[rsbrsvp]

The OOR is that good huh? I listened to it last weekend with the Diana TC and it sounded quite polite with a smallish soundstage. The sweet colouration is pretty nice though.

Not THAT good. Just a nice pleasing warm sound that go well with substandard digital sounding source or hyper analytical cans.

Both of these comments are somewhat correct IMHO. It is more polite. The sweet coloration of the oor is IMHO addictive. The CFA-3 is much more revealing, has ZERO sweetness of tone because it is just raw uncolored music. Yes- the CFA excels over the oor in most technical measures including extension, detail, transparency and soundstage to name just a few. However, to be fair, the oor has the more correct midrange presence and fullness (by a good amount) as the CFA-3 midrange is IMHO heavily compromised probably as a result of the superior extension and soundstage. Midrange presence is VERY important to me and I consider this a serious flaw. By the way, although the oor is somewhat polite, it can still punch pretty hard- just has a gentleness behind the punch. I know that may sound like a contradiction, but IMHO it is a correct explanation.

TONE has always been the most important aspect of headphone listening to me. The oor has it- and it is supremely beautiful while remaining very transparent. It sounds much more like real music with a beautiful analogue sweetness that IMHO is nearly perfect. Live music is not IMHO as raw and sterile sounding as the CFA-3 presents it. The CFA-3 is a very digital sounding piece of equipment which brings out technical prowess beyond anything I thought possible, but that does not mean it is more pleasant to listen to or more correct..

The CFA-3 can be tonally colored with a preamp as many have said- and perhaps one can get the best of both worlds... I have not succeeded in coloring the CFA-3 correctly and at this point I prefer it with no preamp; raw, and uncolored. The preamps I have tried ruin the raw sharpness of the presentation which make it so unique. These preamps round the sound- however slightly and diminish (however slightly) the stunning microdetail retrieval, and so far- I don't like the results. The CFA-3 needs to be left alone accepting it's many strengths and few shortcomings IMHO as it is. True, the oor is already rounded- but they got it down in a way that just sounds right. It was built and intended to be a rounded presentation- and it was done extraordinarily well.

I am very much leaning to keeping both amps... The are TOTALLY different in their presentation each having a place in my heart. The oor sounds way more like real live music IMHO and brings me pleasure through it's transparency and beautiful tone, but the CFA-3 is technically superior in almost every area and brings me pleasure through it's stunning accuracy and power .

I respect anyone who disagrees with my analysis. We all have different ears, and different souls. This is my take on the two amps and not necessarily anyone else's.. Head-fi is a place for sharing opinions and learning together.

 

[paradoxper]

Nods. Keep it.

I know the CFA3 and Elrog 300B has achieved that place I've been searching for. I hope you're there too.

 

[sahmen]

Both of these comments are somewhat correct IMHO. It is more polite. The sweet coloration of the oor is IMHO addictive. The CFA-3 is much more revealing, has ZERO sweetness of tone because it is just raw uncolored music. Yes- the CFA excels over the oor in most technical measures including extension, detail, transparency and soundstage to name just a few. However, to be fair, the oor has the more correct midrange presence and fullness (by a good amount) as the CFA-3 midrange is IMHO heavily compromised probably as a result of the superior extension and soundstage. Midrange presence is VERY important to me and I consider this a serious flaw. By the way, although the oor is somewhat polite, it can still punch pretty hard- just has a gentleness behind the punch. I know that may sound like a contradiction, but IMHO it is a correct explanation.

TONE has always been the most important aspect of headphone listening to me. The oor has it- and it is supremely beautiful while remaining very transparent. It sounds much more like real music with a beautiful analogue sweetness that IMHO is nearly perfect. Live music is not IMHO as raw and sterile sounding as the CFA-3 presents it. The CFA-3 is a very digital sounding piece of equipment which brings out technical prowess beyond anything I thought possible, but that does not mean it is more pleasant to listen to or more correct..

The CFA-3 can be tonally colored with a preamp as many have said- and perhaps one can get the best of both worlds... I have not succeeded in coloring the CFA-3 correctly and at this point I prefer it with no preamp; raw, and uncolored. The preamps I have tried ruin the raw sharpness of the presentation which make it so unique. These preamps round the sound- however slightly and diminish (however slightly) the stunning microdetail retrieval, and so far- I don't like the results. The CFA-3 needs to be left alone accepting it's many strengths and few shortcomings IMHO as it is. True, the oor is already rounded- but they got it down in a way that just sounds right. It was built and intended to be a rounded presentation- and it was done extraordinarily well.

I am very much leaning to keeping both amps... The are TOTALLY different in their presentation each having a place in my heart. The oor sounds way more like real live music IMHO and brings me pleasure through it's transparency and beautiful tone, but the CFA-3 is technically superior in almost every area and brings me pleasure through it's stunning accuracy and power .

I respect anyone who disagrees with my analysis. We all have different ears, and different souls. This is my take on the two amps and not necessarily anyone else's.. Head-fi is a place for sharing opinions and learning together.

Not in a position to agree or disagree as I am not familiar with either amp. Still, I actually find the comparative analysis to be very helpful except for the fact that you do not mention any DAC in assessing the sonic end product of either amp, and I am not sure how to interpret that omission. You seem to be more preoccupied with how a preamp might color the sound of the CFA3, but what about the impact of DACs? I am not sure whether you're implying that DACs are of no consequence in shaping the sonic end-product at all in either case, or whether the omission is simply a blind spot in the analysis.

 

[rsbrsvp]

I am using a Mytek Liberty 2 dac. This dac is essentiality pretty neutral. I did not think to bring the dac into the equation because it does not fundamentally change the reality of the how each amp. sounds. I used the same dac, same cables, source, headphones, etc. for both amps. I only changed the headphone amplifiers. So- all other factors were constant,

I think this is essentially reasonably fair. My intention was not to praise or demote either headphone amplifier but to analyze their inborn traits. Perhaps, a tube dac, or highly SS colored dac may match up better with the CFA-3 but that it not the point. I admitted in my analysis that the CFA-3 may in fact be able to be colored properly, but that "I" have not found the proper way to color it yet. Others have claimed they have and I am happy for them. I doubt however that any coloration will not take away somewhat from the uniquely sharp and incisive nature which makes the CFA-3 so special. The essential nature of the CFA-3- is IMHO a raw, naked, ultra transparent presentation with enormous power, control and finesse. It is also IMHO by it's nature somewhat "sterile" sounding and lacking midrange presence. And the oor/hypsos by nature is is all about analogue sweetness done right. It is also by it's nature, polite, or softer, and more limited in it's soundstage and extension to name just a few limitations. It can be modified somewhat even separate of the dac by changing the Hypsos voltage, but it nevertheless remains essentially what it is based on it's DNA and no DAC will fundamentally change that.

Please don't take my analysis personally. Cognitive dissonance plays a big role in headfi as people feel a need to defend their purchases at all costs. The CFA-3 is an INCREDIBLE component; but pretending it is perfect and pleasing to everyone's ears is an injustice. Same with the OOR or anything else.

 

[UntilThen]

TONE has always been the most important aspect of headphone listening to me.

Amen to that.

 

[jjshin23]

I am using a Mytek Liberty 2 dac. This dac is essentiality pretty neutral. I did not think to bring the dac into the equation because it does not fundamentally change the reality of the how each amp. sounds. I used the same dac, same cables, source, headphones, etc. for both amps. I only changed the headphone amplifiers. So- all other factors were constant,

I think this is essentially reasonably fair. My intention was not to praise or demote either headphone amplifier but to analyze their inborn traits. Perhaps, a tube dac, or highly SS colored dac may match up better with the CFA-3 but that it not the point. I admitted in my analysis that the CFA-3 may in fact be able to be colored properly, but that "I" have not found the proper way to color it yet. Others have claimed they have and I am happy for them. I doubt however that any coloration will not take away somewhat from the uniquely sharp and incisive nature which makes the CFA-3 so special. The essential nature of the CFA-3- is IMHO a raw, naked, ultra transparent presentation with enormous power, control and finesse. It is also IMHO by it's nature somewhat "sterile" sounding and lacking midrange presence. And the oor/hypsos by nature is is all about analogue sweetness done right. It is also by it's nature, polite, or softer, and more limited in it's soundstage and extension to name just a few limitations. It can be modified somewhat even separate of the dac by changing the Hypsos voltage, but it nevertheless remains essentially what it is based on it's DNA and no DAC will fundamentally change that.

Please don't take my analysis personally. Cognitive dissonance plays a big role in headfi as people feel a need to defend their purchases at all costs. The CFA-3 is an INCREDIBLE component; but pretending it is perfect and pleasing to everyone's ears is an injustice. Same with the OOR or anything else.

Appreciate your thoughts and opinions of what you like and not so much. Because of preferences like this, it has helped me develop my taste of what I like as well. For almost exactly the opposite reasons I like the sound I like and enjoy. Since I enjoy the midrange so much I have to push it back a little to enjoy the full canvas of the music. It almost balances the music for me. I completely respect the sound you enjoy because it works for you. Thanks again for your humble opinions of your likes and dislikes and explaining why. I’m sure it will help others understand how chains work for different people.

 

[rsbrsvp]

Appreciate your thoughts and opinions of what you like and not so much. Because of preferences like this, it has helped me develop my taste of what I like as well. For almost exactly the opposite reasons I like the sound I like and enjoy. Since I enjoy the midrange so much I have to push it back a little to enjoy the full canvas of the music. It almost balances the music for me. I completely respect the sound you enjoy because it works for you. Thanks again for your humble opinions of your likes and dislikes and explaining why. I’m sure it will help others understand how chains work for different people.

Your welcome..

 

[sahmen]

Please don't take my analysis personally.

I'm not. I'm just curious about how both amps might fare with A DAC, in my case, an NOS/R-2R DAC.

Thanks for your elaborate response.

 

[MN8372]

For what it is worth, I use a CFA3 with a Holo Audio May and it is a fantastic paring. No harshness at all. Clean, clear and punchy - yes. But also very refined in the sense that there is lots of control and no harshness. I personally would not use words like sterile or raw to describe this amplifier - but that’s just my take. Not knocking the Orr because I haven’t heard it (and historically I have tended to prefer a warmer more natural tonality - it’s just that I am getting great tonality out of my CFA3).

In my view the source does matter a lot with an amp of this calibre. I’ve thought about pairing with a tube pre-amp (largely due to recommendations on this thread from paradoxper and normie) but I’m in no rush. If I do get a tube pre-amp I would want it to double up as a stand-alone amp (can’t wait for more reviews of the Feliks Envy..). But again no rush and not sure if it will be worth it in my system with my headphones (I don’t currently have brighter headphones like the SR1A or TC - although one of those will be my next move I think).

 

[rsbrsvp]

For what it is worth, I use a CFA3 with a Holo Audio May and it is a fantastic paring. No harshness at all. Clean, clear and punchy - yes. But also very refined in the sense that there is lots of control and no harshness. I personally would not use words like sterile or raw to describe this amplifier - but that’s just my take. Not knocking the Orr because I haven’t heard it (and historically I have tended to prefer a warmer more natural tonality - it’s just that I am getting great tonality out of my CFA3).

In my view the source does matter a lot with an amp of this calibre. I’ve thought about pairing with a tube pre-amp (largely due to recommendations on this thread from paradoxper and normie) but I’m in no rush. If I do get a tube pre-amp I would want it to double up as a stand-alone amp (can’t wait for more reviews of the Feliks Envy..). But again no rush and not sure if it will be worth it in my system with my headphones (I don’t currently have brighter headphones like the SR1A or TC - although one of those will be my next move I think).

I do agree that the dac paring does make a difference- of course. I just believe the general nature of the CFA-3 is extraordinarily raw and revealing and that nature cannot be changed. DAC, preamp, or cables can deliver smoother, fuller, tubier, tonally colored, or any other kind of music-- but whatever is delivered to the CFA-3, will be revealed. I do believe a more tonally colored source would be revealed as such in the CFA-3. I just don't have one myself. My system is very neutral and I believe this is my problem; perhaps no one else's problem..

Based on my minimal experience with the amp. I would advise people who want some color to get it in a dac or preamp, or cables. If one has a very neutral system, it will not IMHO sound pleasant with the CFA-3. To dry, to sterile..

 

[rsbrsvp]

Has anyone tried a tube dac or a more saturated sounding dac like a Terminator plus with the CFA-3?

 

[K3cT]

What headphone do you use again? @rsbrsvp

 

[rsbrsvp]

TC and ES-R10

 

[normie610]

For what it is worth, I use a CFA3 with a Holo Audio May and it is a fantastic paring. No harshness at all. Clean, clear and punchy - yes. But also very refined in the sense that there is lots of control and no harshness. I personally would not use words like sterile or raw to describe this amplifier - but that’s just my take. Not knocking the Orr because I haven’t heard it (and historically I have tended to prefer a warmer more natural tonality - it’s just that I am getting great tonality out of my CFA3).

In my view the source does matter a lot with an amp of this calibre. I’ve thought about pairing with a tube pre-amp (largely due to recommendations on this thread from paradoxper and normie) but I’m in no rush. If I do get a tube pre-amp I would want it to double up as a stand-alone amp (can’t wait for more reviews of the Feliks Envy..). But again no rush and not sure if it will be worth it in my system with my headphones (I don’t currently have brighter headphones like the SR1A or TC - although one of those will be my next move I think).

Just to add a bit, I had the Bakoon 13R amp before CFA3, and CFA3 sounds a lot fuller with more body, more analog than 13R. The impact and dynamics are also better. Both are paired with the same DAC and tube pre-amp. Many considered 13R as a smooth sounding amp, but CFA3 does it better I guess. Still very full, smooth and clean sounding with added dynamics.

 

[chesebert]

I can’t wait for a commercial version - patiently waiting.