The CAL!s are some of the best deals in audio. They share everything with the d1001ks except for two things. Earpads are better, oddly enough, though not more isolating, just a bit fuller/softer. Same materials, just a little different to allow them to have a little more on the bottom end than the d1001s.
The earcup internal volume and external cosmetics. The external cosmetics, to me, the piano black with the metal accents, very nice, but the Denons are designed so that the internal volume of the phones are tuned to slightly different listening styles. To put it simply, the d1001s are better for symphony music, the CAL!s are better for more mid-bass and low bass music like hiphop, electronic music, and rock, where you don't want ear piercing highs. There are some mods that can be easily done on the CAL!s that will make them spank stock d1001s in every area, symphony music, jazz, chamber music, contemporary classical music, and so forth. Everything else is exactly the same, bcause they are made by the same company, so same driver, same driver baffle, same internal wire-type, same headband, same everything, but the cable on the d1001s is a tiny bit better externally, as the plug is better, to me, but the CAL!s plug is lower profile. Both phones have an extension cable, and while the one for the denons is bad, the one for the creatives is just aweful, but for both you should get a better extension cable anyway, so it really doesn't matter. The bags that come with the phones, the denons have no label, and the creatives have a little creative tag, but both are same size and material.
I would get the Aurvanas out of the two, but the m50s are superior in isolation, for sure, but with the right mods, it is very hard to knock the d1001/cal! out of the contender picture.
To me, from a portable, the aurvanas/denons would be a better choice. I have pretty good spatial instrument location from my Sansa, which, the Sony XB700s fit well on a portable too, are sensitive as hell, but they are for those that don't mind the look, and are willing to take them seriously as more than just a bass headphone. The modded aurvanas, to me, are a bit more punchy than the xb700s on a portable, and the m50s have a very natural HF and metallic instruments sound smooth and sweet, I just don't like to mate them with my Sansa because they need a tad more power, though you say you have some kind of portable amplification option, so it may be a good fit. I would ditch more opamps in the chain and get a set of cans that can work with the DAP's own little amp, which already is often not the best due to cost cutting. The Cowan players were made for music, so much better, and the Zune, of course, has a far better output for a portable player than the ipod/iphone, but you don't get all the usefulness of all the applications for the apple device. It is all about what you want more, I guess. I would count out the apple simply because you have to jump through so many damn hoops to put music on it. The zune is not much better, but at least you can use WMP, so it is fairly seamless. I bought the Sansa over a nano because the sansa mounts as a HD, and you just copy your music into the music folder. Done. It also doesn't sound any worse than a nano. On that level, SQ is going to be about the same, and it is personal preference. Right now, The Cowan players, the ZuneHD and Sony has some good players, but I would be careful trusting sony, those i named here have the SQ crown. A lot of people here use older ipods because they just sound better, even through the line out, they just seem to sound better. All the recent BS with the iphone4 shows me exactly where apple has it's sights set and it isn't music. If MS would only make a phone! ZuneHD+phone/windows apps=
Edited by yashu - 8/7/10 at 7:36am
