 could sound and how "confortable" are them with the carbon headband.

SOME TRACKS FOR TESTING
Finally I want to share with all of you some tracks that we used during the day.

"El Vito"
https://tidal.com/track/77319915
Amazing with the LCD4 + Moon + H2, specially the chords.

"A Thousand Kisses Deep"
https://tidal.com/track/82250316
Another great track for Audeze but fully enjoyable with Utopia.

"A Thousand Kisses Deep"
https://tidal.com/track/32570002
This version didn't work so well with Audeze but Utopias... wow!

"Wagner: Lohengrin, WWV 75, Prelude To Act I (Live)"
https://tidal.com/track/83317717
Take your 800s and forget everything else

"Corrina corrina"
https://tidal.com/track/9377647
I love this track. It is the first I listen when I have to test something.
My friend prefers with Audeze. In my case Utopia

"Camaron (taranta)"
https://tidal.com/track/3979314
Impressive chords. Awesome record.

"Barley"
https://tidal.com/track/78402088
OMG!

"200 more miles"
https://tidal.com/track/13045200
Ideal for Utopia IMHO.

"Love, Your Spell Is Everywhere"
https://tidal.com/track/13704208
Amazing using LCD-4


And that's all!
If we have to sum up all the day in one sentence this will be the right one:
Chord Hugo2 is the best investment we both made to enjoy our headphones. Period.

Extra ball
We NEED the 2Go now!
We DESIRE an mScalerGo too!

Thanks for your time!

fine review but no way the LCD-4 has a more narrow soundstage than the Utopia...not even close....I own both

 

[MikeRight]

fine review but no way the LCD-4 has a more narrow soundstage than the Utopia...not even close....I own both

Maybe it is the feeling or subjective sensation after discovering a more deep than wide stage (LCD-4). Something that is new for me. I am used to wider but no so deeper stages.

 

[miketlse]

Is it only a mscalar or does it also have Poly features? And any rumours how big it will be? (Seeing how much bulk the Poly adds to the Mojo, a Hugo 2 addon will probably make it a more stationary unit rather than a portable DAC.)

The posts from chord/RW indicate that it will connect via the BNC connectors, which probably indicates a stationary unit.
@dmance has already posted his experience connecting a Blu2 to a Hugo 2, so in effect we know that the technology works, but can only make assumptions about what the MScaler case looks like.

 

[Triode User]

Yes, it has been sort of confirmed by hearsay, although without any release date.

Haha, well if that old news counts as confirmation then all I can say is don’t hold your breath.

 

[miketlse]

Haha, well if that old news counts as confirmation then all I can say is don’t hold your breath.

Very true.

 

[vlach]

Hello headfiers!

As we expected, yesterday was an amazing day!

We spent all the day enjoying with several configurations and tests using some of the best headphones and equipments in the market.

Of course there is a long highway ahead if you enter in the Dave and Blu2 road but this "street" is not bad at all :-D

Just some disclaimers before starting:

• This is not a review.
• We bought all the equipments.
• No brand or store supported us.
• Our opinions are totally subjective.
• Moon 430HA is on sales forum since some days ago because my lifestyle requires more portable solutions.
• Sorry for my English

ZEUS XRA + AK300 vs ZEUS XRA + Hugo2
You can read my opinions here: https://www.head-fi.org/threads/emp...rmerly-earwerkz.786335/page-698#post-14002727
Just to sum up, Zeus XRA with Hugo2 is amazing compared to AK300 but not perfect because of the hiss.
If you are going to listen rock, house or some "noisy" music in no so quiet environments, Hugo2 is perfect.
But if you love jazz, small bands and enjoy the music at night in the silence of your room, then AK300 (with lower detail, huge stage and zero hiss) will be a better option IMHO.


800s
I have tested these headphones a lot during the last 8 months combined with AK300 + Moon, Hugo2 + Moon and just Hugo2. But I was interested in discovering if my opinions match or not with my friend ones.

He started with AK300 alone through 2.5mm balanced connection. Volumen 80-90 of 130. You can hear them but...

Then he connected 800s to the Moon using 4 pines XLR balanced connection, using AK300 as a DAC with a 2.5mm line out cable to the double XLR balanced input of the Moon. And of course the improvement was huge in all senses. Can you live with this configuration? Of course! Specially if you never test another DAC

Time to change AK300 and plug in the Hugo2 but keeping the Moon and... OMG! what happened?! This is incredible better. Now the music engages you much more. And not only for a more detailed sound. Transparency, clarity, stage,... This is a global and huge improvement.

Finally we tested 800s directly connected to Hugo2 without the Moon.
What was the result? You get all the sound that H2+Moon gives you but with a little extra of transparency. It is no so much. It is necessary to pay attention and choose the right songs but definitely it is there.

So after this first test, my friend and I have the same opinion.

• The improvement from AK300 as a DAC to the Hugo2 as a DAC is huuuuuuugeeee.
• Moon gives you more "power" without taking almost nothing... but in this case with 800s + H2 you don`t need that extra power (in our humble opinion).
• We both prefer the 800s directly to the Hugo2. (notice that I said prefer, no it is better or similar)

FOCAL UTOPIA
Time to jump to the Focal Utopia. My friend has this headphone for several months but in my case just since two weeks.

We decided to focus our tests trying to compare H2 + Moon vs H2 alone and the results were different from what we got with 800s.

• Both of us were not able to discover any change in the sound comparing those configurations.
• 800s seems to be more sensible to the equipment you put in the chain than Focal Utopia.
• Moon demonstrates again to be an amazing transparent amp not changing at all the sound that the Hugo2 creates... but it is not necessary to put it in the chain for Focal Utopia.

AUDEZE LCD-4
Ok headfiers. This is what most of you were waiting for... and we know it

My friend has the LCD-4 for several years ago. In my case it was the second time I tried them. And of course we tried to compare again H2 + Moon vs H2 alone.

So I put the LCD-4 on... Ok, nice touch but heavier than the previous ones. In any case the carbon headband is essential to enjoy them because the weight is distributed and you don't feel them in one point over you head.

First I connected LCD-4 to the Hugo2 alone.
Volumen level: between green and cyan depending on the track in my case, a little more for my friend.

My first impressions:
More sub bass than Utopia.
The stage is more narrow than Utopia but more deep too.
I could't say that LCD-4 are less detailed than Utopia but definitely the sound profile is different.
Bad news for my pocket: you can live with both of them at the same time

Regarding Hugo2, nothing to say. Enough power to listen at insane volumen levels.
Let's see what happened connected to Moon. Low gain and volumen at 50-55.

My friend looked at me and he discovered immediately that expression in my face: F....K !!!!!
Remember what we said regarding 800s? Ok now it was the opposite. Moon clearly was giving to me an extra with the LCD-4. I am not going to say better sound, but an extra that made me enjoy with them definitely more.

So I took out the LCD-4 to check if the opinion of my friend was the same or not.
And again... F....K!!!!

So just to sum up:

• We both prefer the sound of the LCD-4 using H2 + Moon than only using the H2.
• The differences are there, specially with chords and bass.

AUDEZE LCD-X
I have never tested this headphone before. My friend bought it several years ago.
He has the LCD-X with the standard band, not the carbon one... and you notice it a lot.

These are the more easy to drive headphones we tested during all the day.
Red levels using H2 and 30 in low gain using the Moon.

I have to say that I don't like them too much.
I felt them a little bit bright. The stage was right but it was more difficult to me to put every instrument in the right place. Specially with pianos.
So I didn't spend too much time with them.

Conclusions:

• H2 or H2 + Moon... you choose. There is no difference at all.

WHAT SET DO YOU PREFER?
Just for funny we asked ourselves this question and here you have the results:

My friend:

• LCD-4 + H2 + Moon... but the Moon it's mine and he asked me to turn it off early in the morning. He was trying to forget all the day that sound :-D
• Choose 2 headphones: LCD4 and 800s

My turn:

• Utopia + H2.
• Choose 2 headphones: Utopia + 800s... but I hate my friend because I discovered how the LCD-4 could sound and how "confortable" are them with the carbon headband.

SOME TRACKS FOR TESTING
Finally I want to share with all of you some tracks that we used during the day.

"El Vito"
https://tidal.com/track/77319915
Amazing with the LCD4 + Moon + H2, specially the chords.

"A Thousand Kisses Deep"
https://tidal.com/track/82250316
Another great track for Audeze but fully enjoyable with Utopia.

"A Thousand Kisses Deep"
https://tidal.com/track/32570002
This version didn't work so well with Audeze but Utopias... wow!

"Wagner: Lohengrin, WWV 75, Prelude To Act I (Live)"
https://tidal.com/track/83317717
Take your 800s and forget everything else

"Corrina corrina"
https://tidal.com/track/9377647
I love this track. It is the first I listen when I have to test something.
My friend prefers with Audeze. In my case Utopia

"Camaron (taranta)"
https://tidal.com/track/3979314
Impressive chords. Awesome record.

"Barley"
https://tidal.com/track/78402088
OMG!

"200 more miles"
https://tidal.com/track/13045200
Ideal for Utopia IMHO.

"Love, Your Spell Is Everywhere"
https://tidal.com/track/13704208
Amazing using LCD-4


And that's all!
If we have to sum up all the day in one sentence this will be the right one:
Chord Hugo2 is the best investment we both made to enjoy our headphones. Period.

Extra ball
We NEED the 2Go now!
We DESIRE an mScalerGo too!

Thanks for your time!

I love the real, non-biased feedback! Very interesting to see the Moon offers nothing SQ wise over the H2 besides more gain. Well done!

 

[JaZZ]

Haha, well if that old news counts as confirmation then all I can say is don’t hold your breath.

In the video Rob himself confirms that there will be a separate M-Scaler in the foreseeable future – exactly what was asked for. I won't hold my breath for it, but won't buy a Blu 2 in the meantime either.

 

[mozes]

From a product portfolio perspective, I think it is important for Chord to have two Mscalers targeting two price brackets. One for Dave and another for Hugo2/Qutest.

 

[TomSix]

You're repeating the same old litany. Of course your ears decide what it's best for you. And of course you're entitled to prefer a certain sound. I'm an absolute advocate of tayloring the sound to one's liking, maybe more consequentially than most others. But you simply draw the wrong conclusions. Fault number one is the notion that a headphone (or your headphone) has to sound perfect with a perfect source and amp. In fact no headphone sounds perfect, so how can it sound perfect with perfect gear? It's always a matter of synergy – which means (passably) compensating flaws. Like so many posters with your mindset you keep ignoring the essential points brought up from the «no-amp» camp...




It's not about postulating a single tonal balance and sonic characteristic as the only true way to listen to music for a real audiophile, it's about proposing the best way to acheive the best sound possible, independent of the individual perception and sonic ideal. You may know that the Hugos' integrated «headphone amp» can't be bypassed. So how can you seriously expect a signal «improvement» from reamplifying it? The only scenario where an extra amp would be beneficial is if the Hugo would be driven near clipping, hence to massively increased harmonic distortion. I think meanwhile you realize that this is – usually – not the case. Therefore it is really not helpful if people continue to spread the misinformation of the «underpowered headphone output» solely based on a sound that's too thin for their taste. The best remedy against thin sound is a bit of a bass increase, and it's absurd to delegate this task to an amp with its arbitrary coloration – and (as you may slowly be realizing) its bad habit to degrade transparency and transient response. Unfortunately the kind of colorations produced by an amp can absolutely be perceived as an improvement, the more so as it usually introduces a general forgivingness to tonal flaws (from the headphone's inevitably flawed frequency response).

Note that even the Hugo₂ isn't really neutral – no hi-fi component is! –, therefore the wish to get tonal perfection with plug and play is an illusion.

Hello folks,

Just thought I'd chime in a bit on this interesting discussion. On the "amp vs no amp" question; the amplifier "coloration" issue ; and the attendant question "how can an amplifier improve performance of a flawed source?" question.

There area a few important things to consider here, though they may seem subtle at first blush, are directly relevant to these questions.

On the issue of amplifier "coloration" : We have to be careful here, because though such "additive" phenomena surely do exist to widely varying degrees between various amplifiers, blanket assumptions about amplifier coloration can lead to erroneous conclusions. Case in point: tube amplifiers, particularly SET type amplifiers, are quite often/commonly believed to be "euphonic", that is, to add a pleasant but artificial character to the reproduced sound. There is a limited basis in reality here, as less-than-exceptional tube amplifier designs can often sound very nice, but be said to "round-off the edges" or "add warmth" etc to the music. In fact, some such colorations most often exist chiefly as a result of nonlinearities manifesting as IMD (inter-modulation distortion) which, though sometimes relatively benign, do quite audibly change the character of the reproduction.

Having said the above, and recognizing such potential phenomena as real and not uncommon, let me suggest often these facts tend to cause many to misinterpret/misunderstand the positive virtues of higher-quality tube amplification which are not the result of "coloration" or similar additive effects.

Let me propose a combination thought-experiment in conjunction with a subjective listening experiment. Here is the basis of the thought experiment:

Proposition (1): * If* a given amplifier's perceived virtues/pleasantness of sound is largely or wholly a function of introduced 'colorations' which would ostensibly be an additive phenomenon, i.e. the amplifier is artificially making the reproduction sound more pleasant, *then* we would logically have to assume said amplifier would introduce such coloration to *all* musical recordings, regardless of the objective quality of any given recording. The result would be crummy or mediocre recordings, not just quality recordings, would also sound better when played-back through such an amplifier.

Experiment for Proposition (1): Is the above found to be the case in actual listening? Do all recordings, poor or superb, seem to be euphonically improved to some degree, sound "better" through a given amp? If so, then logically it would be easy to conclude that an 'additive' mechanism is at play which uniformly brings effects into the playback not actually existing in the recordings themselves. This would be close to a "slam dunk", a "case closed" --no?

Question in relation to above Proposition (1) Experiment: Is the above what we actually find to be the case with higher-quality vacuum tube amplifiers? I will suggest that in fact the answer is no. One will find that poor quality recordings will most often, all the more apparently, be perceived to be compromised or flawed --often much less enjoyable because the "warts" are seemingly revealed. Conversely, recordings which are known to be of high quality *do* uniformly seem 'improved' or more engaging, with details and nuances objectively *known* to actually be part of the recorded musical performance and/or recording and mastering process becoming highlighted and more clearly perceived.

So.... therein lies a very fundamental argument against the proposition that the perceived virtues of some tube amplifiers are chiefly resultant of an 'additive' process of coloration, etc. We would have to ask ourselves how an amplifier would possibly be able to "know the difference" between crappy and excellent recordings! If the subjective results were, at core, the result of 'additive' contributions from the amplifier, then we would only expect such a mechanism to uniformly add it's euphonic "secret sauce" and juicy-up *all* recordings into something tastier. But... that is not what we find, rather one discovers the principle of "garbage in, garbage out" very much in play.

 

[JaZZ]

From a product portfolio perspective, I think it is important for Chord to have two Mscalers targeting two price brackets. One for Dave and another for Hugo2/Qutest.

Yes, that's one point. The other is that DAVE, Hugo₂ and Cutest are already there, waiting for the full spectrum of selling arguments to take effect, among them the «M-Scaler readiness». It would be bad marketing from Chord Electronics to wait another two or three years. That's why I think it won't take two years, not even 1½ years, till its launch.

 

[TomSix]

At the risk of ungracefully flooding the thread with "TMI", I'd like to add a further few thoughts in relation to the 'amp versus no amp' question as well expressed by JaZZ in a recent post (italics mine):

"It's not about postulating a single tonal balance and sonic characteristic as the only true way to listen to music for a real audiophile, it's about proposing the best way to acheive the best sound possible, independent of the individual perception and sonic ideal. You may know that the Hugos' integrated «headphone amp» can't be bypassed. So how can you seriously expect a signal «improvement» from reamplifying it? The only scenario where an extra amp would be beneficial is if the Hugo would be driven near clipping, hence to massively increased harmonic distortion. I think meanwhile you realize that this is – usually – not the case. Therefore it is really not helpful if people continue to spread the misinformation of the «underpowered headphone output» solely based on a sound that's too thin for their taste. The best remedy against thin sound is a bit of a bass increase, and it's absurd to delegate this task to an amp with its arbitrary coloration – and (as you may slowly be realizing) its bad habit to degrade transparency and transient response. Unfortunately the kind of colorations produced by an amp can absolutely be perceived as an improvement, the more so as it usually introduces a general forgivingness to tonal flaws (from the headphone's inevitably flawed frequency response)"

I think JaZZ poses some interesting questions here worthy of consideration. There are some subtleties, however, which I feel modify/challenge some of his conclusions as expressed.

On the surface, I agree it is very reasonable to ask how it would be expected that adding an additional stage of amplification to a high quality source/hp amp could possibly increase the fidelity of playback? Excepting of course, the obvious such as JaZZ mentions, in instances where the source amplifier were clipping because it simply had insufficient drive for a given set of headphones in use, and an additional amplifier of higher output were employed as remedy, etc.

Prima Facie, it would seem quite logical to assume that because *any* conceivable amplification device, will add it's own distortions, noise, phase shifts etc; therefore introducing such an additional unit into a playback chain would automatically degrade the net end-quality of the musical reproduction. Thus JaZZ poses just this question:

"...the Hugos' integrated «headphone amp» can't be bypassed. So how can you seriously expect a signal «improvement» from reamplifying it?"

This seems very elementary, and is a quite reasonable question. Allow me to propose, however, a factor of key significance which comes into play:

First, let me say that within a limited, bracketed portion of JaZZ's question/argument, I am in full agreement: Connecting *any* additional amplification stage/device into a signal chain (such as the instance in question here of sending the output of a high-quality player/HP amp as the Hugo through an additional headphone amplifier) will, invariably, degrade the quality of the signal being played to some degree --this is certainly true, and unavoidable. There are absolutely no perfect amplification devices in existence, and so to some degree, even if only slightly, signal quality is degraded the more stages a signal must pass through. NOTE: key emphasis on the term signal.

So, acknowledging the above, wouldn't it automatically be true that adding an external amplifier to an excellent playback unit such as the Hugo could not possibly improve the quality of musical playback through headphones? Here is where it gets a tad subtle, but there is a key factor we have yet to presently address: the question of the amplifier-to-headphone drive behavior of various amplifiers.

The electrical interface between an electronic amplification device (such as a headphone amplifier) and an electromechanical transducer (such as a headphone driver) is a very complex thing. Headphone drivers have frequency-dependent reactances, impulse behaviors, resonance and ringing behaviors, etc, etc, etc..... It would be very easy indeed if simply driving headphones from a very low output-resistance source/amp with a high damping factor and high output would automatically ensure us optimum playback performance, but unfortunately it's just not that simple.

To cut to the chase: the interface relationships between an amplifier and the headphones is a critical thing. To say it in simple terms, the synergy, or lack of synergy, between an amp and phones can "make or break" the net subjective result. Even though adding an additional amplifier to a unit such as a Hugo will measurably degrade the signal (as measured directly with electronic test gear) electrically to some degree, it is also true that the amplifier-to-load (headphones) parameters/performance plays a huge role in the net quality of the sonic playback.

To sum up:

The beneficial increase in acoustical performance which can come from a more optimal synergy between an amplifier and the headphones can easily overshadow the small additional signal distortions gained by plugging such an additional amplifier into the signal chain.

The complexities of amplifier-to-load (headphones or loudspeaker) behavior is, in my experience, widely/generally under appreciated. It's a realm of insufficient understanding and IMO in need of much further study/quantification.

Sorry, that surely got a bit pedantic...

Cheers!