Heed CanAmp
May 3, 2007 at 11:13 PM Post #1,876 of 2,784
As a painter and a writer, I appreciate the above posts.

It also makes me look kindly upon the Heed, based upon the company it keeps!
600smile.gif


=Gregg Fedchak=
 
May 4, 2007 at 5:23 AM Post #1,878 of 2,784
YAY...Got her in!!!

Open her up for the full photo shoot, I'd be interested in the internals....

Won't be long till we hear your review hopefully
wink.gif


TIA
 
May 4, 2007 at 5:58 AM Post #1,880 of 2,784
Ok I'll take more pics of the internals tomorrow.

It's a good thing I'm not reviewing this amp for StereoMojo, otherwise I wouldn't be able to say anything about it right now. I'm still going to withhold my impressions anyway, good things come to those who wait!
tongue.gif


Major kudos to Dan btw, fantastic guy to deal with folks! He's one reason alone to buy the CanAmp!
smily_headphones1.gif
I've started a feedback thread for him too, the new owners should go over and post!
 
May 4, 2007 at 8:20 PM Post #1,882 of 2,784
I'll try to go for pics tonight when I get home from work.

CANAMP - INITIAL IMPRESSIONS - 0 HOURS

So I started listening last night. Fresh out of the box and all that. Plugged in my main ICs, the Silver Res Analog (not exactly finding the Audioquest Python as good as I hoped but that's barely used so I'm burning it in as well).

First, the good part. It's a nice amp out of the box. Good clarity, deep strong bass, good soundstage width.

Now the bad. I was expecting something much better than this based on all the raving - saying it competed with GS-1, better than all other solid-states up to $1K, etc. In its present state, it does not compete with GS-1 IMO. Soundstage depth was so lacking it was immediately obvious. It also sounded less transparent on the source signal, with an emphasis on low bass, and there's a funny sinkhole on the upper treble. There was also a strange recession on the upper mids that reduced the power of female vocals that effectively negated what the K701 sound natively does for them.

Articulation and attack weren't anything to write about either. For something that's been said to be a "giant killer," I was really disappointed. It's not deficient in this area, but I'm very used to the GS-1 at this point, and it pales next to the GS-1. Notes did not sound like they were emanating from empty space. Hopefully burn-in rectifies this.

There was also a quality about the sound that made it feel suffocating, as if the air was being sucked out of the image. Again, this pales compared to the GS-1 which excels at this and provides plenty of air & breathing room, as much as is being given by the source.

To summarize, I'm not very impressed at the initial state of the amp. We'll see what 16 hours of burn-in does when I get home from work.
tongue.gif


It does already sound more transparent than the Gilmore Lite v2 w/ DPS though, with fewer alterations on the signal. I don't presently have my Gilmore Lite stack though, I sent it out yesterday as part of Loaner #4, so direct comparisons will be made when the amp returns home.

A disclaimer for those who might get the impression that I have a bias for the GS-1: I don't. There are indeed some sonic flaws I find with the GS-1, which is the reason I have the GS-X (presently unlistened to though, but that will soon change). The GS-1 is simply currently the only amp I've heard/own that's exceedingly transparent and clear with unmatched soundstage width and depth, acting as a literal window into the sound of the source, a quality I haven't yet found with other amps. I may also be alone (or at least in the company of very few) in the opinion that a solid-state amp should not be inflecting its own sound on the input signal - when I sit down to listen, I want to be able to hear the source, with the amp getting out of the way as completely as possible.
 
May 4, 2007 at 8:24 PM Post #1,883 of 2,784
Very interesting viewpoint.. Not in unison with the 1,000 page Heed thread. Hmmm, I wonder has anyone else experienced this at 0 hours with their Heed?
confused.gif
Most people claim it packs a big whallop at 200+ hours (???)...

Hmmm...inquiring minds, want to know!
 
May 4, 2007 at 8:47 PM Post #1,884 of 2,784
I received mine last night and was only able to listen for a short time, about an hour. First off, I'm no audio expert, but I know what I heard, and from my experience right out the door I was very much pleased and impressed.

I had planned to bring it to work and listen all day, but in my haste I brought everything except the cable to connect to my source ! DOH !!!

I guess I'll have to wait until tonight, but as I said, I'm liking what I hear so far.
etysmile.gif
 
May 4, 2007 at 8:48 PM Post #1,885 of 2,784
Not at all unexpected Asr....

This is not at all to devalue what it is the Heed does do very well inline with its price especially when compared by a listener use to the GS-1 or GS-X...

Looking forward to more pointed criticism....

As well as pointedly defining its strenths...

I'm not at all disappointed in your fair assessments.

T&TIA
 
May 4, 2007 at 9:19 PM Post #1,886 of 2,784
I remember I was very dismayed too when I listened to my Heed first time fresh out of the box. I gave quite unflattering first impressions, but after few hours of burn in and mating the amp with another set of ICs I was sold. (I went to a live concert while the amp was settling in, perhaps that contributed to resetting my brain :F). I ditched the tunes I had been listening with my old amp and dug out those that I couldn't enjoy with it and that's where I noticed Canamps strengths. The point I fell in love with this amp was when I remarked that I was listening to the _music_ instead of an amp with strengths and weaknesses.
 
May 5, 2007 at 6:04 AM Post #1,888 of 2,784
FURTHER IMPRESSIONS - 18 HOURS

No pics of the insides yet, sorry. Too tired after a busy week at work. Will get to that some other time this weekend.

I think I might want to preface this update by saying that I'm probably one of very few on Head-Fi that want to hear the sonic virtues of a source more than what might come from the amp. I read this forum constantly and it appears that most people here expect and want an amp to either alter their source's sound, or cover up its sonic flaws, or add something to the sound. Incidentally, most such people don't listen to CD players. Nothing against people who listen like that, just saying I'm not one of them.

That said, if these early signs are a slight indication of what's to come, the CanAmp may much more likely be for that camp, rather than the camp that I come from.

I'm saying this because the CanAmp is a fine amp - aside from a few sonic mis-steps right now, for the most part, I can say without reservation it's worth its price tag.

With that part out of the way, I'm afraid this update is going to reflect even more negatively on the CanAmp. The GS-1 doesn't cost that much more than the CanAmp relatively speaking, but its sound is so much more accomplished, and its sonic virtues instantly recognizeable and appreciated when switching between the two. The scope of the soundstage is so much clearer, wider, and deeper in comparison, and imaging is so pin-point. Not that these are attributes of the amp necessarily, as it's supposed to amplify only what it's receiving - more specifically, the GS-1 has the ability to more realistically portray soundstage being derived at the source level. It also effortlessly reveals layers upon layers, and gives them breathing space between each other. And layers within the mix are cleanly placed, with so much focus that there's vibrancy. The CanAmp is not at this level or even half the level yet - I'm not getting a sense it's reaching into space, picking out layers, and making them clear and focused so you can track them by ear if you so choose.

The CanAmp's positioning within the soundstage is also not very exact, as if it has the inability to track positioning.

Also compared with the GS-1, there's a lack of finesse and refinement - it's a bit more brash, more forward-sounding. An assertive quality to it, whereas the GS-1 has something more of a passive quality.

Finally, the CanAmp is not catching the richness, timbre, or texture of instruments that the GS-1 effortlessly retrieves off my Arcam CD73. It actually sounds like it's neutering the sound from the Arcam in comparison. With the GS-1, there's a deep alluring sense of body and texture - scraping, slips, brushing - if those are there, the GS-1 makes it come across. The CanAmp is presently not fully getting these details.

Burn-in to continue...
 
May 5, 2007 at 6:30 AM Post #1,889 of 2,784
Quote:

Originally Posted by Asr /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The GS-1 doesn't cost that much more than the CanAmp relatively speaking...


From Headamp's website it seems that the GS-1 is 2x the price of CanAmp...
wink.gif
 
May 5, 2007 at 1:34 PM Post #1,890 of 2,784
Quote:

Originally Posted by yrh0413 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
From Headamp's website it seems that the GS-1 is 2x the price of CanAmp...
wink.gif





LOL.... Yes......

Also, I think I read this or a quite similarly worded review comparing the GS-1 vs another amp, which cost 2X the GS-1
wink.gif


All kidding aside, this is just what I wanted to know with regards to the Heed and how exactly it does stack up against amps which cost more and what is is it is lacking in that regard.

Nicely done Asr, I thank you sir....
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top