[Currawong]

Thank you for the explanation. If I've understood you correctly, this simply means that the discrete version of the A90 has the potential of sounding better, or at least different, from the original A90, but at the end of the day it depends on the further choices made by the engineers? In other words - it's not automatically better, simply due to the fact that discrete parts have been used?

Yes, that's it, basically. An opamp is basically an amplifier in an integrated circuit, so a manufacturer has to work within its specifications.

 

[Mista Lova Lova]

I couldn't resist the temptation of comparing the OG and the new A90 so bought one with the option to return it if I don't like it. I should have it tomorrow and will post my findings once I've had a listen; I'm gonna A/B them directly.

 

[Mista Lova Lova]

OK, I've got some preliminary impressions for you, but bear in mind I've only had my new "toy" for a few hours.

Source: Tidal --> Roon
DAC: Gustard X26 Pro
Amps: Topping A90 (OG), Topping A90 Discrete, THX 789
Headphones: Focal Utopia (Hifiman HE1000se to follow next)

My very first impression was the opposite of what I was expecting (and I was expecting richness and warmth) - the new A90 sounded more analytical than the OG, with the sound being slighly pushed away from me (reminding me of the THX's presentation), in comparison making me feel like I'm observing/analysing music rather than participating in it.

I let the amp warm up, not sure if it made much of a difference, but on further listening I started appreciating the extra space (airiness) and separation that it seemed to offer in comparison to the OG. However, it still left me feeling a little underwhelmed - it spoke to my brain more than it did to my heart.

I hooked up the THX for comparison to have yet another reference point. The new A90 is definitely not as clinical and sterile as the THX - it gives music more body and is less sharp. What they (to my ears, at least) have in common, though, is the presentation of music being a little more in front of me rather than around me/embracing me.

The OG A90 in comparison comes across as slightly warmer, richer, rounding things off ever so slightly, bringing things forward a little, making music more of an experience to immerse yourself in and forget about specific aspects of sound. The highs appear a bit less sharp, and most importantly I'd say the bass is "felt" rather than heard (take this with a grain of salt, of course, we're still talking about headphone listening). The THX is the worst performer here where the bass does not feel fully aligned with the rest of the audio spectrum; the new A90 is much better, it's much more enjoyable; the OG A90 makes the bass kind of embrace you and gets out of the way of other sounds.

So far the new A90 sounds to me like a better version of the THX, whereas the OG A90 clearly sounds different from the other two. Does it make the new A90 more "correct"/transparent-sounding, thus perhaps revealing the OG's added warmth and some "magic" making listening sessions more pleasant? I'm not sure, I've not heard any better amplifiers to compare these to (although there have been reviewers stating that the OG A90 basically sounds like the £3,000 Benchmark HPA 4).

One thing that seems obvious to me at this stage - those who found the OG A90 already too neutral/sterile should not purchase the new A90 without either hearing it first or being able to return it as to my ears it leans even further towards the lean side.

 

[De7mi]

OK, I've got some preliminary impressions for you, but bear in mind I've only had my new "toy" for a few hours.

Source: Tidal --> Roon
DAC: Gustard X26 Pro
Amps: Topping A90 (OG), Topping A90 Discrete, THX 789
Headphones: Focal Utopia (Hifiman HE1000se to follow next)

My very first impression was the opposite of what I was expecting (and I was expecting richness and warmth) - the new A90 sounded more analytical than the OG, with the sound being slighly pushed away from me (reminding me of the THX's presentation), in comparison making me feel like I'm observing/analysing music rather than participating in it.

I let the amp warm up, not sure if it made much of a difference, but on further listening I started appreciating the extra space (airiness) and separation that it seemed to offer in comparison to the OG. However, it still left me feeling a little underwhelmed - it spoke to my brain more than it did to my heart.

I hooked up the THX for comparison to have yet another reference point. The new A90 is definitely not as clinical and sterile as the THX - it gives music more body and is less sharp. What they (to my ears, at least) have in common, though, is the presentation of music being a little more in front of me rather than around me/embracing me.

The OG A90 in comparison comes across as slightly warmer, richer, rounding things off ever so slightly, bringing things forward a little, making music more of an experience to immerse yourself in and forget about specific aspects of sound. The highs appear a bit less sharp, and most importantly I'd say the bass is "felt" rather than heard (take this with a grain of salt, of course, we're still talking about headphone listening). The THX is the worst performer here where the bass does not feel fully aligned with the rest of the audio spectrum; the new A90 is much better, it's much more enjoyable; the OG A90 makes the bass kind of embrace you and gets out of the way of other sounds.

So far the new A90 sounds to me like a better version of the THX, whereas the OG A90 clearly sounds different from the other two. Does it make the new A90 more "correct"/transparent-sounding, thus perhaps revealing the OG's added warmth and some "magic" making listening sessions more pleasant? I'm not sure, I've not heard any better amplifiers to compare these to (although there have been reviewers stating that the OG A90 basically sounds like the £3,000 Benchmark HPA 4).

One thing that seems obvious to me at this stage - those who found the OG A90 already too neutral/sterile should not purchase the new A90 without either hearing it first or being able to return it as to my ears it leans even further towards the lean side.

Thank you for your impressions, please keep listening some more and keep the impression coming. Very interesting that the A90 D is more analytical.

 

[Mista Lova Lova]

I've switched over to my HEKse now and overall my impressions are very similar; however, the difference in separation has become more obvious. The new A90 seems to be even "cleaner" than the OG - individual notes are even more distinctively separated from each other and there's more "air" in the high frequencies. It's quite addictive and it makes me think that overall the new A90 seems to be a more transparent medium than the old one. Perhaps my headphones are an issue here, both of which are also very transparent and are quite unforgiving in certain aspects (Utopia - incisiveness/directness of sound; HEKse - slightly brighter tuning).

I would say that whilst the new A90 seems to be "cleaner", the old A90 is a bit warmer and has a touch more body to it, so perhaps it all comes down to gear synergy. I can't wait to hear others' impressions; @Currawong surely has lots of different gear at hand.

 

[Arniesb]

OK, I've got some preliminary impressions for you, but bear in mind I've only had my new "toy" for a few hours.

Source: Tidal --> Roon
DAC: Gustard X26 Pro
Amps: Topping A90 (OG), Topping A90 Discrete, THX 789
Headphones: Focal Utopia (Hifiman HE1000se to follow next)

My very first impression was the opposite of what I was expecting (and I was expecting richness and warmth) - the new A90 sounded more analytical than the OG, with the sound being slighly pushed away from me (reminding me of the THX's presentation), in comparison making me feel like I'm observing/analysing music rather than participating in it.

I let the amp warm up, not sure if it made much of a difference, but on further listening I started appreciating the extra space (airiness) and separation that it seemed to offer in comparison to the OG. However, it still left me feeling a little underwhelmed - it spoke to my brain more than it did to my heart.

I hooked up the THX for comparison to have yet another reference point. The new A90 is definitely not as clinical and sterile as the THX - it gives music more body and is less sharp. What they (to my ears, at least) have in common, though, is the presentation of music being a little more in front of me rather than around me/embracing me.

The OG A90 in comparison comes across as slightly warmer, richer, rounding things off ever so slightly, bringing things forward a little, making music more of an experience to immerse yourself in and forget about specific aspects of sound. The highs appear a bit less sharp, and most importantly I'd say the bass is "felt" rather than heard (take this with a grain of salt, of course, we're still talking about headphone listening). The THX is the worst performer here where the bass does not feel fully aligned with the rest of the audio spectrum; the new A90 is much better, it's much more enjoyable; the OG A90 makes the bass kind of embrace you and gets out of the way of other sounds.

So far the new A90 sounds to me like a better version of the THX, whereas the OG A90 clearly sounds different from the other two. Does it make the new A90 more "correct"/transparent-sounding, thus perhaps revealing the OG's added warmth and some "magic" making listening sessions more pleasant? I'm not sure, I've not heard any better amplifiers to compare these to (although there have been reviewers stating that the OG A90 basically sounds like the £3,000 Benchmark HPA 4).

One thing that seems obvious to me at this stage - those who found the OG A90 already too neutral/sterile should not purchase the new A90 without either hearing it first or being able to return it as to my ears it leans even further towards the lean side.

Both of your headphones are analytical with little more warmth than HD800S...
Perhaps you should get Soloist? That one have massive amounts of distortion.
Amps like that slow things down and give lot warmth.

 

[Mista Lova Lova]

Both of your headphones are analytical with little more warmth than HD800S...
Perhaps you should get Soloist? That one have massive amounts of distortion.
Amps like that slow things down and give lot warmth.

It might be a good idea, I should check that out, but to be honest since I bought the Gustard DAC I've been really happy with the original A90 which seemed to mostly strike a good balance between clarity and just a tiny bit of warmth and rounding things off to make things a bit smoother. But the new A90 Discrete is bothering me with its laser-sharp precision. But I got it mostly out of curiosity to compare the two seemingly very similar amps, it just turned out to be different from what I'd expected, but it's got its own strengths so it was an interesting exercise nonetheless.

 

[Arniesb]

It might be a good idea, I should check that out, but to be honest since I bought the Gustard DAC I've been really happy with the original A90 which seemed to mostly strike a good balance between clarity and just a tiny bit of warmth and rounding things off to make things a bit smoother. But the new A90 Discrete is bothering me with its laser-sharp precision. But I got it mostly out of curiosity to compare the two seemingly very similar amps, it just turned out to be different from what I'd expected, but it's got its own strengths so it was an interesting exercise nonetheless.

You can also try full copper interconnects or full copper headphone cables since every component have certain amount of distortion and copper is also less precise than Silver and gives more soft more laidback presentation.
Headphones with sharp attack like hd800S, Utopia, HE1000Se pair very well with copper cabling.
Headphones with softer attack like some lcd's, empyrean campfire cascade perform great with silver cable since those up the transients.

 

[Mista Lova Lova]

You can also try full copper interconnects or full copper headphone cables since every component have certain amount of distortion and copper is also less precise than Silver and gives more soft more laidback presentation.
Headphones with sharp attack like hd800S, Utopia, HE1000Se pair very well with copper cabling.
Headphones with softer attack like some lcd's, empyrean campfire cascade perform great with silver cable since those up the transients.

I have always only used copper cables I've never tried silver, I have however tried silver-plated ones and hated them for the way they coloured the sound. Thanks for all the good advice but instead of solving the problem that the new amp has created I think I'd be better off sticking to the original A90 or perhaps eventually upgrading to something like the Ferrum Oor.

 

[Arniesb]

I have always only used copper cables I've never tried silver, I have however tried silver-plated ones and hated them for the way they coloured the sound. Thanks for all the good advice but instead of solving the problem that the new amp has created I think I'd be better off sticking to the original A90 or perhaps eventually upgrading to something like the Ferrum Oor.

Its just that open headphones have almost no bass. Better of with headphones that have more bass.

 

[Currawong]

Its just that open headphones have almost no bass. Better of with headphones that have more bass.

You must consider that anything that doesn't have a considerable amount of bass to have no bass, as most of the headphones I have here are open-backed, and most of them have quite a bit of bass, some excessively so. If anything, given the popularity of planar headphones, it's the closed-backed versions that have less bass.

 

[Arniesb]

You must consider that anything that doesn't have a considerable amount of bass to have no bass, as most of the headphones I have here are open-backed, and most of them have quite a bit of bass, some excessively so. If anything, given the popularity of planar headphones, it's the closed-backed versions that have less bass.

Oh please... How many of them have good amount of bass? T1.3gen, Abyss, Verite?
How come closed backs have less bass? when seal is requirement for bass and especially for deep bass.
Abyss for example have massive bass since those have huge earpads for good seal, but since they are open and not completely sealed they have a lot of distortions down low.
Old planars with massive double magnets is the past...

 

[Mista Lova Lova]

Its just that open headphones have almost no bass. Better of with headphones that have more bass.

That's what I used to think when I used to hook up my old Beyerdynamics or even Focal Clear directly to my PC's sound card (Asus Xonar Essence STX II) - I admired the clarity but everything sounded flat and unengaging. When I got my first stand-alone DAC and amp (D90 + A90) things changed a lot and I could tell that the headphones were getting the juice they needed. Now, after further upgrades, I find the open-back bass quality so good that it's virtually impossible for me to listen to music in any other way for any longer than a short listening session because I've got so used to this super-clean and super-tight bass. Listening to my speaker set-up (a rather cheap one) which includes a subwoofer or using IEMs when I'm out and about is enjoyable at first but it doesn't take long before I'm wishing there was less quantity but more quality and control instead.

It needs to be said that the HD800 (which I've still got, just hardly ever use it) is simply lacking in bass quantity (quality is good) and because of its sound presentation it is virtually incapable of sounding punchy with certain types of recordings (relative to e.g. Focal Utopia, Focal Clear etc.). This headphone does other things really well and while I would never want to have it as my only headphone, there's a reason why I still haven't sold it.

There is also the exception of songs that have clearly been mastered to be played on V-shaped systems (probably mastering engineers expecting that those would be played on gym headphones, in cars etc.) where the bass is lacking on a very accurate open-back headphone but on those rare occasions EQ can be applied (if the headphone was tuned differently then the properly mastered tracks would be overblown). Having a highly-accurate headphone is a double-edged sword as it will make great recordings sound outstanding but it will also amplify any shortcomings a weak recording might have. But (personal choice) I'd rather have that than a headphone which rounds everything off, adds warmth, bass etc. effectively making everything sounding "decent enough" (but rarely great). Some people might prefer that and there's nothing wrong with that.

 

[Currawong]

Oh please... How many of them have good amount of bass? T1.3gen, Abyss, Verite?
How come closed backs have less bass? when seal is requirement for bass and especially for deep bass.
Abyss for example have massive bass since those have huge earpads for good seal, but since they are open and not completely sealed they have a lot of distortions down low.
Old planars with massive double magnets is the past...

Those are three headphones I haven't had here yet. Planar headphones are strange in that you get a drop in the mid-bass when you cover the back. The original LCD-XC was an LCD-X with a back cover. You audibly and measurably lost mid-bass. DCA Ether C likewise. Aeon as well.

Regular dynamic driver headphones are a bit of a different beast. They require some kind of enclosure to control the bass response, and indeed often a good seal.

The whole thing gets more complex when it comes to low bass, mid-bass, actual bass or reflections and distortion. Discussion about this disappeared when Tyll Hertsens left Innerfidelity and stopped taking measurements of things such as square wave and impulse response of headphones. Similarly, I've heard talk about there being similar measurements done on amplifiers which may reveal why even a super-low THD amp such as the Topping ones, may not be so resolving.

 

[Mista Lova Lova]

Those are three headphones I haven't had here yet. Planar headphones are strange in that you get a drop in the mid-bass when you cover the back. The original LCD-XC was an LCD-X with a back cover. You audibly and measurably lost mid-bass. DCA Ether C likewise. Aeon as well.

Regular dynamic driver headphones are a bit of a different beast. They require some kind of enclosure to control the bass response, and indeed often a good seal.

The whole thing gets more complex when it comes to low bass, mid-bass, actual bass or reflections and distortion. Discussion about this disappeared when Tyll Hertsens left Innerfidelity and stopped taking measurements of things such as square wave and impulse response of headphones. Similarly, I've heard talk about there being similar measurements done on amplifiers which may reveal why even a super-low THD amp such as the Topping ones, may not be so resolving.

Could you give an example of an amp that you would consider "resolving"? I've never heard anything above the A90 - as I've mentioned, the OG was considered to sound on par with the Benchmark HPA 4, and that led me to believe that anything above it (except for headphones such as the Suvara, Abyss, estats etc.) would not be better as such, just tuned differently (e.g. warmer) which some people might prefer. Would your perception of an amp being more "resolving" not be (at least partially) affected by its warmer tuning, making things sound deeper/more "mature' and thus leading you to perceive it as "more resolving"? I'm trying to work out if upgrading my amp should be my next step or whether it would be more of a horizontal change.