[zazex]

A3 arrived today; listened to it most of the afternoon.

Very good sound, no surprise as it follows so many
positive reviews.

No problem at all driving the Beyer T2 (600 ohms).
The sound is very rich and almost "majestic" in places,
I think in part because it has so much power.

Fit and (black) finish are superb.

Source: flac files from a Cowon Plenue D2

 

[zazex]

re: leaving A3 it on all the time

pros: keeps unit thermally stable (thermal cycling from heating / cooling can reduce semiconductor life); no turn-on/ turn-off pops & clicks with HP's connected (IMHO, may be more of a concern with IEM's)

cons: consumes about 11 watts (a lot less than the typical computer / monitor setup)

Interesting question

Back in the day - meaning solid state gear, no Mac or Marantz tubes, etc. -
word got around that equipment sounded better when left on..Turned off
only when not using it for a good while.

In fact, in the late 70s and 80s.. mfgs of higher end gear began to entirely
omit a power switch altogether. I recall having some great preamps
from db systems, audio research and others without any power switch.
Only a pilot light in some cases. Amps tended to have power switches,
after all they could get really hot esp. Class A. And people had a sense
that the big caps inside could be wearing down with the amp on continuously.

After plenty of years gone by, I don't ever turn off my (solid state)
preamp. My amp at 250/side, though, I do turn off when I'm not
listening to it.

And - if you have a moment, here are a couple of interesting
discussions to check out. 2019 and 2011.

https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/does-anyone-leave-their-amp-and-preamp-on-all-the-time
https://www.psaudio.com/pauls-posts/leave/

Cheers,

 

[SMOTOJO]

I’m sure this question has been asked and answered but I can’t find it - should I turn off the Asgard when I’m not using it?

Go to page 85, near bottom of page, read my post regarding your ???

 

[Runrunsmithfly]

I've been on the fence for several weeks now about upgrading from my Asgard 2 to the Asgard 3. I recently bought a pair of Focal Clear headphones and they sound great with the 2 so why fix it if it ain't broken?

 

[SMOTOJO]

I've been on the fence for several weeks now about upgrading from my Asgard 2 to the Asgard 3. I recently bought a pair of Focal Clear headphones and they sound great with the 2 so why fix it if it ain't broken?

Get off fence-know one is forced to buy...

 

[Chastity]

I've been on the fence for several weeks now about upgrading from my Asgard 2 to the Asgard 3. I recently bought a pair of Focal Clear headphones and they sound great with the 2 so why fix it if it ain't broken?

It's not brutally expensive to try out, and return it if it doesn't make you happy.

 

[Runrunsmithfly]

Get off fence-know one is forced to buy...

Nope, been in HiFi for 50 years and was never once forced to buy anything.

 

[Runrunsmithfly]

It's not brutally expensive to try out, and return it if it doesn't make you happy.

$200 is a crazy good price and Schiit has a great return policy.

 

[tincanear]

For my ears / setup, the A3 high gain (improved imaging, transients) >> A3 on low gain
and A3 on low gain (more detail retrieval, less veiling of upper mids) >= A2 on high gain.

differences I hear between A2 and A3 could be attributable to: Mosfet output stage on A2 vs A3's bipolar output stage; continuity circuitry of the A3; higher max power rating; and / or synergy between the A3 and my planars.

IMHO, if I spent on a set of Focal Clears and have the A2, I would definitely check out A3 as its a fraction of the cost of the Clears. Presumably, upper and top tier models (~$1K and up) from every reputable headphone maker have sufficient overall quality and resolution to detect differences in the electronics chain from source thru the headphone (power) amplifier.

 

[Neweymatt]

For my ears / setup, the A3 high gain (improved imaging, transients) >> A3 on low gain
and A3 on low gain (more detail retrieval, less veiling of upper mids) >= A2 on high gain.

differences I hear between A2 and A3 could be attributable to: Mosfet output stage on A2 vs A3's bipolar output stage; continuity circuitry of the A3; higher max power rating; and / or synergy between the A3 and my planars.

IMHO, if I spent on a set of Focal Clears and have the A2, I would definitely check out A3 as its a fraction of the cost of the Clears. Presumably, upper and top tier models (~$1K and up) from every reputable headphone maker have sufficient overall quality and resolution to detect differences in the electronics chain from source thru the headphone (power) amplifier.

This is what makes the gain setting such an asset on the Asgard3.

I'm only using CA Cascade HP's for now, and I use high or low gain interchangeably depending on the genre of music, and how I may want to 'colour' how the Cascade presents it. I wouldn't say either is better than the other, just different.

I'm sure I'll use it differently with future headphones, but again the flexibility is great to have..

 

[SMOTOJO]

For my ears / setup, the A3 high gain (improved imaging, transients) >> A3 on low gain
and A3 on low gain (more detail retrieval, less veiling of upper mids) >= A2 on high gain.

differences I hear between A2 and A3 could be attributable to: Mosfet output stage on A2 vs A3's bipolar output stage; continuity circuitry of the A3; higher max power rating; and / or synergy between the A3 and my planars.

IMHO, if I spent on a set of Focal Clears and have the A2, I would definitely check out A3 as its a fraction of the cost of the Clears. Presumably, upper and top tier models (~$1K and up) from every reputable headphone maker have sufficient overall quality and resolution to detect differences in the electronics chain from source thru the headphone (power) amplifier.

Question-what does "the A3 high gain (improved...)>> A3 on low gain and A3 on low gain (more...) >= A2 on high gain mean??? As apposed to, or am I off base with that assumption??? Thanks

 

[ozz]

I think people are putting to much thought into the gain setting if you have it set to low gain and you have to crank the volume past 3 o'clock then change it to high gain and the reverse if 9 o'clock is making your ears ring change it to low gain.

 

[tincanear]

Question-what does "the A3 high gain (improved...)>> A3 on low gain and A3 on low gain (more...) >= A2 on high gain mean??? As apposed to, or am I off base with that assumption??? Thanks

Question-what does "the A3 high gain (improved...)>> A3 on low gain and A3 on low gain (more...) >= A2 on high gain mean??? As apposed to, or am I off base with that assumption??? Thanks

I was trying a form of shorthand. in retrospect maybe better to write it out:

IMO, the A3 on high gain has greatly improved imaging and transients (dynamics) vs the A3 on low gain. furthermore, the A3 on low gain is equal to or better than the A2 on high gain in terms of detail retrieval and less midrange veiling.

 

[Neweymatt]

I think people are putting to much thought into the gain setting if you have it set to low gain and you have to crank the volume past 3 o'clock then change it to high gain and the reverse if 9 o'clock is making your ears ring change it to low gain.

No, I’m not putting much thought into it at all other than how different the sound signature actually is to my ears with my headphones.

The Cascade is bass-heavy to start with, and for bass-heavy music, high gain on the A3 can be just too much even at relatively lower volume. Low-gain but with the volume turned up tames the Cascade bass nicely and lets the mids and highs shine through better.

Conversely, for 'lighter' styles of music, high gain definitely allows you to hear more detail at lower relative volume vs low-gain.

I don’t have all the audiophile-reviewer-lingo to describe this differently, but this is what I hear. Again, I'm very pleased to have the gain option, and I look forward to using it with other headphones in the future.

 

[CarlosAudio51]

for bass-heavy music, high gain on the A3 can be just too much even at relatively lower volume.

I have to agree with this. I have a set of V-Moda M100s which are notoriously bass heavy, have low impedance and high sensitivity. To me, the Asgard 3 on high gain becomes unbearable. Bass is way, way too bloated. On this pairing, the bass has no redeeming qualities and becomes unlistenable. This is not to say that this is the Asgard 3's fault. It is just not a good synergy.

The pairing is significantly better on low gain. Bass is reduced a bit and comes thru more clearly separated from the mids. But, oddly enough I still prefer the M100s on my Vali 2 with EH 6CG7 tube.

Aside: Yes, yes, I know the M100s are not exactly "audiophile-tuned" headphones. I bought them before getting seriously into audio because they sounded better than Bose and looked cool. I've since bought HD 6XXs and HE-4XX headphones and I still prefer those 2 over the M100s.