[lindrone]

I got my Pocket Reference back from LaRocco (with the gain readjusted) and was able to do a more comprehensive side-by-side comparison with my HR-2.

ProPhonic 2X-S was amazingly consistent.. it held its basic sound signature very well, while picked up on the differences that each amp delivered in a very apparent, yet not overtly dramatic way. This all goes to show that 2X-S will execute on its basic sound signature in a very consistent manner, despite the source and amp. Yet at the same time, it doesn't take away from the advantage of having a better amp and source either.

The combination with the HR-2 is darker, with more fluidity and balance in its musical presentation. The trebles are very smooth, not irritating. Bass is deep and controlled without losing any of its visceral impact. Sound imaging is more subtle in comparison to the Pocket Reference, but once again, more accurate and controlled. Overall, the smoothness and resolution of the HR-2 definitely makes it the superior of the two. The darker presentation is more of my personal preference.

Pocket Reference is very, very exciting and punchy. Trebles seems to be more extended, with a little less control on sibilance (nevertheless very good control, just not as well as the HR-2), and bass is deep and punchy. Everything has a more exciting "kick" to them. The extra kick in the sound also gives it more of dimensionality in the way sound imaging is reproduced. Overall though, you can tell the sound is less refined, but nevertheless very, very good.

Which brings me to another conclusion.. I really do like the PR much, much more than the XP-7. XP-7 with AD797 opamp sounds like the HR-2 in many ways.. but it definitely doesn't approach the superiority that is obvious with the HR-2. I've never had a XP-7 with a power supply, so maybe the difference in using the power supply versus the battery would bring it closer to HR-2's level. However, right now I'm very happy I went with the HR-2 instead of the XP-7. Of course, this is being very nit-picky.. but at this level of audiophilism, you have to be, right?

I would take Pocket Reference over XP-7 as my portable amp, because of the versatility (recharges battery when plugged in), consistency (doesn't sound different with AC adaptor or battery), no need for an external power supply. The sound is "different", so it's hard to compare it directly in lineage with XP-7 and HR-2.. but I definitely feels that it brings something different to the table than the XP-7... thus placing it as a better choice to compliment the HR-2.

Most of all, I'm still very, very impressed with 2X-S's performance. It is definitely on par, if not superior than my CD3000 in many, many ways. (Well, all things other than soundstage)

 

[iamdone]

Even though the XP-7 can't recharge the batteries, doesn't having the quick change slot make it better if you carry an extra set of batteries. So if your traveling and the batteries run out, you can just pop in the new ones and then put the other ones in a recharger when you get back to an outlet.

I have the same problem with my PPA with battery board. Once it runs out, there's nothing I can do while on the go. I have to wait until I can plug it back in.

Just another take on the subject.

 

[Welly Wu]

Quote:

Originally posted by lindrone I got my Pocket Reference back from LaRocco (with the gain readjusted) and was able to do a more comprehensive side-by-side comparison with my HR-2. ProPhonic 2X-S was amazingly consistent.. it held its basic sound signature very well, while picked up on the differences that each amp delivered in a very apparent, yet not overtly dramatic way. This all goes to show that 2X-S will execute on its basic sound signature in a very consistent manner, despite the source and amp. Yet at the same time, it doesn't take away from the advantage of having a better amp and source either. The combination with the HR-2 is darker, with more fluidity and balance in its musical presentation. The trebles are very smooth, not irritating. Bass is deep and controlled without losing any of its visceral impact. Sound imaging is more subtle in comparison to the Pocket Reference, but once again, more accurate and controlled. Overall, the smoothness and resolution of the HR-2 definitely makes it the superior of the two. The darker presentation is more of my personal preference. Pocket Reference is very, very exciting and punchy. Trebles seems to be more extended, with a little less control on sibilance (nevertheless very good control, just not as well as the HR-2), and bass is deep and punchy. Everything has a more exciting "kick" to them. The extra kick in the sound also gives it more of dimensionality in the way sound imaging is reproduced. Overall though, you can tell the sound is less refined, but nevertheless very, very good. Which brings me to another conclusion.. I really do like the PR much, much more than the XP-7. XP-7 with AD797 opamp sounds like the HR-2 in many ways.. but it definitely doesn't approach the superiority that is obvious with the HR-2. I've never had a XP-7 with a power supply, so maybe the difference in using the power supply versus the battery would bring it closer to HR-2's level. However, right now I'm very happy I went with the HR-2 instead of the XP-7. Of course, this is being very nit-picky.. but at this level of audiophilism, you have to be, right? I would take Pocket Reference over XP-7 as my portable amp, because of the versatility (recharges battery when plugged in), consistency (doesn't sound different with AC adaptor or battery), no need for an external power supply. The sound is "different", so it's hard to compare it directly in lineage with XP-7 and HR-2.. but I definitely feels that it brings something different to the table than the XP-7... thus placing it as a better choice to compliment the HR-2. Most of all, I'm still very, very impressed with 2X-S's performance. It is definitely on par, if not superior than my CD3000 in many, many ways. (Well, all things other than soundstage)

Lindrone:

Thank you so very much for this succinct impression of the LaRocco Pocket Reference headphone amplifier! You just quashed any and all curiosity I had with the PPA based design to headphone amplifiers...and you saved me from wasting hundreds of dollars to boot!

IF I decide to work and save up for a portable audio system of some sort, then I now know to get the Ray Samuels Emmeline XP-7 as my top choice for a transportable headphone amplifier. That preliminary choice changes everything I was thinking about in terms of building a killer portable audio system.

Again, thank you very much for this revelation!

 

[lindrone]

Quote:

Originally posted by Welly Wu Lindrone: Thank you so very much for this succinct impression of the LaRocco Pocket Reference headphone amplifier! You just quashed any and all curiosity I had with the PPA based design to headphone amplifiers...and you saved me from wasting hundreds of dollars to boot! IF I decide to work and save up for a portable audio system of some sort, then I now know to get the Ray Samuels Emmeline XP-7 as my top choice for a transportable headphone amplifier. That preliminary choice changes everything I was thinking about in terms of building a killer portable audio system. Again, thank you very much for this revelation!

Heh, you're welcome

I'm just not sure what sort of 'revelation' I made to you... do you mind detailing why you would pick XP-7 over Pocket Reference just in case there's any misinterpretation?

Also, I should mention that Pocket Reference comes from a design that is semi-based on PPA.. but it still sounds different than the PPA. PPA is more fluid and refined, imo. I would still take the HR-2 over a PPA though, once again, my personal preference for the dark and smooth sound.

 

[Welly Wu]

The revelation was not what you wrote but what you meant between the lines. I heard in your mini-review that as good as the LaRocco Portable Reference is in terms of a headphone amplifier, there was that same love and comfort in the Ray Samuels Emmeline family of sound that ultimately made the decision for you. That is what I inferred and helped me to make the right decision. Thank you very much!

 

[iamdone]

Quote:

Originally posted by lindrone Also, I should mention that Pocket Reference comes from a design that is semi-based on PPA.. but it still sounds different than the PPA. PPA is more fluid and refined, imo. I would still take the HR-2 over a PPA though, once again, my personal preference for the dark and smooth sound.

I had the same impression. The PR did not even have the same sound signature as the PPA. The XP-7 was actaully much closer. PPA just a had a little more detail across the scale.

 

[lindrone]

Ah.. to that I must clarify.. I love the HR-2 much more, and I feel that HR-2 is overall superior to the Pocket Reference in terms of both technical presentation and sound signature.

However, I do not feel the same way about the XP-7. XP-7 is a shadow of the HR-2 for me, even after the opamp rolling (to have identical opamp as the HR-2). There's something "missing" in the way that XP-7 sounds.. even though most of the characteristic are there, certain smoothness, darkness and warmth of the HR-2 isn't quite here. It is definitely not as powerful as the HR-2 either.

Perhaps that will improve with the addition of a power supply, however that brings XP-7 so much closer to the price range of the HR-2 anyway.

It is a subtle difference, but a different makes that makes the HR-2 worth every bit of its $875 price tag, and XP-7 merely just a $450 amp. Pocket Reference, imo, sounds more than the $350 base price that it warrants.

Before the Pocket Reference, I would definitely consider XP-7 as being the best luggable amp around, face it, there isn't that much high-end battery driven amp choices out there. PPA w/ battery board is there too, but it's just too big and too heavy. Pocket Reference has certainly changed that... It will come down to system matching and personal preference between the XP-7 and Pocket Reference.. it is a definite superiority in any way.

 

[Dixie Flatline]

Quote:

Originally posted by Sczervok THose are some funky ass looking phones... Alien is appropriate eh? I aint never seen anything like that before.. looks like some internal organ you find while dissecting something... hehe...

Oddly enough, my wife (who has a background in medical biochemistry) happened to be standing behind me when I was looking at lindrone's pictures of the earmolds, and her responses were, in order:

1) Is that an internal organ of some kind?

2) Is that a rat fetus?

3) I'm not looking at those pictures any more.

Looks like the 2X-S is not in my future.

(Not that it was anyway -- I'm just happy that my wife is understanding about the fact that in less than 30 days, I've gone from spending $65 on a pair of HD280's to spending exactly three times that amount on the A900, which Audiocubes just let me know is en route. She thinks I'm crazy, but at least she's understanding about it.)

 

[ferdit]

Damn you, lindrone. (Grrrrrrrr!)

Here I am, already made up my mind to get an E5c and saw this post. Now, I'm lusting for a Sensaphonics. (Gotta rob a bank first.)

Next time I see Lindrone's post, I'm NOT going to click it anymore.

 

[cmascatello]

If you have not bought the e5 yet and have the financial means to afford the 2X-S at $750+$50 for the audiologist, it may be worth holding out.....

I just got my 2X-S and the things are UNREAL. More info. to come as I get deeper into listening with them....

 

[lindrone]

Hehehe..I still suggest you to get an E5c first. Then you'll at least get acquainted with what high-end canalphones sounds like (of course 2X-S is just a level above that). Not only that, you can find the E5c for about $370 on the market, and when you upgrade, you can recoup most of that money back by reselling it.

2X-S is a no-going-back purchase. You might even find yourself even satisfied enough with the E5c that you don't feel a need to upgrade. As I said many times, E5c is still more "fun" than anything else...

 

[joelk]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ferdit Damn you, lindrone. (Grrrrrrrr!) Here I am, already made up my mind to get an E5c and saw this post. Now, I'm lusting for a Sensaphonics. (Gotta rob a bank first.) Next time I see Lindrone's post, I'm NOT going to click it anymore.

Hi Guys,

I just picked up my Sensaphonics. I'll post an evaluation after they break in.

I will say, preliminary, that the comfort factor alone may be well worth any difference in price.

Joel

 

[ferdit]

cmascatello: Yeah, that $800 is a bummer. Major ouuuucccch! I keep on telling myself it's a bit too rich for me right now...yet...*sigh* (I really have to wean myself away from headfi.)

Anyway, if any of you gentlemen will be parting with your E5s sometime soon, do pm me. (although the sensaphonics are just too...arghhhh!!!!)