840C and MHDT Havana

Oh, and of course I also ponder how the Havana stacks up in those areas where the 840C excelled (deep bass, separation/delineation etc.)

Hey all and thanks for the responses thus far!

In regard to mixing and matching, of course synergy between components is key. What I prefer in my system is something smooth and easy to listen to. I am actually very sensitive in the upper frequencies and can easy get fatigued. I thus try shy away from anything which is sibilant, etched or too bright.

For example, I could not stand the Benchmark DAC-1 even feeding tube amplification. I much preferred the Apogee Mini-DAC I used to own, which I found to be warmer and more musical. I would gladly sacrifice extreme detail extraction for musicality and smoothness. I would, however, be wary of anything too euphonic, rolled off or soft in the bass region.

Timnaim - do you find the bass to be sloppy at all? From what I have read, the tube used would make a great difference - the likes of the WE396A may be too slow or "tubey" whilst something like a Bendix 2C51 better at being crisp, clear, and with better bass control.

One other question I have - I'd be using the Macbook outputing digital optical to the DAC. I have it set at 24/96 generally....is there any negative effect or loss in sound quality feeding 24/96 data to a 16-bit DAC (like the Havana)?

Thanks again for the info guys.

In regard to the 840C, anyone have experience with it or own(ed) one, and felt it to be bright/analytical/sterile? Would a warm tube amp counteract that?

I suppose it is all about attaining the right balance between dynamic, punch, sparkle etc. and smoothness/musicality. The 840C would certainly have more of the former; the Havana seems to have more of the latter.

Just as a corollary to that question, any Havana owners find it to be too soft and lacking dynamics/punch?

Thanks for that feedback Rad21. What I have been reading up about quite a lot is the burn-in factor for the 840C....a lot of guys even saying they never believed in burn in until the 840C. From my understanding, quite a few people got the 840C new from shops (online or bricks and mortar) and only have 20-30 hours to form an opinion.

There seems to be quite a lot of consensus on the Cambridge requiring a good 150-200hrs of run in, after which the initial dryness/glare/sheen subsides. Has anyone had this experience? Did you find, as some have reported, that the brightness and harshness is reduces substantially (but the detail and dynamics remain)?

Cheers
X

Thanks for that comparison. When you refer to "sheen" is it something which bothers you, specifically for long-term listening (e.g., does it induce fatigue)? The word I see used to describe that sheen is that music comes across as somewhat artificial, though still very smooth.

Thanks for the responses.

I was quite surprised at the description of the Audio Mirror being more dynamic - I would have thought that the 840C would have better dynmamics (than the NOS AM). Similarly surprised with there being less fatigue. That said, I have read some 840C observations about it having excellent bass depth, but midbass and mids being a little soft (attack/"thwack" factor).

How do you guys find the smoothness of the two DACs? I listen to a lot of female vocal so this is a crucial area which is often not quite cracked.

Mapman - the pros of the Havana are indeed creeping up. I suppose the only concerns I have are of too soft a bass or HF...that is, both extremes being rolled it (giving too romantic a sound). From what you say though, tube rolling should hopefully alleviate that.

Cheers,
X

Hi all and thanks for the responses. Brownsfan - thanks for that very detailed and descriptive write-up!

I was fortunate enough to have an opportunity to try out the 840C at home this weekend....the private seller was kind enough to entrust the player to me to help with the decision.

I tried it playing CD's, but primarily used its optical input with my Macbook and lossless files (that is how I generally listen to music). As an aside, I tried switching between 16/44.1, 24/44.1, and 24/96 output from the Mac but did not really detect any difference....the soundstage did seem to open up a bit moving from 16- to 24-bit (irrespective of sample rate)... though I concede that may have been placebo.

It was a bit of an enigma to be honest. I'll break down what I heard in each of the three major frequency spectrums:
- high frequencies were very extended and open. Whilst I did not find them overly bright or forward, there is indeed something in their presentation which makes them a little unnatural. It was not etched, nor sibilant, but had perhaps too much "excitement" which could irritate my ears. This was particularly evident with new age music which has lots of layering of various instruments. Delineation was excellent though.
- midrange was good; not great. As above, the delineation, detail and separation was excellent. I found the soundstage a little odd....it was wide and open, but it seemed as if there wasn't sufficient music to occupy that vast space. I would not say it had a hollow sound, but perhaps a little distant. I found this especially with vocal music (male and female alike) where I am more used to an intimate presentation; the vocalist sounding closer to me and more alive and the instruments painting the background of the canvas. The 840C had that with a few recordings (which have particularly intimately miked vocals); but for the majority of them the vocals and instruments were in the same acoustic plane. One could say that the soundstage was not deep....at least not commensurate with its width?
- bass...also a bit of an odd one. The very low frequencies are amongst the best I have heard. Deep, taut, excellent sustain and delay, with no overhang or thinness. However, the slightly higher bass frequncies (midbass?) were missing something. I think it was some punch which I was used to (e.g., midrange pitched Japanese drums)...attack was a little soft. In addition, this frequency range was somewhat missing a little texture.

Please note, these are what you could call prelimenary finding, having had two days thus far with the 840C. It does some things extremely well; other areas are less accomplished - as can be expected. I am not certain if the areas in which it compromises are the areas in which I myself can compromise...that is, if the 840C is something I can live with long term.

I sure am itching as to how the Havana compares, especially in the areas I find the 840C a little wanting (soundstage depth; midbass attack and texture, upper frequency control).

Cheers for now,
X

Thanks for the responses. I will do some further listening today to decided if I can live with the 840C's shortfalls in the context of my system.

Mapman (or anyone who owns the Havana) do you find it has just a warm/musical character, or would you also describe it as dark in any way? The former would be great with both headphones; being dark though may not be too synergystic with the HD650.

Havana ordered, arrived, and within 20 minutes developed a loud hissing/crackling in one channel. I contact MHDT - they say it is likely a faulty PCM56P chip (not the first time they found this). Sending it back to them for a refund - do no want to risk it again especially with the cost of shipping back/forth internationally.

I still have the 840C as an option - I wonder if rolling in some different (warmer/smoother) tubes into my amp may alleviate the hint of sheen in the Cambridge?

Thanks for the reassurance fellas ;-)

In terms of power filtering - yes, my entire system is connected to a medical-grade online UPS putting out a pure sinewave at a constant 220V....the power supply here in SA is notoriously bad for injecting noise as well as fluctuating anywhere from 190V-250V!

Cables are another area to look into, yes. For a long time, my reference has been my Zu Audio Gede II, a silver/copper allow which I have found to give some openness and clarity of silver without the harshness or brightness associated with pure silver cables I used to use (e.g., Kimber KCAG).

Just to add, whilst I continued my research, two other options which cropped up were the CIAudio VDA-2 with VAC-1 power supply, and the CEC DA-53. Anyone perhaps have any experience with either of these?

Regards
X