Elephas

I'm not the best person to ask about the K1000. I've tried it with several amps, including a Cary 300B, and liked it very much. But it clamps tightly on my head and becomes uncomfortable so I'd rather not use it. Yeah, the HD800 has superb notes separation and clarity. I'm amazed too. Hopefully someone from Sennheiser will explain more about the graphs. There might be no season. The team manager has recommended that everyone forfeit to Team Source First + HD800.

The K701's soundstage is quite large and wide. It is one of the things I like about it. I don't think it is as coherent as the HD800's, though, meaning that the the distances between instruments aren't as well-spaced. This is kind of difficult to describe because all the sound is appearing inside and 'around' your head. I just don't think the K701's illusion of a soundstage is as convincing. Here's a group shot of Team Top Ten Favorites. It wasn't easy getting everyone together, and one member (Jade) is actually missing, current whereabouts unclear. The Team has somewhat hastily found a substitute, the HP-2, though not everyone is convinced that it is a full-fledged member. Yes, the Team is aware that there are more than ten members. No, they don't intend to change their name. The Team says they're ready to take on Beyers whether modded or not, Denons, whether modded or not, JVC and Ultrasone.

I'm really enjoying the HD800's soundstage/headstage. It has less of the 'inside-the-head' feeling of most headphones, and more of a 'sound coming from the front and sides' sensation. Yes, other headphones have large soundstages and some like the K1000 or Sony PFR-V1 are unique in their own ways. For some reason I'm finding the HD800's to be extremely comfortable and pleasant. Depth and width of the soundstage are excellent. Along with the precise imaging, and fast attack and decay, each note's position and 'distance' in relation to others is extra clear. The resulting soundstage illusion is very nice. It's a stark contrast to the O2, which has a small and focused headstage and 'tiny' sound images, or Grados, with their very forward presentation and small soundstages.

I forgot to mention that the HD800 had a larger soundstage and better notes separation than the HE90. It has a very clean and clear presentation that can even make the HE90 seem just slightly out of focus. I thought the HE90 was more warmer, smoother, more liquid and more refined. The Sylvania 5751 closes the gap with the HD800 in terms of clarity and separation, but sacrifices some warmth and smoothness compared to the Mullard or TF ECC83. The liquidity and refinement makes it immensely enjoyable and involving. It's the same story of win some lose some. The HE90 is not better than the HD800 in every area and vice versa, just like other headphones at this level. Given the market prices, I think the HD800 is a relative bargain and a good value, even. With a good system behind it, it ranks among the discontinued headphone greats.

Yep, yep, that's what I meant by the R10's nice coloration. HE90 Strikes Back Well, I moved the Aristaeus to the Esoteric system and did the same comparison with the Patricia Barber SACD as before. This time the HE90+Aristaeus beat the HD800+Lehmann BCL. The result wasn't unexpected, because this is why the HE90 is my favorite headphone even though it, like any other headphone, isn't 'the best' I've heard in most categories. Team HE90 v2 proved merciless and switched tubes in the Aristaeus to a pair of Sylvania 5751 and then to a pair of Mullard ECC83. These two types of tubes made the sound shift towards crispness and very well-defined notes separation in the case of the 5751, and towards liquidity, smoothness and refinement in the case of the Mullards. I remembered why I like tubes. Sennheiser used the Lehmann Black Cube Linear to demo the HD800 at some of their events. In Germany there was an Orpheus system for comparison. I've never heard the HEV90, but if they were confident about how well the HD800 would compare, I don't think I'm missing a lot by using an Aristaeus instead of an HEV90.

Yes, its bass impact. But it seems that everything else are its strengths: midrange, treble, details, imaging, soundstage, refinement, etc. I don't think anything I've heard beats the R10 in pure midrange magic. I thought the bass-lite unit I used to have has even better midrange than the bass-heavier unit I kept. Acoustic singer-songwriter type female vocals was fantastic with that headphone. But its bass just didn't have any impact. Keep in mind that the bass-heavier R10 people talk about doesn't have a lot of bass impact either, just more than the bass-lite R10. I would guess that most bass-lite R10s are older units with lower serial numbers and the bass-heavier units have higher serial numbers. I suspect that crumbling foam inside the R10 housings have something to do with it, besides potential production changes, of course. I think the HD800 is very neutral-sounding while the R10 has some coloration. But it is nice coloration, in a very good way that adds to the enjoyment of music. I don't mind a little deception if it enhances the experience.

Stax Mafia people here browsing dynamic threads, it's kind of suspicious. I'm going to stop the "I think the HD800 sounds like" thing for now. I suspect the HD800 is very neutral, transparent and uncolored, without extensive listening and comparisons my impressions seem to be all over the place. More so than most other headphones, its sound seems to be very dependent on the recording and the system. I already mentioned the W5000, K701 and SR-007. Those three definitely don't sound like each other. I think people were polite and refrained from blasting me, even though that was probably just blathering nonsense by a new HD800 owner who doesn't know the headphone well yet.

Keep in mind that I basically just pulled those "better than HD800 categories" out of a round, dark place. I haven't done direct comparisons with the HD800. BTW, your former GS1000 has a balanced APS v3 cable now, and it says it likes the Zana Deux and is doing fine. I did do one comparison last night before going to bed, and it was interesting enough that I didn't get to sleep soon afterwards. I was thinking that I needed to get back to this thread and report. Here goes. Test 1: Team HD800 versus Team HE90 (or "Maybe the source is quite important after all?") Team HD800 HD800 with stock cable Lehmann Black Cube Linear (with a Furutech fuse) Crystal Cable Reference RCA IC Esoteric P-05/D-05/G-03x All components using DIY Neotech NEP-1001 silver power cables with either Furutech carbon-fiber or Oyaide metal plugs Acoustic Revive RTP-4 passive power outlet Oyaide R1 wall power socket with carbon-fiber cover Patricia Barber Modern Cool SACD layer only Team HE90 HE90 HeadAmp Aristaeus with TF ECC83, Siemens ECL86 (with HiFi tuning fuses) Poeima RCA IC Accuphase DP-500 Both components use Telos Audio Golden Reference power cords Isotek Sigmas power conditioner Patricia Barber Modern Cool SACD (Redbook layer only) This Team HD800 is heavy on the source side as well as cabling. But the amp is somewhat of a lightweight. It is small and humble-looking. The giant ES-1 could crush it flat, the Zana Deux thinks it is a weakling and the Aristaeus turns up its nose at a solid-state amp. Team HE90 is heavier on the headphone and amp side. The HE90 + Aristaeus combo is supposed to be a pretty good one. The tubes are good reliable old-stock. The source is comparatively lightweight, though, and it is also Redbook only. Cabling isn't bad by any means, but isn't up to the level of Team HD800. In any event, cabling differences should be subtle at best, or maybe even non-existent, right? I played Track 5 "Light My Fire" a few times on each team, switching back and forth four times. I like the song, and it has some nice deep bass (the large string instrument) and also some nice deep drums. Ambiance, air, imaging and soundstaging are also nicely showcased. A maracas and an electric guitar adds to the fun. The result? Team HD800 beat Team HE90. The HD800 was clearer-sounding, had better details and imaging and a larger soundstage. It actually made the HE90 seem a bit muddy. The bass instrument's notes had better details, texture and impact. The maracas to the left, french horn at the middle left back, electric guitar at the middle right back and hand drums to the right were all better defined, with nicely detailed attack and decay. Each of their notes appeared and disappeared very clearly in their own spaces. The soundstage illusion was very convincing. And the HE90? Smooth and liquid as ever, and refined. But it didn't have the clarity and details of the HD800. Imaging was a bit blurry, even, and the soundstage was small and not convincing at all. Soundstaging with headphones for me is a tricky business. I know I'm listening to two small speakers strapped close to my ears. There's really no soundstage in front of me, and a lot can depend on the recording itself. I want to be deceived by the headphone and believe in its illusion, feeling as if I'm a like a hummingbird with big ears floating in front of the singer's face with all the other instruments arrayed around me. The illusion works better with some recordings than others. I thought that Team HD800 won this matchup quite easily. There wasn't much doubt, or maybe some subtler differences than required more listening time. Team HD800 was more involving and the better listening experience, and I would choose it over Team HE90 without much hesitation.

Hehe, I'm Team Electrostats, what did you expect? I used to be a gopher/driver in the Stax Mafia and got kicked out after I said the O2mk1 and O2mk2 sounded very similar. You might find higher volumes fatiguing with the HD800 because of its brighter and crisper treble compared to what you're used to. But it could be due to other factors. I think that the audio chain has effects on a headphone's brightness, harshness, brittleness and listening fatigue. And if your background is a bit noisy and not really that black, listening fatigue can easily occur. You'll feel like turning up the volume because you're not hearing the details clearly, but the higher volume exacerbates treble and upper-midrange harshness. A good recording + good system + good headphone should allow you to listen at whatever volume you feel like. Ultra-low and barely audible late at night when it is super quiet, without a sense of missing anything or lacking details. Or high head-banging volume (in my case butt wriggling) without any treble harshness, just crystal clear, smooth and crisp treble.

I think I was too hasty proclaiming the HD800 a possible Top 5 favorite. I listened to the HE90 yesterday and its level of refinement, smoothness and effortlessness was definitely a step higher than the HD800. The HD800 does everything well, but I don't think it excels in any particular area when compared against other 'top tier' headphones. This is the same with most other headphones, of course. It gets very competitive and no single headphone leads most categories. For example, I think that the following headphones are definitely better than the HD800 in these categories; there may be more, these just seem to be the more obvious ones to me: Refinement: HE90, O2mk1, O2mk2, SR-Omega, R10 Imaging precision: O2mk1, O2mk2, Qualia Soundstage size: R10, Qualia Soundstage coherency: Qualia, O2mk1, O2mk2 Tonal balance & naturalness: HE90, SR-Omega Bass quality: L3000 Bass quantity just right: O2mk1, Qualia Midrange quality: HE90, R10, O2mk1, O2mk2 Special magical female vocals: R10 Treble quality: HE90, SR-Omega, R10 Speed: most of the electrostats, Qualia, R10 Details: not really sure yet, probably O2mk1, O2mk2, Qualia I've left out some headphones I have less experience with such as the K1000, PS-1, HP-2 and Jade. My Top 5 favorites, HE90, O2mk1, O2mk2, SR-Omega and R10 are tough to beat. The most important category for me is refinement. I can sacrifice some bass quantity, some imaging, some soundstage/headstage size, etc. but refinement is top priority. With improved amplification, maybe balanced, the HD800 will probably be more competitive. I don't think it'll be easy or cheap, maybe I should just stick with electrostats.

I don't think either the Lehmann BCL or AT-HA5000 drive the PS-1 or other Grados very well, at least not as well as the Zana Deux. The PS-1 is fun to listen to, but I think it lacks some refinement compared to the 'top tier' headphones. Balancing Act?! I wasn't considering other amps, you big meanie! Now you're making me think. Did I say yesterday that the HD800 lacked some bass impact? I must have been smoking something weird. Its bass is very well-balanced, not lacking and not too dominant. Kind of reminds me of the SR-007's bass. In fact, I think the HD800 is a lot more like the SR-007 than the K701. Similar combination of detailed sound plus smoothness and refinement. I can't remember why I mentioned the K701. I think the HD800 is deserving of being considered one of the 'top tier' headphones. I like it very much. Maybe a Top 5 favorite?

I also use the Zana Deux. I don't have a lot of experience with amps, certainly a lot less than most people here. I've never heard a balanced amp. Besides the ZD, I only have the Lehmann BCL and a AT-HA5000. I've been more interested in electrostatics than dynamics for a while, but maybe the HD800 will kick-start my interest in a better dynamic amp. I'm thinking about how to acquire a balanced Beta22.

Oh, wow, the L3000 and PS-1 are very unlike the K701. I really like the L3000's bass and I think it's probably the best quality bass of all headphones I've heard. The PS-1 on the other hand, I think its bass isn't quite as good as the L3000's but the quantity is massive. Each use requires a lot of acclimatization time. Yay, I really like the HD800! It passed the Rihanna test quite easily with very high scores. Yeah, of course better recordings sound better. I can't help it, I have bad taste in music. I thought it would get better as I got older, but it isn't. The HD800 is one of my top 10 favorite headphones!

Er, before I get squashed by the combined forces of K701 dislikers and HD800 likers, let me say that I think more highly of the K701 than seemingly most people. Rihanna on the HD800 is sounding as good as ever!

I just finished running 30 minutes of the Isotek Burn-in CD. I've found it to be useful in the past, but it can be hit or miss and results vary. Yeah, treble is quite bright and bass impact and quantity is low. It's very unlike the HD650. It actually reminds me a bit of the W5000, but tonality, or coloration, is different of course. I consider the HD800 to be more neutral and less colored. It also reminds me of, dare I say it, the K701. Yes, I said it. It's like an improved supercharged K701, with more refinement, more details, faster speed, better imaging, better liquidity, basically better everything than the K701. Poor, maligned and misunderstood K701...

Zana Deux and Lehmann Black Cube Linear

I guess this is the official HD800 thread? I'm listening to the HD800 right now! No, no Rihanna yet, but I played a few Leona Lewis - Spirit (Deluxe Edition) already. I'm saving Rihanna for later when I'm ready to do some butt clenching exercises. I also played some Opus3, FIM Super Sound, Jennifer Warnes, Inger Marie Gundersen and a few other "audiophile cred" tracks. My out of the box impression: It's quite good. It is brighter, clearer and more detailed than the HD650 or HD600. Definitely no veil. I already prefer it over the HD6x0 or K701. It has refinement, good details, accurate tonality and a spacious soundstage. I don't think it is better than most of my electrostats, and probably also not better than the R10, Qualia or several other dynamics. Based on my high expectations, I'm somewhat disappointed. But a lot more listening is needed.

In my notes I have the SP ECC-2 adapter as being the one for: 6CG7 6GU7 6FQ7 12FQ7 I've never had problems biasing any of the front four tubes. The only times I've had problems were with EL34 quads that were not well-matched. The shop also sells adapters the other way around, such as 6SN7 to 6CG7. I thought of getting a couple to use in a Stax SRM-T1W, but then I thought maybe the larger tubes wouldn't fit in the casing. True, the SP adapters look better but they also cost a lot more.

I was wondering if the propensity for Single Power amps to break down is related to their "flexibility" with the tubes and adapters. If the tolerances are necessarily loose in order to accomodate the different tubes, might that also make the amp more susceptible to breakdowns? As far as I know, SP amps are the only tube amps with so much flexibility with the adapters. If this isn't because of some special genius technology on Mikhail's part, maybe other tube amp manufacturers don't do this because it isn't a good idea? Here's a look at my three pairs of SP adapters (except the 3D21A adapters not shown) along with the cheapo adapters, which cost me about US$9 each. I got a bunch of them because they're so cheap and now I don't know what to do with them.

Here are internal shots of one ES-1. The covers were very easy to remove, once I had the right 1/16" hex wrench. There are only four screws on each cover, two on the faceplate and two on the back. (click thumbnails to view 2560 x 1920 images) Amp section Power supply

First, let me point out that I don't know much about amps and electronics. I've been wondering about how Single Power amps use tube adapters. I have an ES-1 and several types of adapters which allow the use of a variety of tubes. The default configuration is 2x 6SN7 per channel in the two gain stages, for a total of four 6SN7, and then 2x EL34 power tubes per channel, for a total of four EL34 tubes in the amp. Four 3D21A adapters allow the use of 3D21A tubes in place of the EL34. Two 2C51 adapters and two 5687 adapters allow the use of the respective tubes in the 6SN7 positions. Two "ECC-1" adapters also allow the use of 12AU7, 12AX7 and 5751 in the 6SN7 positions. From my communications with Mikhail and his recommendations, it appears that the adapters can be used in various combinations and in either the first or second gain stages. I know some other tube amps can also use tube substitutes and adapters. For example, a local audio shop sells 12AX7 to 6SL7, 6CG7 to 6SN7, and 12AU7 to 6SN7 adapters and I bought four of each. They were very inexpensive. I asked Craig about using a 12AX7 to 6SL7 adapter in my Zana Deux, and he explained that while it might be possible he doesn't recommend it because the 6C33C-S tubes are biased with the 6SL7 and might not work correctly with a 12AX7 in there. He says the 12AX7 is not an exact substitute for the 6SL7. I'm aware that there are some direct tube substitutes, such as 7N7 for 6SN7 or some fairly close substitutes which may or may not work depending on the individual tube amp. How is it that many Single Power tube amps can use a large variety of tube types utilizing the adapters? I've asked Mikhail about this and he says it is because of the special design and capabilities of SP amps. The adapters themselves are sold by SP at very high cost. They are much more expensive than the adapters I bought locally. Is there anything special about the SP adapters, or are they basically the same as any other tube adapter?

I don't know much about DIY electronics, so I would appreciate any comments about the design, parts, potential safety issues, etc. of the ES-1. It sounds very good to me, the best I've ever heard from the O2Mk1 and O2Mk2. With the HE90, I can't decide between the ES-1 and the Aristaeus, they each do some things better than the other.

(click thumbnails to view 2560 x 1920 images) Amp section Power supply

As yourpasswordsucks points out, it does seem a bit cramped in there. Removing those two large round things would make things nice and roomy. *stunned* *shakes head, disoriented* Whoa, dude, your plus 12 Thunder God Shout ability is making me deaf. *partially deaf* *feels like I have Etymotic ER20's in my ears* I'm afraid. My tired old camera only goes up to a puny 5 megapixels. People will make fun.

I can't decide which one of you I'd rather have as a neighbor.