johnanderson
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Nov 11, 2005
- Posts
- 349
- Likes
- 16
I was in the market for a solid state amp when I noticed the Rockhopper CKKIII demo program over at Mall-fi. Stephen was nice enough to let me demo his CKKIII and here are my thoughts on the amp.
My setup is as follows:
AV710 Wolfson DAC -> CKKIII -> Headphones
Headphones used: Modded Denon D2000 Recabled w/ spc, AT W1000
Music:
the Gazatte - Filth in the Beauty
Uverworld - GROOVY GROOVY GROOVY
Uverworld - Shaka Beach~Laka Laka La~
Lar'c~en~ciel - Stay Away
Peter Tchaikovsky - Piano Concerto No. 1: Allegro non troppo
I only tested against my music preferences, which is mostly jrock and classical. For these tests I specifically used the D2000 for rock and the W1000 for classical. I don't believe the W1000 would sound very good for rock whereas the D2000 is good for both rock and classical.
Since I sold my other two amps a couple weeks ago I only have memory to go on but I can certainly remember what each sounded like. I was going to purchase a desktop amp in between that time but didn't get a chance before the CKKIII arrived.
[size=medium]D2000[/size]
The main problem I had with the Denons were the recessed mids and the out of control bass, even after I recabled them and stuffed the cups with cotton. They were also somewhat sibilant in the highs when running straight out of the LDII, Head-six, and my DAC.
I have to admit that it took a while for my ears to adjust to the amp but after that I began to notice the differences. For one, the bass was more tightly controlled and the mids were more emphasized, although not to the point of the LDII. Details stayed about the same but clarity improved. Soundstage is about the same as the Head-six, but then again the soundstage on the denons were not huge to begin with.
Compared with the LDII the CKKIII has more clarity and seems more analytical. The LDII was IMO too forward and muddied the sound. I prefer a more distant sound and so the tubes weren't really for me.
Compared with the Head-six the CKKIII seemed to have a fuller sound. Even though the head-six was a also an analytical amp the CKKIII seemed to give a more full sound, whereas the head-six seemed dry.
[size=medium]W1000[/size]
I was truly impressed with these cans when I first got them. They weren't very good for rock but for classical they were amazing. I only got them the day before I sold my head-six and LDII so my impressions with the other two amps are limited. However, these cans sound great with the CKKIII. The main problem the the AT's were that they were too bright, and sometimes the sound could get fatiguing after listening for a long time. The first thing I noticed with the CKKIII was that the highs were tamed, reducing the sibilance. The soundstage was also enhanced, although it was already pretty decent to begin with. The most impressive thing though was the detail. AT's are known for their detail, and I thought that amping such a low impedance headphone wouldn't make a difference, however I was wrong. Detail in each note was more controlled and was separated from the other notes. It was like isolating a note and the improving on it.
[size=medium]Conclusion[/size]
I think the best words to describe this amp are "balance" and "control". It seems to handle all the flaws I noticed in my two headphones and emphasize the sound where each was lacking. It took a while for me to notice since both my headphones are low impedance and don't see a huge difference when amping. The difference, albiet subtle, is there and it was a while before I caught on.
If someone was going to buy or build this amp I would recommend matching gains for the headphones you have. The level I listened to was only a quarter turn of the volume knob.
I have to thank Stephen once again for his generosity. I think that this is an excellent amp and unfortunately with my low impedance headphones I don't think I was able to see the true potential of it. Maybe if I had kept my HD650 then I would have notice a huge change. Never-the-less it is a great amp for the price and I would whole heartily recommend it to anything in its price range.
My setup is as follows:
AV710 Wolfson DAC -> CKKIII -> Headphones
Headphones used: Modded Denon D2000 Recabled w/ spc, AT W1000
Music:
the Gazatte - Filth in the Beauty
Uverworld - GROOVY GROOVY GROOVY
Uverworld - Shaka Beach~Laka Laka La~
Lar'c~en~ciel - Stay Away
Peter Tchaikovsky - Piano Concerto No. 1: Allegro non troppo
I only tested against my music preferences, which is mostly jrock and classical. For these tests I specifically used the D2000 for rock and the W1000 for classical. I don't believe the W1000 would sound very good for rock whereas the D2000 is good for both rock and classical.
Since I sold my other two amps a couple weeks ago I only have memory to go on but I can certainly remember what each sounded like. I was going to purchase a desktop amp in between that time but didn't get a chance before the CKKIII arrived.
[size=medium]D2000[/size]
The main problem I had with the Denons were the recessed mids and the out of control bass, even after I recabled them and stuffed the cups with cotton. They were also somewhat sibilant in the highs when running straight out of the LDII, Head-six, and my DAC.
I have to admit that it took a while for my ears to adjust to the amp but after that I began to notice the differences. For one, the bass was more tightly controlled and the mids were more emphasized, although not to the point of the LDII. Details stayed about the same but clarity improved. Soundstage is about the same as the Head-six, but then again the soundstage on the denons were not huge to begin with.
Compared with the LDII the CKKIII has more clarity and seems more analytical. The LDII was IMO too forward and muddied the sound. I prefer a more distant sound and so the tubes weren't really for me.
Compared with the Head-six the CKKIII seemed to have a fuller sound. Even though the head-six was a also an analytical amp the CKKIII seemed to give a more full sound, whereas the head-six seemed dry.
[size=medium]W1000[/size]
I was truly impressed with these cans when I first got them. They weren't very good for rock but for classical they were amazing. I only got them the day before I sold my head-six and LDII so my impressions with the other two amps are limited. However, these cans sound great with the CKKIII. The main problem the the AT's were that they were too bright, and sometimes the sound could get fatiguing after listening for a long time. The first thing I noticed with the CKKIII was that the highs were tamed, reducing the sibilance. The soundstage was also enhanced, although it was already pretty decent to begin with. The most impressive thing though was the detail. AT's are known for their detail, and I thought that amping such a low impedance headphone wouldn't make a difference, however I was wrong. Detail in each note was more controlled and was separated from the other notes. It was like isolating a note and the improving on it.
[size=medium]Conclusion[/size]
I think the best words to describe this amp are "balance" and "control". It seems to handle all the flaws I noticed in my two headphones and emphasize the sound where each was lacking. It took a while for me to notice since both my headphones are low impedance and don't see a huge difference when amping. The difference, albiet subtle, is there and it was a while before I caught on.
If someone was going to buy or build this amp I would recommend matching gains for the headphones you have. The level I listened to was only a quarter turn of the volume knob.
I have to thank Stephen once again for his generosity. I think that this is an excellent amp and unfortunately with my low impedance headphones I don't think I was able to see the true potential of it. Maybe if I had kept my HD650 then I would have notice a huge change. Never-the-less it is a great amp for the price and I would whole heartily recommend it to anything in its price range.
