X-Can V2 vs. Headroom Little
post-223326
Thread Starter
Post #1 of 8

Doc Sarvis

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 24, 2002
Messages
1,283
Reaction score
10
Joined
Nov 24, 2002
Posts
1,283
Likes
10
I'm a headphone newbie but well-versed in high-end audio (through speakers). I've purchased a pair of HD-600s, and now (based on the comments at this site) have narrowed my amp decison to the MF X-can V2 or the Headroom Little. My system is mostly solid state (although I do have a newfound interest in tubes from the recent purchase of an Ah! Njoe Tjoeb from Upscale Audio). For me the decision comes down to "tube magic" from the V2, vs the processor and seemingly cleaner operation on the Little. The price is virtually the same. I'd love to hear your comments. Also, am i missing anything obviously superior in the same price range? Help!
 
     Share This Post       
post-223333
Post #2 of 8

fredpb

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 8, 2001
Messages
1,405
Reaction score
0
Joined
Dec 8, 2001
Posts
1,405
Likes
0
Headroom Little is nice. It' can't match a tube amp though. The Premium Little comes close, but no cigar.
 
     Share This Post       
post-223346
Post #3 of 8

Doc Sarvis

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 24, 2002
Messages
1,283
Reaction score
10
Joined
Nov 24, 2002
Posts
1,283
Likes
10
How about this: Is the Wheatfield HA1 worth almost double the money of the X-Can?
 
     Share This Post       
post-223377
Post #4 of 8

PinkFloyd

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Messages
9,511
Reaction score
21
Joined
Jan 13, 2009
Posts
9,511
Likes
21
Haven't heard the headroom but own a MF X-can V2 and a Creek OBH-11.

The X-can is a superb piece of kit for the money and is capable of withstanding many tweaks, such as power supply, valve replacement etc etc.

Thing is... "tweaks" cost money so you could face a lot of expenditure if you get "tweakers fever".

I am always trying to squeeze every last ounce of performance from my equipment to the stage that I no longer "enjoy" listening to the music like I used to years ago... these days I am listening for "differences" to sound quality that each "tweak" brings.

My advice to you is to use your ears as a guide.... forget what anyone else thinks... if the equipment and sound makes you come out in goose pimples then it's the right stuff for you!

I'm too deeply into listening to the components that I have forgotten the joys and emotions real music brings but I think I can safely recommend the MF X-cans to you.

Don't change the valves, don't upgrade the power supply, don't encase the X-can in epoxy resin, don't cryogenically suspend it and don't encase it in concrete. I believe superb results have been gained by simply plugging it in and "listening" through it.

I'm off to prepare some epoxy resin... according to a friend the X-can produces a more spacious soundstage and 3 dimensionality if its encased in a 3 metre square block of epoxy resin... I'm going to take it a bit further and add some pasta into the resin and see if makes Italian opera sound a bit more realistic.

Pinkie
 
     Share This Post       
post-223410
Post #5 of 8

Magic77

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 24, 2001
Messages
840
Reaction score
23
Joined
Jun 24, 2001
Posts
840
Likes
23
I have both the HeadRoom Little and the X-Can v2; both of which I am using right now.

I would have to give the advantage to the X-Can v2 as far as overall sound and performance.

But the Little is also a great "little" amp as well. I have noticed the difference that the Crossfeed makes on a few CD's, but not all CD's. So, it's a nice feature to have.

The Little seems to work well with lower-impedance headphones, where the X-Can v2 works well with almost any headphone that I have had.
 
     Share This Post       
post-223560
Post #6 of 8

andrzejpw

May one day invent Bose-cancelling headphones.
Joined
Jun 25, 2001
Messages
6,636
Reaction score
10
Joined
Jun 25, 2001
Posts
6,636
Likes
10
Although the X-Can gives you very nice midrange, and all that "lush" tube sound, the little offers superb bass response and detail. Also, the little gives you the crossfeed and upgrade path. If you feel the need, that little can become "maxed out," with a premium electronics module, power supply, etc.

Also, have you tried the MG head OTL?
 
     Share This Post       
post-223681
Post #7 of 8

bootman

King o'Ping
Joined
Jun 22, 2001
Messages
3,308
Reaction score
10
Joined
Jun 22, 2001
Posts
3,308
Likes
10
I'll throw a vote for the MG Head.
It mates very well with the Senns.
 
     Share This Post       
post-223755
Post #8 of 8

MacDEF

Headphone Hussy (will wear anything if it sounds good)
Joined
Jun 26, 2001
Messages
6,761
Reaction score
12
Joined
Jun 26, 2001
Posts
6,761
Likes
12
I've owned the X and an old-model Little, and have heard a new-model Little.

The X/HD 600 combo provides some very impressive midrange. However, the treble and bass are much better on the Little, especially the newer version. In addition, the Little has a MUCH better upgrade path. You can eventually upgrade it to the level of a Maxed Out Home, which leaves the X in the dust.

If I were going to spend $250 - $300 of my money on an amp, I'd get the Little over the Creek, MGHead, or X-CAN. I look at the others as a temporary thing, since if you get into this hobby you're going to want something better eventually
whereas I think of the Little as an investment. It holds its own against all of them out of the box, and with upgrades is far better than any of them.
 
     Share This Post       

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top