[purrin]

Well do be fair, Lehmann does say on his website: 
 
... the zero global feedback Class A output stage.
 
Both statements (zero global feedback, and Class A output stage) are technically true. I guess we shouldn't expect him to also say "by the way, I put in a US $4 opamp for the input stage" 

 
The Lehmann chassis looks to be better and more precisely built; and I'm sure Lehmann put in a significant amount of effort into selecting the components on the PCB to voice the amp a certain way. No one has yet compared the M-Stage with a BCL, it could very well be that the BCL does sound better.
 
On another note, and upon closer examination, the M-Stage looks similar to a two channel PPA v2 (with a simpler diamond buffer and without the separate high/low current power sections and no class A biasing of the opamp.) There are really not that many different ways of building chip based amps. Everything in audio amplification has already been done before - generations ago. What it comes down to is implementation (parts selection, layout, etc.)

 

[dpump]

Quote:

 

The only thing missing in regards to the Asgard is with the Matrix you cannot cook Bacon and Eggs like you can with the Asgard. Also with the Matrix you can play any headphone including my T1 and denon D7000 as well as 701 and everything else you can throw at it. Not so with the Asgard only low impedance works. So it is a one trick pony

Frank,
 
I don't normally respond to misleading and incorrect posts but I couldn't let this pass. I can't believe kwkarth didn't respond to this already.
 
The Asgard is not a 'one trick pony' as you state. It is speced by Schiit to drive headphones from 8-600 ohms. I own both Matrix M-Stages-Versions 1 & 2. They are great amps. I also own an Asgard which I received last Friday. It is also a great amp. I have used headphones from 32-600 ohms on the Asgard and it drives all of them with ease and the sound quality is consistent on any impedance.
 
For you to say that the Asgard will only drive low impedance is totally false. From your profile you don't own an Asgard. It seems you are basing your statement on what you have read, not from personal experience. If you have listened to an Asgard and think it doesn't work well with high impedance phones then you are entitled to your opinion and I apologize. If what you wrote is your opinion based on experience with the Asgard you should say so.
 
Your statement persuaded the Head-Fier in the next post below you to say he was going to purchase a Matrix and forget about the Asgard. That's not fair to the Matrix or the Asgard since he is basing his decision on what you wrote. IMHO, you should be more careful in the future before making statements which aren't based on fact and aren't stated as being a personal opinion.
 

 

[kenken1985]

Quote:

Frank,
 
I don't normally respond to misleading and incorrect posts but I couldn't let this pass. I can't believe kwkarth didn't respond to this already.
 
The Asgard is not a 'one trick pony' as you state. It is speced by Schiit to drive headphones from 8-600 ohms. I own both Matrix M-Stages-Versions 1 & 2. They are great amps. I also own an Asgard which I received last Friday. It is also a great amp. I have used headphones from 32-600 ohms on the Asgard and it drives all of them with ease and the sound quality is consistent on any impedance.
 
For you to say that the Asgard will only drive low impedance is totally false. From your profile you don't own an Asgard. It seems you are basing your statement on what you have read, not from personal experience. If you have listened to an Asgard and think it doesn't work well with high impedance phones then you are entitled to your opinion and I apologize. If what you wrote is your opinion based on experience with the Asgard you should say so.
 
Your statement persuaded the Head-Fier in the next post below you to say he was going to purchase a Matrix and forget about the Asgard. That's not fair to the Matrix or the Asgard since he is basing his decision on what you wrote. IMHO, you should be more careful in the future before making statements which aren't based on fact and aren't stated as being a personal opinion.
 

Could you describe some difference between M stage and Asgard?

 

[Frank I]

. I believe the Matrix with gain adjustments and my experience with the Matrix it is suitable for all types of headphones as I had 6 different phones work with it. So I can't see how I mislead anyone and offered an opinion . If I was wrong I do then apologize/

 

[kite7]

You did say this
 
Quote:

Also with the Matrix you can play any headphone including my T1 and denon D7000 as well as 701 and everything else you can throw at it. Not so with the Asgard only low impedance works. So it is a one trick pony

 
Which makes it seem like you know for a fact that the Asgard cannot drive higher impedance cans when it in fact can from personal experience and as stated on the website. You say it only works with low impedance, not so.

 

[purrin]

 
Quote:

Could you describe some difference between M stage and Asgard?

x2 
 
Inquiring minds want to know. It should be very interesting comparing these two budget amps which take such different approaches (one, a commonly used two stage opamp / diamond buffer topology, and the other, a minimalist "pure" class A single ended SS design).

 

[nmurthy]

Quote:

 

x2 
 
Inquiring minds want to know. It should be very interesting comparing these two budget amps which take such different approaches (one, a commonly used two stage opamp / diamond buffer topology, and the other, a minimalist "pure" class A single ended SS design).

 
x3
 
I'm in the exact same boat. I want to pull the trigger on a used M-Stage (for ~$75 cheaper than an Asgard when factoring in taxes and shipping), but can't decide whether it'd be prudent to wait for the Asgard or not. My new cans (HD650s) are arriving soon, as well as a uDac-2. This would be my first headphone amplifier.

 

[dpump]

 
Quote:

 

x2 
 
Inquiring minds want to know. It should be very interesting comparing these two budget amps which take such different approaches (one, a commonly used two stage opamp / diamond buffer topology, and the other, a minimalist "pure" class A single ended SS design).
 
Ok guys, these are my thoughts on the Matrix and the Asgard. Keep in mind I am 60 years old and don't have the higher frequency hearing you younger guys hopefully still have. I have been into audio since the 70s so I do have a lot of experience under my belt.
 
I haven't done a direct comparison of the Matrix V1 vs the V2, but my short time listening to the V2 I received recently left me thinking there is no appreciable difference between them. The circuitry appears to be identical except for a few noncritical parts, so that's not surprising. I replaced the OPA-2134 in both of my units with an OPA-2107 as I think it sounds smoother and more detailed. I haven't yet done any other opamp swaps.
 
To my ears, the Matrix has the 'modern' hi-fi sound. By that I mean the Matrix tends to be a little more upfront and exciting sounding than the Asgard. When I first listened to the Asgard I immediately felt the highs were a little down in level compared to the Matrix. This was using Grado 125i and 325is. The Asgard has a sound that many might say is more like the classic tube sound-warmer and smoother than most present day solid state amps I've heard. The bass on the Asgard isn't like a tube amp though, it is tight and defined. And maybe because the highs do sound a little mellow, the midrange detail is excellent.
 
After trying the Grados on the Asgard, I tried the AKG 702 w/Black Dragon cable. The 702 can have fantastic detail but on many amps the sound is tilted toward the high end. The overall sound of the 702 is then lacking in bass and the midrange is a little down in level. On music with a strong high end the sound can get harsh in the highs. The 702 can sound great on the Matrix with some cds, but it can also have this brighter sound on other cds.
 
If you read some of the Asgard posts you will see people saying the 702 isn't a good match for the Asgard. I have to disagree. To me, the more mellow sound of the Asgard complements the 702 and leaves you with a very balanced sound that has the tight bass, the extremely detailed midrange, and a high end that doesn't sound overdone unless the source is overdone. The common wisdom on the 702 seems to be you need a tube amp to get the sound you get with the Asgard. Now you have a choice between tubes and solid state for the 702.
 
I have also tried the A/T AD1000 and rewired AKG Cardan Sextett LP on the Asgard. You get the same effect as the 702-the highs are somewhat tamed and the overall sound is more balanced. Beyer DT880 250 ohm on the Asgard-the bass is too prominent and somewhat boomy, the highs are dull, and the overall sound is
bland. The Matrix is much better with the Beyers. And my decision on the Grados-the 125i is better on the Matrix-too warm sounding on the Asgard. (The Matrix and the Grado 125i is a great combination). The 325is I like better on the Asgard as it tames their brighter highs.
 
So there you have my thoughts, for better or worse. Source was an Oppo 981 into a MHDT Dialogue II NOS DAC into the Matrix or Asgard. The MHDT may not be as upfront or bright as some modern upsampling DACs, so keep that in mind. Hope this helps and YMMV.
 

 

[Sid-Fi]

Nice comparison dpump! That's encouraging that the Asgard held its own against M-stage while offering a different flavor. It's nice to have solid options at these price points.

 

[purrin]

Awesome comparison pdump! And very insightful on the unexpected pairings (e.g, K702 w/ Asgard and SR125i w/ Matrix).
 
 

 

[reiserFS]

Do we have news on the DAC yet?

 

[nmurthy]

Quote:

Do we have news on the DAC yet?

They're coming out with a new DAC? Successor to the Mini-i?

 

[Violet]

Can I ask for an opinion on the latest version Matrix M-Stage? Someone has already listened to? Alternatively, please link to the description. Thank you.
 
http://cgi.ebay.pl/Matrix-m-stage-Headphone-Amplifier-New-Second-Edition-/280544770344?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4151c57928
 
 

 

[JoetheArachnid]

Quote:

Can I ask for an opinion on the latest version Matrix M-Stage? Someone has already listened to? Alternatively, please link to the description. Thank you.
 
http://cgi.ebay.pl/Matrix-m-stage-Headphone-Amplifier-New-Second-Edition-/280544770344?cmd=ViewItem&pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4151c57928
 

Quote:

I haven't done a direct comparison of the Matrix V1 vs the V2, but my short time listening to the V2 I received recently left me thinking there is no appreciable difference between them. The circuitry appears to be identical except for a few noncritical parts, so that's not surprising.

We've already had this discussion; they're basically the same. I would also avoid that seller, as he appears to have just stolene CoolFunGadget's pictures and scribbled his name on them. If you want the real goods and service, go CFG.
 
Thanks for the comparison, dpump. I think I'm still going to get the M-Stage because it seems more flexible for someone who can only afford one good amp, and it's got the adjustable gain. However, I'm certainly going to keep an eye on Schiit, and maybe buy a Valhalla if I win the lottery.

 

[purrin]

Well I finally removed the input caps on the M-Stage. (When I originally measured the DC offset on one of my sources, I forgot it had output caps that hadn't discharged first, so I thought the DC offset was too high, which made me decide to not remove the input caps. Doh!). 
 
There are two caps for each channel: a big one and a smaller 0.022uf WIMA for bypass. I removed both caps and replaced with a single wire. It's a fairly easy mod with a soldering iron, possibly even for beginners. I haven't had a chance to listen much, but my initial impression is that it does almost as much as replacing the stock opamp with a OPA2107 biased into class A.
 
I would say that the midrange and treble have really opened up, and the bass is slightly more extended. Soundstage is notably expanded. There does seem to be more emphasis in the midrange. The sound floor is lowered a bit, so you get a touch more detail and retrieval of low-level information (similar to the OPA2107/class A mod, but to not nearly as much extent). The most noticeable change is the sound is more natural and authoritative - instruments, voices, etc. sound more like they do real life. There is an organic quality and wholeness to the reproduction of music that tends to steer you away from listening to the little details (which are still there and more than ever) and just enjoying the music. IMO, this is a good thing and actually makes me fairly satisfied now. To put things in perspective, although I liked the unit stock, I wasn't totally satisfied with it. I guess I just like to mess with things.
 
One warning though, with the current modifications (OPA2107 biased into class A and input cap removal), the sound balance becomes less warm than stock. Not that the stock M-stage is a warm sounding amp, but I would still categorize it as very slightly warm. The amp with the current mods sounds neutral with a little bit of emphasis on the midrange. A contributing factor to this may be the extra detail and cleanliness from the mods. It's all relative anyways and YMMV depending upon your source and headphones. 
 
I'm not sure if the mods so far work as well with the PS1000 (I've been listening to my HF-2s mostly in the past two days and need to readjust and reset to the PS1000 sound signature to make a good and valid assessment). The HF-2s are absolutely wonderful though. Again, I wish I hadn't sold my Denon D5000s (w/ markl mods) - I'm betting those phones would synergize very well with this amp+mods.