B52 Observations.

[Yikes]

Considering the overwhelmingly negative sentiment on Head-Case regarding RSA and its designs I have up until now stayed silent. I defer to KG technical expertise. I do read most of the anti-Ray propaganda that is posted. I believe that all of this propaganda has given me a slight predisposition against liking the Sonics of RSA?s products.

It is with this predisposition that I attended this weekends NYC meet. I tend to pay attention to products that might be considered very high end. I already own what I consider to be the finest portable amp so I had little interest in listening to the new Tomahawk or even the Hornet, so I won?t comment on their performance or value except to say that they are very attractive and seem to be well built. The RSA amp that interests me is the B52.

I spent a significant amount of time seriously auditioning the B52. I used my Siltech re-cabled balanced Sony MDR SA-5000s. I don?t care what KG says about the driving capabilities of the B52. It drove my 70-ohm SA-5000s exceptionally well. As far as I am concerned the B52 should definitely be counted among the elite amplifiers currently being manufactured.

The B52s strengths were tremendous dynamics, bass slam and definition. Nothing in the B52s sonic presentation struck me as being wrong or anything less than 1st rate. The amp is also extremely well built and ruggedly attractive, however if I were to buy one I would request one with silver knobs not the tacky gold color.

Examining a product on its technical merit is all good and well, but I am a subjectivist. Ultimately it is a products sound quality that matters to me. KG may be correct stating that the B52 can?t drive low impedances. At least as far as my Sonys and I are concerned he is incorrect. Based upon KG statements I was expecting the amp to be unable to handle my relatively low impedance SA-5000s I was therefore extremely critical in my evaluation. I was pleasantly surprised that the B52 is really an exceptional amplifier. IMHO anyone shopping for an amp in this rarefied price bracket owes it to themselves to at least audition the B52, it really is that good.

Some may accuse me of being a Billy like shill. To them I will have to say F.U.! If I were a shill I would have come out of the woodwork long before now.

[philodox]

Nice impressions.

I don't know enough about it's technical capabilities. My problem with this amp is the cost. Did it have a $5000 sound? If so, what are you comparing it too with a similar price tag?

[PFKMan23]

Nice impressions.

I don't know enough about it's technical capabilities. My problem with this amp is the cost. Did it have a $5000 sound? If so, what are you comparing it too with a similar price tag?

That is my main reservation as well, as price to performance ratio is also a deciding factor when purchasing something. However I am also concerned about the 2 little transformers, as I worry that they might not be able to handle their loads or are running at their limits.

[Dusty Chalk]

Interesting.

What other amps have you heard your modified SA5000 on? Sources, etc.?

And how hot did it run?

[DieInAFire]

Nice impressions.

I don't know enough about it's technical capabilities. My problem with this amp is the cost. Did it have a $5000 sound? If so, what are you comparing it too with a similar price tag?

that's usually the main complaint about rsa here anyways

[Yikes]

It would be easier to list the amps that I haven?t tried with my SA5000s. At the meet I did try most other amps that can lay some type of claim to being exceptional.

Bozebuttons Melos (Heavily modified ? It?s about as original as my ASL OTL/32 is). This amp impressed mightily. If I was in the market and one was available I?d buy one and have it modded. More transparent than the B52, but its bass and dynamics weren?t as powerful.

The Zana Deux must not have liked my Sonys.

The Rudistor NX-33 was sort of un-involving, kind of flat.

ES-1/HE-90 ? If I had the money I?d buy them.

Mikhails other amps ? Every time I tried to listen Mikhail started playing with the tubes. On previous auditions I have liked everything from a PPX-3 Slam to a loaded SDS XLR.

Is the B52 worth $5000? It?s a great amp. Is any amp worth $5000? If you have the money and are looking for a world class amp I?d say it is one to be considered. Just like with anything else, it?s totally subjective.

I didn't feel the B52, so I have no clue as to if it runs hot.

[jjcha]

Yeah, I agree with Yikes. It sounded good.

Unscientific testing, but I put my hand on the B-52 while listening and it wasn't hot.

As for cost, I don't see how it's inconsistent. Dynamight or GS-X are the cheapies of this class. Maxed out SDS XLR is the expensive one. The rest - B-52, balanced Maestro, balanced Max - just fall somewhere in the middle.

Actually, now that I think about it, the balanced Grado amp is the cheapest.

Best,

-Jason

[909]

I compared the B52 balanced against the single ended ZD and thought the ZD sounded better driving the HD600s and PS-1s/RS-1s. In fact, I preferred the ZD because it really drew me in and I wanted to enjoy the music and just sit back and listen to an entire CD. The ZD does double duty as a line amp too.

Didn't do any direct comparisons, but the Dynamight is another great amp. And both these amps are half or more than half of the B52's price tag.

[Yikes]

I really wanted to like the ZD. I dig its looks.

Something else. When I listened to the ZD it was being driven by the EMM labs source. The B52 was being driven by a Meridian 508. The EMM is in the absolute top tier of sources. The 508 is down in the 3rd or 4th tier.

Are you sure that you were being drawn in by the ZD, or the source?

[909]

I used the same source when doing my comparison, either the Meridian 508.24, Moth DAC or my Apollo. I primarily used the 508.24. And also used the same cables. I did my serious listening when I spent the night at the So Cal meet guarding the equipment with my ears. Didn?t get much sleep either.

I also listened with the L3000s, HD650s, and the K-701s (single ended). Didn't try any Sony cans.

[jjcha]

The Zana didn't blow me away with the Qualia 010. But I'm looking for a certain sound from an amp and my 010. Also, I think I generally don't like the EMM source with it. The Zana is certainly worth much more investigation though.

Best,

-Jason

[909]

Hell thinking about it?.

For $5000

One could buy a ZD ($1900), a Dynamite ($1700) and still have about $1400 for whatever else....

[deepak]

I didn't find any faults with the B52 either. It sounded really good with Ray's later model R10 as well, I'm just not really a big fan of the R10.

I think a direct comparison with a Supra-XLR vs B52 would be a very interesting shootout.

IIRC the Supra-XLR is around $3000 base, but the B52 primary function is as a preamp not a headphone amp correct?

[Iron_Dreamer]

I wouldn't pay a higher amount for a headphone amp than that which ANY dynamic headphone ever made costs. Now if you have a multi-$K speaker rig, and can use the thing as an amp or preamp, then it could start to make sense. Granted, I've never heard an SDS-XLR, but count me as extremely skeptical that it could elevate a $300 headphone (HD650) to the point of justifying costing more than a new car. The B52 sounded quite OK to me, run of the mill for a balanced headphone amp, but I'd have to find another way of justifying the cost.

[Yikes]

If you'd never spend that much for an amp regardless of its performance then you are obviously not the target market.

[Guest sacd lover]

I didn't find any faults with the B52 either. It sounded really good with Ray's later model R10 as well, I'm just not really a big fan of the R10.

I think a direct comparison with a Supra-XLR vs B52 would be a very interesting shootout.

IIRC the Supra-XLR is around $3000 base, but the B52 primary function is as a preamp not a headphone amp correct?

I think the B52 as mainly a preamp is RSA spin in case the headphone sound is found lacking. That was the spin with the Stealth when people didnt find that amp particularly good sounding. The Supra-XLR can have preamp outputs added for a nominal cost.

[jjcha]

Hell thinking about it?.

For $5000

One could buy a ZD ($1900), a Dynamite ($1700) and still have about $1400 for whatever else....

Meh, for my HE90, I could have a K 1000, HP1 and Qualia 010...

Oh wait...

Best,

-Jason

[Guest sacd lover]

The Zana didn't blow me away with the Qualia 010. But I'm looking for a certain sound from an amp and my 010. Also, I think I generally don't like the EMM source with it. The Zana is certainly worth much more investigation though.

Best,

-Jason

As usual everyone seems hesitant to post what they actually think. I have talked to a few buds at the meet and none of them were wowed by the Zana. The main comments are the amp lacks soundstage, very average detail resolution and things seem smushed together/ thick. Some of the comments were similar to what grand has said about his Zana.

[909]

So true?. I?ve heard all but the 010 (but heard the R10)?.

IMO, the HE90 was my favorite followed by the R10 (less bass version) and then the K-1000s.

Without question, my cash would be in the HE90s. The Orpheus is the bomb.

[909]

Interesting?.

I wonder why as usually everyone is hesitant to comment? Anyway, it?s amazing such vastly different impressions can be taken away from the Cal meets and this one NY meet. The apparent differences between the two are the source and cables. And system synergy does play an important part. When I compared my amp against the Dynamite the differences were noticeable, but IMO not substantial. And reaching firm conclusions at a meet or even within a few hours is hasty at best. On a side note, such comments pretty much mirror what Mikhail said too. But can't say I completely agree to the extend this is being described.

[aerius]

Interesting?.

I wonder why as usually everyone is hesitant to comment?

Several reasons. Most people don't like rocking the boat so to speak. Speaking one's mind in plain blunt language the way I do causes a lot of shit and bad feelings, most people can't handle the shitstorm that happens afterwards and so they stay quiet or sugercoat their shit to keep the peace. Most people want to fit in and be a part of the "Head-fi community". Being blunt and uncompromising with your opinions does not endear you to the "Head-fi community". There's more but I'd say those are the main reasons.

[granodemostasa]

if that's the case.... i think the mpx's treble is too soft and delicate, the b52 is screechy, the meredian 508.24 doesn't have enough impact (but good bass though), the Stello 220 doesn't have bass, the ori-zhaolu's notes have no authority, the RS-1 is cold and distorted, headroom amps are ugly, the Dynamight is cold and analytical-in a bad way, most ath headphones exaggerate treble and are too sweet (except the L3K, it's amazing), and an hour's impressions are good enough to go on meet impressions thread; but they shouldnt' count as reviews.

[granodemostasa]

let me guess... those RS-1s had bowls.

that's not the point; what i'm saying is that these were meet impressions and are not said often by me precisely because they are not true reviews and would not help anyone but myself make a decision about them. It's quite possible to have gear grow on you, or get to appreciate it's characteristics better after a while; some things are just not that noticable at a meet. For example, i really did hate the G-lite after an hour, but after taking it home for close to a month i came to appreciate it's good qualities. ...... hey, who know... i may even grow to like the look of headroom amps if i ever lived with one.

[PFKMan23]

If you'd never spend that much for an amp regardless of its performance then you are obviously not the target market.

I would pay that much for an amp, but in doing so, I also need to feel that it is/was worth it? And what is the primary function of it anyways? First it was a headamp first and then a preamp, but now it's a preamp and the headamp function is secondary?

[Iron_Dreamer]

I don't think it's a case of one over the other or vice versa. The main circuit that makes a good headphone amp should also make for a good preamp. Put in some extra inputs and outputs, a selector, and it's a preamp. Only the most insanely anal "audiophile" would think adding a few very simple parts like that would somehow make the sound quality worse.

Now whether one markets it mainly as a preamp or mainly as a headphone amp is another matter (and quite irrelevant to the actual performance either way, as a bad preamp circuit will be a bad headphone amp circuit, and vice versa).