I guess one of us will be there first to write that one. It is going to be 2-3 months before I get my amp though.
McIntosh MHA200 Impressions
- Thread starter warrenpchi
- Start date
Yeah...don't hold your breath. McIntosh typically doesn't send out a ton of review samples...I suspect the Positive Feedback review was of a purchased unit.
My Bifrost 2 finally arrived, and it's made a substantial difference in my system, far more detailed and crystalline - compared to using the onboard MB card from my Asgard 3. To say it pairs well with the MHA200 isn't exactly true - as the MHA200 is so transparent it just lets the DACs character come though unmolested. I had hoped that the higher output voltage of a dedicated DAC might allow for more useful travel in the volume knob, but that's not the case. The "usable" travel in the volume knob is extremely tight and remains between 12:00 and 2:00 using the 32 Ohm impedance setting. Adding the MHA200 to a system with a pre-amp was likely an expectation in the design. Nevertheless, this remains the best sounding, most transparent, amp I've ever heard. Still no regrets on the purchase.
I would also be keen to hear more reviews. The impression from Positive Feedback lived up to its name by being too hyperbolically positive and not enough in the way of critical feedback.
TSAVJason
Sponsor: The Source AV
That writers style is sort of bubbles in your pop but his enthusiasm is pretty much in the ballpark even with the over zealous style.
He comments on the volume issue... but otherwise loads of praise. His cable tastes are certainly above my means. Do you think you have a first run unit and did you have any issue with your volume? Congrats on the purchase.
TSAVJason
Sponsor: The Source AV
We are happy to announce our July 17th Zoom meeting is with Ken Zellin of McIntosh. He is very intimate with the MHA200 and it’s development. Not only will Ken be explaining the features and design but there will also be a Q&A session. Ken is amazingly informative and always fun to talk with.
Date: 7/17/2021
Time: 2pm Pacific Time
Zoom Meeting
more updates to follow!
Date: 7/17/2021
Time: 2pm Pacific Time
Zoom Meeting
more updates to follow!
Attachments
TSAVJason
Sponsor: The Source AV
OOPS sorry 
Didn’t mean to post it twice
We are happy to announce our July 17th Zoom meeting is with Ken Zellin of McIntosh. He is very intimate with the MHA200 and it’s development. Not only will Ken be explaining the features and design but there will also be a Q&A session. Ken is amazingly informative and always fun to talk with.
Date: 7/17/2021
Time: 2pm Pacific Time
Zoom Meeting
more updates to follow!
Didn’t mean to post it twice
We are happy to announce our July 17th Zoom meeting is with Ken Zellin of McIntosh. He is very intimate with the MHA200 and it’s development. Not only will Ken be explaining the features and design but there will also be a Q&A session. Ken is amazingly informative and always fun to talk with.
Date: 7/17/2021
Time: 2pm Pacific Time
Zoom Meeting
more updates to follow!
Attachments
Last edited:
I can only agree with his comments regarding the performance, especially after 40+ hours of use. Yes, same observations with the volume control, between 12-2 at most for Utopia's. I find setting the load to the 250 ohm setting for the Utopias gives me a nice level at about unity (12) or just a small tick past (using balanced 4V fixed line out from the Kann).
I ordered at the beginning of Feb and received my unit (I believe in the first batch that shipped) first week of May, serial #1002. My first tube amp and extremely impressed with the performance, every day I listen it seems to open up more...
Yup...frankly for me, this amp could have a toggle switch for volume control and it would still be extraordinary. I'm one of the early adopters, and bought ears unheard. Volume control issues are real, and are an annoyance, but life ain't perfect. But if you want close to the ideal in transparency, this is the amp for you. Colored OTLs are super cool, and can sound fantastic with the right setup - but the MHA200 gets close to the "straight wire with gain" ideal.
With that said...you should still spend most of your money on transducers. A Schiit Asgard 3 MB with Focal Clears sound better to me than an MHA200 with HD 660S's...Buuuut LCD-2F's and the MHA200 are, for me, audio nirvana...methinks Empyreans are next...
- Joined
- Dec 24, 2015
- Posts
- 700
- Likes
- 813
After spending a couple weeks with the MHA200, I am finally ready to give some initial impressions. Thanks to @TSAVJason and his excellent staff at The Source AV for the amp and help with cabling to make A/B comparisons easier.
Setup:
My setup is Tidal running from a PC in exclusive mode > McIntosh D1100 DAC/preamp > MHA200 > McIntosh MHA200 > Focal Utopia. All cables are from Kimber, if that matters to anyone. Prior to purchasing the MHA200, my headphone amp was the excellent Cavalli Audio Liquid Gold. I still really enjoy the LAu, so this write-up will refer to it a lot as it really is a different beast from the MHA200.
Initial impressions:
The most immediately striking characteristic of the MHA200 is how it breathes life into vocals. One of my favorite albums right now is Bonny Light Horseman’s self-titled debut, and the MHA200 makes it shine. Unlike many modern recordings, this one makes excellent use of dynamic range; you can feel the pleading in Eric D. Johnson’s voice when he begs you not to break his heart. The MHA200 allows the supporting guitars strums and picks to be heard and presents them with accurate placement.
The bass is punchy but not overly thumpy (which may be a negative to some), and details such as cymbal decay sound life-like.
Listening to a live recording such as The National’s excellent performance of Boxer in Brussels with the MHA200 is the next best thing to being there: you can hear Matt take a breath and the applause of the crowd around you. (I really miss live music!)
Versus Liquid Gold:
My major quibble with the D1100 and LAu pairing has always been that they are both so accurate and transparent that the soundstage on the Utopia feel narrow. Swapping a turntable for the digital source rectified this and swapping the MHA200 for the LAu gives similar results.
The bass with the MHA200 has more thump than with the LAu, but the LAu has more accurate sub bass. The vocal-centric nature of the MHA200 clouds some of the treble details. For these reasons, I feel that the LAu is a better choice for electronic, classical, and metal. However, for music in which the most important instrument is the singer’s voice, the MHA200 can’t be beat. I listen to the latter more than the former, so I suspect that the MHA200 will be my everyday amp.
MHA200 with TT:
I have also done some listening with using a Pro-ject Debut Carbon Esprit SB as a source and Pro-ject Phono Box S2 phono pre-amp. To be honest, with this setup I prefer the LAu. The combination of TT and MHA200 is almost too much of a good thing: the vocals are so forward that it feels like the singer is sitting on top of my head. In fairness, this could be a limitation of my TT setup.
Hardware:
I’ll try to address a couple of the hardware concerns that have been raised.
The volume knob is lightweight, but it doesn’t feel flimsy to me. If you are able to turn a knob like an adult and not like a toddler who must grab everything with a clenched fist there won’t be a problem. It is true that the volume increase is very non-linear past the 12 o’clock position. I’ve been running with the load set to 100 Ohms because of the D1100 (I’ll get to that later), but changing to 32 Ohms gives the volume knob more usable range. I do think this concern is valid; the volume does increase so sharply with a small turn of the knob after ~1 o’clock that it would be easy to blow out your ear drums.
About the recommendation to use the MHA200 with fixed output while adjusting the volume with the source: The D1100 has fixed and variable balanced outputs. I have the MHA200 connected via the variable output of the D1100, which allows me to adjust the volume using the remote control for the DH1100. This eliminates the usable range of the volume knob as a problem. Many head-fiers are probably using sources with a fixed output so I understand why the recommended setup is weird, but when paired with a McIntosh preamp it makes sense… presumably McIntosh would like people to have all McIntosh setups. A cheap-o M/M 3.5 mm cable also allows one button on/off for both the D1100 and MHA200.
Regarding the green lights: it would be nice to be able to turn them off, but the stock tubes do not glow very brightly, so perhaps that is the rationale behind the always-on green lights.
In conclusion:
Like @Crowbar44, I bought the MHA200 without auditioning it. It is my first tube amp, and I do not regret the purchase at all. Hopefully this helps someone considering a purchase. Feel free to ask any questions and I will do my best to answer.
(Edited to clean up a couple of typos).
Setup:
My setup is Tidal running from a PC in exclusive mode > McIntosh D1100 DAC/preamp > MHA200 > McIntosh MHA200 > Focal Utopia. All cables are from Kimber, if that matters to anyone. Prior to purchasing the MHA200, my headphone amp was the excellent Cavalli Audio Liquid Gold. I still really enjoy the LAu, so this write-up will refer to it a lot as it really is a different beast from the MHA200.
Initial impressions:
The most immediately striking characteristic of the MHA200 is how it breathes life into vocals. One of my favorite albums right now is Bonny Light Horseman’s self-titled debut, and the MHA200 makes it shine. Unlike many modern recordings, this one makes excellent use of dynamic range; you can feel the pleading in Eric D. Johnson’s voice when he begs you not to break his heart. The MHA200 allows the supporting guitars strums and picks to be heard and presents them with accurate placement.
The bass is punchy but not overly thumpy (which may be a negative to some), and details such as cymbal decay sound life-like.
Listening to a live recording such as The National’s excellent performance of Boxer in Brussels with the MHA200 is the next best thing to being there: you can hear Matt take a breath and the applause of the crowd around you. (I really miss live music!)
Versus Liquid Gold:
My major quibble with the D1100 and LAu pairing has always been that they are both so accurate and transparent that the soundstage on the Utopia feel narrow. Swapping a turntable for the digital source rectified this and swapping the MHA200 for the LAu gives similar results.
The bass with the MHA200 has more thump than with the LAu, but the LAu has more accurate sub bass. The vocal-centric nature of the MHA200 clouds some of the treble details. For these reasons, I feel that the LAu is a better choice for electronic, classical, and metal. However, for music in which the most important instrument is the singer’s voice, the MHA200 can’t be beat. I listen to the latter more than the former, so I suspect that the MHA200 will be my everyday amp.
MHA200 with TT:
I have also done some listening with using a Pro-ject Debut Carbon Esprit SB as a source and Pro-ject Phono Box S2 phono pre-amp. To be honest, with this setup I prefer the LAu. The combination of TT and MHA200 is almost too much of a good thing: the vocals are so forward that it feels like the singer is sitting on top of my head. In fairness, this could be a limitation of my TT setup.
Hardware:
I’ll try to address a couple of the hardware concerns that have been raised.
The volume knob is lightweight, but it doesn’t feel flimsy to me. If you are able to turn a knob like an adult and not like a toddler who must grab everything with a clenched fist there won’t be a problem. It is true that the volume increase is very non-linear past the 12 o’clock position. I’ve been running with the load set to 100 Ohms because of the D1100 (I’ll get to that later), but changing to 32 Ohms gives the volume knob more usable range. I do think this concern is valid; the volume does increase so sharply with a small turn of the knob after ~1 o’clock that it would be easy to blow out your ear drums.
About the recommendation to use the MHA200 with fixed output while adjusting the volume with the source: The D1100 has fixed and variable balanced outputs. I have the MHA200 connected via the variable output of the D1100, which allows me to adjust the volume using the remote control for the DH1100. This eliminates the usable range of the volume knob as a problem. Many head-fiers are probably using sources with a fixed output so I understand why the recommended setup is weird, but when paired with a McIntosh preamp it makes sense… presumably McIntosh would like people to have all McIntosh setups. A cheap-o M/M 3.5 mm cable also allows one button on/off for both the D1100 and MHA200.
Regarding the green lights: it would be nice to be able to turn them off, but the stock tubes do not glow very brightly, so perhaps that is the rationale behind the always-on green lights.
In conclusion:
Like @Crowbar44, I bought the MHA200 without auditioning it. It is my first tube amp, and I do not regret the purchase at all. Hopefully this helps someone considering a purchase. Feel free to ask any questions and I will do my best to answer.
(Edited to clean up a couple of typos).
Last edited:
SpeleoFool
100+ Head-Fier
I met a friend for lunch on Friday and had my portable Arya rig with (SP1000 + Amp). There's a HiFi shop nearby that specializes in McIntosh and a bunch of extremely high-end gear. For example, they had the MHA200 hooked up to a Burmester 088 preamp (had to look it up--it's somewhere in the $30k range).
Like others have commented, I was immediately struck by how tiny this amp is (footprint is about half of Pendant). Between that and listening impressions on Aryas, my want factor was through the roof.
I returned yesterday with a small pile of headphones to see how the MHA200 handles them. The results were surprising, and unfortunately, not all good. I expected to walk out with this amp, but ended up giving it a pass.
What I brought and why:
1. Susvara: I didn't expect the MHA200 to have the oomph to drive Susvara well, but after hearing how it handled Aryas, I had to try. I love Susvara on Pendant, FWIW.
2. VCs: The penultimate tube can, as far as I'm concerned. I pretty much only listen to my VCs on Pendant, because the synergy is so magical.
3. DT880 600 ohm: The other end of the "hard to drive" spectrum, sound quality can vary astronomically with source
4. DT1770 Pro: another middling can--not hard to drive, and tends to like tubes. For variety and evaluating bass, etc.
5. Stellia: I have never cared for any of my Focal headphones on tubes; brought as a challenge to see if the MHA200 could do it justice
Yeah, it's an AWESOME pairing. The SP1000 + Amp drive Arya about as well as my desktop chain (ADI-2 -> A90), so it was nice to have that along as an A-B. I only had a couple songs with Aryas, but while piano percussion was a little more solid on the DAP, everything else was as good or better on the McIntosh amp. It played well to Aryas staging capabilities and made a wonderful first impression.
Susvara did better than I expected, but it lacked the air and control that comes from higher end chains. Overall, Susvara on MHA200 reminded me of Susvara on A90: performance is good enough to demonstrate that something special is going on, but not to squeeze every drop of resolution out of the headphones. I wouldn't write off this combo, but I also wouldn't seek it out. For the price, I easily prefer Susvara on Pendant.
FWIW, my reference chain for Susvara actually uses a McIntosh amp--specifically, Zone B of the 8207 that drives my home theater. That's a 200Wpc 7-channel SS amp. I use a Goldpoint level control for trim and feed that chain through a Holo May. It's a wondrously expansive, clean, precise sound.
Shockingly, I didn't like this combo. Going in, I expected this to be a slam dunk--I love ZMF headphones on tubes, but I had a hell of a time dialing in the MHA200 for my VCs. There is a sweet spot, but getting there was so much effort that I got annoyed.
The "load" dial changes the sound significantly for all headphones, but the effect was especially dramatic with VCs. The lower ohm settings produce overwhelming, boomy bass, while mids felt lacking on the 250 and 600 ohm settings until I got the volume up high enough--but getting there put overall volume on the edge of being too much. It's like, with the right combination of dials in the exact right positions, the stars will line up and you get beautiful music. But there's no play.
I feel like maybe this could be mitigated with a better setup--one that uses a pre for trim, for example. However, that kinda killed the appeal of the tiny footprint. Why not just put a nicer volume control on the unit?
That is precisely what I experienced as well. Moreover, both Stellias and Susvaras had the same usable range, which was really odd. But at least the MHA200 never has trouble delivering plenty of volume.
I brought Stellia, but also own Utopia; their characteristics are similar enough that I expect my Stellia experience to translate--and that experience was good.
I have never really cared for Focal headphones on tubes. Even with Pendant, it felt like the tubes were in conflict with Focal's typically bright and detailed voicing.
I didn't expect to like Stellia on the MHA200, but I did. Details are great, bass was well balanced (had the signature Stellia bump, but with tight control and good quantity). I am sure Utopia will perform equally well.
Ironically, the 880s stole the show. It's both funny and a little unsettling that out of everything I bought, these sub-$200 cans outclassed both VC and Susvara on the MHA200. But I suppose it's not surprising.
Most desktop amps tend to run out of steam by 600 ohms, and the 880s have a sensitivity that's just low enough to make them challenging to drive well for a lot of amps. On stuff like THX amps, A90, etc., they sound like $200 cans--well behaved with a nice balance, but a bit of graininess and ho-hum detail extension. But if you pair them with an amp that has muscle at 600 ohms, they scale like crazy.
These 880s were so good on the MHA200 that I called the sales guy over to listen, and the first thing he said was, "these are $200???" This from a store that stocks RMAF-level gear.
1770s were also outstanding. Bass was tight and not exaggerated beyond what 1770s already do. Not much to say here--MHA200 handled these perfectly.
I have owned the pre-SE Pendant for almost a year; I picked it up with my VCs since those are my 3rd pair of ZMF headphones (after Eikon, Auteur), and I wanted a tube amp specifically for my ZMF cans. Beyond that, the plan was to experiment with other cans to see what worked. I just wanted a "good" tube amp.
What I got was an exceptional tube amp. I knew from CANJAM what to expect from my ZMF cans, and indeed, VCs on Pendant are my favorite chain for euphonic listening. I didn't Pendant to drive Susvara, much less with the authority that it does. It's a wonderful alternative option to the 8207. Pendant smooths the highs and delivers an enhanced sense of space. I do prefer the SS chain for timbre & dynamics for stuff like orchestra music and scores, but most everything else just sounds more musical on Pendant.
Based on my listening experience with the MHA200, it didn't strike me as being as versatile as Pendant. Performance ranged from exceptional with the right pairings, to "passable" with others.
The biggest disappointment with the MHA200 was how finicky the volume controls are. Even with Susvara, the volume change is shockingly rapid past the 12:00 detent (and the knob is tiny, less precise than I'd like, and moves too easily for how rapidly it changes volume). There's nowhere near enough play available, and it was challenging with VCs to balance bass performance, mid involvement, and overall loudness to an enjoyable range. I suspect that using an external volume control / pre might improve or even resolve that problem, but for an amp with such a small footprint, I'd really prefer to have a better built-in volume control.
For looks and industrial design, McIntosh wins hands down (unless you have OCD about fingerprints, lol). This little amp is stunning in person and represents McIntosh's legendary aesthetics well. Pendant is more rustic / utilitarian, but does have very good build quality. It's also roughly the size of two MHA200s side by side--more a testament to how compact the McIntosh is than a critique of Pendant's size.
Between the two, Pendant is an easy pick for me, only because it's the better amp for Susvara and VC, which are my two favorite headphones. If I only had Aryas instead, it would be a much tougher choice.
Like others have commented, I was immediately struck by how tiny this amp is (footprint is about half of Pendant). Between that and listening impressions on Aryas, my want factor was through the roof.
I returned yesterday with a small pile of headphones to see how the MHA200 handles them. The results were surprising, and unfortunately, not all good. I expected to walk out with this amp, but ended up giving it a pass.
What I brought and why:
1. Susvara: I didn't expect the MHA200 to have the oomph to drive Susvara well, but after hearing how it handled Aryas, I had to try. I love Susvara on Pendant, FWIW.
2. VCs: The penultimate tube can, as far as I'm concerned. I pretty much only listen to my VCs on Pendant, because the synergy is so magical.
3. DT880 600 ohm: The other end of the "hard to drive" spectrum, sound quality can vary astronomically with source
4. DT1770 Pro: another middling can--not hard to drive, and tends to like tubes. For variety and evaluating bass, etc.
5. Stellia: I have never cared for any of my Focal headphones on tubes; brought as a challenge to see if the MHA200 could do it justice
Yeah, it's an AWESOME pairing. The SP1000 + Amp drive Arya about as well as my desktop chain (ADI-2 -> A90), so it was nice to have that along as an A-B. I only had a couple songs with Aryas, but while piano percussion was a little more solid on the DAP, everything else was as good or better on the McIntosh amp. It played well to Aryas staging capabilities and made a wonderful first impression.
Susvara did better than I expected, but it lacked the air and control that comes from higher end chains. Overall, Susvara on MHA200 reminded me of Susvara on A90: performance is good enough to demonstrate that something special is going on, but not to squeeze every drop of resolution out of the headphones. I wouldn't write off this combo, but I also wouldn't seek it out. For the price, I easily prefer Susvara on Pendant.
FWIW, my reference chain for Susvara actually uses a McIntosh amp--specifically, Zone B of the 8207 that drives my home theater. That's a 200Wpc 7-channel SS amp. I use a Goldpoint level control for trim and feed that chain through a Holo May. It's a wondrously expansive, clean, precise sound.
Shockingly, I didn't like this combo. Going in, I expected this to be a slam dunk--I love ZMF headphones on tubes, but I had a hell of a time dialing in the MHA200 for my VCs. There is a sweet spot, but getting there was so much effort that I got annoyed.
The "load" dial changes the sound significantly for all headphones, but the effect was especially dramatic with VCs. The lower ohm settings produce overwhelming, boomy bass, while mids felt lacking on the 250 and 600 ohm settings until I got the volume up high enough--but getting there put overall volume on the edge of being too much. It's like, with the right combination of dials in the exact right positions, the stars will line up and you get beautiful music. But there's no play.
I feel like maybe this could be mitigated with a better setup--one that uses a pre for trim, for example. However, that kinda killed the appeal of the tiny footprint. Why not just put a nicer volume control on the unit?
That is precisely what I experienced as well. Moreover, both Stellias and Susvaras had the same usable range, which was really odd. But at least the MHA200 never has trouble delivering plenty of volume.
I brought Stellia, but also own Utopia; their characteristics are similar enough that I expect my Stellia experience to translate--and that experience was good.
I have never really cared for Focal headphones on tubes. Even with Pendant, it felt like the tubes were in conflict with Focal's typically bright and detailed voicing.
I didn't expect to like Stellia on the MHA200, but I did. Details are great, bass was well balanced (had the signature Stellia bump, but with tight control and good quantity). I am sure Utopia will perform equally well.
Ironically, the 880s stole the show. It's both funny and a little unsettling that out of everything I bought, these sub-$200 cans outclassed both VC and Susvara on the MHA200. But I suppose it's not surprising.
Most desktop amps tend to run out of steam by 600 ohms, and the 880s have a sensitivity that's just low enough to make them challenging to drive well for a lot of amps. On stuff like THX amps, A90, etc., they sound like $200 cans--well behaved with a nice balance, but a bit of graininess and ho-hum detail extension. But if you pair them with an amp that has muscle at 600 ohms, they scale like crazy.
These 880s were so good on the MHA200 that I called the sales guy over to listen, and the first thing he said was, "these are $200???" This from a store that stocks RMAF-level gear.
1770s were also outstanding. Bass was tight and not exaggerated beyond what 1770s already do. Not much to say here--MHA200 handled these perfectly.
I have owned the pre-SE Pendant for almost a year; I picked it up with my VCs since those are my 3rd pair of ZMF headphones (after Eikon, Auteur), and I wanted a tube amp specifically for my ZMF cans. Beyond that, the plan was to experiment with other cans to see what worked. I just wanted a "good" tube amp.
What I got was an exceptional tube amp. I knew from CANJAM what to expect from my ZMF cans, and indeed, VCs on Pendant are my favorite chain for euphonic listening. I didn't Pendant to drive Susvara, much less with the authority that it does. It's a wonderful alternative option to the 8207. Pendant smooths the highs and delivers an enhanced sense of space. I do prefer the SS chain for timbre & dynamics for stuff like orchestra music and scores, but most everything else just sounds more musical on Pendant.
Based on my listening experience with the MHA200, it didn't strike me as being as versatile as Pendant. Performance ranged from exceptional with the right pairings, to "passable" with others.
The biggest disappointment with the MHA200 was how finicky the volume controls are. Even with Susvara, the volume change is shockingly rapid past the 12:00 detent (and the knob is tiny, less precise than I'd like, and moves too easily for how rapidly it changes volume). There's nowhere near enough play available, and it was challenging with VCs to balance bass performance, mid involvement, and overall loudness to an enjoyable range. I suspect that using an external volume control / pre might improve or even resolve that problem, but for an amp with such a small footprint, I'd really prefer to have a better built-in volume control.
For looks and industrial design, McIntosh wins hands down (unless you have OCD about fingerprints, lol). This little amp is stunning in person and represents McIntosh's legendary aesthetics well. Pendant is more rustic / utilitarian, but does have very good build quality. It's also roughly the size of two MHA200s side by side--more a testament to how compact the McIntosh is than a critique of Pendant's size.
Between the two, Pendant is an easy pick for me, only because it's the better amp for Susvara and VC, which are my two favorite headphones. If I only had Aryas instead, it would be a much tougher choice.
Last edited:
Thank you, this is by far the best set of impressions I've read on the MHA200.I met a friend for lunch on Friday and had my portable Arya rig with (SP1000 + Amp). There's a HiFi shop nearby that specializes in McIntosh and a bunch of extremely high-end gear. For example, they had the MHA200 hooked up to a Burmester 088 preamp (had to look it up--it's somewhere in the $30k range).
Like others have commented, I was immediately struck by how tiny this amp is (footprint is about half of Pendant). Between that and listening impressions on Aryas, my want factor was through the roof.
I returned yesterday with a small pile of headphones to see how the MHA200 handles them. The results were surprising, and unfortunately, not all good. I expected to walk out with this amp, but ended up giving it a pass.
What I brought and why:
1. Susvara: I didn't expect the MHA200 to have the oomph to drive Susvara well, but after hearing how it handled Aryas, I had to try. I love Susvara on Pendant, FWIW.
2. VCs: The penultimate tube can, as far as I'm concerned. I pretty much only listen to my VCs on Pendant, because the synergy is so magical.
3. DT880 600 ohm: The other end of the "hard to drive" spectrum, sound quality can vary astronomically with source
4. DT1770 Pro: another middling can--not hard to drive, and tends to like tubes. For variety and evaluating bass, etc.
5. Stellia: I have never cared for any of my Focal headphones on tubes; brought as a challenge to see if the MHA200 could do it justice
Yeah, it's an AWESOME pairing. The SP1000 + Amp drive Arya about as well as my desktop chain (ADI-2 -> A90), so it was nice to have that along as an A-B. I only had a couple songs with Aryas, but while piano percussion was a little more solid on the DAP, everything else was as good or better on the McIntosh amp. It played well to Aryas staging capabilities and made a wonderful first impression.
Susvara did better than I expected, but it lacked the air and control that comes from higher end chains. Overall, Susvara on MHA200 reminded me of Susvara on A90: performance is good enough to demonstrate that something special is going on, but not to squeeze every drop of resolution out of the headphones. I wouldn't write off this combo, but I also wouldn't seek it out. For the price, I easily prefer Susvara on Pendant.
FWIW, my reference chain for Susvara actually uses a McIntosh amp--specifically, Zone B of the 8207 that drives my home theater. That's a 200Wpc 7-channel SS amp. I use a Goldpoint level control for trim and feed that chain through a Holo May. It's a wondrously expansive, clean, precise sound.
Shockingly, I didn't like this combo. Going in, I expected this to be a slam dunk--I love ZMF headphones on tubes, but I had a hell of a time dialing in the MHA200 for my VCs. There is a sweet spot, but getting there was so much effort that I got annoyed.
The "load" dial changes the sound significantly for all headphones, but the effect was especially dramatic with VCs. The lower ohm settings produce overwhelming, boomy bass, while mids felt lacking on the 250 and 600 ohm settings until I got the volume up high enough--but getting there put overall volume on the edge of being too much. It's like, with the right combination of dials in the exact right positions, the stars will line up and you get beautiful music. But there's no play.
I feel like maybe this could be mitigated with a better setup--one that uses a pre for trim, for example. However, that kinda killed the appeal of the tiny footprint. Why not just put a nicer volume control on the unit?
That is precisely what I experienced as well. Moreover, both Stellias and Susvaras had the same usable range, which was really odd. But at least the MHA200 never has trouble delivering plenty of volume.
I brought Stellia, but also own Utopia; their characteristics are similar enough that I expect my Stellia experience to translate--and that experience was good.
I have never really cared for Focal headphones on tubes. Even with Pendant, it felt like the tubes were in conflict with Focal's typically bright and detailed voicing.
I didn't expect to like Stellia on the MHA200, but I did. Details are great, bass was well balanced (had the signature Stellia bump, but with tight control and good quantity). I am sure Utopia will perform equally well.
Ironically, the 880s stole the show. It's both funny and a little unsettling that out of everything I bought, these sub-$200 cans outclassed both VC and Susvara on the MHA200. But I suppose it's not surprising.
Most desktop amps tend to run out of steam by 600 ohms, and the 880s have a sensitivity that's just low enough to make them challenging to drive well for a lot of amps. On stuff like THX amps, A90, etc., they sound like $200 cans--well behaved with a nice balance, but a bit of graininess and ho-hum detail extension. But if you pair them with an amp that has muscle at 600 ohms, they scale like crazy.
These 880s were so good on the MHA200 that I called the sales guy over to listen, and the first thing he said was, "these are $200???" This from a store that stocks RMAF-level gear.
1770s were also outstanding. Bass was tight and not exaggerated beyond what 1770s already do. Not much to say here--MHA200 handled these perfectly.
I have owned the pre-SE Pendant for almost a year; I picked it up with my VCs since those are my 3rd pair of ZMF headphones (after Eikon, Auteur), and I wanted a tube amp specifically for my ZMF cans. Beyond that, the plan was to experiment with other cans to see what worked. I just wanted a "good" tube amp.
What I got was an exceptional tube amp. I knew from CANJAM what to expect from my ZMF cans, and indeed, VCs on Pendant are my favorite chain for euphonic listening. I didn't Pendant to drive Susvara, much less with the authority that it does. It's a wonderful alternative option to the 8207. Pendant smooths the highs and delivers an enhanced sense of space. I do prefer the SS chain for timbre & dynamics for stuff like orchestra music and scores, but most everything else just sounds more musical on Pendant.
Based on my listening experience with the MHA200, it didn't strike me as being as versatile as Pendant. Performance ranged from exceptional with the right pairings, to "passable" with others.
The biggest disappointment with the MHA200 was how finicky the volume controls are. Even with Susvara, the volume change is shockingly rapid past the 12:00 detent (and the knob is tiny, less precise than I'd like, and moves too easily for how rapidly it changes volume). There's nowhere near enough play available, and it was challenging with VCs to balance bass performance, mid involvement, and overall loudness to an enjoyable range. I suspect that using an external volume control / pre might improve or even resolve that problem, but for an amp with such a small footprint, I'd really prefer to have a better built-in volume control.
For looks and industrial design, McIntosh wins hands down (unless you have OCD about fingerprints, lol). This little amp is stunning in person and represents McIntosh's legendary aesthetics well. Pendant is more rustic / utilitarian, but does have very good build quality. It's also roughly the size of two MHA200s side by side--more a testament to how compact the McIntosh is than a critique of Pendant's size.
Between the two, Pendant is an easy pick for me, only because it's the better amp for Susvara and VC, which are my two favorite headphones. If I only had Aryas instead, it would be a much tougher choice.
My motivation was to pair this with my VC, but coupled with the volume issue, it sounds as though the Pendant is far better suited to this purpose. It's disappointing because the form factor would have been ideal for me.
Good to hear about the Beyer pairing, especially the 880. I hope to demo this at some point, though just out of curiosity.
Thanks again.
SpeleoFool
100+ Head-Fier
Thanks. I wasn't expecting to do a writeup, but I found this thread after looking for reviews to see if others were having the same issues with the level control and if anyone had tried an external pre. After reading the early posts, though, it was apparent that I had something to contribute. Glad you found it helpful.
I'm personally looking forward to other impressions with VC. I'm still having a hard time accepting that I didn't care for the experience, and hoping it's something a different chain setup could fix.
Thanks for confirming this. I had inferred from the detent, the dramatic difference in volume scaling before and after 12:00, and my familiarity with other McIntosh gear that the MHA200 probably expects to be used with an external volume control. I was a little proud of myself for guessing that when I read somewhere back on the first page or two here that something to that effect is in the manual. But it's helpful to hear that you're getting a good experience with that setup.
For context, my home theater uses a McIntosh C2600 tube preamp, an MX122 processor, and an MC8207 multichannel amp. I use this setup for music, movies, and gaming, and I've (loosely) integrated my best headphone amps with this setup so that I can use my Holo May for both speakers and headphones.
Anyway, the McIntosh way to hook this all up requires routing the main L and R channels from the preamp directly to the power amp. That's the optimal connectivity for 2 channel music, of course, but it means that the preamp is a passthrough for surround, and I have to turn the processor off for pure 2-channel music. In fact, the whole idea with McIntosh 2-channel is to use the pre-amp as the main control hub for all stereo audio. In that paradigm, an MHA200 is just another output accessory, so the whole goofy level control thing makes sense. I just wish it was a little friendlier for standalone desktop usage without an external level control.
chrishunt
New Head-Fier
My usual headphone amp is the Chord TT2 and my usual headphones are the Rad-0 and ZMF VC. We use a McIntosh MC240 for our speakers at home and love the sound, so I was excited about this headphone amp. I finally got the chance to listen yesterday at a local shop for a couple hours and unfortunately was disappointed in both the build quality and the sound, but had a fun time.
Both knobs (impedance and volume) felt cheap and small. It seems silly to complain about knobs and I usually don't place much emphasis on how a knob feels, but the knobs are just so cheap feeling (to me) that it stood out to me immediately and ruined my experience from the start. The cheap knobs and overall cheap build quality felt more obvious to me when I set a PrimaLuna 100 Integrated next to it for comparison.
Cosmetics and build aside, I unfortunately was also underwhelmed by the sound. When comparing to the Chord TT2, the inexpensive Mackie ProFXv3 op amp, and the PrimaLuna 100 Integrated, the McIntosh sounded the least satisfying to me. In comparison, I would describe the MHA200 as weak/thin sounding... more midrange and less everything else. I clicked through the different impedance values and found them to have a large impact on the sound (mostly in the bass), but none were interesting enough to get me excited. It didn't sound terrible or broken, I just found it less preferable to anything else I plugged my headphones into.
I spent most of my time in the shop comparing directly with the PrimaLuna 100 Integrated and preferred the PrimaLuna in every way besides its size. It's substantially larger and heavier (almost 4x the weight) with larger/more tubes, tube status indicators, larger transformers, lots of point-to-point wiring, more inputs, remote control, and speaker taps. Our older MC240 at home is also very large and heavy (and still works great today). The PrimaLuna sounded fantastic to me compared to the MHA200. It reminded me very much of the TT2, but with a bit of color.
Overall, I'm disappointed with the MHA200 and am probably going to pick up a PrimaLuna 100 or something from ampsandsound. I don't think the MHA200 is a bad amp (sounded fine to me), but in comparison to other options I have at home or are available for the same price, it wasn't exciting or better in any way to me. I think I would still consider it if I wanted to expand an existing McIntosh collection, but I'm not a collector so I'm going to pass on this one.
Both knobs (impedance and volume) felt cheap and small. It seems silly to complain about knobs and I usually don't place much emphasis on how a knob feels, but the knobs are just so cheap feeling (to me) that it stood out to me immediately and ruined my experience from the start. The cheap knobs and overall cheap build quality felt more obvious to me when I set a PrimaLuna 100 Integrated next to it for comparison.
Cosmetics and build aside, I unfortunately was also underwhelmed by the sound. When comparing to the Chord TT2, the inexpensive Mackie ProFXv3 op amp, and the PrimaLuna 100 Integrated, the McIntosh sounded the least satisfying to me. In comparison, I would describe the MHA200 as weak/thin sounding... more midrange and less everything else. I clicked through the different impedance values and found them to have a large impact on the sound (mostly in the bass), but none were interesting enough to get me excited. It didn't sound terrible or broken, I just found it less preferable to anything else I plugged my headphones into.
I spent most of my time in the shop comparing directly with the PrimaLuna 100 Integrated and preferred the PrimaLuna in every way besides its size. It's substantially larger and heavier (almost 4x the weight) with larger/more tubes, tube status indicators, larger transformers, lots of point-to-point wiring, more inputs, remote control, and speaker taps. Our older MC240 at home is also very large and heavy (and still works great today). The PrimaLuna sounded fantastic to me compared to the MHA200. It reminded me very much of the TT2, but with a bit of color.
Overall, I'm disappointed with the MHA200 and am probably going to pick up a PrimaLuna 100 or something from ampsandsound. I don't think the MHA200 is a bad amp (sounded fine to me), but in comparison to other options I have at home or are available for the same price, it wasn't exciting or better in any way to me. I think I would still consider it if I wanted to expand an existing McIntosh collection, but I'm not a collector so I'm going to pass on this one.
Last edited:
Thanks for the honest impressions. I have a VC/VO too and will have to listen for myself. I have an entry level Feliks Echo OTL amp and am rather new to tubes. MHA200 should at least be a good upgrade from that
Users who are viewing this thread
