Let’s play “Global Thermonuclear War” …
3 Likes
Wouldn’t you prefer a nice game of chess?
3 Likes
Later.
Let’s play “Global Thermonuclear War”.
4 Likes
In case you were curious or couldn’t guess the obvious, this setup sounds like cr*p:
Bifrost 2 → THX AAA 789 (balanced) → Sennheiser HD-600
In contrast, this setup sounds great:
Bifrost 2 → RebelAmp (single ended) → Sennheiser HD-600
The 789 is way, way, way too bright and edgy. I has too much treble and nothing but shards of glass in the treble.
EDIT: This chain is too bright and thin but tolerable, and the Bifrost 2 brings out more harmonics with the AEON Flow Closed:
Bifrost 2 → THX AAA 789 → AFC
As above, this has more fullness and body without the hostile treble:
Bifrost 2 → RebelAmp → AFC
I dread testing the Clear, as it was a nightmare on the 789 with other DACs. I probably won’t bother.
2 Likes
Can anyone compare a 789 to a Phoniter X? Is there a significant difference in sound?
Do a search for “THX” in the “SPL Phonitor X” thread, and you’ll find a good number of comments on both from multiple posters.
They sound very different … its one of those comparisons in which it is hard to imagine not being able to tell them apart. I don’t know anyone that’s compared them and come away preferring the THX AAA 789, even when I’ve run blind comparisons at some of the meets I’ve hosted.
Ultimately, though, for me it would depend on the headphones in question. If you’ve already got seriously good headphones (Focal Clear, HEDDphone, Sennheiser HD800S, Audeze LCD-X, ZMF Aeolus or Auteur or better), then the Phonitor X will reward that. If not, you’ll get more bang for your buck going with a THX AAA 789, Jotunheim 2, Lyr 3 or Rebel and spending the difference on getting better headphones.
6 Likes
I’m a recording/mixing engineer and I’ve been using the 789 for a year or so now. Do you think that it’s possible people prefer the Phoniter X because it’s more forgiving? Or does it have the same level of accuracy/detail without the occasional harshness?
I wonder if the raw sound of the THX is a good thing for engineers because most people will be listening back on cheap/simple/IC based amps. So to make a mix clean on the THX ensures smooth playback more universally. OR is the harshness of the THX more specific to the THX technology.
I have found that it’s far easier to distinguish the differences between DACs using the THX amp over any other amp I’ve tried including the Burson Soloist x3. Is it even easier to pick up on DAC differences via the Phoniter X?
1 Like
I could tell the improvement over the thx789 with the RNHP. I think you’ll open your eyes to a whole new world if you move up to a better amp. Just my opinion.
Edit: what headphones you using?
It’s Phonitor not Phoniter; the difference will matter in non-Google searches.
I don’t consider the Phonitor X to be “forgiving” at all and the rest of my comments are in the linked thread.
As for being better to use something like the THX to mix from while worrying about listeners using cheap IC based amps (the THX AAA 789 is an IC driven amp too), you could just as easily take the output from the desk or interface and listen that way - most of those have op-amp driven outputs that are a lot closer to what consumers are using than a dedicated, $350, amp.
1 Like
In my experience, yes. A THX is really harsh on bright DAC. It emphasizes details and moves toward a high-relief and etched presentation. These details are impossible for most other (read “normal” or “natural”) amps to generate. I wonder if THX amps effectively strip out the faint but normal room background noise that was present during recording. That noise may need to remain for a natural tone. It could explain both their thinness and ability to resolve.
While a THX may be fantastic for detecting nits and improving flawed (read cheap) headphones, it doesn’t reflect the mass market sound.
Yes. I hear mass market items as shaky and mid-focused due to their extremely basic DACs and amps, and often plasticy due to small speakers placed in plastic enclosures. They are not resolving like a THX, they are not bright like a THX, and are often thick and boomy.
have you heard the Phonitor SE? Do we know if that sounds the same minus the extra features?
No, I haven’t heard it.
1 Like
It’s funny, when I first received my 789 in late 2019 I was amazed at its linearity. Lately that has given way to its deficits; namely the size and depth of the stage. Compared to my Meier-Corda Arietta, it has a slightly wider and flatter stage, which is useful for critical listening. For the past week or two I’ve even used it as a stethoscope; identifying the difference between opamps, preamps etc with the 789 as my headphone’s amplifier.
Running my La Figaro 339i preamp out to the 789, I can pinpoint the sound signature of the tube amp and how it colours the sound. However, when I unplug my HD800S from the 789 and plug it straight into the 339i, I get the exact same sound signature but with an extra 25% width and massive depth increase to the soundstage, The 789 sounds straight up claustrophobic in comparison.
Going forward, I think I will whip out the 789 when purchasing a new piece of equipment (The Burson Soloist 3XP is next up on the chopping block) just to ascertain how its sound signature varies from the 789 - i.e. pure linearity.
6 Likes
I have to humbly walk back my previous comments regarding the 789…
After going back and forth yesterday, comparing the single ended and balanced outputs I noticed a marked improvement in soundstage width, control of the drivers and imaging. The 789 has moved from ‘serviceable’ to downright ‘enjoyable’ using the balanced output with the Focal Clear Professional.
This would not be the case without the Gustard P26 softening up the signal ever so slightly thanks to the inclusion of the Burson Classic opamps in the signal chain.
The 789 is now noticeable wider in stage, and as such the instrument images are wider and have more room to breathe, so to speak. IMO this lets microdetails of instruments come through more and increases the overall resolution. I can wait more patiently for the Burson Soloist 3XP thanks to this revelation. All I had to do was remove the SE adaptor of my Periapt balanced headphone cable! 
The transient speed with this setup is simply unparalleled. Microdynamics and instrument textures are remarkable. The highs are still present, dialled back 5% or so if I had to guess.
4 Likes
agreed! the SE output of the 789 is very Meh
Im late to the game but I bought a Drop 789 still in the box for $120 and i love this thing. I’ve turned off my Asgard 3 which I’ve used for years, since it replaced my Asgard 2. Ive been mixing it up with the Modi 3E which i like with my HD600’s and my Focal Clear Pro’s which i like with my Modi multibit. I haven’t even tried my Modi 3+ or Modius. Using SE cables both pairs of the headphones have a wider soundstage with the 789 than with the Asgard 3. Overall more dynamic sound. Im a CD spinner and i use an Audiolab 6000CDT transport. I will definitely be looking into balanced headphone cables. This is the best $120 that I’ve spent in audio in 50 years.
5 Likes