[wolfen68]

I use my ihp-140 with the headphones in my signature. My main complaint (because I really like the iRiver otherwise) is the cool, dry sound that the 140 produces in comparison to my Archos Recorder. It sounds "digital" and every little defect jumps out at you and it sometimes seems shrill...especially with my 225's which are borderline requiring an amp anyways. I'm a detail freak, but I found the iRiver's presention somewhat fatiguing over time with the Grados (and not too impressive to start with).

I purchased a used headsave go-vibe from comabereni (thanks!) and I must say that while the change is not earth shattering, I am pleasantly surprised at the results.

On my test tracks, the go-vibe warms up and gives the music a more flowing and easier on the ear presentation. It has effectively reduced the sharpness I found disconcerting with the Grados and iRiver. The bass seems more even, but I can't say that it is terribly better than straight out of the iRiver...just easier to take in. The white noise introduced by the go-vibe is non-existent on the grados, and very low with my UE5c's (which are sensitive to this). I even tried the go-vibe on the headphone out of my archos and it added a similar pleasant listening effect.

General observations:

- The 140's line out is superior and more impactful than the headphone out. I set the volume at around 32 during my testing.

- The go-vibe drives the grados to deafening levels.

- The go-vibe added virtually nothing to the UE5c's. This was not a surprise. The UE5c's actually detect that there is a very slight loss in detail as everything gets more "creamy" with the go-vibe.

- My KSC-35's saw a slight improvement with the amp. Not enough to warrant using regularly while on the move.

All in all a neat little unit. I would rank it as equal or slightly superior to the 2004 TAH I had awhile ago. Take this with a grain of salt as I'm going by my memory on that one.

I'm using alkalines for now...I'll see how it goes.

 

[Kirosia]

I agree that the IHP has a very dry, digital sound. But I honestly do not think the Line is superior. Yes it is more "impactful", but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better. The soundstage is constricted, and the "impactful" sound is because the music is shoved in your face. It sounds more dynamic, but the sound is really crappy overall (compared to the headphone out). I amp the H. out and think it sounds much better (closer to "audiophile" in a portable sense). More airyness and balance. Of course you have your opinions and I have mine.

 

[terrymx]

i'm getting a mint vibe too, should have all the same part as your. i prefer the ihp line out. hphone out have unbalanced bass (as with all irivers i've tried). line out is cleaner and bass is more controlled. i connect the hpone out to my harmno kardon receiver to a pair standing polk speaker and it has treble skrills and mad bass distortion, through the line out it was very clean.
i think the imaging/layering is lacking from the iriver sound, not the sound stage. its soundstage is ...so-so.