Well, it arrived a few minutes after making that post, and I've been listening ever since.
Build quality is a lot better than I expected. It's heavy, uses thick and well finished metal, all the switches are high quality, and the volume knob has a nice high quality weighty feel to it. Also, Schiit wasn't kidding when they said this amp runs hot. Holy crap!
I'll keep sound impressions broad for now, since I haven't had much time with this amp. All impressions are at high gain unless noted. The M-Stage is not the new HPA-2 version, it's the 2010 or 2011 version. My DAC is currently an ODAC hooked up to a USB PCI-E card to minimize noise and distortion issues I had with normal USB ports.
_________________________
The M-Stage is darker, but the Valhalla 2 is warmer, meaning that deep bass and upper highs have increased compared to the M-Stage. I currently have an EQ (Equalizer APO) applied system-wide tuned for the HD800's. I will probably reduce the bass by a db or two and reduce the upper treble by a db on the EQ. I can imagine without an EQ, the Valhalla 2 would give more satisfying levels of bass than the M-Stage.
The less dark nature of the Valhalla 2 means that they're more fatiguing than they used to be (admittedly, I am also listening to music at higher volumes than usual because of the New Amp Yummy Goodness™).
Instrument separation is definitely improved with the Valhalla 2, but individual note separation (decay rate) is longer. Notes are more individual and fast sections are better with the M-Stage. (Some very minor testing with low gain on the V2 seems to help with this). I will say, however, that longer and intentional decays (upright bass especially) has more detail on the V2. Bass is less taught on the V2, but it's also stronger, so a reduction in the EQ may tighten it back up.
Valhalla 2 is more impactful.
Soundstage is larger and imaging is more defined with V2. Some would describe it as more "holographic".
V2 is much more detailed. Yes, it does have more treble, but detail is better across the frequency range, notably in the bass and midrange.
The V2 definitely sounds "tubey" to me compared to the M-Stage. I know some say it's not that tubey, but I definitely hear it. Low gain is definitely less tubey. I'm very glad I didn't go with a Crack, the Valhalla is a good amount of tubeyness, high gain is about as much tubeyness as I would want at the moment.
The V2 does not get as loud as I would have expected considering the power rating. It should be a fair bit more powerful than the M-Stage, but I find the volume pot at similar levels on the V2 (high gain) and the M-Stage (18 gain). About 11:00-1:00 in high gain depending on the music, and around 3:00 on low gain. Really quiet music like Chesky stuff can get close to 3:00 at high gain, where I can hear noise from my ODAC. Of course, as noted before I could be listening to music louder than normal because of the new amp, so take the previous with some salt.
The most notable difference between the two is that recorded music sounds quite a bit more "real" with the V2.
Low gain seems better for electronic at the moment, and high gain seems better for stuff like classical, folk, and bluegrass.
__________________________
Please note that these are just first time use impressions, my impressions may change over the next few days/weeks. My brain getting used to the new amp's sound as well as whatever "burn-in" if necessary may also change my impressions.
I'm happy to finally be the proud owner of a tube amp! I've wanted a good tube amp for a long time, but the HD800's are the first high Z headphones I've owned, so I finally had the chance to get into tubes when I picked them up mid last year. This amp may also play nice with my D7000's in low gain, which may be worth trying out.
![DT1990-ChSd-1024x555[1].png](https://cdn.head-fi.org/a/12230656.png)
