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

Ultrasone Pro 2900 Thread

post #1 of 419
Thread Starter 

2900 Owners/Interested parties!


I hope this thread provides a lot of insight and builds enough information for potential buyers. 


There has not been a comprehensive review of this headpone thus far, so feel free to contribute for all the existing and new Pro 2900 owners.



post #2 of 419




Couldn't resist gs1000.gif

post #3 of 419
Thread Starter 



I know I know... But there are scattered opinions for these cans, so the aim was to consolidate everyone's thoughts on them.

post #4 of 419

I'll get my old impressions copied over here later tonight! I will say this though: The 2900s are very different beasts than their closed siblings-the Pro 900s! I could easily see someone owning both-and I may just buy the 900s back again! But the the Pro 2900s are DEFINITELY a much, much better all-around headphone. More to come later...




Columsterd: Did you ever buy these, or just the 900s? Also-Jibbie needs to get these since he cheated on his own massive thread-but he's still welcome here! tongue_smile.gif



post #5 of 419
Originally Posted by BournePerfect View Post


Columsterd: Did you ever buy these, or just the 900s? Also-Jibbie needs to get these since he cheated on his own massive thread-but he's still welcome here! tongue_smile.gif



Nope, though I have heard them and in all honesty I didn't find them to be vastly different. I also have owned the hfi-2400s, but that's an entirely different story. I'm considering selling my 900s for some d5000s, but I havn't made up my mind yet!

post #6 of 419

Here's some of my impressions cut and pasted from the 'other' thread, of my Pro 2900s. I bought these on 9/14/11-please forgive the somewhat disjointed impressions because I'm to lazy to post a real review. :) Feel free to ask any questions!!!!!!!


My 2900s are HERE!! Very premature impressions (out of a Zune only (I'm on vacation lol): These pads seem quite a bit thinner than the Pro 900 pads were. They are definitely softer too-they remind me of the silver 900 pads. With a MASSIVE grain of salt after 5 minutes of listening-I already like them more than I ever did the 900s. The mids are only mildly recessed, and vocals come out clear as day. Bass is positively excellent-but we knew that already. Airiness is there-that's the biggest complaint I had of the 900s, and they don't seem quite as metallic sounding.


Obviously I need much more headtime with them, but that won't really happen on proper equipment for probably another week! Stay tuned...




Like I said-I'm on vacation and only have a Zune and iPod atm! And the mids are still more forward than on the 900, so if they are 'thin' now, I sure as heck am in for a treat because I've got no complaints about them at this point. I should be home by the weekend to listen to them with a proper source/amp.




My non-audiophile little brother has noticed the same thing as me-the sibilance has toned town quite a bit with only about 30 hours of burn in. It seems like the 900s improved the most in the first day or two as well. I bought these primarily as my movie/gaming cans since the 900s impressed me so much with them-these continue that pattern but I am definitely liking them quite a bit more with music-they seem much more balanced and natural sounding.




Do you still have the 900s? These cups seem a lot smaller on the 2900s, or is it just the pads?? Either way, I'm having none of the loose positioning issues that I had with the Pro 900s, which always drove me nuts searching for that sweet spot. Just another positive in the 2900s arsenal. So far the only thing 'better' with the 900s is the bass impact, which I suppose is to be expected with their closed design. Even so, my basshead gf still likes these quite a bit more as well. Still burning in, more impressions down the line... Update: Yes...it turns out the cups are quite a bit smaller...




Most people consider the Pro 2900 just an 'open' Pro 900-but I feel they are are different enough to own each if one wanted to do so. The more my 2900s are burning in, it seems to be quite a great all-arounder, whereas the 900 seemed very limited to just couple of genres. I relied on the 900s primarily as my movie/gaming cans, and very little for music since I don't really listen to EDM. I am enjoying the 2900s a great deal more, and the only area they are behind in is bass impact-but then again I'm not running them out of an amp atm. Long story short-the 2900 really aren't that similar to the Pro 900s as one might expect. They seem much more refined, neutral, and natural sounding. The Pro 900s are definitely more aggressive, sibilant (ugh), and not as refined in comparison, but certainly better for electronica, and worse for everything else. Not that the 2900 aren't good for electronica by any means...I should just wait til I get them hooked up to an appropriate amp before saying more lol. My still early .02 ;)




These things continue to impress! A couple more brief impressions...I don't find the mids recessed AT ALL on these. In no way whatsoever does the bass intrude on the mids-even my silver pads Pro 900 couldn't make that claim! These really do have a very neutral presentation to my ears. I think I'd honestly say they may even be a tiny bit mid-forward...and I haven't really noticed any hint of sibilance believe it or not. I'm currently around 100 hours of burn in. I have only listened to them off and on during burn in...and so far the biggest changes came in the first 24 hours. They do keep getting more refined (although my Qinpu Q-2 amp is burning in with it) by the day. However, I just have the crap stock tube, and it doesn't really sound any different than my (very neutral) vintage Kenwood KA-3500 headphone output....stay tuned!


Jibbie: I've also said my biggest 900 complaint was finding the sweet spot since the cups always kinda slid around on me. These are 100% stable at all times for me-and they do not exhibit that problem whatsoever. Thanks to Sansant for confirming the smaller cup sizes!


Also: They still are definitely lacking in bass impact compared to the 900s-but take that with a big grain of salt since I haven't heard them out of a proper SS amp yet, like I did with the 900s.



More to come!



Edited by BournePerfect - 7/24/12 at 2:47pm
post #7 of 419
And I know I've refered to them as "the best metal headphones I've heard" and "the most natural sound you can get without sounding boring"
post #8 of 419
Originally Posted by MohawkUS View Post

And I know I've refered to them as "the best metal headphones I've heard" and "the most natural sound you can get without sounding boring"

You gotta do better than that-start cut/pasting!! lol Here's some more recent impressions after probably a few hundred burn in hours and *gasp!* proper amping:


These are a COMPLETELY different beast than the Pro 900s. In fact I've been thinking about buying some Pro 900s again-even though I clearly prefer the 2900s. The 2900s simply don't have the massive impact as the 900s, which I find very appealing in different situations. But the 2900s are a much better all arounder-in fact one of the best I've heard! The mids are EXCELLENT, and I wouldn't say they are recessed in the slightest. I never heard sibilance with these, and the airy presentation (open cans) just suit me better. The kicker is that to my ears, they don't exhibit the metallic/fake tonality that I found with the 900s, and are much more enjoyable to me because of it. I would even recommend getting these over the silver-padded 900s, unless you're simply buying them for dubstep-where the 900s still kill them. All in all they are much different, and could easily recommend having both if you could afford it-and need a better all-arounder to complement the 900s.


Shoot me any questions and I'll try my best to answer. FWIW, I'm running the 2900s out of the C -2.1 with LT1028 ANC8 opamps, fed by the analog outs of my Squeezebox touch at the moment. I can already say that I am hearing even MORE details and nuances from this am than any other I have owned.




You should also notice quite a few more details with vocals and guitars since the bass no longer covers it up.I didn't really pay attention to how the sibilance changed-but it never did fully go away.Until I got my 2900s, that is. wink_face.gif I'm not sure I'd call the 2900s underappreciated-I'd just say they are more...unknown lol. A big reason for that is that they generally cost $200 more than the 900s, and came out quite a bit after them as well. But I stand by my point that they are entirely different sounding signatures, and are merely grouped together since they are the same brand, and similar model #. Maybe all the sonic differences are because of closed vs. open-but either way they are VERY different imo. Like I said-I might just buy the 900s again to complement these. That is if I don't get a T1 next-which seems right up my alley. Time will tell.




That said-listening to these 2900s right now---I'm not just hearing more details with this C-2.1 amp-but all sorts of microdetails in vocals/backing vocals in songs I've heard a million times. WOW. These headphones are incredible...can't wait to get a real dac again...WOW...peace.






post #9 of 419

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.

Edited by BournePerfect - 10/25/11 at 6:55pm
post #10 of 419

And the cheap post-count whoring continues lol-why didn't I create this thread!?!?:


Also: these NEED amping-much more so than the Pro 900s do. I agree with the other poster who said the mids get a little sucked out without an amp. I agree-the mids REALLY come out -as do the details-with proper amping.


Burnin? They need some, but not a whole lot. I was visiting my little brother when I bought these for the first time. I left them burning for 24 hours, and on the second day he goes "These sound a lot better than yesterday!". I agreed as well. And he doesn't even know what the term break in means, he's not an audiiophile, and I never mentioned anything about it to him. He just simply came to that conclusion. I would say that the biggest change during that first day was clarity and separation of everything. A lot of that caould probably be attributed to the bass tightening up a bit during that time-but honestly I didn't really listen that critically during the first 24 hours.


I've probably burned them in a 800 hours by now-but I'm not gonna say what changes took place, because I have used them on all sorts of equipment during the past month-so it's hard to say. I'll let others chime in in that regard if they want.




You can rest assured that amping these will help alot-though I'm not sure about your onboard amping abilities either. If you wanna just get a cheap E-9, I'm sure that will bring great benefits right off-it matches pretty well imo when I tried it with my Pro 900s. But if you want more refinedment from top to bottom, and are a detail-slut like me-you should look into the C2.2 (newest version with MOAR POWER!!) which will surely be incredible-just swap out the stock opamps. I'm using the LT1028 ANC8s in mine, fwiw.




The Pro 900s definitely DO NOT sound very similar at all to the 2900s imo. And the bass impact isn't even close-in favor of the 900s of course. But everything else is much better on the 2900s imo, I've posted plenty of comparisons in this thread if anyone is interested. I'd have a hard time believing someone (no offense though!) who owned both who say that they sound very similar...they just don't. The mids are MUCH MUCH better-and it's not just that they are brought out more either. The 'fake' tonality of the 900s are gone, replaced with a much richer, realistic timbre. They are NEVER sibilant to my ears-even straight out of the box either-those piercing highs can never be extinguished on the Pro 900 from my experience....and on and on...


post #11 of 419

Whew! Done! Hopefully someone can glean something meaningful out of that wall of text! Looking back at all of that-I should have probably done my first ever review lol. Feel free to ask any questions folks-let's keep this thing running and try and catch the massive 900 thread!




edit: Cool I just post spammed my way to 800 posts!

Edited by BournePerfect - 10/25/11 at 6:54pm
post #12 of 419
Thread Starter 

Great piece mate, that would be very helpful for prospective buyers. Maybe you should have started the thread!

To summarise your post, it really feels like a headphone I would like.

I should be getting them tomorrow. Regarding your comment on the earpads, I felt the Pro 900 was adequate enough, but a little bit concerned that you mentioned they are a shallow version.

It may not be an issue, but thanks for highlighting that out to us.

The one thing that annoyed me with the Pro 900 was the "long" half 1/4 Neutrik spiralled cable. Its pretty much useless, and being designed as an open headphone, you'd think they would add an extension cable for home/studio use, rather than a portable cable option.


post #13 of 419

I'm not sure if it was more shallowe so to speak-I think my ears may have touched the drivers a tiny bit but it wasn't a problem at all. But the cups are definitely smaller in diameter-which imo was a great thing since they do not slide around and change the sound sig drasticall, like the 900s do. And the 2900s cable is pretty short I think-especially since you don't stretch it out generally. Be sure to post plenty of impressions-and keep in mind they should noticeable change after the first 24 hours or so.



post #14 of 419
Thread Starter 

You're referring to the actual cup diameter, and not the earpads?


From pictures, they look like they are based on the same cup mould, with the difference being the outside open port hole design.

post #15 of 419

All of it I'm pretty sure. Leander7777 should know-I think he still owns the 900s.



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 Thread