X-CanV2 upgrade thoughts
Apr 30, 2006 14:29:11 GMT
Post by themystical on Apr 30, 2006 14:29:11 GMT
Just been through the "upgrade" process on the V2 and I must say the final results are absolutely stunning! I really cannot imagine a headphone amp that can better this and I have tried a few.
I replaced the power supply capacitors with 1800uF Panasonic FM's and this certainly gives a better "effortlessness" to the sound especially in the lower frequencies. I am researching the improvements possible by changing diodes in the power supplies (see my other thread) but not getting far very fast! There seems to be umpteen types which are supposedly better then the IN4007's including Schottky's, Ultrafast soft recovery, FRED's, HEXFRED's etc. If you have any experience of this, can you kindly share it!
The major factor for the improvement in sound quality is not the power supply improvements imho but the input and otput capacitors on the lower board. I had initially replaced the input and output capacitors with Capxcon non-polar's (RS type NK) without bypassing them and the resulting sound was rather scratchy and screechy! The remarkable clarity and cleanliness that I had been used to with the x-canV2 had been reduced!
I decided to put back the original output capacitors (the much malaligned Jamicon) but this time bypass it with the biggest polypropylene (4.7uF) that I thought I might be able to fit loose (cabled) within the enclosure. I also removed the input capacitor and put links instead.
Wow! What an improvement this made to the sound from my AKG K1000's! A level of detail, clarity and cleanliness that I had previously experienced with my Stax 3030 set-up but with presence and body to the sound, in other words, the being there experience that one can never achieve with an electrostatic set-up.
I am not sure how much of the improvement can be apportioned to the bypassing and how much to the removal of the input capacitor. My own suspicion is that around 70% comes from the removal of the input capacitor!! Thats how I have rationalised it anyway as removal of a "non-linear" device from the signal path must reap sonic dividends.
I musy say for the benefit of our newest member (bigtony, if he ever reads this!) that MF have done an absolutely brilliant engineering job with the x-cans in squeezing high-end performance for so little money! So congratulations bigtony!!! Now if only you could apply the same flair to all your other products.......
I replaced the power supply capacitors with 1800uF Panasonic FM's and this certainly gives a better "effortlessness" to the sound especially in the lower frequencies. I am researching the improvements possible by changing diodes in the power supplies (see my other thread) but not getting far very fast! There seems to be umpteen types which are supposedly better then the IN4007's including Schottky's, Ultrafast soft recovery, FRED's, HEXFRED's etc. If you have any experience of this, can you kindly share it!
The major factor for the improvement in sound quality is not the power supply improvements imho but the input and otput capacitors on the lower board. I had initially replaced the input and output capacitors with Capxcon non-polar's (RS type NK) without bypassing them and the resulting sound was rather scratchy and screechy! The remarkable clarity and cleanliness that I had been used to with the x-canV2 had been reduced!
I decided to put back the original output capacitors (the much malaligned Jamicon) but this time bypass it with the biggest polypropylene (4.7uF) that I thought I might be able to fit loose (cabled) within the enclosure. I also removed the input capacitor and put links instead.
Wow! What an improvement this made to the sound from my AKG K1000's! A level of detail, clarity and cleanliness that I had previously experienced with my Stax 3030 set-up but with presence and body to the sound, in other words, the being there experience that one can never achieve with an electrostatic set-up.
I am not sure how much of the improvement can be apportioned to the bypassing and how much to the removal of the input capacitor. My own suspicion is that around 70% comes from the removal of the input capacitor!! Thats how I have rationalised it anyway as removal of a "non-linear" device from the signal path must reap sonic dividends.
I musy say for the benefit of our newest member (bigtony, if he ever reads this!) that MF have done an absolutely brilliant engineering job with the x-cans in squeezing high-end performance for so little money! So congratulations bigtony!!! Now if only you could apply the same flair to all your other products.......
