[lojay]

  Detailed comments #Lojay.
 
Reading your first comment I understand why you could prefer the 4-45 vs the Teton as point (b) could influence your judgement but point (a) comes undoubtedly from your own listening experience. Perhaps the difference with Minimus' feelings spotlighting the Teton rises from his feelings about OTL and Transformer Output technologies. OTL drives better the HD800 ??
 
Second comment is a surprise for me but I'm happy with it since I do like the HD800. So no PS1000e, no Ultrasone ED 10, even the HE1000 doesn't do it !! But where is in your opinion the Abyss there ??

 
I have said this more than once already: the difference between what minimus is hearing and I am hearing boils down to different tubes. He is using vintage 45 globes. I have NOS versions of 45 globe vintage tubes, but I prefer the EML 45 solid plates which, when used with the EC 445, allows it to exceed in performance compared to the Teton. Let me repeat again - with the tubes I prefer, the EML solid plates - the Teton lags behind in accuracy, imaging, soundstaging and leading edge/ transient attacks, but is "better" in emotional involvement, tonality perhaps, and certainly bass quantity if you are using a high impedance headphone like the HD800. If I use the vintage 45 globes on the EC 445, the immediacy is gone, the leading edge/ transient attack is totally gone, and the soundstage and imaging becomes imprecise. 
 
If you are suggesting that I am influenced by Craig's comments on OTL vs OPT, I respectfully differ. I have detailed the differences between two amps in objective terms. I had numerous colleagues come over to compare the Teton and 445 and they reached the same conclusions as I did (and I did not tell them what to look for). The difference in the transient attacks and soundstage are very hard to miss. On the soundstage part, Mark (minimus) also opined that the Teton has a less wide soundstage but coming from a very expensive speaker setup, he did not rank the soundstage aspect of headphone sound reproduction very highly.
 
I haven't heard the Abyss. But you can ask those who have. I don't think anyone has said that the Abyss resolves, images and does soundstage better than the HD800 when using TOTL amps matching the HD800. As for the HE1000, PS1000 and SR009, I have owned or loaned these extensively.  
 
I think my opinions have been fairly and reasonably stated. If you think I am hearing things I am not, please state YOUR experience and WHY you disagree with YOUR ears. 

 

[lojay]

I am perhaps more interested in what people think about the Teton as a preamp. I think it is absolutely stellar. The tonality and richness that this amp adds to the table is amazing.

 

[cladane]

I think my opinions have been fairly and reasonably stated. If you think I am hearing things I am not, please state YOUR experience and WHY you disagree with YOUR ears.

I beg your pardon if you found I was unrespectfull and I want to let you know that I find your comments very instructive writing I was pleased to read your craze for the HD800 which I do like.
 
I was convinced that OTL amps would suit more the HD800 impedance fluctuations relatives to frequencies but I understand that choosing the wright tubes and an OPT amp like the 4-45 I should get the contrary, speaking of soundstage which imports me more since I listen orchestral work generally.
 
You correctly point out that sources and amps pairing play a substantial role in how headphones perform.

 

[jibzilla]

  I am perhaps more interested in what people think about the Teton as a preamp. I think it is absolutely stellar. The tonality and richness that this amp adds to the table is amazing.

 
I use the peak/volcano as a preamp with my adam a7x's and sub8 and it is stellar. Tried out a decent amount of $500ish preamps as I was thinking of going a first watt route and out of 6 only 1 I found kept up with my djr400 mixer that also shares my adam's along with a pair of mk5's and sl-3. Granted it is a $2300 mixer that has a focus on s.q., but still I thought I could get a stand alone preamp that could keep up if not best my mixer. The peak/volcano bested my mixer and the 6 preamps by quite a large margin...night and day large. I also have spent a decent chunk of change on g.i.k. bass traps and that also helped the sound tremendously.

 

[lojay]

I beg your pardon if you found I was unrespectfull and I want to let you know that I find your comments very instructive writing I was pleased to read your craze for the HD800 which I do like.

I was convinced that OTL amps would suit more the HD800 impedance fluctuations relatives to frequencies but I understand that choosing the wright tubes and an OPT amp like the 4-45 I should get the contrary, speaking of soundstage which imports me more since I listen orchestral work generally.

You correctly point out that sources and amps pairing play a substantial role in how headphones perform.

Thanks for the clarification, all is well. Meaning is often lost in translation and words over the Internet!

I have not found another headphone that does orchestral works better than the HD800. I happen to listen to a lot of orchestra. I would suggest you stick with EC amps including the ZD you have (and some time move up the chain if you like). The Teton is great for this genre but the 445 has qualities that suit the genre better. I think if I like modern production pop/rock or female vocals the Teton will be preferred, with more prominent bass and a more emotional sound.

Some people enjoy the SR009 better with orchestral works but I just don't. My friends like the ephereal nature of the mass of strings but I personally find the tonality a bit off compared to HD800. As for soundstage, it's a no brainer: the HD800 wins for orchestral works.

 

[lojay]

I use the peak/volcano as a preamp with my adam a7x's and sub8 and it is stellar. Tried out a decent amount of $500ish preamps as I was thinking of going a first watt route and out of 6 only 1 I found kept up with my djr400 mixer that also shares my adam's along with a pair of mk5's and sl-3. Granted it is a $2300 mixer that has a focus on s.q., but still I thought I could get a stand alone preamp that could keep up if not best my mixer. The peak/volcano bested my mixer and the 6 preamps by quite a large margin...night and day large. I also have spent a decent chunk of change on g.i.k. bass traps and that also helped the sound tremendously.

Good to know.
I always subscribed to the "less is more" school of thought. But somehow music with the Teton as preamp just sounds more like music than directly connecting the DAC to the power amp. Sure the edges are rounded off, but in a more convincing manner than having the digital sharpening filter make everything sound ... Fake.

 

[cladane]

Thanks for the clarification, all is well. Meaning is often lost in translation and words over the Internet!

Agree with the point of vue and I use an online dictionary to try to avoid misinterpretations.
 

I have not found another headphone that does orchestral works better than the HD800. I happen to listen to a lot of orchestra. I would suggest you stick with EC amps including the ZD you have (and some time move up the chain if you like)

For HD800 drive I also bought the HDV600 which has a 43 ohms impedance output that Senn seems to prefer for their headphone and the SS amp HEADA from Aurorasound known for their VIDA phono preamp.
 
But what comes out reading comments on the HD800 is that the best ever amp is the Manley Labs Classic Neo 300B. Had you the chance to verify it ?
 
Regarding EC, how would you compare the BA to the 4-45 vs the HD800 ? I was said that the BA is more modern/Electro music oriented than Classical.

 

[Sorrodje]

   
Regarding EC, how would you compare the BA to the 4-45 vs the HD800 ? I was said that the BA is more modern/Electro music oriented than Classical.

 
 
If You favorite musical Genre is Jazz ( Like me )  : BA = smoothness , humanity, natural tone but still the EC soundstage, transparency and clarity.. I compare it to and very old "Bourgogne Grand cru".. if you're more into Classical : 4x45 .  heavenly divine clarity and transparency , borderless soundstage , grandeur... it's more like the best "Bordeaux" .   4x45 tend to push HD800 best qualities to an outstanding level. Balancing Act helps more to make the HD800 more "all rounder" , to tame its flaws. That's what I concluded from the listen I had with the two amps.  Takes this with a BIG grain of salt though.  Short listens during meetings.
 
I'd personaly Take the BA over the 4x45 because I'm a one headphone  guy and I don't listen primarily to classical and I'm from Burgundy

. So I 'm ready to not have the best of the best I could bring from my HD800. YMMV. 

 

[jibzilla]

Enjoy your E.C.'s...I'm still sticking with apex. 

 

[agooh]

   
On your first point, do take note that Eddie Current's top of the line amps are all OPT: the EC 445, EC BA and EC 2A3MKIV. What I read Craig to be saying in that article is that, in the single ended world, it is hard to wind a good transformer which is needed to make a OPT amp sound good. He is also saying that OTL amps (like the ZDSE) measure better but do not necessary sound better. Those comments are also specifically about SE outputs, where the 445 has floating balanced speaker and headphone outputs. So I am afraid one needs to be more careful when taking Craig's comments in the 6moons article into account. What I can confirm is that (a) Craig has obtained some very good transformers for his 445 and (b) in his conversations with me, he says "I have never heard an OTL amp that can match the speed, and detail of a good transformer amp."  
 
About your second point, I have heard all the top current production headphones and I can confidently say that I have not heard a headphone, including the SR009 that I own and listen to regularly, which has better soundstage depth, soundstage width, precise imaging or resolution/detail than the HD800. In these technical aspects, SR009 is behind, but is rather quicker in the transient movements and may have better front to back layering as opposed to spatial images spread across the stage. So the HD800 can be truly end-game for the right amp and DAC. It needs the right amp to sound its best. If technology has "moved on" I do not think we have that technology on the market yet.
 
In fact, I am a beta tester for the "latest" technology of Hifiman headphones, the HE1000. I can again confidently say that the HD800 images and does soundstage better (both depth and width and spatial separation). But HE1000 does other things better (better bass, more laid back sound, vocals to die for). It depends on your preferences at the end of the day. We are at a lucky time where sound reproduction is truly top notch for relatively affordable prices. 

This is one of the strangest thing I ever heard hd 800 beat 009 in resolution/detail stax 009 are you sure !!...

 

[lojay]

This is one of the strangest thing I ever heard hd 800 beat 009 in resolution/detail stax 009 are you sure !!...

Yes certainly in terms of marco detail and spatial details, sometimes SR009 does internal microdetail eg sonic textures better. Might be the limitation of the KGSSHV I do not know.

What is true is that the SR009 portrays details more naturally than the HD800, which tends to zoom in on any sort of detail, whether artefacts or irrelevant sonic information. But the flip side of that statement is the HD800 is more resolving.

I am not the only person who shares this view. If you do not agree, obviously you have not heard the HD800 at its best yet. I thought for a long time that the SR009 was more resolving when I was driving the HD800 with the Woo WA5, and only changed my views with the EC445 (with solid plate EMLs). It is a headphone that scales very high with the right matching setup.

Get me a Stax Omega or DIYT2 for the SR009 and that might beat the HD800, but the HD800 is king of resolution in my staple so far.

 

[minimus]

Enjoy your E.C.'s...I'm still sticking with apex. 

Agreed. On a related noted, I received a PM not long ago from a long-time Head-Fi member, who wrote, "I used to own the EC Balancing Act. The Teton is noticeably better and by no small margin. I am demoing one now." So that's another comparative opinion worth knowing about. I think three of four who have weighed in with actual experience comparing these TOTL amps side by side at home have preferred the Teton to the 445 or the BA. I doubt the reason is that only one of us has used the right tubes in our EC amps.

In any case, I started this thread to discuss the Teton, and it has gotten derailed to a large extent into a discussion of Eddie Current. To summarize the discourse, two people own both the Teton and the 445 right now. Lojay has a solid preference for the 445. If you listen to classical primarily and buy EML 45s, you might feel the same way he does. I own both amps and have a solid preference for the Teton. I listen to rock and jazz, and maybe 10% classical. The Teton sounds like a great tube amp to me, but with tremendous speed, bass depth and detail. The 445 sounds lean and closer to solid state to me. It lacks the detail of the Teton. Lojay says my judgement of the 445 is inaccurate because I haven't bought the EMLs for the 445, although I could counter that for all I know he hasn't optimized tubes in the Teton. Has he tried the Tung Sol BGRP 6SN7, the Mullard ECC32, a Mullard U52, a TI 6528, etc.? The list is endless, frankly, for the input, output, and rectifier, presenting an extremely large number of possible combinations. Each will change the sound of the Teton. (In my experience, tube choice has a much bigger effect on OTL amps like the Teton than on transformer-coupled amps like the 445. I have owned both the 445 and the Super 7 and tube choice has had a minor impact on both, especially in comparison to the Teton.) Maybe the EMLs will "transform" the 445. I have my doubts. Craig voices his amps a certain way, and tube rolling won't transform the SQ of any of his amps from, say Pass Labs to Conrad Johnson. In any case, I might test Lojay's theory. If Lojay is right, I will start singing the praises of the 445 (but primarily in the 445 thread in this forum). If he is wrong, then I guess we have differing tastes. But reread the first paragraph of this post before concluding that opinion is equally divided.

 

[lojay]

Agreed. On a related noted, I received a PM not long ago from a long-time Head-Fi member, who wrote, "I used to own the EC Balancing Act. The Teton is noticeably better and by no small margin. I am demoing one now." So that's another comparative opinion worth knowing about. I think three of four who have weighed in with actual experience comparing these TOTL amps side by side at home have preferred the Teton to the 445 or the BA. I doubt the reason is that only one of us has used the right tubes in our EC amps.

In any case, I started this thread to discuss the Teton, and it has gotten derailed to a large extent into a discussion of Eddie Current. To summarize the discourse, two people own both the Teton and the 445 right now. Lojay has a solid preference for the 445. If you listen to classical primarily and buy EML 45s, you might feel the same way he does. I own both amps and have a solid preference for the Teton. I listen to rock and jazz, and maybe 10% classical. The Teton sounds like a great tube amp to me, but with tremendous speed, bass depth and detail. The 445 sounds lean and closer to solid state to me. It lacks the detail of the Teton. Lojay says my judgement of the 445 is inaccurate because I haven't bought the EMLs for the 445, although I could counter that for all I know he hasn't optimized tubes in the Teton. Has he tried the Tung Sol BGRP 6SN7, the Mullard ECC32, a Mullard U52, a TI 6528, etc.? The list is endless, frankly, for the input, output, and rectifier, presenting an extremely large number of possible combinations. Each will change the sound of the Teton. (In my experience, tube choice has a much bigger effect on OTL amps like the Teton than on transformer-coupled amps like the 445. I have owned both the 445 and the Super 7 and tube choice has had a minor impact on both, especially in comparison to the Teton.) Maybe the EMLs will "transform" the 445. I have my doubts. Craig voices his amps a certain way, and tube rolling won't transform the SQ of any of his amps from, say Pass Labs to Conrad Johnson. In any case, I might test Lojay's theory. If Lojay is right, I will start singing the praises of the 445 (but primarily in the 445 thread in this forum). If he is wrong, then I guess we have differing tastes. But reread the first paragraph of this post before concluding that opinion is equally divided.

 
I thought we were largely agreed on most things, Mark, but it seems you are doubting what I hear or say. For those who may get your post in the wrong way, let me just say that I have no affiliation with Eddie Current. If it helps anyone to know my background, I am a barrister (i.e. equivalent to a litigation attorney in the USA) spending most of the time working or arguing cases in court. I don't have much free time, but when I do I hope to enjoy the best sound reproduction while I am in my office. Against this background, I have always tried to maximise the potential of the amps I have at hand and have not hesitated to stock up rare tubes for my amps.
 
I truly wanted to have my Teton replace my 445, I don't want to have two amps for driving the same headphones. I bought the Teton because I find your views very reasonable (I still value them). So were the views of Chengka which I trusted. But it was quite unfortunate that I found the Teton too different from the 445 to replace it. Compared to the 445, I found the Teton lacking behind in air, instrumental separation, resolution and realism. This was not only my own view, but also the view of some pals I invited over to my office to do an amp. To my surprised most were awed by the resolution and treble clarity of the 445. I still wanted to have the Teton replace the 445, so I spent shedloads of money increasing what was already a very substantial 6SN7 and 5U4G collection. So I have bought all the tubes you mentioned, except that I only have the Chatham/ Tungsol 6528, not the TI. On top of that I also have the Telefunken 6SN7 and own 3 pairs of Tungsol BGRPs and also one single 6F8G BGRP. I have the metal base Sylvania 6SN7W. I have the Mullard ECC32 (which I don't particularly like). I also use the Mullard U52 and the Mullard GZ34 metal base. I also have the Tungsol 7236 which Pete Millett regards as the most transparent or solid-state like tube for the Wheatfield HA2, Teton's predecessor.
 
With that in mind, I think the Teton can be tuned to sound close to the 445 (with the CBS/Hytron 5692, Tungsol 7236 and Mullard GZ34), but it is still lacking in that magnificent leading edge and transient attack. 
 
Now this is a Teton thread. I have to say that the Teton sounds very realistic in its own way. It has better bass than the 445 for sure. It is more emotionally involving than the 445 for sure. All of this while not being too mushy or lacking in detail like the Woo WA5 or other classic tube amps.
 
As you correctly point out in your last sentence, "we have differing tastes" but I think that applies whether I am wrong or not. We certainly have different tastes, at least when it comes to searching for the best amp for the HD800 (I would never listen to rock with the HD800)! However, I think I'm right. I have just done a comparison between using vintage globes 45 and EML 45 solid plates. The former sounds obviously more veiled. It takes 2 seconds to recognise the difference. So if you are using globe 45s, you are missing out. 

 

 

[agooh]

Yes certainly in terms of marco detail and spatial details, sometimes SR009 does internal microdetail eg sonic textures better. Might be the limitation of the KGSSHV I do not know.

What is true is that the SR009 portrays details more naturally than the HD800, which tends to zoom in on any sort of detail, whether artefacts or irrelevant sonic information. But the flip side of that statement is the HD800 is more resolving.

I am not the only person who shares this view. If you do not agree, obviously you have not heard the HD800 at its best yet. I thought for a long time that the SR009 was more resolving when I was driving the HD800 with the Woo WA5, and only changed my views with the EC445 (with solid plate EMLs). It is a headphone that scales very high with the right matching setup.

Get me a Stax Omega or DIYT2 for the SR009 and that might beat the HD800, but the HD800 is king of resolution in my staple so far.

I disagree . no dynamic HP will ever match 009 in that regard .

 

[jibzilla]

Lojay I really like rock and electronic with the hd800 out of a otl. I was not the biggest fan of the hd800 until I heard the hd800 out of an otl so there is that point. I was almost exclusively an SS guy for several years and even $1k+ SS amps made the hd800 sound too bright, bass light, and sterile. With an otl amp though all that changed: The bass was neutral and engaging, no treble spike, and a large holographic soundstage that really captivated me. This was on 3 different otl's as well: someone else's dna stratus and mainline and my own wheatfield ha-2.
 
I listen to zero classical. I respect it and I def. understand why people use it to test out there headphone gear but it puts me to sleep along with minimal trance and other genres.