I could understand why someone would think a denon/fostex is really good with an L-2.  It has a little bit punchier/livelier sound than the DSHA.  Headphones that are bottom heavy may benefit from that, though I never had a chance to pair them together.


Considering the markdown on the L-2 is even more, its not taking too much risk for it, and its almost like having a solid state amp in terms of not having to worry about tube rolling and not having the tubes very exposed.  (Can't be grasped at all without taking off top plate.) 


I was serious about that appreciation thread.  I don't think his amps are for everyone (preproman and his HE-6 can breathe a sigh of relief knowing he doesn't need to buy another amp,) and I really don't want to start a sort of club, society or clique, which sort of ends up happening with the appreciation threads.  I also want healthy criticism to have a voice (otherwise the thread really isn't all that helpful), and appreciation threads preclude such a situation.


Hope you enjoy the pairing - considering the TH900 has fidelity to pretty low levels, an ECP amp in general should be a good pairing, much along the lines of EC gear.

Your bias is roughly the same as mine after listening.


The HD800's can be made to sound completely different than in their stock form, and the 009 may be a possibility as well - tests are forthcoming.


TH900's have some nice detail, particularly with that amount of bass present.  The bass definitely isn't cloudy, nor does it cloud up the other registers.

Actually I fall in this category, thanks.

Seeing I listen (almost) religiously only to my modded pads-HP 1000i (with Magnum v4 and vintage RS1 as unneeded alternatives), I've been interested in the DSHA-1 for almost a year now. But it's only the first time I can actually read about it, so much (like you said) criminally underrepresented/-exposed ECP Audio is.

Initial impressions on the ecp L-2 pairing with the TH900s:

This is an amp that I'll stick with for a while on the TH900s. It has complete grip and control over these cans. Not that these were difficult to drive to begin with, the L-2 takes it to another level. Things sound tighter and extended on extreme frequency ranges. The "picture" is a lot cleaner and clearer as well (which I'll explain a little below).

The L-2 gets "out of the way" and is pretty damn transparent, almost like "wire with gain". There are details that were not there with my X-CAN v3 which are now clearly audible via the L-2s. They were already there to begin with, given my source being the PWD Mk II DAC and FLAC material. You don't realize it until you removed the layer of "haziness or cloudiness" with the Musical Fidelity headamp.

Any additional improvements from this point on will be very incremental: ie, OR5/6, cables, power, isolation, etc. that it doesn't seem to be worth it in the long run if I'm already enjoying the system now. We'll see what level of incremental improvement happens and where it is worthwhile making the investments into. I'd say that my curiosity is now greatly tempered on "tweaking". I can just fire up some tunes, enjoy them, and not worry about tweaking... much. But as always, these forums always pique them in the long run.

More detailed points later on as I continue to take written and mental notes. Also looking forward to getting my HE-6 cable done to allow me to connect them directly to a speaker amp. I'll be doing some comparisons on the dynamic TH900s vs. the planar magnetic HE-6s.

Mike, if you really wanted to save us some cash you'd stop telling us how good it was.


That's good to hear.  My L-2 is on loan right now but that definitely sounds right (though I stopped using the term "wire with gain" when it became a rally cry in the perception battles for certain companies.)  With headphones that have as much bass as the Fostex, I'd be afraid with a lot of tube amps of things getting out of control - its already prominent, if its prominent and sloppy or diffuse or muddy that would not be an enjoyable listen.  Fortunately the L-2 is not part of that group.