New H20 Signature S250


After reaading a lot of reviews about these amps, i emailed Henry to build me (2) S250 to biamp my speakers, I have an immediate response from him and this is what he say:

Hi Patrick,

The Amps are the Signature Stereo which has an addional Big Toroidal
transfomrer which makes it a true dual mono design, for $300 more which
makes the amp now $2800. Of course, The amp is improved over the
regular stereo across the whole Audio Spectrum. If you want the regular
version stereo, let me know.

Thanks for the number and I'll try to give you a call sometime today.

Henry

Does anyone yet owned this amp?
rneclps
Mr. Bill,

I have no experience with the MIT & H2o together. However, in the past I had used the MIT 750 Series 2 biwire with Theil 3.6's and McCormack DNA-Deluxe. As you state, there was no loss of low level detail... It was there and fine. I ended up making and audiophile "adjustment" and ended up with Martin Logan SL3's, same amp, same MIT cabling. Still sounded alright. Looking to make a swap to tubes, friends came over with Sonic Frontiers SFS-80, Music Reference RM-9, as well as a Conrad Johnson model I can't recall. I can tell you after swapping all of them in and OUT, everyone was scratching their heads. Two friends *swore* it had to be those damn MIT boxes and one drove home and brought back a pair of Synergistic Research speaker cables (No. 2 or No. 3 if I recall) and it was amazing, every single ONE of the tube amps there sounded MUCH better than the big McCormack DNA-2 Deluxe with the MIT... actually we then tried the DNA-2 Deluxe with the Synergistic as well, and it was much better. All we could come up with is the box must have caps and such that "adjust" or "tune" the highs and lows to affect the sound for SS amps that may be bright in some systems. It was definately affecting the sonics in my system.

Disclaimer: This was well into the past... about 8 years or so ago, perhaps 7. However, after that weekend - I listed every MIT interconnect and speaker cable for sale, and will never consider another again.

Don't get me wrong, I have heard them sound quite decent on a Krell or Spectral / Avalon or Thiel / MIT system, however detailed, sterile, analytical doesn't appeal to my musical tastes... at least not anymore (that is what got me hooked initially).

All in all I guess I am just trying to relay almost all cables have strengths and weaknesses. Some more than others, I assume. In this case, I know there were "major" sonic landscape shifts with the comparison of the MIT cabling with tube gear compared to Synergistic Research.

Perhaps the MIT boxes adversely affect the H2o. Like I said, I don't know personally. I know the MIT boxes did adversely affect the SFS-80, Music Reference RM-9, and those Conrad Johnsons...

At the summit, it usually does depend on overall synergy of equipment to bring out the best in each component.
The sixth entry in this thread describes my problems with the 250sig and my Transparent ref speaker cables. Jafox put it so much better and I find most of his description about turning it up to try to get the mix better on MITs was exactly MY problem (and again, Henry Ho said his amp doesn't perform well with network boxed speakers.) I subsequently tried Anti-Cables and the harmonics and volumes felt much better, but I thought the Anti-Cables weren't up to the quality I had been used to in the Transparents on the end of my ARC VT100MKII. YMMV.
John

Two general comments:

1) I don't know how similar the Callisto is to the Calypso, but the July Stereophile reviewed the Calypso and discussed impendance behavior. The significant point for the H20 is that John Atkinson recommended that the amp have an input impedance of at least 30K ohms if used single ended. The H20 has an 8K ohm input impedance.

2) You do not mention if the XLR cables and XLR preamp outputs were thoroughly burned in. In my experience XLR connectors can take a long time to burn in - longer than RCAs. Adaptors and binding posts can take a long time as well. Until fully burned in, the treble suffers. There can be an issue of component burn-in if there are parts in the preamp that are only exercised through the balanced path.

Bob
Woodburger, I hear you on the looks of Anti-Cables. Speaker cables that look like they were just stretched out wire hangers, do not encourage confidence. I figure, someday, someone will fit the wire into hoses, and sell them at 10 times the price.

I don't know how resolving MIT cables are on some amps, but the Anti Cable has replaced similar box cables, improving the resolution. I was there.
Oh no! Mr. Bill. Sorry, I just had to do that. Yes, I am using Anti-Cables, and it is good.