[Jaunty]

Mythless - Thanks for taking the time to right up your thoughts. It is quite daunting, I'm sure, and I would not know where to start. I find my Pico Slim just makes everything a bit more effortless, and as it is no hassle to carry around I use it most of the time now with my iPod Classic and Livewires. (Usability is great, holding it in my left hand I can make track selections on the iPod and adjust volume on the Pico Slim with my index finger quite naturally).

 

[mythless]

Yep, the Pico Slim is quite the handy amp.

 

[bcwang]

Finally got my pico slim today!
 
Holy...I totally forgot about the turn on "thump" issue since it's old news now.  I'm so glad I forgot my IEMs today as even with my HF1 that thump was loud!  Now I'll remember to turn on before plugging in headphones.

 

[justin w.]

Someone in the pre-order thread had asked about internal photos.  Here they are:
 

 

 
If you already have the Pico Slim you can add your name on the Head Gear page for it: http://www.head-fi.org/products/headamp-pico-slim-portable-amp

 

[rayk]

Nice internal shot, almost tempted to pull mine apart to have a look inside!
 
I wonder if there is an RK27 sized volume control like the one Pico uses. Would love to fit one in my CKKIII

 

[wuwhere]

It uses AD8656 amp chip as a pre-amp?

 

[justin w.]

Quote:

Nice internal shot, almost tempted to pull mine apart to have a look inside!
 
I wonder if there is an RK27 sized volume control like the one Pico uses. Would love to fit one in my CKKIII

" class="bbcode_smiley" height="" src="http://files.head-fi.org/images/smilies//smily_headphones1.gif" title="

" width="" />

size won't matter here.  the pot is just to control the digital volume attenuator. 

 

[Nemosan]

My new portable

 
There are a few more photos in the portable rig thread
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/439019/pictures-of-your-portable-rig-part-xiv/870#post_6957900
 
 

 
 
The new Nano 6G doesn't sound as good as my iPhone 3GS through the line out. I haven't actually tried the headphone out. If there is any improvement over the 3GS, I'd say it has an infinitesimal wider soundstage

 

 

[K3cT]

On retrospect, I prefer the sound of the older Pico but I would still get the new Pico Slim due to its minuscule size and the very wicked attenuator. I tend not to engage in critical listening anyway when I'm outside so practicality > SQ and therefore Pico Slim > Pico in that respect.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

My new portable

 
There are a few more photos in the portable rig thread
 
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/439019/pictures-of-your-portable-rig-part-xiv/870#post_6957900
 
 

 
 
The new Nano 6G doesn't sound as good as my iPhone 3GS through the line out. I haven't actually tried the headphone out. If there is any improvement over the 3GS, I'd say it has an infinitesimal wider soundstage

 

I thought the 6G Nano line out was below my iPhone 4 and 3G Nano line out, but possibly above my current 5G Nano which is not as warm sounding and slightly brighter.  I need to borrow a 6G again or buy my own and do longer comparisons with more music that I am familiar with.  It certainly didn't suck.  Before the iPhone 3G/GS/4, the 3G Nano line out was closest to my 5.5G iMod video in sound signature, and very balanced sounding (I still have 2 of them).
 
The 6G headphone out is a little colored with a mid-bass bump that makes it a little more fun sounding than neutral, but it's not sibilant in the highs like my old 4G Nano was through the headphone out.  So, I thought it was kinda fun and bouncy with the UM3X, but not as transparent as other iPods and maybe too much bass for the W3. I actually only have about 5-10 hours through my 5G Nano headphone out because of my bad 4G Nano experience, and I currently only use the 5G or 3G (with LOD to Pico Slim of course).  
 
More Slim Impressions - the Slim is an upgrade over any of my iPod/iPhone headphone jacks, and the size is small enough that I bring it everywhere with me.  Comparing the Slim to my iPhone 4 headphone out there are a couple of small but immediately noticeable differences in sound (1) the Slim has a deeper more pervasive bass response and impact, and (2) the Slim has a wider and deeper soundstage.  More subtle is the increase in transparency and realism, but it's there.  I like the Slim more with my Westone IEM (custom and universal) than I do with my JH13Pro, so I leave the JH13Pro at home paired with the Protector off the Macbook > Pico DAC.  I think the JH13Pro bass is a little thick when paired with the Slim, and more accurate with the Protector.  The Protector also fills in the JH13Pro mids a little better, while the mids sound a bit more laid back with the Slim.  Other than with HD600 or HE-5 LE in balanced mode, I prefer the Slim with almost everything else.  While HD800 are underpowered by the Slim, they sound more natural and balanced while they become a bit bright with the Protector (HD800 have a similar tone with the HM-801, which is more powerful but not as small).  The Slim is very good with my UM3X and W2.  It's not too bad with my W3, but not optimal unless I use my UM56 tips.  The Slim also pairs well with my MTPG, and TF10Pro, although I'd wish for fuller mids with the TF10Pro.  That's an issue I have with the TF10 and not the Slim.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

On retrospect, I prefer the sound of the older Pico but I would still get the new Pico Slim due to its minuscule size and the very wicked attenuator. I tend not to engage in critical listening anyway when I'm outside so practicality > SQ and therefore Pico Slim > Pico in that respect.

 
For a while I preferred the P-51 over my original Pico for it's added warmth and fullness in the sound, but at times it was slightly aggressive sounding and I would turn to the Pico.  When I compared the three amps at CanJam 2009 I felt that the Pico Slim added that missing warmth I wanted, while remaining smoother and more refined than my P-51.  
 
I do feel the Slim is very slightly more laid back than the original Pico, but not in a bad way.  I no longer have the original Pico or P-51 for comparisons, but that would have been the only reason to keep them - otherwise they were not as practical for portable use as the Slim.  Until I got the Slim I found I was using my tiny iBasso T3 more than the others even though it wasn't as good, because it was smaller.

 

[Nemosan]

Quote:

 
For a while I preferred the P-51 over my original Pico for it's added warmth and fullness in the sound, but at times it was slightly aggressive sounding and I would turn to the Pico.  When I compared the three amps at CanJam 2009 I felt that the Pico Slim added that missing warmth I wanted, while remaining smoother and more refined than my P-51.  
 
I do feel the Slim is very slightly more laid back than the original Pico, but not in a bad way.  I no longer have the original Pico or P-51 for comparisons, but that would have been the only reason to keep them - otherwise they were not as practical for portable use as the Slim.  Until I got the Slim I found I was using my tiny iBasso T3 more than the others even though it wasn't as good, because it was smaller.

 
 
For me, I also find the Pico Slim laid back. Its missing that punch at the low end as compared to my P-51, but the mids really shine on the Slim. Overall SQ-wise I think the P-51 is marginally superior, but the truely *pocketability* of the Slim and its fine volume control has made my P-51 redundant. Now that I have bought a Nano 6G to go with the Slim I can put the whole thing in my shirt/trouser pocket without getting raised eyebrow looks from the females

 
One thing I find with some people commenting on the Nano 6G saying its a glorified iPod Shuffle, is that they overlook the 30-pin dock connector. In the Head-fi world the line out signal is the differentiator between the two devices. It allows the Nano to be connected to all the audio accessories out there.
 

 

[Currawong]

I get the impression that the Slim was aimed to be non-coloured (essentially) whereas the RSA amps are deliberately slightly coloured.  Would I be right?
 
If the new Nano has a bit more bass punch than my iPhone 4, I might consider getting one to use with the RE-ZEROs, which are very bass-light.  I really need to consider different IEMs though.

 

[Nemosan]

 
Quote:

I get the impression that the Slim was aimed to be non-coloured (essentially) whereas the RSA amps are deliberately slightly coloured.  Would I be right?
 
If the new Nano has a bit more bass punch than my iPhone 4, I might consider getting one to use with the RE-ZEROs, which are very bass-light.  I really need to consider different IEMs though.

Yes, I think the P-51 is more coloured than the Slim. For me, the P-51 is superb for electronic/acoustic/pop as its more aggressive at the low end and high end. It also does a pretty good job at vocals/jazz type music. However with the Slim, I find its better suited for vocals/jazz only with its accenuated mid-range. For bassy music I think its really bland. In that sense the P-51 is more versatile and so I find it to be better overall.
 
The new Nano 6G has no more bass presence than my iPhone 3GS, so I don't think it will be any better than an iPhone 4. It is a great little DAP, and I am satisfied with my purchase if not overwhelmed. Battery life isn't too hot. I'm only getting ~15hours per charge. But I believe that is the norm...

 

[WalkGood]

Posted my Pico Slim review here --->  http://anythingbutipod.com/2010/10/headamp-pico-slim-portable-amp-review/