Hovland HP200 - still relevant after 7 years?
- Thread starter spiritofmusic
- Start date
It wasn’t my unit Ron , Jed was for ever swapping resisters in and out replacing several metal films , also several cap experiments in spite of the unit sporting ‘s Hovland own brand capacitors which were pretty nice , mostly in the signal path , Teflon’s , Oils , Films , Styrenes etc .
Last edited:
When HP200 came out I borrowed one home for a week to see if I wanted to upgrade (HP200 was quite a bit more expensive). HP200 sounded a bit cleaner and more transparent. Ultimately HP200's line stage was more refined sounding than HP100, but I actually preferred the tube HP100 phono stage with my cartridge at the time (Clearaudio Insider Wood), so I kept the HP100.
Last edited:
No. Both sounded very smooth and musical.
IIRC the line stage board of the two preamps was the same. I am not sure if there were differences in the power supply.
If there's an audio equipment I wish I didn't sell, HP100 would be it.
I find very interesting the different design philosophies of different preamp designers. By many accounts the HP100 is an emotionally-engaging preamplifier -- in one manageable box.
Other preamps are composed of three and even four boxes. Is that necessary? In cost-no-object theory, maybe . . . probably. But in practice?
For those wanting a little background on the Hovland preamps, you may find these comments by a former Hovland tech of interest.
www.diyaudio.com
My time at Hovland - HP-100 Lore
Every once in a while I see a post about Hovland and the HP-100 preamp. I worked at Hovland as a bench tech for about 3 months in 2002. I thought that since enough time has passed I would document all that I know about the inner workings of this lauded audiophile company and the esteemed HP-100...
Robert Hovland worked at Marantz and it was reported that the preamp circuit (HP100 and HP200) was based on Marantz 7. I am certainly not an engineer per se, but a line stage circuit is probably quite simple, so a huge chunk of money we spent on super fancy preamps were, well, fancy boxes... and extremely over-built power supplies.
Hi thank you for the link. Interesting read.For those wanting a little background on the Hovland preamps, you may find these comments by a former Hovland tech of interest.
My time at Hovland - HP-100 Lore
Every once in a while I see a post about Hovland and the HP-100 preamp. I worked at Hovland as a bench tech for about 3 months in 2002. I thought that since enough time has passed I would document all that I know about the inner workings of this lauded audiophile company and the esteemed HP-100...
Thanks for sharing. Apart from Hovland amps sound good or bad (I heard it 20 years ago and it was good) I had a strong feeling like the writer is a sound ignorant. I guess he may say powercords don’t make a difference, no such a thing like burn-in, bits are bits, no need for a top digital cable, printer usb cable is all you need etc.For those wanting a little background on the Hovland preamps, you may find these comments by a former Hovland tech of interest.
My time at Hovland - HP-100 Lore
Every once in a while I see a post about Hovland and the HP-100 preamp. I worked at Hovland as a bench tech for about 3 months in 2002. I thought that since enough time has passed I would document all that I know about the inner workings of this lauded audiophile company and the esteemed HP-100...
There are many people with preconception believe that things other than switching gear don’t makes a difference and they believe it without experimenting and without proper equipment. I’m tired of this kind of ignorance.
Last edited:
I owned an HP-100 with built in phono stage for 20 years. It was very good for a long time. Unfortunately I had an early model where the volume pot became very noisy and required replacing which I had done by Hovland. That was probably in the tenth year of ownership. Over the next ten years it had a number of problems and I finally sold it and bought the current generation of VTL 6.5 preamp line stage. My preference is definitely the VTL. I’ll add that I contacted Robert Hovland who perhaps 8 years ago was no longer in the audio biz but had a small office in Santa Monica and did repair work. I never took mine to him.
1) Why do you prefer the VTL?
2) Which preamp did you find to have better midrange "liquidity" and greater "breath of life"?
Last edited:
Ron IMO two different design philosophies. The Hovland was a tube unit. The VTL uses two tubes on the input side but is SS on the out. I use a Pass 150.8 amp. When I purchased the 6.5 I was home auditioning the 5.5 which is all tube. The Hovland used a SS device only in the power supply I believe. I called VTL and Bea answered. After talking she recommended the 6.5 over the 5.5 precisely because the SS out on the 6.5 would be a better match to the Pass. I heard it and thought the 6.5 to be a better unit than the 5.5 at a much higher price but I bought it. If you are running it into a tube amp I don’t know what it would sound like. Don’t forget that all of VTL’s electronics are hybrid designs.
I thought at the time the VTL was so much more robust with better grip than the Hovland. That was what appealed to me most. And my Hovland was having issues after twenty years so it was deteriorating and no match for the VTL. BTW when I sold the Hovland to someone in Oklahoma he told me that Robert Hovland was out of the audio business but doing refurbs and upgrades in a small office in Santa Monica. I contacted him and came close to taking it up there but never did. He openly said that although the HP-100 had a good phono stage it wasn’t great. I don’t believe he had his hand in the 200 and I never heard one. Hovland, the brand, only lasted another few years. I’d love to have the VTL 7.5 but I don’t have the room and I think it’s $30K or more which isn’t in my future. Regarding the Hovland phono stage my PS Audio Stellar BLOWS the Hovland off the map. I don’t say that lightly.
