EC Studio

I am just happy to finally see a picture of it. I currently own a BA with KR PX4's running, and a set of NOS AVVT PX4s on the shelf, but I am very interested in the Studio. I have no idea how long it'll be before someone thinks about selling one, though.

 

I would happily buy EC monoblocks. Whattayasay Marv?

 

You know, I'm really digging the aesthetics of the studio. Would love to see the BA and ZDS get the same visual treatment.

 

I think each EC amp is a thing of beauty in its own way, for me the Studio isn't the best looking EC amp though from a purely aesthetic point of view. Although it's only one of many aspects, I prefer the font of Zana Deux and Balacing Act to Studio's Helvetica font.

 

How does the Studio Jr sound in comparison to other amps EC, Woo etc?

 

The Studio Junior does not technically exist yet, so no one knows.

 

So what tubes have folks tried? I sorta' want to try bring some warmth into the studio as I prefer a meatier amp.
So I was looking at the NOS RCA and maybe EML mesh plate?

 

Yeah that sounds interesting. I sent you an email.
There is not too much of an advantage by going to monoblocks. Particularly since I really only want a headphone amp.

 

Wow, the amp is beautiful. Glad to hear that it's surpassed the pre-production impressions.

The casing looks like a significant step away from the EC designs from a few years ago. I like this new look a lot more, as it's much more modern. Is that from Marv's influence? Will all the new EC models look similar?

Is the noise level low enough to pair with UERM/UE18s?

Still was thinking of getting a BA one of these days, but the Studio is looking much more appealing.

 

I agree. I love the look of the Studio.

I wouldn't necessarily dismiss the BA appearance though. IMO, it's one of EC's most aesthetically striking amps. The BA with 445 tubes would likely be a spectacular, unique amplifier (since most seem to opt for the 300B option).

Negura received his MSB Select II and will be offering a comparison between direct connection to it and the Studio. This should be quite interesting.

 

Yep. That would be even better if he included a comparison with the 2A3, assuming your response wasn't bitterly sarcastic ("I heard from the grapevine").

 

Eddie Current Studio Impressions

I've had my Studio for a significant while now, so it's probably time to organize my notes and post them here. Before receiving my sample and with living overseas, I could not hear it prior to ordering and had been trying to guess & extrapolate how it would sound from various comments. For the same reasons I also dithered a lot between ordering the original Studio or the Studio M. Blind purchasing is never ideal. My previous amplifier before the Studio, was the EC 2A3 (Hammonds), now with a trusted SBAF member. I really liked the original 2A3, and this one was one of the reasons that facilitated my decision to commit to the Studio range.

After hearing a few of the better solid state headphone amplifiers in my system (Ragnarok, Moon 430HA, Audio GD HE-9) and many more in various setups and conditions, I decided there was no contest between the former three and the EC 2A3 and kept the latter. It is important to mention the 2A3, and like it the Studio, is also a speaker amp and extremely capable at it. Compared to the SS amplifiers I mentioned before the 2A3 had a more natural rendering of human voices, instrument timbres and textures, sublimely holographic stage, better coherence and very good resolution. It was not a technical master, and some amplifiers could do one or two things better, but not as a whole.

So here comes the EC Studio. One of my main questions was: Does it actually improve on the 2A3 or it sounds just differently?

Gear used:
EC 2A3 amplifier
EC Studio amplifier
MSB Select 2 DAC stack
MSB DAC V stack
MSB UMT Plus transport using I2s & LAN streaming
modded HE-6, modded HD800, modded HD650 for the lulz
PMC IB2i speakers
some expensive cables




A quick comparison with the EC 2A3:

Music: many Stockfisch recordings, DALI CDs, Burmeister - you know the audiophile recorded stuff. Classical: Best 100 CDs. Some EDM: Infected Muhshroom, Shpongle. Soft/vocal stuff: The Civil Wars, Dawn & Hawkes, Pink Martini, Ben Howard (=wife buy-in music), Rock: Muse

Tonality: When talking about the tonality of a tube amplifier the tubes used shold be mentioned. There is a base tonality to the amplifier itself, but since it doesn't work without tubes, the latter can and will colour the sound, so it can and will shift. This is no different with the Studio.

With the tubes I have/had at my disposal I can get the Studio to sound anywhere between one notch warm to one notch bright from neutral compared to the sound of the source (* - read below). My preferred combination is 4x Kron 2A3 or 2x Kron 2A3 + 2x EML solids, 2x Amperex 5842, 2x Sylvania EY500 rectifiers. With these tubes it sounds rather neutral to the source and with great textural complexity and very good density. It has all the textural richness and liquidity I would expect from a reference sounding amplifier. With the same setup the 2A3 would be one or two notches warmer and more dense/thicker sounding. Surely a more euphonic sounding amplifier, but not a lot. In fact I use more neutral/bright tubes on the 2A3 than I am with the Studio, hence they rather tend to converge.

Resolution: One of the weaknesses of the 2A3 is that is had a less resolving thicker bass compared to some other amplifiers including the Studio, and that's a product of its transformers from what I understand. It did not really bother me though because, it's still good quality overall - just not benchmark level. I had an expectation the Studio would do better in the bass region, based on comments from Marv. But I was still surprised: Drums resolution, slam and kick are such a treat with this amp every single time. It also goes down really low into sub-bass (with transducers that can resolve that). I've heard no tube amplifier managing this audible bass performance and it really plays at the level of the best solid states. It's that good. But it also does improve on the original 2A3 and resolves better any macro-detail across the FR, source and recording allowing: from string detail to vocal inflections, and to ambiental micro-detail.

Soundstage: The Studio has a noticeably bigger and more open sounding stage than the 2A3. It's still very holographic, typical of DHT. Layering and instrument focus in the stage are more noticeable.

Transient response: Typical of both 2A3 and Studio is a very lively transient response. It sounds very exciting and engaging. It's something quite unique to the EC amps that has to be heard. I am really enjoying it, although I am not sure it's not in fact a coloration. The Studio sounds faster and more energetic than the 2A3, although the latter was no slouch at all, having great energy and presence.

Clarity: No doubt with more precise focus, more resolving, a bigger airier stage, the Studio sounds more clear than the EC 2A3

Realism/coherence: In regards to coherence considering the tubes impact to the sound balance, I don't think one can just throw any random tubes on an amplifier as resolving as the Studio and call it a day. It makes no justice to the amplifier and while the odds are it will sound very good, maybe excellent, it won't sound as coherent as it can, and this will be audible even more so than with the 2A3. Moving past tubes, it can also uncover flaws in the upstream system. But once dialed in, the Studio is able to pull the listener into the music significantly more than my old 2A3. The downside: It's twice as hard to achieve this.

Midrange: With a lot of the stuff I listen to, most of the music lives in the midrange, so it has to be the most important part of the FR for me. The 2A3 amplifier was an absolutely amazing performer in the midrange and I was naturally concerned the Studio could have lost something here. The way I am hearing it, the Studio delivers similarly amazing textured and engaging mids. Whereas I found the 2A3 benefitted some of the most neutral/bright/airy tubes I had, the Studio works best with at least a pair of tubes with good midrange presence and density. In this setup the Studio delivers equally involving and deep reaching mids and with the additional resolution, can sound breathtaking really.

Tube rolling:
I've owned the EC 2A3 for over an year and I settled on using 2x 2A3 Kron + 2x 2A3 KenRads, Ericsson 5842. But I can say its tonality no matter what, lies on the warmer side of neutral. With that setup, it was a notch warmer sounding than Ragnarok, Moon 430HA, but not warmer than Audio GD HE-9.
With the tubes at my disposal I could get the Studio to sound anywhere between one notch warm to one notch bright from what I hear neutral to the source. My preferred combination is 4x Kron 2A3, but I also like 2x Kron 2A3 + either 2 of EML Solids or Visseaux. Amperex 5842 drivers. Sylvania EY500A rectifiers. I would say in these combinations I hear it between half a notch warm to neutral sounding.

A note on Kron 2A3: These tubes sound rather neutral and resolving, with a hint of liquidity. But what I like most about these tubes is their coherence and that they do not exhibit noticeable flaws: no bright edge, no wooly bass, no distant or dry mids, no grain. I had already rated these tubes as my favourites with the 2A3 amp, but with the Studio it's even more noticeably so. To be bought only with warranty / return policy as they seem to be very sensitive to transport. I had a pair arrive with issues that got exchanged by dealer with a good pair working fine ever since. A second pair was received without issues.

Conclusion: The EC Studio delivers as being an exceptionally transparent, resolving amplifier capable of delivering a sound that comes across as very real and engaging. It comes extremely close to the original sound of the source and keeps up with even the most resolving DACs available today, which is really amazing and did surprise me. It sounds very clear, clean, open, focused, airy and resolving. It's not perfectly neutral - as with any components it has some detectable colouration, but surprisingly very little. Being a tube amplifier it does offer significant fine tuning potential, which can act as double-edged sword: tune it well and you'll be amazed how responsive and realistic it can sound. Use some harsh, edgy or wooly sounding tubes on it, or an underwhelming source, and it will not go unnoticed. But I have to also get carried away: this amplifier IS SO MUCH FUN. I don't listen to a lot of EDM, and it's counter-intuitive to mention this, especially for a tube amplifier, and also because the Studio really shines with well recorded music and real instruments, but it's such a blast listening to EDM every single time. That bass is crazy good, and combined with all the positional info, that speed and resolution - it just has to be heard. It can sound soft and very gentle with music that requires it, and neck breaking energetic when called for.

If someone is interested in the Studio these are what I can endorse as "great reasons":
- to sound transparent to a highly resolving source
- resolution / properly extended FR
- clarity / open sound
- realism

Not so ideal for:
- people looking for a romantic/warm sounding amplifier (although the Studio can be made to sound warmer, I almost cringe imagining one bent on trying to make it sound like a Vioelectric; thankfully probably not possible either, unless using defective tubes or something)
- people who are in the game of trying to get flawed components cancelling or compensating for each other's glaring flaws. Simply because the Studio isn't in the business of hiding anything. If you have a messed-up source, transducers or whatever, sort that out first.

Personal bias: At this level of the game**, I am very much a source first person: I want the most resolving and most coherent sounding source possible and a system that allows for the source to do its work. This is not arbitrary - it's based on my experience that past a certain point (say after getting to at least level50 in audio gear level**) better sources deliver the biggest improvement in realism / "you are there feeling" / "long dead people performing live in my room". Contrary to some arguably popular thought, more resolution does not lead to an analytical sound. It's not enough true and cohesive resolution that does. And compared to high-end sources, all amplifiers struggle to keep up in technicalities, hence a more resolving amplifier is always desirable, all the rest being the same. I firmly believe any additional components in the chain will affect transparency and realism. Hence my present view is that the role of the amplifier is very much keeping out of the way and sacrificing as little as possible. I don't care for colouration in particular, but I can accept and also enjoy some colouration. I guess I am rather agnostic to this. It's also because having heard the source directly, my thoughts are I don't have a requirement for what an amplifier can or should "add" to the sound. Also transducers are never perfect, and to an extent I have learnt to accept that. All of them are more flawed and coloured compared to amplifiers and much more so compared to any level50+ sources. I use multiple transducers hence I cba to use EQ and I do my best to mod the trasducers to fix the issues at their source, rather than compromise the rest of the chain.

**I consider the minimum requirements (level50): headphones like the modded HE-6 or modded HD800 and a resolving amplifier (a very good solid state speaker amp would many times out-resolve and sound more dynamic/open than headamps in my experience, hence why I am not a big fan of SS headamps; tube amps: high-end EC for example). Level50+ sources: Theta V A, Yggdrasil (both with a good transport) to start with.

*MSB Select2 DAC:
This is claimed to be one of, if not, the most resolving DAC available today. I have this DAC stack at home for an extended evaluation and it couldn't have come at a better time than before posting my EC Studio impressions. There is a lot to talk about this extremely expensive DAC, and for some good reason: it is a very impressive sounding and performing DAC, but that's a topic for another time and place. For the purpose of the Studio discussion, the Select 2 allows to use headphones directly connected to its XLR output. It has a built-in preamp to control the volume (at 0dB it's bypassed completely). Thus it offers the rare possibility of hearing the sound of the source directly, before the amplifier comes in. Volume matched, I did use this DAC for the last week to get a better understanding and further fine tune the sound of my Studio to be as close as possible to the source.

 

I will be taking my time before posting further details on the direct DAC connection vs EC Studio.

 

Ok - gonna have to check out a quad of those Kron 2A3's

 

Come, join the Dark Side. It's easy.

 

You have FOUR?? I'm two short...

Although technically I'm also short of the amp, lol.

 

I'm not sure if this has been addressed before, but I'm curious about the existence of Studio M. AFAIK Studio is sold out for the time being, but was there ever a production run of Studio M? I've read several impressions & reviews of Studio T but never a Studio M (which supposedly has a slightly warmer more organic sound). I wonder if Studio M has been scrapped completely either due to lack of supply or demand (I'm guessing the former), or there indeed was a production run but they are still in the process of being built that none of them has been shipped out yet.