Matrix Quattro Balanced Amplifier

After spending a lot of time with some high quality tube amplifiers, I thought it was time to revisit the world of solid state (using sound processing chips rather than tubes). Some headphones seem to pair well with tubes while others like solid state so it’s always nice to have both options available.

Matrix M-Stage (HPA-1): the Quattro's older sibling

Matrix M-Stage (HPA-1): the Quattro’s older sibling

The amp I decided on is the Matrix Quattro amplifier which offers balanced and unbalanced operation (which I’ll explain later) and pairs really nicely with the Matrix X-Sabre DAC I bought a little while ago. I was fortunate enough to also be able to buy a second hand Matrix M-Stage (HPA-1), the Quattro’s baby brother (although it’s been around longer). The M-Stage is renowned as a great bang-for-buck entry level amplifier (around $300) so how would the more expensive Quattro compare at its $450 level? Let’s find out…

Overview

The Quattro builds on the success of the famously affordable and excellent M-Stage amplifier, but brings improved design and balanced operation. It was the balanced operation that hooked me because I love the idea of it from my days working in car audio where I often designed systems with completely separate left and right channels, but let me explain the concept a bit better.

Every speaker (or driver in a headphone) requires a positive and negative connection or an active signal and a ground connection. In unbalanced systems, there are two active outputs that deliver the stereo signal  – one to each driver – and there is a single ground connection that is shared between both drivers. This setup can produce very, very good sound, but there is also the risk of the ground connections causing some leaking of sound between the left and right channels which can result in the sound becoming less defined and less controlled. I’m sure there are much better explanations of these circuits out there if you’re interested, but hopefully this paints enough of a picture to say that balanced circuits have the potential to provide cleaner, better defined sound.

Specifications

  • Max power:  1 W (balanced mode)
  • Power per impedance:  800mW @ 60 ohms / 400mW @ 300 ohms (balanced mode)
  • Inputs:  1 pair RCA, 1 pair balanced 3-pin XLR
  • Outputs:  2 x stereo 6.3mm headphone jacks / 1 pair balanced 6.3mm headphone jacks
  • Signal-to-noise ratio:  >98dB via XLR / >95dB via RCA
  • Distortion:  <0.001%

Just to explain some of these specs, the power of the Quattro in balanced mode is twice that of its unbalanced mode because it’s essentially 2 amplifiers working together when running balanced versus just a single amp when running unbalanced. Also, there is just one set of outputs that are used for both balanced and unbalanced operation, but I’ll explain that setup a little later.

The specs of the Quattro don’t really tell us a lot about its performance and there was nothing in that list which excited me more than any other amplifier on the market, but for the price and with its offering of balanced operation for my beloved T1 headphones, I had to give it a run.

Design & Compatibility

01170021The Quattro is a simple design that’s been described as two M-Stage amplifiers sandwiched together. That may or may not be true as there are definite similarities under the hood, but also some differences in terms of the components used.

Perhaps the most obvious differences are the combination of unbalanced and balanced circuits as well as the use of different op amps. Op amps are the chips that amplify the sound and lend the amplifier a significant dose of sound signature (how warm, cool, bright, dark, bassy, or tinny the amp sounds). Where the M-Stage uses the OPA2134 chip, the Quattro uses the OPA604 and OPA2604 chips for its balanced and unbalanced circuits respectively.

Inputs / Outputs

01170020The Quattro has a pair of RCA (unbalanced) inputs and a pair of 3-pin XLR (balanced) inputs. Unfortunately, it doesn’t get any line level outputs which is a shame. It’s always nice to have the option to use headphone amps as pre-amps or to have a straight pass-through to connect other amps in a chain, but for the average consumer who doesn’t stockpile audio gear, the Quattro offers everything you need in terms of these 2 input options.

For output of sound, the Quattro comes with a pair of 6.3mm sockets on the front which are labelled Solo 1 / Balanced R and Solo 2 / Balanced L. It’s only as I write this that I realise that the left socket is on the right side and vice versa!? Oh well, doesn’t really matter. The point is that this pair of sockets is multi-functional which is both good and bad.

The Good

01170018Having 2 jacks means that you can use 2 pairs of headphones simultaneously which is great if you’re comparing headphones or if you want to listen with a friend. It ‘s amazing how often I would like to be able to switch between headphones without having to plug and unplug leads all the time so the Quattro is great in that regard.

Neither good nor bad is the fact that the twin sockets are used for balanced output via normal stereo 6.3mm headphone jacks which are easy enough to buy from most electronics shops if you need to make an adapter. Please be aware though that you specifically need to use stereo jacks. Mono ones won’t work with the Quattro’s auto-detecting circuit which I’ll explain shortly.

The Bad

In my experience the twin 6.3mm arrangement is one of the least common ways to connect to a balanced output with 4-pin XLR being a much more common choice. That means you’re most likely going to need an adapter lead to connect your 4-pin terminated headphones to the Quattro’s 6.3mm sockets. It’s an easy DIY build if you can be bothered, but you can also buy this type of lead if you prefer so it’s not the end of the world, but an XLR socket would have been better I think.

The other thing I’m not a total fan of is the auto-detect circuit on the Quattro’s outputs. Although the concept of the amp switching modes for you is nice, the reality is that the process isn’t seamless and sometimes leaves me with a balanced connection to an unbalanced output. This is because the Quattro detects the status of the connection with the contacts on the 6.3mm plugs. It seems that sometimes, the plugs touch the wrong contacts on the way into the socket and make the amp think it’s connected to an unbalanced headphone. The only solution I’ve discovered is to unplug and reconnect the headphones or to switch the amp off and on again. It’s not the end of the world, but I would have been perfectly happy with a third button on the front panel to select my output type.

Other Design Elements

In terms of size, the Quattro is about twice the width of the M-Stage, but is shorter by about 15-20% and a hair lower in height. It’s a nice compact size.

On the front right of the unit is a nice large aluminium volume knob with a rough texture around the side. It looks good and feels good and it’s attached to a high quality Alps motorised volume pot so you can also use a remote control with the amp if you want. The remote is an optional extra, but it’s very well priced.

Also on the front panel are a power button and source button to switch between the RCA and XLR inputs. I was pleased to note that both inputs are able to provide output to balanced and unbalanced phones so you don’t have to use a balanced source to enjoy balanced ‘phones. Not only that, but the difference between the sound from the balanced / unbalanced input is near enough to identical that it makes no difference which you use.

01170017Finally, on the left side of the amp’s fascia are lights indicating mute status (only available using the optional remote control), input in use (RCA / XLR), and output status (balanced / unbalanced).

Compatibility

The Quattro’s power output means it will drive most headphones other than difficult-to-drive planar magnetics. I’m hoping to try it with some Audeze LCD 2s soon so I’ll update if there’s anything notable to share. Unfortunately, the Quattro has an output impedance of around 10 ohms which is quite high and may negatively affect the frequency response and tightness of sound from lower impedance headphones depending on their specific specs. Testing the Quattro with my 32 ohm headphones showed some variation compared to the M-Stage with its 5 ohm output, but it was very much a case-by-case thing. The one thing I can say for sure is that it will not match ideally with low impedance, multi-BA IEMs like the Miracles. The sound is really clean and hum is negligible, but the frequency response is altered slightly by the impedance mismatch.

Other than the minor issues with output impedance – and I do consider it minor because it’s an amp designed for desktop headphone listening, not IEMs and portables – the Quattro drives all my phones really nicely and I love the fact that it can run unbalanced / balanced in and unbalanced / balanced out. There’s plenty of versatility in how you use the amp and with what.

Sound

01170022Having been excited to buy the Quattro, I was initially disappointed with its sound. It was a bit harsh with the T1s and I felt like it wasn’t significantly better than the much cheaper M-Stage. The balanced output was definitely an improvement, but I was still left no really enjoying what I heard. Although I’m still quietly skeptical about the effects of burn-in, I decided to leave the Quattro running for a while to see if the sound changed at all. I didn’t listen to it during this time so I know I haven’t adjusted to its sound, but I can definitely confirm that I now thoroughly enjoy the sounds being produced by the Quattro in both unbalanced and balanced modes.

For the review of the sound, I’m referring to the character of the sound in both balanced and unbalanced mode. The balanced circuit is just 2 of the unbalanced circuits running in parallel so the character of the sound is identical. I’ll explain the audible impacts of balanced versus unbalanced output separately.

Treble

Treble from the Quattro is present and extended, but smooth. Even with the sometimes edgy Beyer T1s, the Quattro produces very listenable treble that’s easily on par with the treble produced by other amps in this price range or slightly above.

The Quattro produces brighter treble than the M-Stage, but manages to do so without getting cold or harsh. The treble can be a little dry, but the overall signature is slightly warm so it balances the treble nicely. Fans of sparkly treble may want to look elsewhere for an amplifier because there’s not a lot of sparkle in the Quattro’s sound, but don’t mistake that for a lack of treble or extension. The treble’s there, it’s just not enhanced or lively – instead it’s smooth and easy to listen to. To my ears, the Quattro strikes a really nice balance by presenting a sound that’s not as thick as the M-Stage (which is a great amp) while still keeping the smooth and musical presentation that makes the Matrix gear so enjoyable. I was really impressed with the Quattro’s rendition of the detail present in the sound of a solo violin during the listening I did for this review. The Quattro was able to accurately recreate the subtle rasp of the bow being drawn across the strings sounding completely accurate and lifelike. I think that’s a benefit of the slightly dry sound – it allows details like this to come through where a lusher, smoother sound might cover them over.

Mids

The Quattro’s midrange is accurate and clean. It’s got good presence in the overall presentation and strikes a nice balance between musicality and accuracy. Once again it’s drier and cooler sounding than the M-Stage, but still enjoyable and slightly smooth. I really like the presence of the midrange created by the Quattro. Even in busy, active tracks, the vocals are always clean and separate, but not enhanced or pushed in your face in any way. THey are slightly forward compared to the rest of the spectrum, but only to a degree that you notice if you’re listening for it.

Bass

The Quattro produces bass that is largely accurate, but possibly a bit behind the rest of the spectrum. I wouldn’t say it’s lean sounding at all, but the mids and treble overshadow the bass ever-so-slightly. The quality of the bass though is very good. There is texture and impact as well as body on sustained bass notes – it’s just that all of this happens slightly behind the rest of the spectrum. Extension of the bass is really good all the way down and is probably more balanced in the lower ranges than around the mid-bass.

It’s hard to be sure because of the time taken to switch, but I think bass impact and present improves slightly when running in balanced mode. This could simply be a reflection of the power output doubling and therefore having more energy to apply to bass notes.

The Quattro’s bass presentation pairs really nicely with bass-tilted phones like the Fischer FA-011 LEs and I imagine it would also really suit some of the Sennheiser models with a bit of extra mid-bass warmth.

Signature Summary

I don’t normally do this, but I wanted to clarify the descriptions I’ve provided of the bass, mids and treble. I found myself struggling to describe the Quattro’s sound in this review and I think it’s because the Quattro is largely neutral and accurate to the source with a slightly dry, but musical presentation. The comments above reflect very subtle impressions only and should not discourage anyone from considering this amp because it’s very, very good for its price and the evidence of that fact is the difficulty I had trying to really dissect its sound signature.

General Presentation and Staging

Matrix Quattro AmpIn unbalanced mode the Quattro produces a good-sized soundstage (or headstage) with decent width and depth, although I would say it is wider than it is deep. There’s not a lot of vertical layering or vertical space so the result is that all of the sound seems to be placed across a narrow stage extending side to side. The stage sounds open and in no way congested, but it’s not expansive and spacious like some amps I’ve heard, although those amps also cost significantly more (e.g. $200+ more). Staging is definitely more open and more accurate than the M-Stage so the Quattro is a definite upgrade.

Beware: moving to balanced mode makes a significant difference to the soundstage! Switching over to use the balanced outputs of the Quattro lifts the sound to a whole other level. The overall signature is unchanged, but staging resolution is dramatically increased. Everything becomes more sharply defined, gains extra presence and weight and just generally gets better. This is why you buy a Quattro!

In balanced mode the stage is deeper and taller while retaining the same side-to-side space. The accuracy of placement is improved and the ability to hear vertical layers in the sound is improved as well (i.e. vocals now sound higher than a guitar being played by the singer). In balanced mode, the Quattro’s stage and presentation is outstanding and highly enjoyable. It’s still not expansive and massive, but strikes a good balance by placing the listener “a few rows back” from the stage while keeping the music close enough to be engaging.

Summary

For its $450 price tag, the Quattro is definitely an amplifier worth considering if you’re running balanced headphones (or if you can get a cable to make them balanced).

I probably wouldn’t specifically recommend the Quattro if you’re only using unbalanced headphone connections even though it’s a good amplifier even in unbalanced mode. With the new M-Stage (HPA-2) out now, I would expect it to match the Quattro for unbalanced performance and you can always change op amps (see below) to upgrade the sound of either amp so I’d probably choose the M-Stage plus an upgraded op amp for unbalanced use, but it’s a no-brainer for balanced headphones – the Quattro is excellent!!

Just like its older brother, the original M-Stage, the Quattro offers outstanding value for money with good power, an enjoyable sound that’s more neutral and detailed than the older M-Stage, and the opportunity to wring every last bit of performance out of your headphones with balanced cables.

A Quick Note on Op Amps

01170024I’m new to op amps, but having come from recent experiments with tubes in amplifiers, I look at these little “chips” kind of like digital tubes. What I mean by that is that you can tweak the sound of your amplifier by using different op amps. In the image to the right, the op amps are the black, rectangular things – there are 4 along the top and one in the bottom left corner.

The Quattro uses a single, stereo op amp for unbalanced operation and uses 4 mono op amps for balanced operation. This can make it an expensive prospect to upgrade because you need to buy 5-6 op amps depending on the versions you use, but it can also provide some relatively cheap fun because you can pick up decent op amps from as little as $5-6. You can also spend up to nearly $100 each if you want to spend that much, but it’s not necessary. You do need to make sure the op amps you buy are suitable for your device, but it’s not too hard to work out with a bit of online reading and asking on forums.

I’ll be posting an article specifically on op amps soon so subscribe if you want to know more. I’ve ordered a bunch to plug into the Quattro and a couple of other amps I’ll be reviewing soon and I’ll have impressions of the different op amps and how they influence the Quattro, M-Stage and a Fiio E12DIY portable amp.

Advertisements

SoundMAGIC HP200

11010050I have a confession to make. I have completely disregarded the SoundMAGIC headphones for ages simply because of their name. It wasn’t the fact that they’re a Chinese (i.e. not German) company because I love some of the IEMs and headphones coming from companies like HiFiMan. No, the simple reason is that I thought the name sounded a bit dinky and cheap.

It was only because the HP200s were setup as a demo at the recent AV Show in Melbourne that I heard them at all and I was really excited to discover a hidden gem. These are an incredibly well-priced headphone for their outstanding performance and well worth considering for anyone looking at headphones like the Sennheiser HD650s or HD600s.

Overview

The HP200 is an open-backed full-size headphone from Chinese manufacturer, SoundMAGIC. SoundMAGIC built a reputation on their excellent budget IEMs, but are showing with their HP100 (closed) and HP200 (open) headphones that they can play at a higher level too.

Specifications

  • Driver:  53mm dynamic
  • Frequency range:  15 Hz – 35,000 Hz
  • Impedance:  20 ohms
  • Sensitivity:  98 dB / mW (at 1 kHz)

With a price tag at a little over AUD $300, the HP200s are direct price-point competitors for headphones like the Audio Technica ATH-AD900 and AD900X, the AKG K/Q701, and Beyerdynamic DT880 and DT990. That’s stiff competition, but I would also go so far as adding the much praised and more expensive Sennheiser HD600 and HD650 to that mix. Intrigued? I was…

Design & Comfort

11010059These are some nice looking cans – and they feel as good as they look!

They are made from a combination of plastic, metal and faux leather and everything looks and feels solid, but not heavy. When you pick up the HP200s they just feel great – soft and smooth where they should be (ear pads, headband, etc.), and solid and sturdy everywhere else. In terms of design and build quality, the HP200s are easily on par or ahead of every other headphone I listed above as their competitors so we’re off to a good start.

The headband slider is metal over plastic and moves in clearly notched increments. It’s even labelled with numbers painted onto the metal to help you return to your perfect settings every time.

The outside of the ear cups are covered in a gloss black metal grille that looks and feels great. Meanwhile, other parts of the frame are made from high quality soft-touch plastics that feel almost luxurious.

In terms of practical design, the HP200s are basically faultless. Their visual design is a matter of taste, but isn’t going to offend anyone. I personally wasn’t “wowed” by the styling of them, but I would also be very happy to have these displayed on my headphone rack.

Electronic Design

The HP200s have a relatively low, 20 ohm  impedance which helps them easy to get good volume levels from portable devices but can be a double-edged sword because lower impedance leads to less control, especially in the bass and can reduce the overall tightness in the sound of the headphone. If I had to pick a fault with the HP200 it would be this low impedance. Had these been a >100 ohm headphone, they might just have completely dethroned some of the long-term kings of the category. As it is, they are great, but can be a little bit picky with the source / amp used. If you try these or buy these make sure you use them with a source or amp that has an output impedance below 2 ohms. If you listen to them and they sound a bit loose and flabby try another amp or source – it’s not the headphones.

Accessories

11010051It’s always nice to receive some extra goodies with a set of mid-to-high level headphones and the HP200s deliver with a nice black hard-case, extension cable and airline adapter. A really nice touch is the pouch that’s built into the case using a velcro system so you can store your adapters, etc. in the case without them rattling around and damaging your headphones.

Cable Options

I mentioned the extension cable provided with the HP200s, but it’s worth going a little deeper.

11010057The headphones come with a straight, 1.2m cable which is great for desktop use, but won’t reach to your television and may be a little limiting if you like to move around without always having your source at your hip. The extension cable takes care of that by adding a couple of extra metres to the cable. The main cable ends in a 3.5mm jack with a screw on adapter for 6mm connection while the extension cable ends in a plain 3.5mm plug without screw thread.

In addition to the extension option, the HP200s have a detachable cable which uses a simple 3.5mm stereo jack so it would be very easy to buy (or make) a replacement cable if required. If you did decide to go the custom cable route though, it’s worth noting the SoundMAGIC locking system which limits the size of the plug used (and means the plug won’t lock into the headphones so it could pull out if accidentally tugged on.

The stock cable is a little bit prone to hold the “waves” created by coiling so a slightly better cable would be nice for ergonomics, but it sounds fine.

Comfort

Having waxed lyrical about the great feel of these headphones in the hand, it’s probably a good time to consider if they feel as good on the head!

The simple answer is “yes”. The HP200s are very comfortable. The soft ear pads are very comfortable and the cups are big enough to fully cover the ears without putting pressure anywhere and without getting too big. The padding on the headband is sufficient to keep it comfy for long listening sessions, but I’d say overall the headband is not quite as comfortable as some of the best in the game (HD650 / Beyer T1, etc.) due to a slight sense of pressure in the centre of my scalp. It’s worth keeping 2 things in mind here: firstly that I have no hair to add padding between my scalp and the headphones, and secondly that I am being very nit-picky to find anything you might want to know.

Overall I’d rate the HP200s as a fraction behind the HD650s in terms of comfort, but it’s literally just a fraction.

Sound Quality

The HP200s garnered their comparison to the HD650s on account of their sound signature. Similar to the HD6X0 series from Sennheiser, the HP200’s sound smooth and a touch warm, but without losing any detail. They have more top-end sparkle and clarity than the HD650s and may be more akin to the HD600s, but I can’t compare directly to the HD600s because I don’t know the HD600s well enough.

Bass

11010060The HP200s produce excellent, controlled bass that has plenty of body and impact in the mid-bass region, but without bloat and boom. Once again they’re quite similar to the HD650s in their presentation. Bass is warm, full and smooth with kick and presence. It’s not the most detailed bass I’ve heard, but it’s very enjoyable and tends to flatter most music I’ve thrown at the HP200s.

I often use Marrakech by Incognito to test bass because it opens with a well-recorded kick drum that really tests a headphone’s ability to move the air cleanly and tightly, but with force. The HP200s performed beautifully here and sounded as natural as anything else I’ve tried. The presentation had both the sound and the feel of standing in a room with a kick drum being played.

The HP200s also have sneaky sub bass. I was about to write that they didn’t go as deep as I might like, but I changed tracks and found the hidden rumble. While not quite at the level of the Beyer T1s (which cost nearly 4x the price of the HP200s), the sub bass is present and authoritative. While not a bass-head can, the HP200s are very impressive in the bass department, but present the bass in a very natural and musical way.

Mids

Hopefully you’re not getting bored of my HD650 references yet because there are at least 2 more to go.

The midrange from the HP200 is clean, smooth and balanced with everything else. Nothing about the midrange sticks out, but I think that’s exactly how it should be because it means nothing is being overshadowed or over-emphasised.

Switching over to Tin Pan Alley by Stevie Ray Vaughan, the guitars and the drums had beautiful texture and clarity, but were buttery smooth the way they should be. What struck me though is a level of openness that I think was lacking from the Sennheiser HD650s. People often talk about the Sennheiser veil and although I never bought into it 100%, I can understand where the term came from. To my ears, the HP200s present the same quality of silky smooth midrange for vocals and instruments, but manage to add a tiny amount of edge and attack that the HD650s never gave me. That edge takes the sound from relaxing and enjoyable to exciting and enjoyable. It does this without bringing fatigue – just excitement.

I also like to test headphones with tracks from the Alison Krauss and Union Station album, Paper Airplane because some headphones can sound a little glassy with some of the strings used. The HP200s aren’t among that group though. The strings all remained clean and “plucky” (for want of a better term), but without getting edgy and fragile sounding. To sum it up I guess I’d say they maintained both warmth and detail which is perfect!

Treble

11010053

If you’re waiting for the big “but” here and expecting the HP200s to falter you might be disappointed, but the treble does require some discussion.

Final HD650 reference alert! In my opinion the HP200s deliver better treble than the HD650s. It is brighter, more detailed and with more extension. Where the HD650s may have an edge over the HP200s is that they never become sibilant. It’s not a regular issue, but it is possible for the HP200s to sound a bit edgy in the treble, particularly if a track has been poorly recorded or heavily compressed. While not brutal like the T1 or HD800 headphones, the price we pay for treble detail and extension is the risk of sibilance. I personally think the HP200 balances the divide really well. Overall it’s still a smooth sounding headphone, but without drifting into anything mushy or vague.

I think the sound engineers at SoundMAGIC created a beautiful balance between enjoyable listening and detailed listening by presenting just the right amount of treble, but without going to the extremes and revealing every flaw and weakness in the music or the source.

Staging & Imaging

When listening to the HP200s, the headstage (a new term I’ve picked up from someone somewhere and prefer to soundstage because it recognises the fact that it’s all inside the head) is spacious and clear. The sound is intimate and feels like you’re up close to the musicians, but it’s not claustrophobic, just intimate. I noticed that the size of the headstage was influenced by the source I used. A better-matched source (i.e. <2 ohm output impedance) resulted in a larger, more spacious sound and a headstage which is clean, open and very lifelike.

Spacing in the headstage is good and instruments are well placed in a good-sized semi-circular stage. While I’ve noticed a few triangular headstages lately (front and sides with no depth at the diagonals), I’d say the HP200s perform quite well at the diagonals and present a convincing auditory picture. There’s also good vertical layering with voices sounding slightly higher than the instruments being played by singers.

In terms of imaging, the HP200s define the placement and boundaries of instruments really well. Listening to orchestral music, each instrument is clearly separated and defined and there is a nice sense of depth and placement within the stage.

I would describe the HP200’s staging and imaging as immensely enjoyable and relaxing. Sure, surgical tools like the HD800s will perform better at pulling apart instrument placement, etc., but the HP200s do a great job for enjoyable listening and a wonderfully relaxing and yet engaging presentation.

Summary

The easiest way to sum up this review is to say that this pair of HP200s was kindly loaned to me by Billy at Noisy Motel for the purpose of reviewing them. I am dropping them off again tomorrow afternoon and will not only miss them, but have started budgeting to by a pair. I like them that much!

I really wish I still had my HD650s to compare side-by-side with the HP200s because I have a feeling that the HP200s are on par or better in every area (as long as they’re paired with the right source) and a clear winner in the treble region. As mentioned, I have a feeling the HP200s are actually a very close competitor to the HD600s and look forward to a direct comparison soon hopefully.

In the meantime, if you have around $300 to spend on an open headphone and you’re looking for a headphone that delivers a slightly warm, but mostly neutral sound with plenty of detail and clarity then honestly look no further than the HP200s. I’ve tried the HD650s, HD600s (briefly), DT880s, AD900s, AD900Xs, and various other headphones at this general price-point. The HP200s are the first ones I’ve decided to buy since owning my T1s and selling my HD650s. If I could have HD650s or HP200s at the same price, I’d still choose the HP200s and the same goes for all of the other headphones at the same general price-point with the possible exception of the HD600 which I need to listen to in more depth.

Don’t be put off by the relatively unknown brand-name and lack of European heritage, the HP200s are the real deal and an absolute must-listen before spending any money on an open headphone. I can’t stress enough though that these must be paired with the right source. With a poosly matched source (like my tube amps) the HP200 sounds better than average, but with the right amp / source, the HP200s are simply astounding – not just for their price – simply astounding, period.

Beyerdynamic T1

Beyerdynamic are a well known name in the headphone industry and in the professional audio world. I have toyed with the idea of purchasing Beyers on many occasions, but never pulled the trigger… until now.

Specifications

  • Style:  Semi-open
  • Frequency response:  5 – 50,000 Hz
  • Impedance:  600 ohms
  • Nominal SPL:  102 dB

To read this review please head over to the new Passion for Sound site. It’s sexier and there’s lots of great new content.