Review : PS Audio HCA 2 amplifier


This amplifier I awaited with eagerness since it represents a union between the old and the new. The amp uses a digital switch-mode device and a large torrodial transformer to output 150 watts into 8 ohms. The unit upon arrival stayed on for 200 hours with both FM and cd music playing. The rest of the system consisted of a Sony 555es SACD player, Proceed PRE, B&W n805's. Interconnects are XLO er-4, Audioquest viper, and Cardas Cross. Speaker cables are Kimber 4tc, Cardas Neutral Reference, and Transparent music wave 200. Comparisons were done with a Musical Fidelity A3CR amplifier. In rotation is Murray Perahia Back Keyboard Concertos 3, 5, 6, 7 (sony Classical), Stravinsky Conducts Stravinsky (CBS Records), Kathleen Battle Grace (Sony Classical), and Avalon Blues a tribute to Mississippi John Hurt, and on SACD James Taylor Hour Glass, Copeland conducts Copeland, Dave Brubreck Quartet.
The first impression is one of immediacy and energy but with much upper midrange/ treble grain/ glare. Furthermore, there was a lot of hash in the signal that despite many grounding schemes I was not able to get rid of and I suspect is endemic to the design. I will note that I ran the amp single ended only. But I can hardly expect this to be the culprit as I have never experienced such a problem before. The static is noticeable at the listing position.
Second, all voices sounded dry and nasal in quality, as if the body and chest were missing. Kathleen Battle sounded exactly that way and contrasted through the MF A3CR there is much less bloom and much more glare to the HCA 2's presentation. Strings on both CD and SACD sounded steely and metallic but low level detail seemed to come up in the mix compared to the A3CR. Both units presented a layered and deep soundstage but the HCA 2 reduced the height of the image to below the speaker plane compared to the A3CR. Imaging went to the A3Cr which made it possible to recognize that there is a whole first violin section in the Copeland SACD instead as the HCA 2 made it sound as if there were only three or four players. I much preferred the A3CR in all respects and any music compared to the HCA 2.
Third, cable changes made slight differences, but not major. The Cardas gave a little more bloom, the XLO a more lively presentation, and the AQ viper a more clear sound. However, compared to the MF A3CR there is always a glare to the HCA 2 that is fatiguing in the extreme. For instance, my girlfriend could not listen to the HCA 2 for more than about 5 minutes. Neither of us found any worth in the PS Audio amplifier from a musical point of view.
On a positive note the input jacks and speaker terminals are top flight and the included power cord is almost equal to their micro lab cable in Sonics. Further the lower midrange/ upper bass boost in the HCA 2 did deliver a punchy and dynamic sound and seems like a nice addition for mini monitors especially. Again though, the glare apparent through the HCA 2 is a fault that is not forgivable. I feel that if you have more forgiving speakers the amp may work for you, IF you can get over all of its other problems.
Have a good day.
kchahoc
Wow, sorry to hurt your feelings. I did not have a problem with clarity per se, only that the amp seemed to scream through the speakers instead of play music; Just not my cup of tea. In fact, it broke my tea cup:)
PS What's with the "Mrs. Lincoln" ? Oh, you mean the amplifier is Pres. Lincoln and I'm Booth: Or am I the mystic, mentaly ill wife? Intresting, thst you pick this phrase/insult for use towards a historian.
Soix,
Is not the HCA 2 supposed to come with its own power cleaning outlet, port or whatever? Besides I used it both direct into the wall, and into a PS power plant 600 (amp only, multiwave set to 55 and 60 mostly, with no difference in sound. I love the power plant, by the way.
I believe Ivan was rhetorically asking whether there is a bright side to this review. I don't believe there are any other inferences. BTW, Momus came up with the quote "Tell me Mr.s Lincoln, did you enjoy the play?"
Sure, as I said the amp is a detail master and delivered a very entergetic and dynamic sound. I think I can see why some would call the amp "tube-like", but in other ways the sound has nothing at all to do with the glowing stuff mid- range wise.
I for one am glad to see a "thorough" evaluation of this amp. Clearly, this amp did not fit Kchahoc's system and/or tastes. But the information he provided is very useful to me, and I hope Fiddler will post his own review of the amp on his ribbons. We all know that "synergy" is far more important than how "good" any particular piece is.

I suspect that with the B&W's (metal dome tweeter, kevlar woofer) the MF with its warmer midrange would result in a more pleasing sound, than the PS or Bel Canto for example. Perhaps it would be more musical if the PS was mated with a tube preamp?

It is also possible that there is something "wrong" with the PS amp? In my experience, first generation production runs from high end companies are sometimes plagued with problems, either due to parts inconsistency or shipping problems, etc. I guess the good news is that PS offers the 30 day return, right? maybe if Kchahoc reported his findings to PS Audio and returned the amp, they might investigate to learn if there is indeed something wrong with that particular specimen, or if it was just a case of system conflict.

All in all, thanks to Kchahoc for reporting his findings in such detail (cable swaps included). Much more useful than some of the other "greatest amp ever" reviews found here and in audio magazines in general. NOTHING works with EVERYTING in my opinion, and I'd rather know what does NOT work together, than read another glowing review which you have to "read between the lines" to really grasp any useful information.