Ultrasone Pro 2500 vs. Pro 2900 - Page 4

Is it me, or the PRO 2900?  

At about 150 hours they seem to sound shrill in the highs and absent in the lows.  I re-auditioned them against the PRO 2500 a few nights ago, on the system  where I already tended to prefer the 2900, too.  "Harry Belafonte Live at Carnegie Hall"/RCA.  The trumpet section highs were almost unbearably piercing on "Mama Look a Boo-Boo".  

They've since been consigned to an out-of-the-way corner, running FM off a cheap "boom box" system since Friday night.  Will give them another listen before I go to sleep tonight, if I don't get too absorbed in reading John Henry Cardinal Newman's "Mystical Rose" first!  : )

The plastic locking rings are interchangeable, but the circular foam pads themselves differ dimensionally.  See my previous post, the one with the pictures.  : )

Took a very quick listen to the PRO 2900 (still hooked up to the boom box system).  Not as comparatively thin and bass-less as before.  (I am excited to hear what's next with them--it's a hopeful anticipation.) If the 2900, while retaining their distinctive qualities, start "opening up" like the 2500, we are in for a major treat!   

After About 250-275 Hours:

The 2900 have passed the "shrill" phase.  Highs have taken on even more of a refined touch, bass has further filled out, mids emerge with greater cleanliness.  In short, the PRO 2900 have settled more desciptively into their own, unique sound [i.e. as distinct from the PRO 2500].

The PRO 2900, while perhaps acquiring a dash more "airiness" over the last hundred hours (although they still must concede to the 2500 with respect to airiness and "overhang"), still come across with more refinement and finesse; with a playful, "winking" spriteliness, tonal blush and spice all their own.  Bass lines are cut more clearly, and profered with more smack.  Despite their more laser-like ordering and placement of things, the 2900 never lose their winsome brand of musicality. 

If the PRO 2900 are more "ethereal", then the 2500 are more "corporeal', in overall delivery.  If the 2900 conjure delicately scented and variable (early) spring breezes, the 2500 bring a steady, more sober (early) autumn breeze to bear.  The 2900 could certainly be called the "brighter"of the two, but without the presumption of being overly sibilant or otherwise unwelcomely tizzy.

Swapping the 2500 for the 2900 can initially strike the listener with an immediate sense of comparative thinness and aloofness, but these invariably give way to a rediscovered appreciation for the tidiness, dexterity and sense of higher RPM with the PRO 2900: engaging, sometimes even enchanting, in its own, sweet way.  

To repeat: the PRO 2900 represent a distinct departure from the PRO 2500 on several fronts, but an enjoyable departure, nevertheless.  To my ears, the two are different enough to warrant keeping both on the rack.  : )

jpelg,

I still intend to get beneath the MU plates on both headphones.  Wouldn't you know: the particular, tiny Philip's head screwdriver that I need is conspicuously missing from my [Dollar Store] set.  

One thing, though.  Rounded, flat-bearing machine screws might work better than the tapered shoulder screws currently used, since the MU plate holes are not countersunk.

Patrick

Hope to listen later today on my "reference" rig, which includes the EVS-modded SONY BDP-S780 and the Fitz-improved Bada PH-12.  The Shakti Stone is in, too.  : )

Curious to hear the PRO 2900 with some tubes up front (on the hybrid Bada).

Audition on "Better" Equipment:

The PRO 2900 sound excellent with the EVS-modded SONY BDP-S780 and Fitz-improved Bada PH-12 (1x Mullard ECC33/2x Ken Rad 6SN7GT)!  The 6SN7 lend a more liquidy cohesion to the overall presentation.  Bass definition--especially low level resolution--is much improved as well: plummeting and dense.  Mids are warmer, fuller and more rounded.  Highs, on typically over-sibilant recordings, are less piercing but without loss of resolution (think of the "D7000 Effect"). 

Hope to do some additional (2500/2900) a/b-ing later tonight--if I can keep my hands off the D7000!  : ) 

Just a few notes from last night.

The PRO 2900 provide clean bass with surprising heft for open headphones.  The bass lines are defined better with the 2900 than with the 2500--whose bass character seems more forward, diffuse and enveloping.  But the jury is still out as to whether the former are actually more extended than the latter. 

The 2900, tuned, you might say, on the "hot" side, can be merciless with deficient source material, be they the recording itself, or any upstream equipment, including tubes.  After swapping the Mullard ECC33 for the Raytheon 6SN7GTB (black plate), the PRO 2900 responded with greater speed and tighter bass (good things), but with drier mids and sizzlier highs (a not-as-good thing).  The Band's un-remastered CD, "Music from Big Pink"/Capitol/1968, sounded thin and bleak, with performers peppered over space and seeming to sing/play through tin cans.  (Crossfeed helped quite a bit, though.) 

While the 2900 are the more finicky of the two, once the stars are aligned properly (i.e. a good recording and good upstream gear in place) the result is a lively soundstage, almost startling with its vividness, an excellent sense of 3-D space, well-cut and easy-to-follow bass, a unique briskness and PRaT to spare: remeniscent of the SONY MDR-SA5000 (although ultimately lacking the SONY's extreme HF extension and low level resolution).  I queued up the Columbia/Legacy re-master of Santana's debut album, "Santana", and ended up listening--all the while very engaged--through the entire disc. 

Yes.  The 2500 are great headphones.  Absolutely speaking, I would say that they resolve low level detail better than the 2900 (call it "micro-resolution"), whereas the 2900 resolve the elements in space better (call it "macro-resolution").  Where the two really part company, though, is in the bass department.  The 2900 have thicker, deeper and weightier bass response.   

Just an ancillary note.

A few recent sessions--nothing short of revelatory--with the PRO 2900.  "Windham Hill Sampler 1988" (the very first CD I ever purchased).  Fresh, sparkling, brimming with "new" detail and wholly engaging.  Again, with everything upstream in order, the Ultrasones do not/will not disappoint.

The PRO 2900 are cut from the same cloth as the SONY MDR-SA5000 and the Grado SR-325i, with "fast" coloration and an edginess that becomes mercilessly revealing with less than stellar sources.  The Ultrasone's "ace-in-the-hold" is their bass reach, definition and weight that singles them out from the pack.   

Have had the HifiMan HE-5LE in-house for a few weeks.  Would like to a/b those with the PRO 2900, eventually.  : )