Well...the sound doesn't change with my LCD-2f's between 32 and 100 load setting, higher settings sound worse to me (and get too loud)...but if I had 600 Ohm Beyers I'm sure the lower setting would sound like crap...the water just isn't pushing hard enough!Thank you! I think I got a bit of a better understanding how it works. The "expensive gain switch" analogy is compellingThough it's interesting you're saying the sound signature doesn't change at all. I could've sworn I read somewhere that you shoud experiment with the different terminals of a McIntosh speaker amp to find the best sound...
New McIntosh MHA200 Headphone amp
- Thread starter TSAVJason
- Start date
Colonel Flac
New Head-Fier
I got that. My point was, that both headphones in question, the Diana V2 and the LCD-2 fall into the same "designed load" - 32-100 Ohms. So if you go strictly by that and set the switch on the MHA-200 to the load impedance of your headphone you end up with the same setting, same transformers, same everything and thus your Wattage would still go down with rising impedance (70Ohm LCD-2s would get 60% of what 42Ohm Diana V2s would get, to stay with the original example).
Also I don't think it's a company secret. Like Crowbar44 has said the schematics are even printed on the housing. I just didn't pay as much attention as I should have in electrical engineering
As far as I know it's a technology McIntosh invented and patened way back in the day. Now the patent has run out but winding is a quite expensive process so no other company has invested in machines to copy it yet. Sounded strange to me since money rarely seems to be an issue in the HiFi world but maybe they didn't see the benefit of it or there are other ways around it (just dump more power into it). I don't know.
Colonel Flac
New Head-Fier
That would surely be an interesting example to push the amp!
Actually... I've found that I can use the Load setting knob to induce tonal changes in at least one of my test headphones here.
With an Audeze LCD-X, I've found that higher load settings tend to increase bass response but not midrange or high frequency response.
With an Audeze LCD-X, I've found that higher load settings tend to increase bass response but not midrange or high frequency response.
That's really interesting Warren, I'm going to have to try listening a bit more critically at the higher settings...for me - with the LCD-2f...I found 32 and 100 to be more or less identical - but the higher settings added just a touch of harshness...since these weren't level matched tests, it just could have been my reacting to the louder volume...
What decibel meter program do you guys use to volume match? Do you play music or simple tones (and where can I find those tracks?)
Anybody try a different octal power cord to see if changes occur?
Anybody try a different octal power cord to see if changes occur?
Yeah, I thought so too. Just to be clear, that doesn't happen with all of the headphones I've been using, but it did happen with the LCD-X. And if I'm honest, I did not like the change - at all - so as far as I'm concerned that's an undesirable thing. Really interested to know what you find out at the higher settings.
I don't even bother with a meter. It is my opinion that, all of my audio devices serve one end goal, which is to give me aural pleasure and enjoyment. So while I appreciate measurements as data points, at the end of the day I just volume match with my ears (i.e. what sounds like a comfortable level to me). That said, the track where I noticed the effect to be quite pronounced is Unstatic by Manu Katché.
Not yet. I'll be experimenting with that - and tube rolling - after my review is done, but I wanted to keep every thing stock for review purposes.
How do you stay honest with yourself then? I mean, psychology plays a big role in auditioning new gear and volume matching can help you stay on top of your biases. Or you don't really care as long as the new gear sparks that part of the brain that loves music?
Well, I don't have any particular reason to lie to myself?
But since you ask, definitely the latter.I generally don't buy a lot of gear these days, mainly because I don't chase gear. In terms of portable gear, I've reached endgame and I'm perfectly happy with my reference set-up there, to the point where I'm not even interested in auditioning anything new. In terms of desktop gear, compared to rigs I've heard and owned in the past, something better be really special in terms of enjoyment, in order for me to even consider it.
Plus, as I said earlier, the tonal change that I noticed is not something that I would consider desirable. So if anything, I'd be "fooling" myself into thinking that I don't like it (as opposed to liking it) and thus it wouldn't constitute confirmation bias.
ThanatosVI
Headphoneus Supremus
What portable gear are you using?Well, I don't have any particular reason to lie to myself?
I generally don't buy a lot of gear these days, mainly because I don't chase gear. In terms of portable gear, I've reached endgame and I'm perfectly happy with my reference set-up there, to the point where I'm not even interested in auditioning anything new. In terms of desktop gear, compared to rigs I've heard and owned in the past, something better be really special in terms of enjoyment, in order for me to even consider it.
Plus, as I said earlier, the tonal change that I noticed is not something that I would consider desirable. So if anything, I'd be "fooling" myself into thinking that I don't like it (as opposed to liking it) and thus it wouldn't constitute confirmation bias.
Astell&Kern SP1000 (SS) > balanced 2.5mm MMCX cable > Westone ES80 CIEM.
The entire chain matters of course, but I consider the ES80 to be the "crown jewel" of that rig. I'll be reviewing it sometime soon, as a long-term review, as it's been my mainstay for the past three years by now. 
Apologies if Warren's video has been posted here already, but I just watched it and they both say that for Susvara, MHA200 is not powerful enough if you are looking for some slam/low end, and especially not a good fit for Raal (but that was to be expected). This makes me wonder, has anyone been able to audition with Abyss AB-1266 yet?
I think your best bet would be @HiFiGuy528 for that question. He has an MHA200, and some Abyss gear, as he works for Woo Audio and they routinely use Abyss gear as demo headphones for their amps.
EDIT: You'd have to PM him for impressions though. Since he works for an audio manufacturer, he's not allowed to post any subjective comments about another manufacturer here on Head-Fi.
Last edited:
Yoram Diamand
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 29, 2017
- Posts
- 246
- Likes
- 168
Empyrean and HE1000 SEI don’t know about the MHA yet, but the euforia definitely can’t handle any planars
TeNeT
New Head-Fier
I am not an engineer, but I might be able to help a little.So my understanding is that the impedance matching is done by switching between different windings on the transformers - and note, there are 3 transformers, with different windings, on the MHA200. There's even a schematic of the windings displayed on the top of each transformer (2 output transformers, one power transformer):
Living with this amp, I found that the sound signature doesn't change at all if you switch the "load" switch higher, all you get is more volume (kind of like an expensive gain switch, but sonically transparent). My LCD-2f's live comfortably at either the 32 or 100 setting. I think the higher settings will probably be used less, but are probably more relevant, as 600 Ohm cans aren't going to be happy at the lower settings, while you have more flexibility with lower impedance cans (as has always been the case - you can drive Focal Clears with an iPhone, but old school Beyers or Senns...no way).
As a non-engineer, my understanding is that instead of just throwing a ton of power at higher impedance cans (kind of a brute force approach), McIntosh has chosen to finesse the issue and match the impedances, thus allowing for less power to adequately drive the cans to high SPL. But keep in mind, you're always sending 500mW to the headphone, it's just that by matching impendence you can do more with less power.
Now this may be a poor description, but let me try: Imagine a hose that is shooting out a defined, constant, volume of water (500mW). Imagine that you want to knock over a bowling pin with that water stream. Without putting your finger over the opening of the hose, the water doesn't have the "oomph" to knock over the pin. but cover half the opening with your finger, and you can use the same amount of water to knock over the bowling pin. In this example putting your finger over the hose opening is changing the output impedance of the amp, and the weight of the bowling pin is the impedance of the headphone. A plastic bowling pin (low impedance headphone) might get knocked over with the hose wide open and no finger over the hose. While a metal bowling pin (high impedance headphone) is going to need that finger over the hose.
Hoping an EE out there can give a more technical explanation.
It is a good analogy, it is called the water flow analogy. It is used all the time, to visualize electricity by replacing it with water.
If you think of a water pump as the power source (or amplifier). The pressure (psi) of the water, is the same as Volts in electricity. The flow of the water or liters per min, is the same as current in electricity. And the diameter of the pipe, is the same as resistance (Ohms) in electricity.
You can solve for the power output of electricity by multiplying Volts by Amps to get watts. And you can solve for power output from a water system by multiplying psi by lpm to get, also watts. Here the thing. I hear it asked all the time here, but in a different form. People want to know "what is the impedance at the output?". I believe really what they are asking is what are the amperes at output, lol. And that is a difficult question to answer because it always is changing. BUT there is a trick, Ohms law (who else? lol). It says that the current (amperes) is equal to the voltage divided by the resistance (Ohms). In more cases than not (for me anyway) it is easier to figure out the amperes by knowing the resistance, than figuring out the resistance by knowing the amperes. In either case you will need to know the voltage to solve. And the figure for resistance, I am pretty sure, would be just the resistance (Ohms) from the headphones ( I say this because how else are you going to quantify resistance? Add it all up, Headphone resistance plus transformer resistance? I don't think so. I think there is just one resistance figure and it is the highest one.). Anyway, Divide the output voltage by headphone ohms and that will give you the output amperes. I may be wrong but I believe that the output Ohms by nature always match the actual Ohms of headphones.
Your analogy was slightly off in the concept of a constant 500mW, (and also calling it a volume of water. The volume of water is represented by liters per min, not watts). But the idea that a hose is delivering defined and constant water from a pump is more or less correct, but how that water turns into power is changed very much by what happens after the pump. Mostly by the size of the pipe, and in your example the introduction of a finger (as it does change the size of the pipe). Which is a very good comparison to an impedance switch that can be flipped on or off independently of what the original pipe size had been. BUT, it is important to remember what that finger does, lol. It may be an impedance, but what is it doing? It is raising psi (and so does the pipe),,, or voltage... SO while it may be called impedance, because it also raises pressure it is also voltage. Your example shows how power output is never constant (if it was you would just hear one loud tone in your ear). As you put your finger over the hose, you greatly increase psi or volts, the lpm may go down a bit, but the overall power output goes way up, and can knock over the heavy object or turn a water wheel. Here is the thing, you can do it other way around too. A hose with enough liters per min going through it with very low psi or resistance, could still knock that same heavy object down. It is just generally you don't have extra lpm (amperes) to throw at stuff, but introducing psi (volts) through only resistance is usually easier. But anyway the point here is that you will always have a change going on in power output based on these factors. Which is all after output, don't forget the music itself creates variations in output. Silent is nearly no watts while loud is many. I believe what creates confusion is the power ratings manufacturers share with us. But these are maximum power ratings. They are based on the factors they know about their amps. Namely how many volts it can produce...
Look at the water pump like the tubes and transformers. They are all going to have certain ratings, and you can't get something from nothing. So in the water example By knowing you have a 1HP pump (for example), you can then figure out what flow of water you can produce, then by using a pipe, you can direct that flow, producing power. Same with an amp. The tubes will be capable of a certain output. In most headphone amps these tubes are not being used to their full potential. Which means they have some headroom, well hey what better way to use some of that headroom? Release it when changing impedance modes. I think what has happened with the MHA200 is that it's tubes don't give it this headroom. As the impedance increases on this one, the voltage is being sacrificed and goes down. Where an amp with more room to play within the tubes, will let the volts increase through all the impedance changes, building higher power ratings with each mode change, due to increased resistance.
I don't know how the manufactures actually make their impedance circuits work, so the last part may or may not be correct. I look at the impedance switch like a faucet or hose spigot/finger, and then the impedance from headphones as a straw. If I set the water to either a trickle, low, medium, fast, or gushing; I will find I can more easy direct the water into different size straws. The slow trickle into a swizzle stick, low flow into a small straw and so on. Overall the actual numbers will be determined by all these factors, and constantly changing within a range. And as far as how the amplifiers are actually working, lol, I am just making an educated guess.
So this is not in any way meaning to say the MHA200 is a bad amp, lol. In fact many may say it is the way an amplifier should be built. I wouldn't disagree, although I would like to see that power rating around 1-2 watts if it is going to be constant through impedance modes. But I also have never listened to this amp. I can say Mcintosh amplifiers are built on a rock solid reputation, that much is for sure.
TLDR:
The water-flow analogy compares Volts to psi (pressure), Amps to lpm (flow), and Ohms (resistance) to pipe size. Volts X Amps = Watts , psi X lpm = Watts
Watts are rarely ever constant, always changing. In fact watts are probably more constant in a water system than they are in a sound system.
Users who are viewing this thread
