[jh8331]

How long until a full review or shootout comparison? At this point I'm hung up wether I should get the Headroom Micro amp (which module is best?) or the SM3

 

[Dick Danger]

Quote:

Originally Posted by devwild Actual picture for reference: Tyll won't be in town till August for us so I doubt I will have a chance to compare against a microamp in the meantime. But the DAC does sound quite lovely with the SMv3. I am curious how they compare, particularly with the OPA627s in the SM. The biggest advantages Xin holds is his recharging in-amp, option switches, the ability to customize with a wide range of op amps, and compared to the headroom equipment, significantly better battery life. None of these are deal killers but for me it was prime reason to buy the SMv3 when I did.

WOW, they must have big cards in Bozeman, that's a lot bigger than I thought it would be.

 

[Jamey Warren]

Quote:

Originally Posted by appar111 Maybe Headroom should change the description from "roughly the size of a deck of cards" to "roughly the size of a deck of tarot cards....

Sorry about that. That was copy from the Coda amp. It now says "a pack of cigarettes." Maybe Camel Wides?

Any better suggestions? I'd love to hear em'

Yngwie, I stand corrected. However, I will have to investigate. Originally, I was thinking we'd use the 822 in the Micro DAC as well for the longer battery life. Maybe we should offer both choices in the DAC too.

Thanks,
Jamey

 

[ChaosCow]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jh8331 How long until a full review or shootout comparison? At this point I'm hung up wether I should get the Headroom Micro amp (which module is best?) or the SM3

Xin's always been real honest, and he said that the Supermacro is better, hands down. He's been honest about competition like the SR-71 being a contender (I think he's said that once or twice), but he says that the micro isn't in the same league. So, use that information as you will, but Xin is extremely honest.

 

[Lorenzo]

Quote:

but he but he says that the micro isn't in the same leaguesays that the micro isn't in the same league

Why did he say this? Not trying to argue since I have never tried an SM3, but considering these two are in the same price class, I am just wondering. I'm talking mostly about sound.

And speaking of sound, has anyone done a shootout between this, the SM3, and the SR-71, the three of which seem to be the contenders in the "portable" category. From a general technical standpoint, the Xin looks the best for the portability, battery life, and op-amp customization. Someone here said this is comparable with the Gilmore Lite, which looks to be slightly larger.

Anyway, I'm generally pleased with the perfomance of my Headroom Micro. It's a bit big, but the sound is great, bringing more of the mids of my Beyer DT880, and enhancing its already tight bass and clean highs. Now if only I could afford to buy the DAC....

 

[gpalmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lorenzo Why did he say this? Not trying to argue since I have never tried an SM3, but considering these two are in the same price class, I am just wondering. I'm talking mostly about sound.

I believe his comments were from a design and optimization standpoint, i.e. traces as short as possible, etc. I don't know that he's actually heard one, or that the criteria was real world sound quality...

 

[appar111]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChaosCow Xin's always been real honest, and he said that the Supermacro is better, hands down. He's been honest about competition like the SR-71 being a contender (I think he's said that once or twice), but he says that the micro isn't in the same league. So, use that information as you will, but Xin is extremely honest.

I don't doubt that Xin's an honest guy, but he's also trying to sell a product that's right in the same price range and type (around $300 and portable), so shouldn't one take his comments with a grain of salt with regard to which amp is better than his? Just curious, what thread did he say that the SM3 is better than the Micro? I'd like to read that one just to see if he goes into more detail, since I've got enough money for either the Micro, SM3 or SR-71 and I'm still very torn as to which I should go with.

 

[digitalcat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpalmer I believe his comments were from a design and optimization standpoint, i.e. traces as short as possible, etc. I don't know that he's actually heard one, or that the criteria was real world sound quality...

Which reminds me of Andrew Tanenbaum and Linus' debate of Linux. Not that the situation is totally comparable but both(Andrew and Xin) value the optimal design and techinical superiority above other things.

 

[mkozlows]

Quote:

Originally Posted by appar111 I don't doubt that Xin's an honest guy, but he's also trying to sell a product that's right in the same price range and type (around $300 and portable), so shouldn't one take his comments with a grain of salt with regard to which amp is better than his? Just curious, what thread did he say that the SM3 is better than the Micro? I'd like to read that one just to see if he goes into more detail, since I've got enough money for either the Micro, SM3 or SR-71 and I'm still very torn as to which I should go with.

It's here: http://www.fixup.net/talk/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=882

I tend to take things like that with an extra-large grain of salt, not because I think that someone is being dishonest, but because I think they can't possibly be an objective judge of the matter. I mean, if you designed something in a certain way, you naturally believe that your design is the right way to do it, so someone else doing it differently is obviously going about it the wrong way.

 

[slwiser]

Don't doubt the design and execution of the Supermacro V3. Xin knows his business. The things you can do with it are impressive if you have the inclination. The op amps others put into their highest models you can select yourself and install or have Xin install them for you. The modifications that he is doing at this time, as noted on his web site forum, shows that this amp is continuing to change for the better. So right now you can say it is the SMV3+ with the Class A modifications being shown today for am impressively small package that continues to be battery powered.

I think others are doing some things much like Dr. Xin, but no one seems to have the optimization and design now that he has. I noticed on the Portaphile site that he is working on a Class A options for his small amp. The PPV2 must also be quite optimized for its size as well. So others are doing much of what Dr. Xin is doing. This just demostrates that the competition is continuing to move the bar higher and higher. If anyone thinks that their design can stay static then they will find themselves on the short in of sales very fast.

I still understand that Dr. Xin is working on other things like a DAC and a Digital Audio Player. So let the competition continue. WE will be the winners in all of this....even if it becomes expensive.

 

[gpalmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by digitalcat Which reminds me of Andrew Tanenbaum and Linus' debate of Linux. Not that the situation is totally comparable but both(Andrew and Xin) value the optimal design and techinical superiority above other things.

Unfortunately in audio the best technical decision may not be the best sounding one. Note the CD and vinyl for one example. Vinyl measures lousy but sounds great. Tubes versus solid state: Tubes measure lousy (or at least usually worse) but many prefer them to solid state. This is one reason why I view xin's statements skeptically.

The second is that as an engineer, I frequently see the same sort of statement being made because an engineer is unfamiliar with a superior approach. While building an opamp based headphone amplifer is more constrained and therefore it is less likely that an engineer will miss an approach than the systems I usually work on, it still makes me wary of xin's statements.

 

[mkozlows]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpalmer Unfortunately in audio the best technical decision may not be the best sounding one.

I assumed that (there's a difference between theory and practice) was actually his point -- Tanenbaum was (as such things go) wrong, too: Microkernels are very rare, and Linux is astonishingly successful.

 

[Oski]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gpalmer I believe his comments were from a design and optimization standpoint, i.e. traces as short as possible, etc. I don't know that he's actually heard one, or that the criteria was real world sound quality...

I agree, it is impressive that Dr. Xin has managed to pack in so much (especially with the optional switches) into such a small package which is a bit of a wonder. However HeadRoom products are professionally made with top level quality and craftsmanship. How any of the above translates to the sound is the real question for me. Since I have not heard the SMv3 someone with both will have to chime in and provide their impressions.

However I have an SR-71 and the Coda amp (predecessor amp to the newest Micro which should be very similar if using the standard module), I will compare these for the benefit of those that may be considering these amps. Ray Samuels should be very proud of the SR-71 as it is the benchmark portable amp with every other contender matched against it for comparison purposes. Please keep in mind that I feel the Coda and the SR-71 to be very similar in sound, so the comparison is mostly on the margin.

The SR 71 has a very open and spacious soundstage with an overall feel of effortlessness and smoothness. The Coda has a slightly more forward sound with an overall more intimate soundstage which contributes to a more cohesive picture. The SR-71 has better width and height (X and Y axis dimensionality), though the Coda has slightly better depth, resonance and texture. This is made even more so when you switch on the crossfeed, which greatly improves the dimensionality as to give a more holographic effect. The above results in the Coda sounding like you are in a club where you are immersed in the music while the SR-71 feels like you are in the middle of a concert hall which is bit more expansive.

Tonally the SR-71 and the Coda are extremely similar, both are extended, balanced, and possessing what I would consider to be a warm, non-fatiguing sound for SS amps. The amps present a very full and punchy bass with good control of the lower registers. On the top end, both are extended but the SR-71 is just a bit more liquid. However the Coda excels in the mids with its more intimate sound and sweeter mid range, making it a great choice for vocals. In addition, both amps are very fast and dynamic with quick transient response. However in complex passages I find the SR-71 to be just a bit more resolving, which is due to the SR-71’s slightly better clarity and transparency.

Both amps possess perfectly black backgrounds with no unwanted noise even with the amp turned up all the way with moderate impedance phones such as the MS-2i and DT 880 (however the Coda does develop a bit of a hiss with my Shure E4cs which are much more sensitive, which I hope is eliminated with the most recent modules).

In terms of the fit and finish, the SR-71 is a testament to Ray Samuels’ craftsmanship, as the casing is beautifully machined and silk screened and the board is meticulously laid out and the parts perfectly mounted. The HeadRoom products are no slouches either, it just looks like a professionally made amp, no DIY about it. I know that the SR-71 suffered from silk screening issues with their first batch which has subsequently been fixed. As for the HeadRoom case, the Coda is this matte black aluminum case (not sure if the Micro line has the same finish), but this type of finish can be a bit prone to showing scratches. Size wise, the Coda (Micro is a similar size) is bigger than the SR-71 by probably 20%, as others have already stated, but the SR-71 is not something that would go in the pocket either, so they both would have to go in a bag of some sort…so I can see HeadRoom’s decision to keep it a bit larger and to have the option to plug in AC power (though I wish they could have made the AC power charge the batteries internally also). As I use both the SR-71 and the Coda for desktop purposes, the size is not an issue with me and I very much prefer the option of being able to use AC power.

I have my Coda hooked up to the Overture (essentially the same as the Micro DAC), which is an amazing achievement on the part of HeadRoom, it’s such a beautifully conceived DAC with tremendous sound quality and ease of use (because of it, I had to spend an entire weekend re-ripping nearly my entire iTunes music collection to a higher bit rate). At $300, I consider this a bargain for anyone that is considering using the computer as an audiophile level source. Strangely the SR-71 actually sounds slightly better than the Coda when paired with the Overture, but visually I just really prefer to have the matched stack with the Coda. I will have the Coda upgraded to the latest desktop module soon because HeadRoom is offering a one-shot deal for Coda owners, which really demonstrates their great after sales service! At which point I expect the Coda to match the Overture not only in looks, but sound quality too.

At $300 each for the Micro DAC and Amp, the stack is extremely compelling and you will get a lot of equipment and great sound for the money. I also really like the fact that HeadRoom developed their equipment with the use of modules that can be switched out. This flexibility will ensure that I’ll have the option to update the technology at HeadRoom in the future as they continue in their development.

Edit: As been brought to my attention.

http://www6.head-fi.org/forums/showp...&postcount=267

Tyll Hertsens said:

The MicroAmp has changed quite a bit from the Coda, it uses the AD822 instead of the BB2137, and uses all metal film resistors and poly film caps in audio chain. It is just as power conserving but it sounds cleaner and quicker, measures quite a bit better, too. ... You can upgrade the amp to the Desktop Line module (it’s green) and get BB2134 op amps in there. ... The Micro also has a gain switch and we have changed the ranges on it so that with UE10s you are not stuck against the bottom of the pot. Speaking of pots, we’ve switched from Spectrol to Alps and the new pots are MUCH better matched on the low end.

 

[gpalmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mkozlows I assumed that (there's a difference between theory and practice) was actually his point

Sorry, I missed it, who is the "his" you are referring to?

 

[gpalmer]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Oski I agree, it is impressive that Dr. Xin has managed to pack in so much (especially with the optional switches) into such a small package which is a bit of a wonder.

Wow, nice comparison, that's one of the best I've seen in some time!