w00t - MOH(R)
Jun 25, 2003 at 6:13 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 15

Geek

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
May 5, 2002
Posts
1,810
Likes
10
I just got the maxed out home with a reference module and a stepped attenuator.

I will do a review later today or tomorrow perhaps.

My initial impressions are that this amp is much faster than the airhead, tighter, more controlled, focused, etc. Transient response is literally sky high when listening to SACD on the NS500V.

Sweet amp.

Cheers,
Geek
 
Jun 25, 2003 at 6:50 PM Post #2 of 15
+30 minutes:

The biggest thing I'm noticing with every format that stands out (even on mp3s on my comp) is punchiness and detail.

The amp makes even really pathetic mp3s sound better than they did with the airhead, but the real improvement comes on my SACD and believe it or not some CDs through my NS500V.

Stay tuned for more updates.

Cheers,
Geek
 
Jun 25, 2003 at 10:23 PM Post #3 of 15
Congratulations on your new amp!
biggrin.gif


I would love to hear the Headroom amps. I haven't gotten a chance to get one yet, partially because they're expensive and partially because my desire to DIY overrides my curiosity of Headroom amps...
biggrin.gif


I know what I need to do. I need to attend a meet.
3000smile.gif
 
Jun 26, 2003 at 12:04 AM Post #4 of 15
doobooloo,

Headroom amps are definitely worth the money. They are well built and I struggle to find any sonic signature, they are really neutral.

We should have a Bozeman Head-Fi meet some time. Kinda a ways away for most people. . .

Cheers,
Geek
 
Jun 26, 2003 at 8:00 PM Post #5 of 15
I will make this brief.

I have listened to the amp now for about a day or so; during that time I have noticed little or no change of sonic characteristics from break-in except perhaps a slight increase in dynamic headroom.

The associated equipment: I have a computer setup and an all-in-one player attached to the MOH right now. Also an airhead. I know, it's unfair comparing this baby to the airhead, but I need to establish a point of reference. This is my first great venture into the super high end world of headphone amplification.

The computer is one I built myself from scratch, 2.4ghz 533fsb, 512MB GeIL DDR350, and so on and so forth. It has a turtle beach santa cruz soundcard. I connect this to the amp with a Kimber 1/8" to RCA 6 foot cable.

The player is a Sony DVP-NS500V which is hooked up with Dimarzio M-Path 1 meter interconnects.

I have done 90% of my listening through my SACD/DVD/CD player. The computer setup is mainly used for gaming and casual previewing of songs before purchasing a CD.

I have done 95% of my listening with crossfeed on. I don't listen to headphones without crossfeed because the image is messed up and the resulting layering of voices results imho in a loss of realism and even detail.

The characteristics of this amp are as follows:

1. It is VERY fast and articulate. As a result, it reveals much detail that I never heard before. The HD-600 literally sound like a different headphone. Due to the increased signal quality the amp produces, the HD-600s have slightly deeper bass which is MUCH tighter, a much more neutral lower midrange without any of the nasal bloom that occured with other amps, a really extended high end, and pure effortlessness. The headphones sound like they are breathing a sigh of relief instead of sounding strained. All traces of harshness are completely gone.

To sum it up, WOW. The more I listen to recordings through my player and this amp, the more details I pick up that were just not present prior to this date. Voices that I never even noticed come out cleanly and clearly. Articulation and intonation is pure and effortless.

2. It has EXCELLENT imaging, if a good recording is played, its imaging is much tighter than the airhead, a musical voice such as a guitar or drum or cymbal is like a pinpoint on the soundstage. I am not used to this. Other equipment that I have heard sounds smeared, blurry, or lacks decent imaging altogether (my PDCP for example). In contrast, with a good analog recording imaging is really great and realistic. It's really sharp and so on and so forth.

3. Realistic, neutral soundstage and air. The amp really focuses the soundstage, and this can be good or bad depending on the recording. With bad recordings, I hear just how overproduced a recording is becuase the amp points out just where reverb is coming from. Good recordings simply sound more realistic with a sense of spaciousness through my HD-600s that beats out a lot of speaker setups I have heard.

The first few seconds that I heard this amp, I was wondering what happened to the soundstage on one of my versions of the Bruch concerto. I finally realized that it was presented over and slightly around the symphony, as opposed to being smeared all over the place as with my other equipment (airhead, pdcp). This is just plain cool: My new amp does classical recordings with a much greater degree of realism.

4. A very convincing crossfeed processor. It uses the same design principles as all of headroom's filters, but does a significantly better job than the one on my airhead. On the airhead I noticed a slight difference between the filter being off and on. On the MOH it's totally obvious. The processor attempts to coherently place audio images in a realistic soundstage. It works for everything and makes stuff more listenable. I do hear a slight increase in bass, but that's due to bass focus: Without the processor, I can't tell where the bass guitar or double basses are. With it on, it becomes much more focused.

5. Good flexibility and overall design. This is the least important of all qualities of an amp imho, because for me sound quality and realism comes first. However, it is very worthy of mention here. The MOH is a versatile, well-built amp with some very useful features. A three-step gain switch is provided, as well as the brightness filter and of course the crossfeed switch.

Toggling the gain from low to medium to high results in a doubling of relative volume for each step up.

I did almost all of my listening on low gain with the volume knob between 9 o 'clock and 3 o' clock.

I experimented with gain, though. On Santana's "Supernatural," I listened at medium gain at about 10 o'clock.

The variability of volume levels allows the listener a great amount of headroom. The same recording can be listened to at a whisper or blaring so loud that permanent hearing damage would result quickly.

The stepped attenuator is included in my version of the MOH. I think it is a definite improvement in sound in that when the knob is turned near zero there is absolutely no channel imbalance, whereas with my other amp I had almost total channel imbalance at lower volume levels.

Brightness is a neato feature, and I will experiment with it later on to try and create the ultimate gaming setting for my amplifier (pinpoint location of whispers and footsteps regardless of fatigue). However, I think that I like the sound best with brightness in the OFF position. Sounds most realistic to me.

I would like to wrap this review up by saying that I am satisfied with my purchase and deem this audio product definitely worth the money. However, I think that it's only suitable for driving extremely good headphones or it's not being used to its fullest potential. My DT770s sounded much better but the HD600s were the clear winner.

Also, I am clearly aware of the fact that my $140 budget CDP is not an acceptable compliment for the MOH. I omitted various sonic flaws and artifacts which were a result of the NS500V on redbook mode, because these flaws disappeared almost entirely when listening to SACD.

This amp is a great value for the money and attempts to maximize sound quality. A great buy.

[edit] I didn't make it so brief. Oh, well.
600smile.gif

Cheers,
Geek
 
Jun 27, 2003 at 3:45 PM Post #7 of 15
One thing I must say, after another day of listening, I need a better source for CD only. SACD or DVD-A is very good already, much fuller and less grainy.

However, CD with my NS500V is thin, grainy, and somewhat bright, although the sound of the player is much better now than with myold amp.

I am considering a modded JD-100A, CD-25, or perhaps a low end meridian.

Cheers,
Geek
 
Jun 27, 2003 at 4:30 PM Post #8 of 15
Very cool. If I were to buy a HeadRoom amp, this is what I'd probably get too--though for a short time they sold a version of the MOHR that also had the Max transformers.
 
Jun 28, 2003 at 6:04 AM Post #9 of 15
I hosted a LAN party today. I used my new amp with quake 3 and to see if there was any difference in precison imaging and impact as well as surrounding detail. I want to hear footsteps and the approach of opponents in Q3 and be able to know where an opponent is firing.

We played Q3 vanilla with patch 1.32, as well as using the xtreme arena mod for about an hour and later a mod which made the game completely realistic.

For those of you not familiar with the habits of today's computer-savvy youth, I must explain a few terms. A LAN party is short for local area network party. It is where at least a handful of people get together, bring their whole computer setup, and connect everything via standard network cable and at least one central hub. After troubleshooting the network and making it run smoothly, a series of computer games are played competitively. LAN parties can last for two days or more straight and really test the stamina of gamers.

Quake 3 is a first person shooter: You run around as if you were in real life, attempting to kill your opponents with heavy weapons to score "frags." The game is fast-paced and disorienting.

Anyways, back to the amp. I noticed not just a considerable improvement with gaming, but a literally JAW-DROPPING one. The amp was doing absolutely precise and wonderful imaging, giving a sense of exactly how far away people were and in what direction they were to be found. With my previous setup, the imaging was decent in comparison but really blurry. I can almost hit someone with my eyes closed now. It's that good. Other aspects that people would look for when gaming such as hard hitting bass impact were there too. I noticed lots of nasty flaws in the audio output from both the game and the soundcard, and it was definitely a grainy and "wooly" presentation. However, the amp did wonders to what was already there.

I don't recommend spending over a thousand dollars for gaming audio by any means, but for a professional gamer or hardcore enthusiast (and there are quite a few of you out there) getting this amp in conjunction with a good soundcard, cables, and HD600s is a way to really make your opponents envy you.

kelly,

I thought it would be the best price/performance ratio possible for one of their products whilst attaining a reference level of sound reproduction.

The only difference between this and a max is the power transformer and cool faceplate.

Cheers,
Geek
 
Jun 28, 2003 at 10:15 AM Post #10 of 15
Nice review Geek! You definitely got the "Gem" in the Headroom line. It never seems to disappoint me how the upper echelon of Headrooms amps are ridiculously fast, and still remain silky smooth, and relaxed on top with blackness to die for. Now, lets talk about what's really important the midrange. I think the MOHR, and Max have the best midrange of any solid-state headphone amp I have heard. What do you think?
 
Jun 28, 2003 at 10:46 AM Post #11 of 15
Quote:

Originally posted by Geek
I hosted a LAN party today. I used my new amp with quake 3 and to see if there was any difference in precison imaging and impact as well as surrounding detail. I want to hear footsteps and the approach of opponents in Q3 and be able to know where an opponent is firing.

We played Q3 vanilla with patch 1.32, as well as using the xtreme arena mod for about an hour and later a mod which made the game completely realistic.

For those of you not familiar with the habits of today's computer-savvy youth, I must explain a few terms. A LAN party is short for local area network party. It is where at least a handful of people get together, bring their whole computer setup, and connect everything via standard network cable and at least one central hub. After troubleshooting the network and making it run smoothly, a series of computer games are played competitively. LAN parties can last for two days or more straight and really test the stamina of gamers.

Quake 3 is a first person shooter: You run around as if you were in real life, attempting to kill your opponents with heavy weapons to score "frags." The game is fast-paced and disorienting.

Anyways, back to the amp. I noticed not just a considerable improvement with gaming, but a literally JAW-DROPPING one. The amp was doing absolutely precise and wonderful imaging, giving a sense of exactly how far away people were and in what direction they were to be found. With my previous setup, the imaging was decent in comparison but really blurry. I can almost hit someone with my eyes closed now. It's that good. Other aspects that people would look for when gaming such as hard hitting bass impact were there too. I noticed lots of nasty flaws in the audio output from both the game and the soundcard, and it was definitely a grainy and "wooly" presentation. However, the amp did wonders to what was already there.

I don't recommend spending over a thousand dollars for gaming audio by any means, but for a professional gamer or hardcore enthusiast (and there are quite a few of you out there) getting this amp in conjunction with a good soundcard, cables, and HD600s is a way to really make your opponents envy you.

kelly,

I thought it would be the best price/performance ratio possible for one of their products whilst attaining a reference level of sound reproduction.

The only difference between this and a max is the power transformer and cool faceplate.

Cheers,
Geek


n00bs will think you are a hax0r
tongue.gif
 
Jun 29, 2003 at 2:19 AM Post #12 of 15
so geek...in combo with the hd 600's...and your source...have you found any weaknesses in the MOHR? I have the identical amp and would be curious to hear your thoughts.
 
Jun 29, 2003 at 4:41 AM Post #13 of 15
Geek, Congrats on your amp. Which setings do you like the best so far? With the HD600 I always liked high gain, crossfeed on and in the brighter position.
 
Jun 29, 2003 at 6:35 AM Post #14 of 15
tom hankins,

I find high gain to be much too loud for 80% of my recordings.

For example, I'm listening to badly recorded trance right now (mostly, but this album has a few gems in it): Trance Mix USA, by ATB. It's pure pumpin' dance music.

With low gain, I find it at a comfortable volume between 9 oclock and 12 o clock. I find the 11-12 oclock position and above at a level which is slightly uncomfortable in volume.

With medium gain, the comfortable volume level is between two notches above the zero point and four notches above the zero point at most. This is about 8 o'clock with about 7 o'clock being where it's at zero volume for all settings.

With high gain, this same recording is at a perfect volume level at the first click above the lowest possible point, and is just a bit too loud at the second click above the zero point.

However, when listening to good classical I find myself in medium or high gain settings.

I use high gain exclusively for PC gaming, no equalization.

I use brightness on some really dull recordings, but generally speaking leave it off becuase it just makes the already bright sound of my source even worse.

I use crossfeed literally always. I find it does alter tone, apparently thickening the bass a bit, but that's only if you listen to tone. If you listen to what's happening to all the aspects of the sound, I find it simply shifts and slightly distances the images and coherently sticks them on a 3D (for headphones, anyway) platform.

Coho66,

I find the only weakness so far being the fact that my source (NS500V) sounds anywhere from slightly grainy to unlistenable as well as being just a bit thin, both of these problems coming from CD playback. It's just really grainy!

Problems:
-Some of my recordings exhibit a laid-back nature. It only happens with CDs and seems to be worst on poorly recorded metal/rock albums and pop recordings. My SACD has no such problems and the HD600 is as forward as could be needed for realistic listening. This is with stock cable (I am planning on making the cardas my next upgrade).

-The Dimarzio cables that I bought are a real pain to get connected properly and I had to actually unscrew the outer aluminum shell to get them plugged into my CDP. The amp was just fine with a bit of wedging.

-The amp is extremely fast, so fast that it is a bane to bad recordings, and although they may sound fine at first, eventually you start noticing glaring flaws in the recording. The soundstage collapses on a lot of my cds. Some rock recordings of popular alternative music have stacked imaging, meaning two or more voices coming from the same spot on the soundstage. Really weird.

-I must emphasize that you should have a good source to pair with this amp.

-There is a bit of noise when clicking the stepped attenuator up and down one notch of volume. This is a sign of good design (as much was sacrificed as possible to ensure increased sound quality, including a silent volume knob). I don't find it annoying becuase I rarely adjust volume after pressing play.

CRESCENDOPOWER,

I am not too familiar with a lot of other amplifiers, but I really like the midrange of the headroom amps especially with HD600s. It is tonally neutral and I don't hear any bump in the lower mids like some people do. I think my airhead struggled to drive the 600s properly; the midrange exhibited some odd colorations and smeared too much and became harsh at medium-high volumes and above.
 
Jun 29, 2003 at 1:24 PM Post #15 of 15
Quote:

Originally posted by doobooloo
Congratulations on your new amp!
biggrin.gif


I would love to hear the Headroom amps. I haven't gotten a chance to get one yet, partially because they're expensive and partially because my desire to DIY overrides my curiosity of Headroom amps...
biggrin.gif


I know what I need to do. I need to attend a meet.
3000smile.gif



Have you read this?

You have no excuse now.
cool.gif
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top