or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › How bright is an ultrasone pro 900?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

How bright is an ultrasone pro 900? - Page 4

post #46 of 206
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by les_garten View Post
Have you thought of Modded Denon D5000's?
I'm wary of the build quality issues with some denons, and I am not really big on modded headphones - you can't really return them. Plus, they are wood - which I'd rather not mess with.
post #47 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greeni View Post
Compared to another headphone at hand, the treble energy is much lessened and some may prefer it as being smoother and easier on the ears, but my feeling is that the Pro 900 is closer to what the instrument was meant to be voiced.

A related issue, which I feel to be my main reservation with the Pro 900, is a lack of tonality and warmth. The 900 is incredibly resolving and transparent, the edge of instruments played through the 900 are sharply defined. Musical details are put into staking contrast with the 900, but the tonality is missing. The sheen of the violin comes to the front, almost cold, but the warmth and color of the wooden reverberations are less of a portrait. The 900 is like distilled water, clean, clear and transparent, but sometimes I like more flavor of red wine. Just as distilled water do let bright sunlight to pass through unhampered; any treble whiteness and peaky edginess in the recordings will have a ball with the 900, thus the perceived brightness.
What you are not noticing here is that basically what you described is recessed midrange - meaning treble is actually stronger in comparison. As a result you get the perception of transparency / clarity, but in reality you are describing a bright headphone (one that has even more bass for that matter, but in the mids it is weak, losing body of many instruments.).
post #48 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by ph0rk View Post
I'm wary of the build quality issues with some denons, and I am not really big on modded headphones - you can't really return them. Plus, they are wood - which I'd rather not mess with.
They are sweet sounding if you haven't heard them. An alternative would be D2000's, that would avoid the wood, you would have to mod them, but you would be richly rewarded. I understand about the Hinge/Pivot issue.
post #49 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaloS View Post
What you are not noticing here is that basically what you described is recessed midrange - meaning treble is actually stronger in comparison. As a result you get the perception of transparency / clarity, but in reality you are describing a bright headphone (one that has even more bass for that matter, but in the mids it is weak, losing body of many instruments.).
Interesting interpretation.
post #50 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by vvanrij View Post
Some questions Greeni, how many hours do you have on the Pro900 and just as important, the rest of your equipment! Compared to the other headphones I have the pro900 is actually one of the warmest, this could be due that I always use warm sources (the NAD gear I have), but still.
Thanks for correcting me. Yes the Pro 900 is like a cameleon and it may well be the case that the rest of the equipment may be the issue.
post #51 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by MaloS View Post
What you are not noticing here is that basically what you described is recessed midrange - meaning treble is actually stronger in comparison. As a result you get the perception of transparency / clarity, but in reality you are describing a bright headphone (one that has even more bass for that matter, but in the mids it is weak, losing body of many instruments.).
Thank you, interesting interpretation indeed…treble is stronger in relation to midrange, but whether it is (1) the treble that is forward; or (2) the midrange being recessed I guess may have something to do with the relative perspective the listener is taking.

My feeling is that we are talking about relative standpoint here which varies amongst individuals. Personally I don't found the Pro 900 midrange to be recessed, but I acknowledge this may hold true for some folks. One way or the other, I agree that the Pro 900 easily lend itself to sounding bright.
post #52 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kees View Post
I also like thew PRO900 better than the ED9. The ED9 are veiled in my experience...
! So I don't have to lust for the Ed9 afterall...but then again there is the Ed8 coming. I just hope that the final prototype is more light weighted, I have some medical issues which preclude me from wearing heavy phones for long sessions.

I have been wondering just how much more detailed could the Ed 9 gets, given that the Pro 900 is already so incredibly detailed. The few distinguishing transducers which I came across as having superb detail rendition include premium loudspeaker offerings from Monitor Audio and Magnepan. Listening to musical passages with interplay of multiple instruments, all the details are there relegating in the background of the soundstage and occupying its own space, and when one chooses to focus upon the specific it is right there. While the Pro 900 cannot be expected to compare with these distinguishing loudspeakers, it processes a miniature of these qualities. Cool.

In a brief comparison with the K701, another highly detailed can, I also decidedly end up preferring the Pro 900. While I am at lost as to how much more detail one could squeeze and want from cans like these, IMHO the Pro 900 is the more mature design in rendering the details in a more coherent manner. Take the notes coming from the pickle of a string, the arising of the acoustic notes out of the black background are perceived as musical details. While both of K701 and Pro 900 readily render all the musical information there is, the Pro 900 more realistically integrated the musical details with the instrumental images in its own space within the headstage. Due to this coherent quality, it is easier to “see” and “feel” the movement of the musician fingers pickling the string with the Pro 900.
post #53 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kees View Post
The ED9 are veiled in my experience...
It's probably because you didn't try them with a good setup.
post #54 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by pfillion View Post
It's probably because you didn't try them with a good setup.
Did you take a look at my profile before you posted this?
post #55 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by pfillion View Post
It's probably because you didn't try them with a good setup.

Perhaps we can compile a list of excuses for why Ultrasone Phones/ ED 9's don't sound good, I'll start

1) You listened to other HeadPhones within the last 5 years, ANY headphones. You just can't do that. To realize how good the Ed 9 sound is requires a commitment to ONLY ED 9's. If you listen to other phones, it will be impossible to appreciate the ED 9's. Your Brain will not rewire.

2) As mentioned here, your setup is not good. No matter what kind of setup you have, there is obviously something wrong with it if ED 9's don't sound good to you.

3) You didn't reach the required 40,000 hour break in period for them to sound right. Titanium takes time to loosen up, be patient! This will be good training for the New Unobtanum drivers coming out in ED 8 which will require REAL commitment to break in.

4) Your brain needs to be "virtually" rewired to hear the Ultrasone S-Logic, just keep listening, you will love them. Really, you will. Really, I mean it. Really...

5) Some people will never be able to hear how good they sound, their brains are just not capable. It's not their fault, they're just are not capable and we should feel sorry for them.

I'm sure that I missed a few in the last 600 pages of reading on this Ultrasone subject, please fill in my blanks.
post #56 of 206
You forgot that the amp needs to be a Rudistor and solid state.
post #57 of 206
@ pfillion and les garten... what the hell?

@ greeni, as a former owner of monitor audio's top series, they are nice speakers but there are so much more better ones out there, without even making a price leap. I can hear loads more details on a Pro900 or stax than I ever did with them (and yes pfillion, they were properly amped). The best thing of monitor audio imo are the looks, they look sweet
post #58 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kees View Post
Did you take a look at my profile before you posted this?
Sorry Kees, I didn't express myself correctly and I admit that I didn't check your profile.

Now, it's a little bit disturbing if your Rudistor amps didn't have a good synergy with the Ed.9 because I'm currently raising money to purchase the RPX-33 eventually.

In the past months I have tried several desktop and portable amps and I agree with you that sometimes the Ed.9 can sound dark or veiled. Thank god, recently I have finally purchase an amp that has a great synergy with them in the name of the RSA Mustang P-51.

With the RSA Mustang amp, to my ears, the Ed.9 have the same amount of details and clarity as the AKG 701 but with a better bass.

Patrick
post #59 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by pfillion View Post
Sorry Kees, I didn't express myself correctly and I admit that I didn't check your profile.

Now, it's a little bit disturbing if your Rudistor amps didn't have a good synergy with the Ed.9 because I'm currently raising money to purchase the RPX-33 eventually.

In the past months I have tried several desktop and portable amps and I agree with you that sometimes the Ed.9 can sound dark or veiled. Thank god, recently I have finally purchase an amp that has a great synergy with them in the name of the RSA Mustang P-51.

With the RSA Mustang amp, to my ears, the Ed.9 have the same amount of details and clarity as the AKG 701 but with a better bass.

Patrick
No problem.
I do find that Rudistor amps have very good synergy with Ultrasones. I liked the PROline 750 and 2500 very much with the Rudistor amps. But they did also very well out of my Pinkie modded X-Can v3.
The ED9 have (IMO) a different sound signature, maybe a less ideal match with Rudistor amps... good thing you like them with the Mustang.
None of these phones I find perfect, but at the moment I like the PRO900 the most.
I am allready modding them and I'm pretty sure I'll get them to sound pretty much the way I want.
post #60 of 206
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kees View Post
No problem.
I do find that Rudistor amps have very good synergy with Ultrasones. I liked the PROline 750 and 2500 very much with the Rudistor amps. But they did also very well out of my Pinkie modded X-Can v3.
The ED9 have (IMO) a different sound signature, maybe a less ideal match with Rudistor amps... good thing you like them with the Mustang.
None of these phones I find perfect, but at the moment I like the PRO900 the most.
I am allready modding them and I'm pretty sure I'll get them to sound pretty much the way I want.
Great !

How is the isolation of the PRO900 compared to the Ed.9 ?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › How bright is an ultrasone pro 900?