Introduction
 
Why am I here? Am I seeking an endgame all-in-one audio device? Am I seeking an amplifier for every conceivable, non-electrostatic headphone? Am I seeking a sound that will draw me in, wisp me away on a magic carpet ride of sonic bliss, while enveloping my auditory senses in a cloud of ecstasy? The short answer to these questions is no. And please, just a moment of your time for an explanation below.
 
I am an audiophile - there, I said it. I admit it. I am enthusiastic beyond the norm regarding audio playback - with particular regard to reproduction of audio that has been stored in a digital medium. And I have been interested in headphones since the early 2000s, when a co-worker, owning the Sennheiser HD600, brought these to work and said, have a listen. Helplessly Hoping was the song - I reflect on it today, and it seems an apt start. Though I feel hopeful and optimistic as I enter the Renaissance period of my audio journey, it is after many years of what I term the Dark Ages, the time between 2003 and 2014. These years were when portable MP3 and multi-channel DVD became dominant technologies, both slowing the growth of well-recorded and well-produced stereo music and accelerating the expense of consumer products with technology suitable to listen to good recordings. During those years, I listened only to expensive players and a small collection of DVD-Audio and SACD discs, having read in a magazine it was the correct way. And I had one solid state amplifier. What choice did I have as a headphone enthusiast in 2003? What choice did I need? On paper, my amplifier was overkill, being able to drive simultaneous two pair of HD650 headphones, to ear bleeding volume, when set to the lowest of its three gains. Then in December of 2014, I chanced at the purchase of a Schiit Fulla and my first audition of what modern high fidelity could be. I had downgraded from a setup with an MSRP of $2700 to a USB dongle costing only $79, yet I was at that moment closer to my ideal sound than I’d been in the 10+ years of prior pursuit.
 
Am I in pursuit of endgame sound? Absolutely not, and an immediate rush towards endgame may lead one to an invitation, an extended stay at a nice place, where you’ll get plenty of rest, relaxation, and hourly observation. I fear there are too many styles of music and variations or interpretations of what defines a musically accurate audio system to call a single setup the end. And more importantly, there are too many moods. I heard a speech at a recent audio event in Atlanta, where a prominent member of our society spoke on a topic, with a simple hook or point of audience understanding - the brain is the most critical component of the audio chain. The speaker was clever and I am not, so I’ll try to explain via self-reference. There are times when I have heard a sound closer to endgame - this often while watching a YouTube video with my headphones plugged into the speaker jack of a standard desktop computer. Does that mean I should sell my solid state amplifier, tube amplifier, and DAC - downgrade my collection of audio hardware to just a PC and stream MP3 across the Internet? The answer is no. There is definite truth to the adaptability of the brain and how it interprets audio - there is also truth that better audio playback equipment exists, and that it can aid the listening experience. I am not expecting the Moon to be endgame, if such a thing can exist. But I do believe the audiophile pursuit is a noble venture. And this is the primary reason I have interest in the Moon.
 
The first and most variable piece of audio gear we should evaluate in any quest for better audio reproduction is the transducer. However headphones can be a tricky challenge to playback gear due to their diversity - the load imparted by the transducer on the amplifier can vary dramatically based on the design of the headphone. Immediately, I remove the bookends of the transducer world, the HE-6 and IEMs, from my selection. I used an IEM during my dark years, but find these too cumbersome to insert, take out, and keep in place for just the right sound. I listen to music only in a quiet room, so an open headphone design will do. I also have not joined the ranks of the HE-6 power starved. The HE-1000 is my headphone requiring the most current to play properly. And the Moon absolutely must play this headphone properly. I also expect a competent amplifier such as the Moon to play properly with my least current hungry headphone, a Grado PS1000e. And a competent amplifier must play properly with a voltage hungry headphone, like the HD800S. These three headphones I will test. Though in no uncertain terms, if an amplifier cannot adequately play any of these three, I will not buy. My expectation is that I can use the Moon to properly assess other headphones that are new to me. And per general amplifier use, I want the ability to choose the headphone that best suits my mood for listening today.
 
Last, I do not want to or expect to be transported away on a cloud of hyperbole. I am looking for a competent tool, which can be used to assess the competency of other parts of the audio chain, those other parts being headphones, sources, and to some extent other amplifiers. I expect the Moon to play, and get out of the way of any source I use. I do not want to be swooned by its amplifier, adding its own coloration to the sound between my headphone and my source. I want to be able to discern the colors of other amplifiers apart from the neutrality of the Moon. I expect the Moon also to play and announce clearly to the listener the differences between sources so these are easily noted. Overall, I expect a competent, honest sound.
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Package
 
This is the part where I tell you the box is yay high and oh so this and that wide - these are details you can find online. I will tell you that the Moon fit everywhere I went to place it. I had no issue on a small table in my family room, adjacent my laptop. I also had no issue on the smallish remainder of a stand, next to my fixed stack of DAC and two amplifiers. The best amplifier that fit on this shelf was a Cavalli Audio Liquid Carbon. Items that have fit well in the family room space are the JDS Labs The Element, Grace Design m9xx, and a Schiit stack consisting of an Asgard on top of a Bifrost. Things which have not fit so well in these spaces are Audio-GD DAC-19 and Ayre QB-9. There is one dimension that might explain - the width of the Moon is 7 inches - the two products I had trouble fitting were 8.5 and 9.5 inches, which is slightly above half-width of the typical consumer electronics product. The family room is the first space I use for almost all new audio products, and the shelf is my permanent space. Thus having the Moon fit here made it feel immediately welcome.
 
An open sitting area is another place I like to listen, where appearance is more important to me than size. Anything I would use here with regularity must look good without a large mess of wires connected all around. The Moon requires only a USB and a power cable in back and a headphone plugged in front. Its setup is simple and clean. I find the black box visually appealing too, recalling the appearance of my classic Denon disc players. The front is brushed metal. There is a nice texture to the metal material on the top and sides. The lightly abrasive finish gives the appearance of a product well-built and capable of withstanding the occasional scratch or rub without gouging. I assume there were a few people who used the unit prior to my audition, and it still looked clean and new.
About the only negative is a slight flexing at the very bottom, on each side of the case. This I noticed while moving or unpacking the Moon. Once seated, everything seen and touched is firm. The four rubber feet keep the Moon from sliding across the table. Never once did I feel the need to hold the Moon in place as I plugged in new headphones. When I did venture around back to plug in a pair of RCA cables, these connections too felt sturdy.
 
The front layout is simple - having only power on/off and input select buttons, both of which feel nice to the touch. A single blue LED above the power button is lit while the unit is on. The front-facing volume knob rotates cleanly. I found the screw hole for the knob, opposite the visual dot on the front, helpful to locate the volume position when using the Moon in a dark room. A friend too noticed that the volume indicator dot is a physical indentation, so it could be used as a point of reference for volume.
The only external feature missing is a readout for volume, which the 430HAD has. This aids in A/B comparisons. Once a volume is adjusted for and measured as a reference point, recovery to that same volume is easier with a digital readout. And I only make note of this because some of the competing products do include this feature, such as the Grace Design m9xx and Ayre Codex. I had no issues adjusting the volume to a comfortable desired level for just listening.
 
Features
 
Those needing balanced inputs and outputs should look to its bigger brother the NEO 430HAD. Otherwise every key feature for unbalanced audio is standard in the NEO 230HAD. It has two sets of analog inputs - RCA on the back and a ⅛” TRS phono on the front. It has two sets of RCA analog outputs on the back - a static line-level output and a variable pre-amplifier output. It has a competent DAC inside - think of the DAC as a baseline source, comparable to other sources you may wish to measure. The DAC accepts external digital input from optical, coax (2 inputs), and USB. Via USB, the sound is clean, which is admirable from my sub-standard USB source, an old laptop. I used my Regen for ultimate listening evaluation, but one need not use this for day-to-day listening or when using a better source.
 
The user toggles through the inputs via a single button on the front. There are two columns of red LED - the left column indicates the input source chosen and the right column indicates the bit rate of the audio fed from an external source into the DAC. Rather than account for every possible rate, there are just a few LED. There are two base rate LED to indicate 44.1 and 48 kHz. There are two multiplier LED to indicate 2x and 4x. The only complication is for playback of 384kHz, which is shown by the 48 kHz base rate and both the 2x and 4x multipliers. There is also a DSD base rate. This too can be combined with the 2x or 4x multiplier when engaged to play higher sample rate data.
 
The DAC processes PCM. More important, to my ears, I found no issue with playback of basic 16-bit, 44.1kHz resolution audio, the standard format of Red Book, and what I majority use in my daily listening and as my primary track selection for testing done in this review. Some DACs will sound their best for playback of higher resolution audio. The Moon was competent at all audio rates. Though I do not use DSD, I did test to verify the NEO 230HAD will play DSD tracks sampled at 1x, 2x, and 4x data rates through USB. I had a minor issue with DSD at 4x. Instead of displaying the LED for DSD and 4x, it showed the LED for 44.1kHz and both the 2x and 4x, meaning PCM at 352.8kHz. However this was also shown in the playback software display. So I’ll attribute this to an issue in software or the hardware of my computer, and not the Moon. I do note though I did not have this issue with a Chord Mojo, which correctly played DSD at 4x using the same track and same software.
 
Sound
 
I connected a USB cable and power cord to the Moon and plugged my HD650 headphones to the front, seeking only at first to verify the box was functional and all sources could play. But as I listened to the sound, I immediately heard something was different - something in the sound was new to me, in a way I was unaccustomed to hearing. It was more different than the typical delta I expect from a new amplifier. So I paused at the question - is this something new a good, or something new a bad? And a second question seemed relevant - how does one go about the measurement of a tool, which itself is meant to measure other products. If I haven’t already, I am certainly about to take a divergent path. First, I’m going to use my ears to measure. And what I will be measuring are products I will not name. To you, these are simply my primary choices to listen to a tube amplifier, a solid state amplifier, and a DAC source. These have been my choices in the blind. And now with the Moon available as a potential discriminator of other products, I ask how good is it at doing this task? In using my ears, I also did something, which may seem troubling or illogical - I did not set the volume the same.
 
I started at a volume too high for normal listening, and slowly lowered the volume until I could barely hear the background sounds. This represents how I would normally set the volume for a typical listening session. The song I used to test is an excerpt from the Piano Trio No. 4 in D Major, Op. 70, No. 1 "Ghost", II. Largo assai ed espressivo, from the soundtrack of the film Immortal Beloved. Pamela Frank is on violin. Yo-Yo Ma is on cello. Emanuel Ax is on piano. The violin and cello do a sort of dance in the background, with the piano acts as a foreground focal point. I adjusted according to my ability to hear the string instruments. And I did so over the course of several hours, pausing an hour or so between each setting. Thus I was blind to how each previous amplifier was adjusted. Did I discern something from the roughly two minutes of introduction? Absolutely, yes. Though there is no change I can make to a solid state amplifier, I found my own to be quite sublime. I could turn up the volume without discomfort, but the volume I used was interestingly the lowest of the three. It has the most clarity such that even at the lowest decibel output, the sounds are smooth and easily heard. The strings do not disappear off into the blackness of the background, but continue to play. This was a satisfactory finding! I had a somewhat opposite finding for the tube. I like the tube, but it requires a higher volume to construct the same level of musical detail. Perhaps it is time to change a tube in this amplifier, or seek other modifications? And after these changes are made, the Moon could again be useful to compare against the sound of the improvements. In short, the Moon provided a good baseline point from which to measure the sonic quality or lack thereof in my existing amplifier equipment. This is what I sought with this listening test - nothing more. Moving on.
 
Next I chose to listen to my DAC source. This part saddened me a little, in that I very much like the timbre and flow of my DAC. However I immediately noticed more detail retrieval via the DAC built-in the Moon. And those details, while not entirely accurate in the Moon, were also not harsh as some detail-oriented DACs can be. Many products employ a showroom look-at-me tactic of sounding different to sell, but then sound strident over a longer listening session. I played the same song from the test above, and easily heard the details of both the string and piano instruments, simply clearer via the Moon than via my DAC (grumble grumble - costing around the same as the entire Moon product). And it was not until I listened to the louder piano section, after the two minutes of intro, that I could clearly discern that the details from the Moon DAC were less accurate. Less accurate in that the piano keys were glassy and sounded less like a real piano through Moon’s internal DAC - I play piano so having this sound correct is quite important to me. In a second DAC comparison to my Ayre Codex, the Moon finally lost both subjective contests regarding accuracy and detail retrieval. In summary, the Moon provided a better understanding of the limitations of my daily DAC and as such I may someday consider a replacement for it. Yet, in keeping with the review, this is what I sought via the Moon. It was again successful as a hearing aid, as a baseline for comparison.
 
At this point, I was starting to develop trust in the neutrality of the Moon. For grins, I decided to also compare the balanced output direct from the Ayre Codex against the single-ended output from the Codex. I did this by using the single-ended RCA output from the Ayre through the Moon. This is the first time I have had an amplifier neutral enough where I felt this test was worthwhile. With volume set equal, I did not hear the same amount of air and breath via the unbalanced output from the Ayre DAC. I’ve read this was true, but could now confirm. I include this test here to point out the truly neutral nature of the amplifier in the Moon and that I found it trustworthy enough to conduct such a listening experiment.
 
The last bit of testing I did was using my three headphones, which I planned from the introduction to this review. I started with the HE-1000. And this time I did balance each amplifier to an identical volume, if slightly higher than my normal listening volume. The disc I used was a best of compilation album of music by Peter Gabriel titled Shaking the Tree. I listened to the first track, Solsbury Hill, to set my volume for each amplifier. For HE-1000, the track I chose was Mercy Street. It has an amazing baseline, as does much of the artist’s music. It starts with a pulsing bass sound in the right channel, which is slowly joined by the company of higher frequency electronic sounds. I first started with the Moon. I had not heard this song in some time, before any of my recent headphone exploration and DAC/AMP purchases. The sonic information passing through the Moon was mesmerizing. Moving next to my solid state, the sound steps back just a hair, but fills in the space with more depth and dynamics. I never felt the Moon was doing anything wrong, just amplifying the music differently. While everything was coherent on the Moon, I could just about get lost in the music from my solid state, no longer caring about instrument location and separation, just floating in the sound. The sound stayed in front of my head via the Moon, never losing or causing me to want to lose focus on any particular sound. The tube was a different experience. I did not feel it was wrong either, but simply focussed on a different frequency spectrum. I did not enjoy its sound as much as I did on either the Moon or solid state.
 
I moved to my next headphone, the HD800S and the next track selection, Don’t Give Up. I am more personally familiar with this song, having heard it many times in use at a High School retreat. However, the sheer volume of stage and emotion conveyed in Peter Gabriel’s voice was stunning. I started this comparison using my solid state. Then I moved to the Moon. While the stage again became flatter, I did not feel that any part of the frequency was being over emphasized. The sound remained evenly distributed and true. Moving last to my tube, I heard less of a change in frequency response, and more of an immersion, head first, into the music. It was like I had leaned in to get a closer peek at the musicians on the stage. Again though, the Moon seemed capable of playing the music through my headphones, and also seemed of the three to be the most balanced.
 
The last headphone to test was the PS1000e, using the track Zaar. It is a rolling, tumultuous series of sounds, many of which are played without reference to any form or rhythm. I again set my volumes against the first track, and started listening with the tube moving next to the Moon. First, the bass became stronger. There is a drum that was particularly more percussive on the Moon. And the higher frequency instruments became less present, in a good way. Last, moving from the Moon to my solid state, everything took a step back. Only this time the sound did not fill in with dynamic volume, as it had with the HE-1000. The dynamics on the Moon and my solid state were about on par through the PS1000e. This may be that I am driving my Grado at the near bottom of the volume of my solid state, in fact just above the point of left/right channel imbalance. The Moon had no low volume imbalance issue that I noticed via the Grado headphones.
 
Listening
 
I realized at this point of the review that some people may not choose to use the Moon strictly as a tool, as I have done above. So this section describes just listening to the Moon, via USB through its internal DAC. This section is more of a relaxed listening exercise and sound characteristic summary. When I was using the Moon for a few moments of focussed listening, it was certainly revealing of a lot of things to me. But would I choose to use it for day-in-day-out listening. I started with my AKG K702 headphones, which have a slight added treble edge, and can become tiresome on systems that have unequal frequency response. I have already established a trust between these headphones and my Chord Mojo. Both headphone and DAC/AMP are what I feel to be dry, but the sheer volume of information, without fatigue, is what I heard and quite enjoyed with the Mojo. I wished to hear something similar with the Moon.
 
I have a playlist composed almost entirely of Radiohead songs from the albums - Amnesiac, In Rainbows, Hail to the Thief, and Kid A. I particularly like the track Everything in its Right Place from Kid A. But after that song, the three tracks I use from In Rainbows can become tiresome. Faust Arp uses acoustic guitar, with focus on the higher pitch notes. It also uses what sounds like violin, but may be a synthesizer - regardless it adds to the treble energy of the song. Reckoner has two cymbals ringing out a percussive, repeated echo. Videotape has a repeated high piano note. But I listened to the entire set on the Moon without any fatigue issue. I next picked a couple of tracks to replay on the Mojo. The Mojo is still one step cleaner, but takes a step back in terms of detail retrieval - particularly regarding the ability to localize musical events, the start and stop of sounds. The distance to each source was a little more obscured on the Mojo. Interesting though, the Mojo had a definite wider stage. But in short summary, those same attributes that kept me attentive to the music via the Moon were now hurting its performance as a piece of everyday listening equipment. Overall I did prefer listening to the AKG through the Mojo, versus the Moon. I’m not sure what this means, but I went back to the HD650 headphones that I first started with, now seeking to hear a few more styles of music.
 

 
The Joshua Tree
Where the Streets Have No Name
I was clearly able to hear and almost touch each instrument, particularly the axes (two distinct tracks of guitar), which hovered out in space. When the music slows, you can hear the exact moment the studio engineer decides to turn up the volume on the synth bassline.
 
I Still Haven’t Found What I’m Looking For
Again each musical note is unique, presented and held within its own individual space, hanging out as if each artist has a solo part. Everything is on the same stage, but the sounds do not overlap. I might have to later listen to that track from Phantom of the Opera, Prima Donna, where there are what seem to be a dozen different singers, often each with their own tune. I would imagine it well-suited to the Moon strengths.
 
With or Without You
This is truly a treat. I was able to hear the small, subtle tricks used by the studio engineers. Generally when played back on the average system, or even on my tubed headphone system, I can hear the overall sound. But then via the Moon and HD650 headphones, not the most revealing of headphones, I could clearly pick out how the sound moves physically around the stage. I’ve never noticed the odd, deliberate placement of each sound. I wrote in my notes - I am starting to understand the charm of this album.
 

 
Who’s Next
The next album did not allow the Moon to highlight hidden subtleties of execution by a studio engineer. The Joshua Tree was made in 1986 and took an entire year to record, while the Who album was made 15 years prior in 1971, and took only 3 months to record. But the album does highlight things I enjoyed, as well as weaknesses of the Moon, relative to competing products.
 
Baba O’Reilly
Repeating myself, I would assume the studio engineer of 1971 would not have as many tools at his disposal relative to modern sound technique. There is an obviousness that anyone can hear in how the keyboard is panned around, at the introduction and throughout the song. But I quickly got into the head bobbing mode once the drums started to thump and ring. And if you understand how things work with regards to music playback, this is a good thing!
 
Behind Blue Eyes
I particularly enjoyed the multiple vocal parts of of this song. It is often where the music becomes more complex that I begin to enjoy the benefits of the Moon. It does not break apart as music can do on poorer implementations. And it surprises me in places where this fidelity allows me to hear deeper into the music, even on songs I have heard multiple times. The distinct nature of each voice on the lyric “behind blue eyes” is one of those focus points.
 
Won’t Get Fooled Again
Here though, I wish the drumming sound had a little more forward presence. It is still there, and audible, but I would just wish to hear it a little more clearly. On other setups, I would describe this more as the drum being part of the band. The percussion drives or allows the other instruments to peak and sway in rhythm to the beat. This gets lost by the separation between it and the bass and guitar sounds.
 

 

 

 
Remain in the Light
Purple Rain
Off the Wall
Most of what is recorded on these three albums is what I would call the weakness of the Moon. First, what is PRAT? I would never suggest that there is a magical property, such that when the perfect DAC, and perfect amplifier, and perfect headphone are paired, that PRAT suddenly appears. It is more that some implementations allow one to hear the transients more clearly. I hear the start and stop of a long sound via the Moon. But I do not hear the rat-a-tat-tat speedy stuff as clearly. Second thing is the single vocal or the single instrument - I have simply heard better sound from competing products.
 
When I was listening to the Talking Heads album Remain in the Light on my Hugo, I heard more of the amazement of the contrasting rhythms than I currently hear via the Moon. The same same happened on most songs from the album Purple Rain - understanding this album is highly dependent on hearing the tight electronic and instrumental rhythms. Getting these rhythms or transients perfectly accurate is what, to my ears, the Chord products do well, and the Moon does not compete at this same level via the internal DAC. Then in hearing how the engineer creates the dialog between Wendy and Lisa at the beginning of Computer Blue, the Moon is best to hear this studio trick. While back on the Chord, I was simply immersed in the sound. Last points, I would have preferred the more clear reference to the guitar heard at the beginning of Purple Rain via the Hugo than I heard on the Moon. And I would have preferred to peer a little more deeply into the emotional vocals of Michael Jackson in the song She’s Out of My Life as heard via the Chord, than to hear the localization of electric piano accompaniment. Some of the true feeling of this recording is lost via the Moon.
 

 
Aja
Deacon Blues
I think Steely Dan is the ultimate musical group to play on the Moon. Hearing every instrument makes their genius seem that much more so. It would be impossible to explain Deacon Blues to someone who has not heard it. But the entire song is simply there for the taking via the Moon. Listening to their sound is a treat!
 

 
Brothers in Arms
Your Latest Trick
Why Worry
Ride Across the River
The Man’s Too Strong
Brother’s in Arms
It is hard to summarize this album and how is it presented on the Moon in a single, simple phrase. I’ve heard better instrument detail from other DACs than heard via the Moon in the song Your Latest Trick. But then on the next track, Why Worry, the Moon just excels. When there are multiple instruments playing in symphony, and you want to focus on the smallest details that sometimes get lost in the background, you can. In this review, I feel perhaps at times I am being too picky. By the time I got to the third song, I did not feel I was listening to a strength or a weakness. The key thing I heard was not in the actual song. Time spent with this amplifier reminds me of some of the best listening sessions, growing up, in front of Dad’s stereo system, with a turntable and two speakers. It reminds of that ease I had in listening to that collective sound. And when I state I’ve heard better, those DAC implementations all come at a price, most starting around $500 more than the entire cost for the Moon. The Moon is a comparative value. And some things still jump out at me and surprise me in the Moon. And most importantly, I can listen to the Moon for hours, at low volume, with no strain or headphone listening fatigue. That to me is worth more than the slight sonic improvement of some of the harder to find and more costly implementations.
 
Summary
 
I admit, when I first clicked the web link to read the literature on the Moon NEO 230HAD and Simaudio products in general, I had a concern:
 

Music is a fascinating motion vector. We are convinced that MOON products, through music, can bring a wellness without measure to achieve musical ecstasy. Our mission is clear: make the best sound system ever made.

Click to expand...

 
This singular statement is in almost complete opposite of the intent I described in my introduction. I had basic expectations for this device, while their mission statement is the hyperbole pile I would normally try my best to avoid. But immediately after placing the headphones over my ears, I heard a truth of possibility to both tasks - their hyperbolic mission statement, and my personal task. Without getting into the kinds of flattery that induce nausea, I’ll say simply there was a clarity and obviousness to the music that was uncharacteristic of many platforms I had heard before. And this was particularly true of single-box platforms.
 
Does the Simaudio Moon NEO 230HAD have what I wanted? Absolutely - yes. It also has limits. Simply, there is space in the market for personal electronics where some other products are likely to be better, or worse, or of the same quality as the Moon. When listening to a single instrument, or a less complex cluster of just a few instruments, the DAC in the Moon does not present the best possible perspective. There are DACs, costing more than the Moon, which present better detail or timbre. When using the best possible headphones, there are amplifiers, also costing more than or around the same price as the Moon, which are capable of blacker, deeper background, and a fuller soundstage. The Moon however does correctly keep the sound clear, and just a little ahead of the listener, to maintain ease of focus on positional and depth cues of instruments and vocals.
 
But note my repeated phrasing - at or above the cost of the Moon. Also consider I am comparing the cost of just a DAC against the entire cost of the Moon. Or I am comparing the cost of just an amplifier against the cost of the entire Moon. To my ears, I have heard its equal or better only in a single regard, never besting it in all characteristics.
 
What do you have here, in the Simaudio Moon NEO 230HAD? A clear view into the motion vector, which is music? Maybe not - the wellness part is too likely a stretch, but I have been reminded of a time of wellness in youth - a simpler era of just a turntable, integrated amplifier, and two separate speakers. I have not heard any product better produce this essence of sound at lower cost - I have certainly heard worse at higher cost. And when listening to instrumentation that is diverse or complex, the Moon does an excellent job at separation and enunciation of each individual sound, its start and stop in time if perhaps not its pitch and rhythm, and its location in space if perhaps not a perfectly matched timbre. It has a complete set of inputs and outputs, allowing for multiple use cases, or comparison against other amplifiers, and other DACs. It is also great for just kicking back, relaxing and letting some music play. And most importantly it plays many headphones quite well. It is a compact, capable, and attractive box. I highly encourage you to give it a try. I plan to do just that for a long, long time.
 
Reference Equipment:
Ayre Codex, Chord Hugo, Chord Mojo, Grace Design m9xx, UpTone Audio USB REGEN
 
Reference Headphones:
AKG K702, Grado PS1000e, HiFiMan HE1000, Sennheiser HD650, Sennheiser HD800S

Intro
 
JDS Labs The Element is a DAC and AMP enclosed in an attractive small black box, intended for desktop use. It is 5.8 by 5.8 inches square and 1 inch tall. On top of the main enclosure is a large knob, 2.8 inches in diameter, and adding another 0.6 inches of height. When powered on, there is a ring of light that glows, beautifully illuminating the knob. The box has four rubber feet, which sit flush against the bottom, giving it a sturdy footing. It weighs just over a pound. It has a modern look and a solid feel. It is a sharp contrast from the ungainly appearance of the O2+ODAC, from which much of the technology originates.
 
Operation and Features
 
The Element is quite easy to use, but it has many uses. So…the following sections, outlining its operation and feature set are unfortunately a little complex. The Element can be used as an AMP, an AMP/DAC, and a recently added option allows it to be used as just a DAC - this new option is selectable from the factory, and its operation is described below:
 

1. Powered off, DAC power and data are sourced from USB. Sound is output to an external system through the line-level RCA outputs. In this mode The Element does not control volume. The external system must provide both amplification and volume control.
2. Powered on, power and data are still sourced from USB and fed through the DAC. However DAC output is routed to an internal headphone amplifier, powered by A/C and controlled by The Element volume knob. The RCA outputs are disabled.

 
In keeping with the posh look, all switches and RCA connectors, and the USB and A/C power inputs, are on the back. The only output on the front is a 1/4 inch headphone jack. I have the original version of The Element. The original configuration works only when powered on, as outlined below:
 
 

1. When RCA cables are connected, input is from the external RCA source.
2. When RCA cables are not connected, input is from the internal DAC (fed from the external USB source).

 
Output in the original configuration is always passed through the internal A/C powered amplifier through to the headphones. The settings for the headphone volume can be adjusted for 1x or 4.7x gain. And that's about it!
 
 
DAC
 
The DAC in The Element is an ODAC rev B ($149), and there are many reviews of this DAC. I, having never heard it, decided to compare it against my HRT microStreamer ($170 - $190). Both DAC follow the USB Audio Class 1 standard. Meaning they are limited to 24-bit/96kHz. Yet they do this without a Windows driver. I connected both DAC directly to my Macbook (2008), and the sound was just okay. I marginally preferred the sound of the The Element over the sound of the microStreamer - they were close.
 
 
My Macbook is poor source for anything reliant on USB power, so I added my Schiit Wyrd ($99) between my laptop and The Element. With the incremental cost increase, I felt it worthwhile to compare it against something a little higher end. I decided to compare The Element with Wyrd against my Meridian Explorer2 ($300), which is a considerable step up in terms of pure DAC performance. I plugged my laptop directly into the Explorer2, and used the Wyrd between my laptop and The Element. The sound I heard was fantastic. To my ears, the Explorer2 is a litmus test, a price point where I feel the sound changes from entry-level, okay sound, to sound that captures the listener's full attention - The Element was now in the realm of the good stuff!
 
In the Radiohead song Nude, from their album In Rainbows, there is an intense, paused moment wrapped around the line "go to h*** for what your dirty mind is thinking." The music halts, and the listener is forced to focus on the sound of just Thom Yorke's voice. Through the Explorer2, I can feel the intensity at the tail end of the line, after the music has already stopped and we are left with the intense vocal. But through The Element, I can feel the moment as it approaches. I had to hold my breath, clench my fists, close my eyes, to get through the same passage. This is indeed good stuff!
 
Amplifier
 
What would I say about the amplifier? It's good - it is very good, possessing plenty of clean power reserve. It is a solid state amplifier, with a low output impedance. Thus it pairs well with a wide variety of headphones. The two gain settings and large volume knob allow you to dial in your exact volume. Though the amplifier is solid-state, it imparts a satisfying sense of warmth. It is a well-implemented design that produces an inviting sound. However do not mistake it for a giant-killer.
 
When I first bought The Element, I briefly compared it against my collection of similar class amplifiers - some solid-state and some tube. Note, these are not the latest release versions of these amplifiers:
 
 

1. Schiit Magni2 ($99)
2. Schiit Valhalla ($279)
3. Schiit Vali ($129)

 
Because of the higher impedance of the tube amplifiers (no gain switch at that generation of the Schiit products), I made the comparison to The Element using my high impedance Sennheiser HD650 headphones. And…my personal preference was The Element. It imparted a clean, effortless sound, with enough detail to also keep me focussed. And it allowed me to use some of my lower impedance headphones, such as my Denon AH-D2000. The Denon sounded quite good - I used it to have my first listen to Multibit.
 
However since then, I have purchased other amplifiers that I think do a better job:
 

1. Meier Audio Corda Rock ($215)
2. Schiit Vali 2 ($169)

 
I truly wish I knew more about the science behind headphone amplifiers in terms of what I like. I know I am particularly selective with regards to my HD650 - having owned them for many years and hearing through them the sound that I want, but only on a few systems. A good amplifier cannot be muddy. It cannot have bass bloat or treble emphasis. But an amplifier must have weight, and must extend the highs far enough to hear the parts of the recording that give clues to things in the recording mix, like room acoustics and space between each instrument and vocalist. Amplifier design is not simple. Yet once you have heard the proper balance, you know it.
 
Reflecting back on The Element versus the original Vali, I found the original Vali to lack certain details. And those details were easily heard through The Element, yet it did so without adding harshness or unnatural treble energy. I hear this same progression today, in switching from The Element to the Corda Rock. Bass depth and slam, treble detail and spatial cues, all seem to be a notch up from what I heard in The Element - but again without any etched harshness. The Vali 2 also fixed the murkiness of the original Vali - from my limited inventory today, the Vali 2 is basically to me like a Corda Rock with a tube.
 
USB DAC/AMP
 
The Element is a single box. And in my opinion, it should not be strictly compared against just DACs or just AMPs. With its single power connection, and single USB, you have a compact and portable tool for listening to music - vastly better than anything your laptop could provide. The other options are here just to keep the consumer/shopper informed.
 
However, let's say the shopper does not mind having two boxes, as long as they are the same form-factor. The Element is $329 as an AMP and USB DAC/AMP. You could instead get a Schiit Magni/Modi Uber stack for $298. The advantage is the Schiit DAC is self-powered, and has COAX and Toslink inputs, and it can be used for pre-amp outputs, or swapped in the future with another DAC or another AMP. In short, the Schiit stack is very versatile. You could also get The Element for $349 (with the factory change) for use as a DAC/AMP and DAC. You could then use it to feed another AMP, assuming that AMP comes with a volume control. But again, the Schiit stack already had this covered. In short, there is no winning feature set comparison between the Schiit stack and The Element. If you are okay with a stack, it'll give you more options down the road. Though my perfect stack would probably be a Schiit Modi 2 Uber and Schiit Vali 2 for $318 - still less cost and oh my, the sound.
 
If you insist that you must have just one box, the only box I know today is the Grace Design m9XX at $499. So what does the $150 premium get you:
 

1. In my opinion, you could consider this similar to The Element and Wyrd upgrade (at only a $50 difference). The m9XX comes with a USB power brick, which suffices to fully power the DAC and AMP, thus bypassing the need for clean USB power from a laptop or other source. And in my personal A/B sound comparison, I believe it works!
2. You can use other sources, not generally good at supplying power. Meaning, you can easily use your cell phone as a USB source. The Element will likely draw too much power from a cell phone source.
3. You get a digital (Toslink) input in the m9XX.
4. You get volume controlled DAC output - you could feed something externally, that does not itself have volume control.
5. You get volume readout - I could write a whole paragraph on how useful this is for A/B, or simply to switch between headphones.
6. You get two headphone outputs.
7. You get more options on the DAC implementation - m9XX has a few filters and a cross feed, useful for headphones.
8. You get the higher USB Audio Class 2, for data rates higher than 24-bit/96kHz. In my opinion, this is minor. I tend to think asynchronous versus adaptive USB technology is more significant. But some people just gotta have their DSD.

 
One more minor point - it's smaller. That is the m9XX is still suitable for desktop use, but is smaller than The Element. And the USB power box is also less likely to take up more than one space on your surge protector versus the power brick that is required to be plugged in for The Element.
 
Anything missing…well, if you still must have an AMP, the m9XX will never have that feature. You must always use the DAC in the m9XX, while The Element can be just an AMP.
 
Outro
 
I've wandered a bit through this review. Some of my wandering was due to the feature set on The Element. But most of it was that I wanted to be honest on where The Element fits regarding its price/performance/value and other options. It has so many features that it competes in many different categories of audio electronics. And no matter what you buy, there are always other options. And there are always better sounding options at higher cost. But here's my overall opinion…
 
The Element is a great single-box USB DAC/AMP, with the amplifier portion powered by an A/C source and the DAC powered by USB. Depending on your personal USB chain, you may have fantastic sound straight from your source or benefit from some form of a USB cleanup like a powered hub (cheaply found for around $15). Regardless, and keeping with the simple nature of the box, the original USB connection will be just fine. And though I have thrown in other options, I'm not advocating that path. I'm simply trying to inform those people looking at this device, and asking themselves how good is the sound and what other options are out there, at or around the same price. In my opinion, the options can be summarized to a few:
 

1. A Schiit stack, which to me has only the drawback of two power bricks and managing two boxes.
2. A more expensive single box design such as Grace Design m9XX, which you can only purchase when they are available from MassDrop - you cannot just decide to and go and buy. Note - the first drop just finished sales, so the future production schedule and future quantity of this item are unknown.

 
My TL;DR opinion is that The Element has a good feature set in a single box. And depending on your requirements, you are likely to only beat it by spending significantly more money, or opting for something of a different design.

Intro
 
HRT microStreamer is a small silver box, powered by and fed audio via USB input, with separate 3.5mm outputs - one output to feed headphones directly using an internal amplifier and a second output for exclusive line-level to feed an external amplifier. It uses USB Audio Class 1.0, meaning the microStreamer has no drivers for Windows, yet is capable of audio playback up to 24-bit at 96kHz.
 
But none of this is what I want to write about - this thing is musical man  And what does that mean 
 
It holds onto a fine edge:
 

1. Engaging, but not overbearing.
2. Detailed, but not etched.
3. Enunciating bass lines, but not boosting them or adding a delayed decay.
4. Allowing for the airy high frequency details, but not throwing them at you like icy blades.

 
Plug in your USB, plug in your headphones, set your volume, and hit play. Music streams out of the microStreamer - it is just that simple. The microStreamer seems like a box that someone took care to design, build, listen to for a while, and tweak, tweak, tweak until they got it right. It is not uber-anything, yet it does everything just about right 
 
Comparisons
 
And...the above is pretty much all I wanted to say. I apologize for having such a short review - more just a personal preference, insight, whatever you wish to call it. I'll quickly run through a few other USB AMP/DAC for at least a brief comparison:
 

1. CEntrance DACport HD - these two DAC/AMP choices are quite close in sonic quality. I would estimate the CEntrance simply has better parts, with less grain - less aural strain. Though the delta is ever so slight.
2. Geek Out V2 (output through 4-pin XLR) - much more detail retrieval, but also more scientific, microscopic. Less alive in its presentation of the music.
3. Meridian Explorer 2 - more 3-dimensional, less harsh. Also what I would call less detail-obsessed with regards to any grit in the recording. For me, sometimes it works - and sometimes I need more grit to feel the musical intent.
4. Schiit Fulla - similarly musical, just sharper - this one comes with teeth. The Fulla has a little less compromise for things like large impedance variation or inherent headphone treble emphases. The microStreamer smooths these issues over, just a little. I like the Fulla on a balanced headphone, like the AKG K7XX. The musical detail in the microStreamer is present, and less pronounced - more subtle goodness for you to seek, when your ears are ready to listen.

 
And now I normally add upgrade options. To my ears the (twice the cost) Apogee Groove and (four times the cost) Chord Mojo both have easily heard upgraded sound. Each keeps what I feel is the best attribute of the microStreamer - a musical and balanced sound with at least a similar level of detail. There is particularly more detail with the Mojo, yet it retains the musical value more so than the GOV2. By moving from the microStreamer to either the Groove or Mojo, I am allowed to dive even further into the music, likely due to what I am certain are better parts. I can listen louder (not usually my preference) or longer (this is what I like) without tiring.
 
Outro
 
If you own the microStreamer, would I advocate you upgrade to those - depends on your wallet. And - no, in that there is nothing either of the two upgrades I have listed does that makes it twice the goodness of the microStreamer. My final thoughts - do not discount this older DAC/AMP. It is still a good choice even when compared to the modern onslaught of DAC/AMP options.
 
Just my brief thoughts - and always, YMMV  

Why are there no reviews for this?
 
The Schiit Fulla was released in December of 2014. It is a made in the USA integrated DAC and headphone amplifier. Though Schiit would always say buy your DAC and amp separately to save upgrade money later, in this part of the market convenience is king - joining the components into a single box is pretty much mandatory for the sake of simplicity. And this product could not be simpler:
 

1. Plug one end of the provided USB cable into the Fulla, the other end into your computer. The computer provides both the power and music source.
2. Plug the 1/8 inch phono connector from your headphone into the output on the opposite end of the Fulla. This is the only product from Schiit with the smaller headphone connection, but for the market this too makes sense.

 
There is no line output. There is no gain switch. There are no drivers to download. That is it uses the USB Audio Class 1 standard, so you just plug and play audio up to 24-bits and 96 kHz. Other than selecting the device for default audio playback, there is no software volume control or anything else you must do through the computer. The Fulla has a real physical, true analog volume knob. Just play your music, adjust the volume, and you're done. Very simple!
 
How does it sound?
 
Well, this is why I wish there were more reviews. There's a great mantra from Jason Stoddard, which I will repeat before I begin:
 

This is only my opinion, I am biased like everyone else, and I have not heard everything on the planet.

Click to expand...

 
I should also state that this little device is what truly got me back into the headphone hobby. I have a little love affair with it, thus my perspective may be a little jaded. I have owned a Sennheiser HD650 since it was first released in 2003. Though I knew it was a good headphone, I was never happy with the sound. Listening to the HD650 plugged into the Fulla in December of 2014 was what convinced me that things had changed a little in headphone industry in the 10 years between. More specifically, I liked the sound I heard through this little $79 combined amplifier and DAC more than through my dedicated $700 HeadRoom Home and that connected to any of a number of transports of MRSP values between $1000 and $2000, I had collected through the years. In isolation, I had mistakenly thought an amp was an amp was an amp, and my transport was at fault. I currently own 6 different USB DAC/AMP and sold another 2. I have also since sold or still own 6 different dedicated desktop amplifiers, with 2 more on order that I have heard at headphone meets. I promise not to use the word little again after this next sentence - I do think I have a little to say about the Fulla.
 
I would describe the sound as a warm, gratifying, and engaging. For comparison, the Peachtree Audio DAC iTx is a DAC I have owned. It is not hard or unforgiving, but much cooler sounding. I wanted to like the Peachtree, but I did not find its sound as lively and inviting as the Fulla. When the Fulla is paired well, it is a satisfying sound. If you have an AKG Q701 or AKG Kxxx headphone, I highly recommend you give this pairing a trial. I did not personally care for the Q701 headphone, but when a friend pointed it out to me, how good the Fulla sounded on his K702, I was tempted to keep my headphone. I sold it still, and recently bought the more balanced K7XX. I find the pairing to be very nice.
 
How does it scale?
 
It depends. Some headphones, such as the HD600/HD650/HD800 not only scale, but only do well IMHO at full scale. Some people may disagree, but that is how I hear it. Not just in terms of defeating the well-known veil on the HD650, but also in terms of taming treble harshness. To my ears, if the amplifier is not smooth, I find it grating through my HD650, as I had for 10 years on my HeadRoom Home. Though the Fulla sounded better than what I was using for 10 years, it still does not sound good, as I hear music today on my HD650. Examples of headphone amplifiers I have found more recently not to be harsh with the HD650 are the JDS Labs The Element and the Meier Audio Corda Rock.
 
In contrast, some songs played on the Fulla through the HiFiMan HE-1000 were quite good. In fact, it amazes me that something at such low cost can sound so good. I'm having trouble continuing my review because I am listening to this pairing at the moment (Tori Amos - Me and a Gun). With some songs, it can be quite a distraction in a very good way. It certainly brings to mind the common saying that sound quality is not proportional to cost.
 
So what does more money buy you, and what does the Fulla lack? Well, using the Fulla for an extended time with the HE1K would probably not work for me. Putting back on my reviewer hat, there are a couple of points from the sound glossary that I personally find to be vitally important to my personal listening pleasure:
 

1. Grainy - there is certainly a non-fluid nature to the Fulla sound. How much grain is relative to technology, such as this is certainly more fluid than the older AudioQuest DragonFly 1.2. However the Fulla is not as fluid as the (4 times the cost) Apogee Groove.
2. Harsh - I may not be using the terms correctly, but peaks in frequency response between 2 and 6 kHz seems to be the issue I am having with the HD650, driven more likely by the high impedance and wildly changing impedance at different frequencies. To a lesser extent, I feel the highs have more presence than I would prefer on the HE1K. Neither of these were issues for me with the AKG.
3. Naturalness - this where I feel Schiit products excel. There is no upsampling, DSP, etc. When listening to something that was recorded in a natural sense, their products play it back with all the realism of the recording in tact.
4. Resolution - it depends. There are other AMP/DAC boxes that allow my ears to focus on foreground and background information at the same time. With some music on the Fulla, the foreground sound does not allow my ears to hear the background sound. If however the only sound is the background sound, I can hear it quite easily.
5. Sub-bass - it is good on the three headphones I have listed. On a headphone which already has a lot of bass, the Denon AH-D2000, I would simply not use the Fulla. I found the bass to be too boomy with that pairing, with likely more fault on the headphones than the amplifier.

 
TL;DR
 
This is really good Schiit. More money will likely buy you an AMP/DAC capable of handling the peculiarities of high-end headphones. But as I see it, this thing is marketed right where it should be. The headphones people are likely to try will likely work quite well with this AMP/DAC. And if you have not heard it, definitely give this a trial with AKG headphones.

There is certainly a design intent for these headphones. An engineer at some point sat down to create these phones, and I believe she walked away from the experience and effort with a certain satisfaction in the results. Why do I say this? It is because I am listening to these phones as I write this review. And I am enjoying what I hear.
 
In the simplest review possible, I could call the Beyerdynamic DT-831 an anti-bass headphone in a sealed form. But that would almost completely miss the point. These phones are intended to be musical, detailed, and free of any bass bloat that is too often associated with sealed headphones.
 
However, unlike other sealed designs against which these phones must compete, the DT-831 will require suitable power to drive. I do not customarily drive headphones to high volumes. In fact I believe that is one of the benefits of using a sealed phone (or an in-ear design) as they can generally be played at a lower volume, allowing for less toxic sonic stress on the listener. However if the user were to connect these phones to an iPod, the sound would not be satisfying. And this would be an issue even at low volumes. I do not know why the engineering decision was made to result in a headphone with 250 ohm load in a sealed design versus the 38 ohm load in the significantly more popular sealed design of the Audio Technica ATH-M50x. But my ears tell me there is a sonic benefit to the design of the DT-831. There is more cohesion and musical tone once the DT-831 is mated to a proper headphone amplifier.
 
That being said, these are most certainly a detail oriented headphone. In an optimally quiet environment, I would much prefer to listen to my Sennheiser HD650, which present a similar load but are sonically more balanced. The load can be a benefit to counter a modern USB powered headphone amplifier, like the Meridian Explorer. Because the Explorer has an internal impedance of 5.5 ohms, it is less friendly to the sealed 38 ohm load of the ATH-M50x. And the DT-831 would provide an acceptable load and reap the benefits of the amplifier. But the HD650 can provide a similar load and a sound that is far more balanced than the DT-831. If you listen to well-recorded Jazz or Classical music, the detail of the DT-831 is welcome. However for the majority of poorly recorded or loudness war mastered disasters of modern pop music, the edge will soon become tiresome with the DT-831. I'm just getting back into my headphone listening hobby, so I cannot offer an alternative sealed option. But I'm sure a few must exist, and at a price somewhere below the cost of the HD650.
 
The source material I used were digital tracks downloaded in FLAC format, each sampled at 24-bit of various rates (96 kHz, 44.1 kHz, 88.1kHz, and 48 kHz). I also listened to FLAC at 192 kHz, which had to be down-sampled to 96 kHz by my playback software (Audirvana Plus). The headphone DAC used (Schiit Fulla) could handle all sample rates up to its 96 kHz limit.