Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Ultrasone Pro 2900 Appreciation Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Ultrasone Pro 2900 Appreciation Thread - Page 2

post #16 of 394
Thread Starter 

You are totally right. I checked the specs on the Ultrasone website. Different sizes indeed.

 

 

1 pair earpad
Ultrasone headphone models:
PRO 900 and PRO 900 BALANCED Headphones
Material: velvet
Colour: black
Outer diameter: 98 mm
Inner diameter: 54 mm
Mounting: speed-switch
 
1 pair earpad
Ultrasone headphone model:
PRO 2900 Headphone
Material: velvet
Colour: black
Outer diameter: 92 mm
Inner diameter: 53 mm
Mounting: speed-switch

 

post #17 of 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by BournePerfect View Post

And here's the closest thing to a 'real review' about my fully burned in, properly amped, averagely-dac/sourced Pro 2900s (lol):

 

I'm not gonna do a review for the 2900s because I've pretty much summed up my thoughts about it a few times in this thread if people wanna search my posts. I haven't heard an HD 650-and the T1 is my next purchase.

 

To be honest-a lot of what people have written about the T1 remind me of the 2900s-except the 2900s will probably have a little more bass emphasis. But the rest is there: great soundstage, great treble that NEVER pierces, VERY DETAILED mids, and deep bass. Even though people rave about the 2900s bass-I have yet to hear a whole lot of slam or impact. That may be because I'm coming from a 900 though. And the bass, while great-I wouldn't say it's very tight and defined either. It's deep, sure-and I wouldn't call it bloated really either. But compared to say an AD2000 or K702 (properly amped)-it's not as distinct and tight as those, if you will. Even the DT 990 (from distant memory lol) had tighter bass-but I have heard much better cans since then so that may be a fluke memory.

 

The mids are...INCREDIBLE. Imagine the Pro 900s mids brought forward about 3 rows-and then add even more detail and texture throughout, and you'd have the 2900s mids. Just phenomenal really. I'm hearing details (cliche I know) in the mids that I haven't heard with other detailed cans such as K702, DT 880, and AD2000. That's saying a LOT imo about the details of this headphone. Textures in a singers voice, background vocals, and even a certain 'growl' that a singer is using that I have never heard before all became readily apparent in songs I've heard literally a few hundred times. If there's a weakness to be had in the mids-I would say that it's not as tonally correct as it could be. Not bad by any means-but amazing timbre/tonality is one of the things that has me salivating over the T1.

 

The treble? Never ever harsh to my ears-not once. It's not a treble I've fallen in love with either-like I did with the AD2000. It never pierces, and extends pretty well. And I think I'll leave it at that lol.

 

DT 880 comparisons: There is no comparison!! I A/B'd these with the DT 880/32 just last night-and what a downgrade it was! First thought that came to mind? "Thin-sounding. Everywhere." They are really not even in the same ballpark as the 2900- AT ALL. The DTs have a very thin piercing treble. The mids seem pretty good still-but a bit lifeless and not nearly as detailed, warm, or smooth as the 2900s. The bass has always been a great part of the 880s imo-in that it is very textured and extends nice and deep to my ears. It's doesn't have nearly the quantity of the 2900s bass-but I think the quality is a little better on the DT 880s bass. Keep in mind though-it still sounds 'light' and would do nothing to appease a basshead, where the 2900 probably could. All in all though-going from the 2900 back to the DT 880 is a major step backward imo. Like going from 1080p back to 480p if you will.

 

EQUIPMENT: I am pairing these with an EXCELLENT amp in the Audio gd C-2.1. To my ears, I preferred this amp over any others I have owned including the Concerto, C-2 SA, m-Stage, and Asgard, and E-9. The weak link in my system at this point is probably my dac-which is a Squeezbox Touch. Most people say this dac compares well with those up to $500 or more-so I'm not too worried about that at this point. I am coming from a Reference 9 though-and am definitely looking forward to something of that caliber again in the near future. The C-2.1 is the most critically revealing amp (not cold or sterile either) that I have ever had-same as the 2900s in that regard. So in that regard, my dac IS the weakest link right now.



nice impression!! and i'm agree with most that you've said..

 

i think the pro 2900 is the headphone that do most everything right without highlighting some frequency or having some kind of signature that draws your attention.. it doesnt have a lush mids like hd650,, clear and open treble like ath ad2000/prm,, or heart pounding pro 900 bass,, but the more you listen to it the more you feel that the sound is very balance and detailed across the entire spectrum and sounds good with whatever music you've thrown at it..

 

well its not like that they are without flaws,, the general complain of most of the ultrasone model is that the midrange is presented too flat and uncolored that makes it sound dry and metalic on some recording.. the pro 2900 although has the least problematic timbre out of the ultrasone PRO line up,, is still has it to some extend.. but if you stick with songs with good recording the pro 2900 will gives you a performance that way above its price value...

 

and the pro 2900 is not an easy to drive headphone,, a portable headphone amp will not gives the full sound and dimentional sound stage of the pro 2900.. well its not like its the most hard to drive headphone,,, just a good $200-300 desktop amp will get the job done,, but from what i've experienced in different setup the pro 2900 will benefit very much from a better source or dac because its more revealing to them than to the amp,, so if you think that your dac/source is the weakest link you will expect much improvement from the dac upgrade.. smile.gif

 

 

----

 

hopefully in the next few days/weeks my friend would lend me his sennheiser hd650,, then i will do a direct comparison in order to see how the pro 2900 fare with the reference headphone... smile.gif


Edited by santsant - 10/26/11 at 7:39am
post #18 of 394

Santsant, I'm of the mindset that a good hybrid amp would work great for these. The little Qinpu Q-2 showed me that these headphones can have truly wonderful vocals with a tube feeding them-but that amp surely wasn't driving them to their full capacity like my C-2.1. The Q-3 definitely lacked the detail and dynamics that the Audio gd did, which I suppose is to be expected with a $99 hybrid amp. I'm thinknpossibly a Cavalli diy or EF-5 would sound great, but perhaps not have the dynamics as a good solid state. To me, I have no issues with the mids out of my AGD, and love that they are so incredible detailed in that area, but I could see why someone may want a tube in the mix too.

 

-Daniel 

post #19 of 394
But with a tube, you'd loose the edge to the sound wouldn't you? I'd say they are as natural as you can get while still keeping an edge to the music. I'm still planning on getting the Audio-GD C2.2 in the next month or two and experimentation with some different OPAs. Do you think the Essence will be a good enough DAC for them?
post #20 of 394

You would lose the edge-that's why I love ss amps for them. Part of the draw of the Pro series is obviously bass and detail-so I would recommend solid state fro the most part. If someone is buying these for vocals-they would probably be better of with a different headphone. That said I LOVE the mids and vocals on these since they're just so darn detailed and clear, and don't sound unnatural to me like the 900s sometimes can. I don't know anything about the Essence-but any quality dac will be fine. Keep in mind with headphones this revealing though, you will certainly hear the quality continue as you improve your source. A more important thing in your case may be to make sure all of your music is lossless...then maybe down the road get an NFB-2 or something similar to pair with that C-2.2!

 

-Daniel


Edited by BournePerfect - 7/24/12 at 3:06pm
post #21 of 394
Quote:.
Originally Posted by BournePerfect View Post

Santsant, I'm of the mindset that a good hybrid amp would work great for these. The little Qinpu Q-2 showed me that these headphones can have truly wonderful vocals with a tube feeding them-but that amp surely wasn't driving them to their full capacity like my C-2.1. The Q-3 definitely lacked the detail and dynamics that the Audio gd did, which I suppose is to be expected with a $99 hybrid amp. I'm thinknpossibly a Cavalli diy or EF-5 would sound great, but perhaps not have the dynamics as a good solid state. To me, I have no issues with the mids out of my AGD, and love that they are so incredible detailed in that area, but I could see why someone may want a tube in the mix too.

 

-Daniel 



actually right now i'm using a DAC with tube output stage as a source and i can report you that i'm not experiencing any unnaturalness in the sound or problem with badly recorded song,, well despite the fact that i've already mod my ultrasone so it loose some of its analytical and revealing nature... right now i'm using a DIY solid state amp (quite a powerful amp, can drives he 6 with ease),, but im planning to make it to a hybrid amp in the near future..  

 

although i dont have an experience with the amp that you've mentioned, i think the hybrid ef 5 or the cavalli would perform very well with the pro 2900,, as i've had a hifiman ef-1 in the past to pair it with my pro 2500 and the wooaudio wa 6 i regard as one of the best amp for the pro 2900,, the pro 2900 would loves a good tube amp in my opinion.. smile.gif

post #22 of 394

I agree, but I just wouldn't want a tube amp if it means losing any detail or dynamic range-and seems to usually be the case until you spend big bucks. I'm sure there's probably some great diy designs out there that would do a great job for these at a reasonable price though.

 

-Daniel

post #23 of 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by MohawkUS View Post

But with a tube, you'd loose the edge to the sound wouldn't you? I'd say they are as natural as you can get while still keeping an edge to the music. I'm still planning on getting the Audio-GD C2.2 in the next month or two and experimentation with some different OPAs. Do you think the Essence will be a good enough DAC for them?


yes,, tube will usually makes sound less sharp than what the SS does..but it doesnt mean that SS amp will always  has an edge in dynamic and clarity,, the matrix m-stage for an example in my opinion is a very warm amp,, and makes the pro 2900 loose some clarity in the treble even though the bass has a very good punch,, while the wa-6 can keep the treble clarity of the pro 2900 while smoothing it down and it also has much better separation while the bass can still keep the dynamic.. but i think its back to the listener taste,,, if you want to keep the original sound signature of the pro 2900,, the SS amp would usually less colored than the tube amp...

 

i've already tried the essence sometimes ago,, and i think its a very good source,, and the option to change the opamp to tune the sound is a very good feature...

post #24 of 394
I pretty much exclusively listen to these with metal(check my last.fm in my sig), I'm sure a tube would sound great, but not with my music. My music is lossless, but I have a lot of poorly recorded music. The 2900s aren't forgiving, but they don't make is unlistenable either, they show the flaws, but they don't shove them down your throat, if you know what I mean.
post #25 of 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by MohawkUS View Post

I pretty much exclusively listen to these with metal(check my last.fm in my sig), I'm sure a tube would sound great, but not with my music. My music is lossless, but I have a lot of poorly recorded music. The 2900s aren't forgiving, but they don't make is unlistenable either, they show the flaws, but they don't shove them down your throat, if you know what I mean.


actually 80% of my listening time are mostly a mix of metal, rock and electronic music though i'm not usually listen to indie metal that you do... i think sometimes if you have the time you should tried some tube amp for the pro 2900,, because they dont make the sound as dull as you've though about.. smile.gif

 

@BournePerfect

 

if you interested for a cheap diy design for an alternative you might like to know about the amp that i currently used,, its basically a speaker amp that tweaked to work as a headphone amp, i think its one of the cheapest amp around that can made the pro 2900 perform at its full performance.. if you know a headphone blog called headfonia.com they has an article that discuss about it,, http://www.headfonia.com/gainclone-and-headphones/ ..

 

 

and actually the amp in the picture was mine.. biggrin.gif  


Edited by santsant - 10/26/11 at 2:07pm
post #26 of 394
Quote:
Originally Posted by santsant View Post





actually 80% of my listening time are mostly a mix of metal, rock and electronic music though i'm not usually listen to indie metal that you do... i think sometimes if you have the time you should tried some tube amp for the pro 2900,, because they dont make the sound as dull as you've though about.. smile.gif

 

@BournePerfect

 

if you interested for a cheap diy design for an alternative you might like to know about the amp that i currently used,, its basically a speaker amp that tweaked to work as a headphone amp, i think its one of the cheapest amp around that can made the pro 2900 perform at its full performance.. if you know a headphone blog called headfonia.com they has an article that discuss about it,, http://www.headfonia.com/gainclone-and-headphones/ ..

 

 

and actually the amp in the picture was mine.. biggrin.gif  


If given the chance I'd almost certainly try out a tube amp, its just that there aren't any good stores around here for that kind of thing. I've been watching youtube videos that compare tube and solid state guitar amp, for what that's worth, and I think I might be wrong about tube amps being 'boring' , but they do seem to have a distinctive sound that I'm still not really a fan of. The two types of amps aren't really as different sounding as I thought. But a tube really wouldn't work for my setup anyway. I'm hooked into my computer and spend a lot of time gaming and watching youtube videos, I'd probably be swapping the tubes out every couple of months at least.
Edited by MohawkUS - 10/26/11 at 3:19pm
post #27 of 394
Thread Starter 

Guys, I received the Pro 2900 just now.

 

beyersmile.png

 

 

post #28 of 394
beyersmile.png

That's great news. Make sure to give them plenty of time to burn in. There were times when the treble spiked, times when the bass spiked(this was fun), and times when the bass disappeared. I'm a believer in listening through burn in, I would say they took about 2 weeks to fully burn in, and I listened about 5-6 hours a day, so roughly about 90 hours for the big changes.
post #29 of 394
Thread Starter 

Most definitely mate! I'm at work at the moment, as its inapproriate right now.

 

I did notice that with my Pro 900's too. Bass would disappear and reappear again. Strange burn in process.

 

I just bought Battlefield 3, so keen to test the 2900's out with gaming. Any Pro 2900 owners tried with an Astro Mixamp 5.8? I'm looking to buy this soon, I just need to weigh up my options.

 

Can't wait to get home though..

 

L3000.gif

post #30 of 394
The 2900 is amazing with gaming. I don't own Battlefield 3, but I play New Vegas on it, absolutely amazing. I don't feel the need to use dolby on them, I turned it off a month ago, but that could just be because my Essence card uses preset EQs with dolby to emulate different sized rooms. It sounds off when your playing in an outdoor place in game, but works well with indoor areas.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Ultrasone Pro 2900 Appreciation Thread