NwAvGuy

On the right source material I prefer the D2000's also. And there are so many freakin' versions of the DT770's I think that could easily explain some of the differences in what others have heard. There's also the source issue. My DT770's sound muddy and boomy with a high impedance source. If that was my sole experience with them, I wouldn't like them either. The midrange I have to agree is a bit recessed--same with my HD590's. On some music, to my ears, that can be a good thing. And my experience with a lot of mods is they're all about making things sound different which isn't always better to other's ears. And I keep reading things like "yeah the pre-2007 DT880's were great but the current ones really suck", etc. So apparently Beyer makes changes along the way that some like and some don't. So perhaps the ones I have are different than those some here have experienced? To my ears, the DT770's, ATH-M50's and Denon D2000's at least deserve to hang out at the same party even if they wear different clothes. All 3 roughly sound more like each other than like the HD280's for example. I haven't tried going back and forth with my Ety ER-4's but that might give a better clue about absolute accuracy. But the fact is, a lot of you guys have waaaay deeper and broader experience with headphones than I do. I only know about the relatively limited selection of cans I've spent some time with. So my point of reference might be really different from some of the others here.

The 590's midrange is a bit dark--especially compared to the Denon's or my Ety ER4's. I could be wrong, but didn't the 595's directly replace the 590's? They're very different physically but it's my understanding they're supposed to have the same sonic signature. Perhaps not? And I've only heard the 600's once, but again, it's my understanding they're just a slightly more refined version of the 595. Not true? Is a huge player like Sennheiser really that random with their R&D and product management to have the 595 be radically different from the previous generation 590? Judging from what I've read it would seem Beyer isn't a model of consistency either. What's up with all that? Do these companies just design random crap and hope people keep trying enough different models, through enough different years and generations, until they finally find one they like? You can go find a 20 year old pair of B&W, or Theil, or lots of other brands of speakers, and compare them to anything similar they've made since, and they'll sound way more alike than different. For that matter the $400 pair will sound amazingly like the $4000 pair in a given line--they just won't play as loud, go as low, etc. Each new generation is about subtle refinements or tweaks rather than an entirely different sound. And there's usually a common "voice" or sonic signature within a product line from top to bottom. Why aren't more headphone companies like that? I get that some want a studio line, an audiophile line, a Dr Dre boom and sizzle line, portable line, etc.. But aren't the 590's, 595's, 600's, etc. supposed to appeal to the same audience? Or for that matter the Beyer 770, 880, 990 and T1? Just like the DT 770's, what sold me on the 590's is the comfort and I was sad to see Sennheiser mess that up on the newer versions. I want headphones I can wear for hours on end and forget they're even on my head. And I can do that with the DT 770's and HD 590's. Many, like my Sony V6's, just end up collecting dust. This stuff is obviously really subjective and one man's pleasure is another's poison. But I'm more curious than ever to hear more of these cans some of you consider way better than the D2000's, DT770's, HD590's, etc? I'm either missing out or just like different things.

I'm curious how much closer the 880's are to "great"? I've heard about the rattle problem with the 770's. I threw away a pair of Grados for that reason. Some say it's crap in the voice coil/magnet rubbing. But there are also guys who claim to break just about any headphone in a year yet have 5 year old 770's still going strong. Supposedly the drivers are replaceable but I have no idea if that's cost effective. Most of my full size can listening the last several years has been with the Denon 2000's and Sennheiser HD 590's. The really high end stuff I've only heard at shows, dealers, friend's places, etc. I mentioned in the "revealing" thread I'd like to live with some Stax for a while. But that's a lot of coin as I'd need an amp too. I'm also curious about orthos but their time seems to have passed. The new flagships are most conventional dynamics like the HD800's, etc.

It can't be as bad as being unable to stop watching Untraceable ...

Not even comfort? You list the AKG K1000's in your profile which are certainly different beasts entirely (and really rare I think?). I'd love to hear a pair sometime. I don't think I've ever heard any of the "orthos" and only a couple quick listens for electrostatics.

EDIT 4/23: If you're just finding this thread, I've substantially revised my published blog review of the DT 770's after living with them a while, receiving comments from others, and comparing them to additional headphones. Many of my initial impressions still apply, but the DT 770's are less accurate than I first believed. Beyer has done a decent job of spicing up the sound to appeal to a broader range of customers while leaving much of the frequency spectrum relatively unscathed. But after living with them for a while, and comparing them to more accurate reference cans, I better understand their weaknesses. All closed cans I've experienced involve significant compromises and it comes down to what trade offs are easiest to live with. For me, the 770's comfort and forgiving midrange still make them the best closed cans I've found for some applications. MY PREVIOUS INITIAL IMPRESSIONS: In my some of you gave the DT880's a solid recommendation. I was passing by the local Guitar Center and decided to check out what they had. They were out of 880's but did have the DT 770 Pro 80's so I figured WTF and gave them a listen using my phone as the source. To my surprise, with the sales guy pointing out their no-hassle return policy, I ended up reaching for my wallet. They're way more comfy and lighter than my existing favorite closed cans--the heavier and more ear-flattening Denon AH-D2000's. I sometimes need to tune out the world for hours at a time so comfort's a big deal. Based on their rep, I was expecting Sony XB/Monster levels of bass from the Pro 80's. So I was surprised they're relatively neutral above 100 hz. And even below 100 hz, where the bass is seriously bumped up, they're still relatively tight and well controlled. But it turns out that's true only with a low impedance source like the "zero ohm" Benchmark DAC1 Pre. With a higher impedance source the bass does get somewhat out of control and objectionable. Overall they surprised me for $200 closed cans. They have a bigger more realistic sound stage, for example, than the $350 Denon's. So now they really have me wondering what the 880's sound like? I've read newer DT880's are too bright and not as nice as the older discontinued version(s). Is there anyone here familiar with both the 770 80's and the current DT 880's to offer opinions on how they compare? The guy at Guitar Center said most of their customers prefer the 770's. He said, above $100, the DT770 Pro 80's are, by far, their most popular headphone for recording and mixing and they have trouble keeping them in stock. But he could have been just been trying to close the sale. It's not my main area of expertise, but just for fun, I threw a review up on my blog. I compare the 770's to the Denon AH-D2000, Audio-Technica ATH-M50, venerable Sennheiser HD 280 Pro's, and HD 590 open cans (which are mostly in the same league as the HD 595 and HD 600). It includes impedance measurements and some more detailed comments about the bass performance with different sources. I only had the M50's for a short time but I own all the others. The short version is the Denon's and HD590 do some things slightly better. But, overall, the DT770's hold their own and are rather addictive in their own way. The M50's were not all that comfortable for my ears and head but I was fairly impressed with their sound while I had them. And all four blow away the sorry HD280's. Beyer DT 770 Pro 80 Review

Assuming I do an Audio-Gd review, I don't even plan on posting it on HF. I learned that lesson with my NuForce review. I just think it would be interesting to see how their gear measures up. If it turns out it's crap, and word gets around, perhaps some of the more intelligent HF crowd will start looking elsewhere for their product information. And if it measures and does well in blind testing it might be a relative bargain. And I like a good bargain.

I want to get my hands on some Audio-Gd gear. As others have said, it is all over HF, and the Audio-Gd posts seem to constantly be bumped near the top. Is all the gushing praise really justified? I'd love to fire up the test bench and find out? Looking at the 3 dozen or more products they offer, all the variations, and how quickly they add new products, my educated guess is the one guy supposedly designing it all can't possibly spend enough time on each one to do a proper job. He seems more interested in following the latest trend-of-the-month than any consistent design philosophy. I might be old school, but I think getting the design right, measuring it, listening to it, refining it, getting input from others, etc. is far more important than using a particular op amp, zero NFB, or unobtanium capacitors mounted upside down with silly putty damping. Give a good chef some basic everyday ingredients and he can make something far more tasty than someone just throwing fancy ingredients together and hoping for the best. Anyone have some Audio-Gd stuff collecting dust you could spare and curious how it would measure up and perform in some blind listening?

I should add the IEC 61938 standard from 1996 does reference 120 ohms. And some manufactures (especially with those headphones marketed for professional studio use) design to that standard. But few of the amps everyone favors on these forums have a 120 ohm output impedance. And companies like Sennheiser and Grado claim they design for zero ohms. The difference can be substantial. Here's a plot I did showing a 50 ohm output impedance with no load in yellow, and what happens with the UE SuperFi 5 IEMs in light blue while the red plot shows the same headphones with a 2 ohm output impedance: And, many may have seen it before, but Stereophile published similar (if somewhat less dramatic) results with the AKG K530 here: Art & Science of Measuring Headphones

I can't argue with the above, beyond the subjective aspects of things like "grados do best with 10-15 ohms", etc. One's man pleasure is another man's poison in that regard. But I can see how there are some general preferences the majority might agree on. I've said all along, the impedance thing largely comes down to what the headphones are designed for (assuming you agree with how the designer wanted them to sound). The sad thing is, unless it's zero ohms, hardly anyone will end up using those headphones with the designer's ideal impedance target. It really is possible for all practical purposes to design a "one-size-drives-all" headphone amp. And it doesn't even have to be expensive. Its output won't change in audible ways with any headphone you want to throw on it. That doesn't mean all those headphones will be a great match, but the amplifier part is easy. So, from my perspective, it's frustrating this is way more complicated than it needs to be. If someone back in 1970 at the IEC said "thou shall make headphone amps with an output impedance less than 1 ohm" we would have nearly all headphones today designed for such a source. And this whole "synergy" thing would be way more simple. From Grado to Sennheiser they would all work as designed on any source that met the standard which would be nearly all of them. Wouldn't that be huge improvement from the compromised mess we have today? As Tyll has said, if the designers could count on high electrical damping from a low impedance source they could optimize their designs around that. But sadly they can't. Few designers have any freakin' idea what their cans will get plugged into. It might have a zero ohm output, 10 ohms, 250 ohms, or whatever. So it's all a big compromise. And when you're trying to design high-end ultimate gear compromises suck. I suppose some headphone enthusiasts may enjoy the endless variations they get due to impedance mismatches when they swap gear around. But surely there has to be a better way to fine tune the sound than random impedance mismatching? Speakers have been designed since the 70's to work with a zero ohm source. There's absolutely no reason the same thing can't be done with headphones. It would make for much more consistent results. Personally, I hope we continue to head in that direction.

Besides the fussy fit, filter hassles, and being relatively fragile, I agree my ER4's are probably the most accurate of what I own. I also wasn't trying to write off the AKG's. I'd love to hear them sometime. Lot's to think about. I'm going to do some experiments with the Denons and Etys and see how that goes. I'll see how I score blind with Foobar ABX and some test files with slight differences and let everyone know what I find out--at least with my ears and choice in music. If I get my hands on any of the others mentioned, I can repeat the same ABX trial and get a good idea if they're really any more revealing that what I have. Out of everything mentioned, the Stax probably hold the most appeal. I love a big soundstage, I remember liking the old ones I heard, and they're probably the most different from what I already have. So they might make a fun addition. Unlike speakers, which can take up lots of space, it's harder to have too many headphones, right?

Thanks. That's an interesting idea. In what ways is the good Mr Gilmore making life easier for DIYers? I found this thread: I'd be happy to give him some of my money rather than Elusive Disc if it made sense to do so. Such a project from scratch would be more time than I have to spare at the moment but the right shortcuts could make it worthwhile. I'll PM him. How does the old SR-X compare to the new 307/407/507? And how would those of you who've spent time with both compare the 307/407/507 to the HD 800?

So, out of curiosity and given all the Denon comments, anyone following this thread own (or used to own) the Fischer FA-003's? Many have heaped praise on them elsewhere. And they have nice deep earcups which I like for comfort. I don't expect them to be "reference grade" but I wonder if they're better overall than my current closed reference, the Denon's? They're eternally out of stock or I probably would have ordered some by now. Their north american distribution (kind of like Stax) is really weak.

I never expected to already own 3 of the suggestions. On top of the Etys and Denons, I already own the Sony's as well. I've had them the longest but don't listen to them much anymore. The pads are dying and the shallow earcups cause me some grief for long listening. But I'll drag them out for the fun of it. It's been a while. As for K701's... the AKG's always seemed so old school to me. But I have heard they sound better than they feel, look, or fit. Still, it's good to get suggestions that are relatively affordable.

Thanks again to all... Looks like used HD 800's are in the $1100 range... I'll keep thinking about the options and, in the meantime, see how far the Denon's will take me.

Thanks. In many ways, budget aside, that would probably be a great combo for me as well.

That's an interesting thought. I have to be careful which "D2000" we're talking about... AH-D2000 or ATH-AD2000. I considered the AT-900's and DT-770's before I bought the Denons. I should probably give the DT-880's more consideration too. So what did you find most useful in churning through all the DACs?

Thanks for all the input. Lots of good suggestions. Used HD800's are worth thinking about. They're new enough I would expect few to be around unless people are dumping them for better options? I suppose some may just need the cash.... It's worth checking out. The point about the cost of an amp is well taken. Where accuracy is concerned I'm relatively happy with the headphone amp in my Benchmark DAC1 Pre. But it obviously doesn't do me much good with a pair of Stax. So if I go that direction I have to include something like the SRM323 which costs more than the SR307's. I already have Ety ER4's and Denon 2000's. They both have their strengths. I bought the Denon's mostly on a quest to find some closed cans I really liked. They're by far the best closed cans I've yet tried, but on top of being bright, they sound a bit "closed" in the midrange to me. I also hate the cable that's about as flexible as a garden hose in Antarctica. I think the ER4's reveal more detail than the Denons. Perhaps it's just my ears, and the fit (or lack of it) with various tips, but they seem to sound significantly different every time I use them. They're the most "fit sensitive" IEMs I have and that makes them poor reference phones for me. And, regardless, I was hoping for something that's significantly more revealing than either the ER4's or D-2000's (or my HD590's). If that's going to require a 2nd mortgage perhaps I'll reconsider?

The HD800 is out of the price range. The SR-307/SRM-323S combo is a bit closer to $1K as are the JH13's. I'm curious if anyone here has both a pair of Lambda's and JH's and how they might compare the two? The last Stax I heard were (I think) the original 404's. I've never heard any of the JH IEMs but I've been curious.

Revealing as in let's say you wanted to see if there was any difference between two different CD players... what headphones would you use to expose the most subtle differences?

I'm curious what cans some of you consider to be the most revealing of the signal chain and still have a 3 figure price tag? I'm not looking for your favorite headphones for listening, but which ones you'd choose if you were evaluating say sources and wanted to hear the smallest of details? I'm hoping "most revealing" is less of a wide open question than "favorite" and there might be some reasonable consensus on at least a few choices?

There are two things going on here: I'm not sure how familiar you are with feedback loops, but they take a portion of the amplifer output and feed it back to a phase inverted (i.e. negative) input of the amplifier. This is typically done to reduce the distortion and effective output impedance of the amplifier. If the phase of this signal shifts significantly it starts to look more like positive feedback to the amplifier. And positive feedback turns amplifiers into either oscillators or they slam into a supply rail and stay there--not good. So an amplifier using NFB has a certain "phase margin" which helps assure it will remain stable under normal use. If we toss a series resistor into the amplifier output, and it's inside the global feedback loop, any drop across that resistor is now effectively seen as a source of "error" from the amplifier's perspective and the feedback loop will attempt to correct the error. That's why the output impedance is still near zero ohms despite the series resistor. Driving a resistive test load, the amplifier will likely behave great as long as you don't try to ask for too much current from it. But if you connect a real pair of headphones--especially balanced armature or multi-driver types--things change. Now the load is non-linear and has a significant reactive component. The load impedance changes with frequency and the current is out of phase with respect to the voltage. That phase shifted current creates the voltage drop across the series output resistor in the feedback loop while the feedback error signal is based on that drop. So now you have a significant portion of the feedback signal phase shifted from the amplifier's output signal and it also varies with frequency. This is less than ideal. With say a 6 ohm resistor and a 16 ohm load, nearly a third of the amp's output signal is dropped across the series resistor. So that's a significant amount of the "error signal" in the feedback loop. While it's possible to make an amp work with such an output resistor in the feedback loop, it's not, IMHO, the best of designs. You would likely have to make some significant compromises to assure it would be stable with any possible worst case headphone. NFB partly gets its bad reputation for what happens when it's on the edge of creating instability. So even if the amp doesn't oscillate or fail in any obvious way, it may well still sound bad playing real music with certain headphones as the relatively large phase shifted error signal may cause some unpredictable results.

That depends. Some raise the output impedance intentionally simply by putting a resistor in series with the headphones. Some use op amps that can't provide enough current to properly drive a 16 ohm load directly, so they're forced to add series resistance to keep the op amp "happy". Some IC's/designs don't have any short circuit protection and might self destruct without some series resistance. Still others might become unstable with certain headphones without series resistance. So the cheap and easy way out of all of these problems is just toss in some series resistance and be done with it. Unfortunately that has plainly audible consequences. There are plenty of IC op amps that are already short circuit protected, and will happily drive 16 ohm headphones directly. And there are plenty more discrete output circuits (using output transistors) that can do the same. So it's really not that difficult to have a low output impedance. As I pointed out, even the little $20 FiiO E5 headphone amp has a near zero output impedance. If FiiO can do it at that price in a tiny battery powered device, it's hard for anyone else to justify it's difficult or expensive. They either have a higher output impedance on purpose, they don't care, or they're being sloppy/cheap/etc. And to geek out a bit more, some put the series resistor inside the amplifier's feedback loop. This has the effect of making the resistor sort of magically disappear and you get a much lower output impedance while still having some protection. But it also creates a whole different set of problems to overcome having to do with large amounts of non-linear feedback, phase shift, etc. when driving real world headphones.

It's hard for me to imagine the uDAC-2 having too little gain unless you want an obscene amount of extra gain to crank it way up for improperly ripped tracks. So I'll have to side with the current majority. I have no idea about the original uDAC. Even the line outputs of the uDAC-2 clip at about 2 O'clock on its volume control and the headphone outputs clip at about 1 O'clock with 2.2 volts of output into 150 ohms--about 32 mW (or 50 mW into 16 ohms). Few will get it past 12 O'Clock with normal tracks and that leaves 10+ dB of surplus gain beyond that point available to compensate for quiet tracks or whatever. But, the damned-if-you-do/damned-if-you-don't argument is still a reason to either have an internal gain option like many other DACs/amps do, or something I haven't seen, offer the same DAC in two versions--low gain and high gain.

I was thinking the Streamer II had a digital output and, being cheaper than the V-Link plus the isolated USB, would be worth considering. But I just checked, and you're correct. Too little caffeine this morning....