Hello head-fi, new to the forum and hi-fi way. Have owned some of the mainstream/cheapo IEs and on-ear gear but was never satisfied.
Recently purchased a pair of 770 Pro-250's from amazon. Did some research and decided these would be a nice place to start, portable amp on the way also so I hope to get the full potential out of them.
Hey guys, I just bought the DT 990 Premium 600 OHM Headphones from Amazon. Anyways I'm asking what are the best amps to go with these? Looking to spend no more than $200
Thanks
Which DT headphones are good for Hip-hop?
DT770 Pro 80 OHMS have great bass and will probably be the best for hip-hop if your going for bass. The sound stage is pretty good as well.
Hey guys, I just bought the DT 990 Premium 600 OHM Headphones from Amazon. Anyways I'm asking what are the best amps to go with these? Looking to spend no more than $200
Thanks
Are you looking for a portable amp or something stationary for home use? The Fiio E11 is pretty portable and has great reviews if you're looking to use it on the go. I'm not too sure about amps for home though.
Are you looking for a portable amp or something stationary for home use? The Fiio E11 is pretty portable and has great reviews if you're looking to use it on the go. I'm not too sure about amps for home though.
Yea mainly for home use
I'll check the E11 out. Thanks
Yea mainly for home use
I'll check the E11 out. Thanks
Went w/this, still waiting for delivery.
At exactly 4,200 hours, the DT880 communicates to you the meaning of Life, the Universe, and Everything. 
Is that what it was? I thought it was just the phone ringing in the background. 
More seriously, I would urge you to keep a more open mind about burn-in, Argyris. Your experience may have been largely negative, but there's ample anecdotal evidence on the other side, and after 45 years of experience in hi-fi I'm convinced there is something to burn in beyond wishful thinking--and I'm one who always burns in without listening, so it's not a question of getting used to the sound. I don't ask you to suddenly believe, just be a little less dismissive.
Is that what it was? I thought it was just the phone ringing in the background.
More seriously, I would urge you to keep a more open mind about burn-in, Argyris. Your experience may have been largely negative, but there's ample anecdotal evidence on the other side, and after 45 years of experience in hi-fi I'm convinced there is something to burn in beyond wishful thinking--and I'm one who always burns in without listening, so it's not a question of getting used to the sound. I don't ask you to suddenly believe, just be a little less dismissive.
+1 I AGREE.. i also think burn-in time is needed..especially with tubes and amps and headphones...i even believe that cables need at least 48 hours of burn in time. maybe its placebo.but my ears tell me they do sound different from out of box play and after burn in time..its not day and night difference..but u hear difference!
Is that what it was? I thought it was just the phone ringing in the background.
More seriously, I would urge you to keep a more open mind about burn-in, Argyris. Your experience may have been largely negative, but there's ample anecdotal evidence on the other side, and after 45 years of experience in hi-fi I'm convinced there is something to burn in beyond wishful thinking--and I'm one who always burns in without listening, so it's not a question of getting used to the sound. I don't ask you to suddenly believe, just be a little less dismissive.
I think it's more of reaction to some of the wild claims I've read about amazing transformations that have sort of make me skeptical. I have personally experienced small changes that might be attributable to a burn-in effect, but they have been incredibly subtle if anything and have happened over a very short period of time. The DT880 was one of the headphones I perceived none of this effect for. I don't even know how many hours I've got on my pair, though it has to be over 1,000 by now, maybe even close to 2,000.
I recall reading an InnerFidelity article (or maybe there were several; I'll have to go check that) that showed some actual small changes in the response of a headphone that had content continuously played through it and wasn't moved from the dummy's head, meaning that the usual positional changes between measurements couldn't account for the effect. That certainly isn't conclusive, being one sample of one headphone, but it does give the idea some credibility. The changes were minuscule, however, and certainly wouldn't constitute a huge transformation.
The intent of that post was more to ensure that the poster I was responding to didn't get caught up in the usual furor around here about amazing transformations after exceptionally long playing times and miss the opportunity to possibly return the headphone if it turns out it ultimately isn't the right one. In my own experience, I battled with myself for over a week with the M50, feeding it days worth of music and pink noise, before I finally admitted that I didn't like it and took it back. I'd read all sorts of stuff about how it supposedly got "better" after x-number of hours.
Incidentally, it's one of the headphones I perceived the most change in, with the bass appearing from nowhere after about three hours (I wouldn't have bought it if it had sounded that bassy in the shop). That still might have just been the result of a different setting, and it certainly didn't take 4,290 hours (exactly) to happen.
Of course everybody is entitled to believe what they think is right. I certainly don't want to be responsible for sending us all into the circular discussion about burn-in, and I appreciate your and hifimanrookie's posts.
I think it's more of reaction to some of the wild claims I've read about amazing transformations that have sort of make me skeptical. I have personally experienced small changes that might be attributable to a burn-in effect, but they have been incredibly subtle if anything and have happened over a very short period of time. The DT880 was one of the headphones I perceived none of this effect for. I don't even know how many hours I've got on my pair, though it has to be over 1,000 by now, maybe even close to 2,000.
I recall reading an InnerFidelity article (or maybe there were several; I'll have to go check that) that showed some actual small changes in the response of a headphone that had content continuously played through it and wasn't moved from the dummy's head, meaning that the usual positional changes between measurements couldn't account for the effect. That certainly isn't conclusive, being one sample of one headphone, but it does give the idea some credibility. The changes were minuscule, however, and certainly wouldn't constitute a huge transformation.
The intent of that post was more to ensure that the poster I was responding to didn't get caught up in the usual furor around here about amazing transformations after exceptionally long playing times and miss the opportunity to possibly return the headphone if it turns out it ultimately isn't the right one. In my own experience, I battled with myself for over a week with the M50, feeding it days worth of music and pink noise, before I finally admitted that I didn't like it and took it back. I'd read all sorts of stuff about how it supposedly got "better" after x-number of hours.
Incidentally, it's one of the headphones I perceived the most change in, with the bass appearing from nowhere after about three hours (I wouldn't have bought it if it had sounded that bassy in the shop). That still might have just been the result of a different setting, and it certainly didn't take 4,290 hours (exactly) to happen.
i agree with this somewhat..but whats weird..i owned a couple of phones until now..and some of them didnt sound much different from out of box and after 100 hours..BUT..somehow the planars (he400 and now my he500) sound signature changed considerably after at least 100 hours of burn in time...out of box they sounded a bit congested and muddy and soundstage was only so so..now after at least 100 hours they sound so much different..and its not only me saying it..my wife listened to them in beginning and she didnt like how the he500 sounded like (she got even angry with me ..wasting this kind of money on that phone sounding like that)..but a few days ago she listened again and she said it sounded completely different..maybe its because the planars use magnets? i dont know..but for hifiman's burn-in time is necesary..even mr fang told me by mail his phones needs at least 100 hours burn-in time. and i suppose he is the master of headphones 
just like tubes for amps..i had a new pair of nos tubes in my amp and they hummed like crazy in beginning..only after around 80 hours they got quiet and started to sound heavenly...and i can give u same example on a copper cable i had bought...but on my he300 and my mmx300 i didnt hear much difference in sound from new to burned in..but maybe its because dynamic headphones dont need it?
I think it's more of reaction to some of the wild claims I've read about amazing transformations that have sort of make me skeptical. I have personally experienced small changes that might be attributable to a burn-in effect, but they have been incredibly subtle if anything and have happened over a very short period of time. The DT880 was one of the headphones I perceived none of this effect for. I don't even know how many hours I've got on my pair, though it has to be over 1,000 by now, maybe even close to 2,000.
Actually I agree entirely with your aversion to hyperbole; there's way too much of it in these forums. No, I don't believe in HUGE transformations over HUNDREDS of hours. At best you'll get a noticeable change over 20 or 30 hours; I've never really noticed much beyond that. People need to keep their adjectives in check.
Re the DT880Pro, I was immediately aware of the much mentioned HF peak, but nowhere near as much as I was expecting. Initially I had to turn the treble down a little. Now, however, after around 50 hours, I hear no treble peak, even in relation to my other two phones: the Senn HD595 and Hifiman HE-500. Balance is just about perfect. Is it burn in or my ears deteriorating severely in the last three weeks? I only know that I like them very much at the moment and can't imagine better value for money.
Yeah, they're definitely a tremendous value. Even at their current MSRP, which is about $100 higher than when I got my pair, they're good, though of course for $250 they were a complete steal. I think people just assume that since they've been around for a while and that there are much more expensive headphones out there, that they must not be real competition anymore. It's funny that the HD650 doesn't get that treatment as much, though the higher MSRP might contribute there, placing it in a higher class in people's minds.
Here's the raw data for the DT880, which I find more informative than the smoothed, compensated curve:
The compensated chart makes it look like there's a huge, broad spike peaking at 9-10kHz and joining the spike at 5-6kHz. The raw data shows general elevation in the 9-10kHz region but also that the 5-6kHz spike is the more prominent of the two. I do hear the latter spike, but in the 9-10kHz region I don't hear any elevation whatsoever. Sometimes I find these measurements to be a bit puzzling. There was yet another IF article about that, basically stating that, in Tyll's headphone measurements, everything above 3kHz or so is less accurate, and above 10kHz all bets are off. Either that, or the "ear canal" resonance of the dummy is around this frequency, instead of a more realistic 6-8kHz (incidentally, mine is 7.76kHz).
Quite a few headphones have that big peak in that 9-10kHz region, and of the several such examples I've tried, I haven't heard it in any of them. I've also seen headphones that were measured elsewhere and in Tyll's measurements they had the spike, but in another set of measurements they were flat. Rhythmdevils' modified Yamaha orthos are one such example that comes to mind. I don't think Tyll's measurements are wrong, per se, but that the HRTF he applies requires that the results be interpreted instead of read literally or compared to a flat line. He pretty much says exactly this but doesn't go into specifics about that treble region.
Yeah, they're definitely a tremendous value. Even at their current MSRP, which is about $100 higher than when I got my pair, they're good, though of course for $250 they were a complete steal. I think people just assume that since they've been around for a while and that there are much more expensive headphones out there, that they must not be real competition anymore. It's funny that the HD650 doesn't get that treatment as much, though the higher MSRP might contribute there, placing it in a higher class in people's minds.
Our tendency to judge solely by price could probably use a thread of its own. When I bought the DT880 it was purely out of curiosity; I never had a thought that it could fulfil sole headphone duties, especially after I'd owned the LCD-2 (Rev1) and currently own the HE-500. The DT880 is an old design long since classified as mid-fi and often selling for less than $250, so how can it possibly rival the big boys?
When I first listened I was very pleasantly surprised, but still firmly resisted any thought that it could possibly be a genuine contender. Good balance, low colouration, decent thump in the bass and bite in the treble, but it must lack somewhere. Poor resolution maybe? Nope, seems okay there, even if not quite the super clarity of the HE-500 on direct comparison. Soundstage? Nope, that seemed to be one of its strengths. Still I resisted the idea that this phone might be good enough as a first and only phone. It was only $250 bucks, and the HE-500 is $700 and considered a steal at the price, while the LCD-2 is $1000. Price defines quality, right? Or why else would people write things on the amp forum like, "Okay, there's no point spending $700 on a headphone unless you're prepared to spend at least $500 on a decent amp," even though an amp's function is purely to amplify, which you wouldn't think was that difficult a job for, say, $200. But, as we all know here, price defines quality.
Okay, so I kept listening to the DT880, occasionally glancing at it with slit-eyed skepticism, waiting for it to reveal its Achilles Heel, the one thing that would rule it out of contention and explain why it was so neglected for the price. The thing is though, I'm still listening, and the more I listen the more convinced I am that there isn't an Achilles Heel, that in fact the gap between this so called mid-fi phone (and perhaps many others) and the flagships and penultimates isn't so wide after all, and that it's more than good enough to satisfy probably 95% of audiophiles, let alone non-audiophiles. Seems to me it's greatest problem is that damn typical selling price of $250, which just robs it of all credibility. After all, no true enthusiast is going to admit that he was satisfied with a $250 phone when everyone's enthusing over the latest $1500 miracle. It would be like admitting you have cloth ears, which I guess is what I'm doing now.
Our tendency to judge solely by price could probably use a thread of its own. When I bought the DT880 it was purely out of curiosity; I never had a thought that it could fulfil sole headphone duties, especially after I'd owned the LCD-2 (Rev1) and currently own the HE-500. The DT880 is an old design long since classified as mid-fi and often selling for less than $250, so how can it possibly rival the big boys?
When I first listened I was very pleasantly surprised, but still firmly resisted any thought that it could possibly be a genuine contender. Good balance, low colouration, decent thump in the bass and bite in the treble, but it must lack somewhere. Poor resolution maybe? Nope, seems okay there, even if not quite the super clarity of the HE-500 on direct comparison. Soundstage? Nope, that seemed to be one of its strengths. Still I resisted the idea that this phone might be good enough as a first and only phone. It was only $250 bucks, and the HE-500 is $700 and considered a steal at the price, while the LCD-2 is $1000. Price defines quality, right? Or why else would people write things on the amp forum like, "Okay, there's no point spending $700 on a headphone unless you're prepared to spend at least $500 on a decent amp," even though an amp's function is purely to amplify, which you wouldn't think was that difficult a job for, say, $200. But, as we all know here, price defines quality.
Okay, so I kept listening to the DT880, occasionally glancing at it with slit-eyed skepticism, waiting for it to reveal its Achilles Heel, the one thing that would rule it out of contention and explain why it was so neglected for the price. The thing is though, I'm still listening, and the more I listen the more convinced I am that there isn't an Achilles Heel, that in fact the gap between this so called mid-fi phone (and perhaps many others) and the flagships and penultimates isn't so wide after all, and that it's more than good enough to satisfy probably 95% of audiophiles, let alone non-audiophiles. Seems to me it's greatest problem is that damn typical selling price of $250, which just robs it of all credibility. After all, no true enthusiast is going to admit that he was satisfied with a $250 phone when everyone's enthusing over the latest $1500 miracle. It would be like admitting you have cloth ears, which I guess is what I'm doing now.
Nah, you're just being objective. You pointed out meaningful comparisons between known references, so the validity of your assessment (and judgement) is unimpeachable, even if somebody out there doesn't agree with it.
I think the thing about the DT880 that sets it apart is that it's old enough to have been a flagship when flagships were much cheaper than they are now. It was engineered to be the statement product of the company (even if they claimed that the DT990 was TOTL). New headphones in this price range aren't TOTL and have obvious flaws, since the makers want you to buy their best and pay $$$$. The DT880 was always the cheaper option, even when it was new, and even then I gather from period posts that people were skeptical something so reasonably priced could perform so well. Even then, people tried to make their HD600 and HD650 better in their minds, or suggest that it was worth keeping both it and the Beyers around because they complemented one another (not going to argue there) and afforded them complete genre coverage.
The DT880 certainly has its weaknesses. It's definitely on the bright side, which I know makes it a nonstarter for some folks. I can't decide how extended its bass is--it makes it all the way to the bottom on the opening pedal passage in Passacaglia in C minor, so it definitely goes pretty deep, but that's a fairly naked passage. On other tracks sometimes I feel like the lowest reaches aren't quite loud enough. Overall bass level is on the lower end of my preference zone, which is fine, especially for classical. It has good punch and tightness, though sometimes I feel like texture is just a little lacking in the bass. That could just be a result of there being less overall presence down there, making what's there less obvious.
Something that surprises me is the common criticism that the DT880's midrange is noticeably recessed. I've never gotten this impression. The midrange is my favorite part of this headphone. It's not euphonic, if that's what people want, but its transparent and detailed and certainly not back in the mix. I've heard headphones that make everything sound like vinyl, with tuneful, forward mids and laid back treble. It's a lovely sound, but it's far from neutral, and certainly not a benchmark to judge the DT880's mids by, if that's what people are doing.
Overall, quite a fine headphone. If you haven't found anything glaring wrong with them by now, chances are it's not there. There's still some great values out there, and I think this is one of them. It's just amazing that it's a headphone that's been around for a decade now, but hiding in plain sight.
so yes i agree with u..good sounding cans dont need to be expensive..look at the mmx i have and the cheaper hifiman's..but for a bit more ur view will be so much more wider..imho ofcourse..and i admit..am not objective here..as i found out u cant be if its concerning listening to music..AND I DONT like to talk bout phones i never experienced at least once...every ears and budgets and preferences are different..i always say..no matter what can u have or what rig u use..if it gives u goosbumps sometimes on certain songs then u made the right choice! Stick with that..as thats what counts in the end..enjoying ur music to the fullest..being loaded (money) or not..for me my rig makes me relax and loose myself in music and smile..and for me thats all what matters..i sometimes even forget to sleep and listen al night long until morning, i just forget time sometimes my wife slaps me (softly ofcourse ) as she gets irritated when i again didnt go to bed and listened to music on the couch all night long..but as i said..the beyer mmx300 i love very much also..its a bit bright..but it has a very full sound..i love that!
