[duranxv]

How does the HM1 compare with the 465?

465 is better, but the HM1 as a pre really adds some extra magic due to the tone and soundstage controls.

 

[adrianm]

465 is better, but the HM1 as a pre really adds some extra magic due to the tone and soundstage controls.

What makes it better?

 

[plumpudding2]

What makes it better?

Noo I was finally cured of SS amp fomo let's just all here pretend the MK465 doesn't exist..

 

[unfitstew]

465 is better, but the HM1 as a pre really adds some extra magic due to the tone and soundstage controls.

Using HM1 as a pre into the 465 is my plan. Also so I can still use the HM1 in general as it is a fantastic amp.

I am getting a DCA Stealth as a demo once my 465 comes in. I really wish I still had my HM1 then (will be getting a new HM1 of this years batch to replace the HM1 I traded for Diana MR + cash) to compare as many have said HM1 is a great pairing for the stealth.

 

[orrman]

What makes it better?

The only things HM1 edges 465 are the extra tone and stage controls, being a preamp and price. For any technical performance measure or timbre related, the Mass Kobo comes on top really.

 

[unfitstew]

The only things HM1 edges 465 are the extra tone and stage controls, being a preamp and price. For any technical performance measure or timbre related, the Mass Kobo comes on top really.

If it has the house sound I remember from the 394 and the 404 it should have a nice energetic lush sound. I don't get my 465 until february or later though so I can't say yet.

 

[orrman]

If it has the house sound I remember from the 394 and the 404 it should have a nice energetic lush sound. I don't get my 465 until february or later though so I can't say yet.

I heard only the 433 and the 465 and they're not very close to each other with the 433 being warmer.
To keep this on topic - the HM1 is more neutral and stays out of the way (as a studio tool should be) while the 465 definitely has an analog sound to it for a lack of better description

 

[alxw0w]

What makes it better?

Price, it's more expensive it must be better right?

 

[adrianm]

The only things HM1 edges 465 are the extra tone and stage controls, being a preamp and price. For any technical performance measure or timbre related, the Mass Kobo comes on top really.

I mean, not to be a contrarian here, but for measured technical performance, the HM1 comes out on top objectively. Then again people like their tube amps so I get how more/the right kind of distortion is desirable. For timbre, I attribute that to the dac, and just want the amp to be as neutral as possible, but system synergy is also a factor.

 

[plumpudding2]

I mean, not to be a contrarian here, but for measured technical performance, the HM1 comes out on top objectively. Then again people like their tube amps so I get how more/the right kind of distortion is desirable. For timbre, I attribute that to the dac, and just want the amp to be as neutral as possible, but system synergy is also a factor.

Has the 465 ever been measured??

 

[genefruit]

I mean, not to be a contrarian here, but for measured technical performance, the HM1 comes out on top objectively. Then again people like their tube amps so I get how more/the right kind of distortion is desirable. For timbre, I attribute that to the dac, and just want the amp to be as neutral as possible, but system synergy is also a factor.

yeah, if we're going down that route - measuring better than the HM1 includes a number of Topping amps, the Holo Bliss, and likely others.

 

[adrianm]

Has the 465 ever been measured??

They state some measurements on a site that sells it

 

[TheAttorney]

FWIW , being used to the soundstage knob on the HM1, i keep it on all the time (1st step), found myself reaching for it even when listening to the He-1 (as dumb as I looked doing it), and could never go back to Dave's CF. The Rossini's Expanse is arguably better, but I still keep it off. The soundstage knob just eliminates the problem of having headphones with narrow soundstage, like closed backs.

Could you elaborate on the key differences between DAVE's CF (the classic Meier type), Rossini's Expanse and HM1's sound stage knob?

Although DAVE's CF is not perfect, one thing it does well is create a more solid central image more clearly placed in a deeper sound stage (at the expense of width and seemingly some transparency). And the components of an orchestra are more connected and life-like, rather than unconnected and diffuse.

I know HM1 has this ability to expand the width, but how does it fare on the above two points?

 

[Jimmyblues1959]

I'd expect the Meier to have a very good implementation of CF, but I've never come across this make at any UK dealer or any of the few shows and meets I've attended.
I've also still not come across an HM1 at any UK dealer anywhere near me.

The Meier products are not that common. They're designed by Jan Meier in Germany and manufactured in China.
The Classic was manufactured up until a few years ago in two versions: standard and ff. Both had the cross feed circuit.
And, yes, the cross feed circuit is very well designed and offers quite a bit of flexibility in tailoring the sound to suit one's
tastes.

 

[Frankie D]

The only things HM1 edges 465 are the extra tone and stage controls, being a preamp and price. For any technical performance measure or timbre related, the Mass Kobo comes on top really.

That I will have to hear for myself. Hopefully they will both be at CanJam NY. While there is not much I dislike, I typically do not care for an overly colored sound, especially if the bass gets loose and thumpy. How is the bass on the 465? Tks.