Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Fostex TH900 Impressions & Discussion Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Fostex TH900 Impressions & Discussion Thread - Page 147

post #2191 of 8042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mortalcoil View Post

 

Not to be a nittpicker gelocks,  however,I must comment.  You own the Sig Pro and are eagerly awaiting the DJ , you still consider yourself in the realm of mid-fi?

 

Please oh please dont tell me you consider the Sig Pro mid fi?

 

Sorry to derail,  Fanboi rant overbiggrin.gif

 

LOL! ;-)

 

I guess so... even though the Signature Pro seems to be an Ultrasone flagship, I don't know if it is comparable to other $1k+ flagships out there... I really want to try: HD800s, LCD2rev2, TH900, Stax and try to discern differences in detail extraction, speed, attack, etc. If I don't deem the differences palpable enough, I can then call stop calling the Sig Pros mid-fi ;-)

 

 

P.S. Still have not received shipping notice for my Signature DJs nor the Sony MDR-1Rs... :-(

post #2192 of 8042
Quote:
Originally Posted by driver 8 View Post

 

I'll have an ECBA I plan on using with them whenever the current batch is shipped out.  I have a WA22 and a Lyr as well, but nothing about WA22 -> TH900 struck me as being better than my SS setup the first few times I compared them, so it mostly goes unused.  The thought of plugging them into a Lyr scares the hell out of me. 

 

I had used my TH900 with Lyr several months ago. I was scared at first too, but as long as you don't turn the volume knob high it's completely safe. The sound quality was okay, too.

post #2193 of 8042
Quote:
Originally Posted by gelocks View Post

 

LOL! ;-)

 

I guess so... even though the Signature Pro seems to be an Ultrasone flagship

 

Whereas the TH900 is definitely Fostex's flagship, I would not say that the SIg Pro or DJ Pro is the Ultrasone Flagship, they have two models that out price them, why would they sell their flagship at a lower price?  Not saying that i would want the Ed10 but those probably would be what they call their flagshipblink.gif even with it's low reviews.....i haven't heard them but not rushing to find a pair to put on my head(nor am i actually looking for the Sig Pros).  The Fostex on the other hand is pretty amazing, i really enjoyed hearing them thru my Zana Deux, just lovely.

post #2194 of 8042

Do you prefer TH900 over Audeze LCD3 ?


Edited by Audio-Omega - 11/4/12 at 7:46am
post #2195 of 8042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio-Omega View Post

Do you prefer TH900 over Audeze LCD3 ?

 

I do, but it depends on your taste. Here are some quick comparisons.

 

Compared to the LCD-3, the TH900 is much more comfortable, isolates better (because it is a closed headphone), is more neutral-sounding overall (although I wouldn't call the TH900 neutral in the strict sense), and works well with a broader range of genres. Heck, it is good with virtually all genres of music. It clearly has superior imaging capabilities too. On a side note, the TH900 also has the most open and widest soundstage I've heard from a closed headphone. The mids sound relatively laid-back, and although laid-back doesn't necessarily mean anything bad, I personally wish it were a tad more forward.

 

The LCD-3, on the other hand, is not neutral but a warm and dark sounding headphone. As David Solomon noted, it is the king of bass among all headphones, the epitome of how a dark sounding headphone should sound. The LCD-3 generally works well with many genres too, but it is the perfect headphone for music that emphasizes bass. Compared to the LCD-2, the LCD-3 has a more open, wide soundstage, and is a bit more comfortable too, although it's nowhere as comfortable as the TH900.

 

So if you listen to a wide array of genres, considers comfort to be an important factor, needs isolation, prefers more neutral sound, the TH900 is your choice. On the other hand, if you are a basshead, love warm and dark sound, primarily listens to music with lots of bass emphasis, and can tolerate some discomfort around your head, go for the LCD-3.

 

P.S. The TH900 is a much more sensitivity headphone than the LCD-3, so it tends to be less picky about amps. I won't say the LCD-3 has low sensitivity, but it still demands greater amplification than the TH900 does. However, this could also mean that the LCD-3 has higher scalability, in other words more room for improvement, if you drive it with a proper high-end amp. The LCD-3 can also be further upgraded by using an aftermarket headphone cable as its stock cable is detachable, whereas the TH900 isn't. The TH900's stock cable is still very good quality stuff, unlike the LCD-3's which I think is just lame.

post #2196 of 8042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio-Omega View Post

Do you prefer TH900 over Audeze LCD3 ?

Yes without a second blink of an eye. The sparkle of th900 is too good to give up.

post #2197 of 8042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio-Omega View Post

Do you prefer TH900 over Audeze LCD3 ?

 

Which LCD3's are you referring to? The veiled, the RMA'd, or the RMA'd becoming veiled over time?

post #2198 of 8042
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio-Omega View Post

Do you prefer TH900 over Audeze LCD3 ?

Without hesitation.
post #2199 of 8042
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Audio-Omega View Post

Do you prefer TH900 over Audeze LCD3 ?

 

I prefer the TH900 to my pair of LCD-3s pre-RMA and post-RMA, yes. It's a bit closer post-RMA but still in favor of the Fostex.

post #2200 of 8042

Quote:

Originally Posted by Audio-Omega View Post

Do you prefer TH900 over Audeze LCD3 ?

Nope. For me, a properly driven LCD3 is still the best I have heard so far. What some people describe as the TH900's sparkle I would describe as over-emphasized treble, which combines with over-emphasized bass. The LCD3 goes lower, but it's the TH900 that has more of it.

 

Now, we're talking about high-end cans so they're both great in their own way, and for my taste the choice is clear but I don't think you can't really go wrong with either. I think being easier to drive and a modicum of isolation (vs. none whatsoever) may favor the TH900 on a more practical level. I never found the LCD3 to be uncomfortable but the TH900 is certainly lighter and one of the most comfortable headphones I've worn.


Edited by TheGrumpyOldMan - 11/4/12 at 12:04pm
post #2201 of 8042

On a similar note, if you had to choose (for now), what would be your preference: the TH900 or the Audio Technica W3000 ANV? Obviously this is a Fostex thread, but I know a number of people here also enjoy the AT. What would you choose, and why? Thanks.

post #2202 of 8042
Thread Starter 

Honestly, the biggest issue for me with the LCD-3 is the consistency. This isn't a secret: it's pretty much out there in the open for those inclined to research. You can see various measurements and read various reports. I'm not leveling accusations, merely stating what I perceive personally as a risk factor in buying them. Audez'e has awesome customer support, so they'll take care of you if you aren't satisfied. The question is whether you want to possibly go through the hassle with regard to a $2k headphone.

 

My own pair honestly sounded about on par with the LCD-2 rev. 1 at first. Kind of muddy. After sending it in for RMA work, it came back sounding more open, a bit less warm and more analytical. Haven't had any issues since, thankfully. For me however the TH900 is still much more engaging, with a depth and liveliness that makes my LCD-3 sound a bit, well, "dead" in comparison. I don't think it's a matter of properly driving it either, as I've heard them out of numerous amps from integrated behemoths to boutique wunderkinds like the Balancing Act. I think it's really more a matter of, again, product variation and personal taste.

 

As for the W3000ANV, a lot has been said about it versus the TH900. A lot. There should be some links on the front page, and if you do a search within this thread you'll turn up tons of entries comparing the two.

 

Basically, in a nut shell, people will tell you: they're both very different headphones that do different things well and have their own weaknesses. The W3000ANV's most unique aspect is its unique midrange coloration, which is more of a timbrel coloration, that gives music (especially vocals) a seductive and enchanting quality. The mids on the TH900 are more transparent and open sounding IMHO, but they have a wee bit of suckout that bothers some people. Other people don't even hear the suckout. It just depends on your sensitivity and source material I guess. The bass on the W3000ANV is much tighter and controlled, whereas the TH900 definitely has more bass emphasis. However it's very clean bass without much distortion, so it responds very well to EQ if you want to reduce it, and it's also somewhat track dependent, not bleeding into the rest of the spectrum and sounding one-note on every track thankfully. Top end on the W3000ANV is brighter, but neither headphone is harsh to my ears. There is a slight touch of sweetness to the highs of the TH900, whereas the W3000ANV is a bit more sparkly. Overall the TH900 is more of a U-shape, but I personally find it's more natural sounding by virtue of the fact that it doesn't have the timbrel quality of the W3000ANV. I also think the TH900 is a bit more versatile, both on its own and because it responds so well to EQ. The W3000ANV can be EQ'd fairly well, but you can't really change the timbre.

 

Both are great headphones. For me personally however, the W3000ANV is something I have to really be in the mood for specifically. When I am in the mood for it however, it really hits the spot. The TH900 is something I'd listen to with a wider variety of music. Neither is a headphone I would want as my sole headphone however, as they both have a distinct coloration. They're both what commonly gets referred to as a "fun" headphone, though they both have a serious edge to them.

 

The TH900 is a polite Japanese working class stiff who has loosened up with a few drinks after work and is ready to have some laughs. The W3000ANV is an eccentric but flirtatious artist with a mysterious laugh. One is a jog on a clear night under the moon with a refreshing breeze. The other is lounging in a smokey, dimly lit nightclub den.


Edited by MuppetFace - 11/4/12 at 1:47pm
post #2203 of 8042

Thanks for the excellent response, MuppetFace. Especially the poetic description at the end smile.gif

post #2204 of 8042
My experience is similar to MF's sans metaphors. wink.gif The TH900 also provides a more visceral listening experience, whereas the W3000ANV is more polite, less dynamic IMO.

Edit: In answer to your question Arcamera, if I had to choose between the two then I'd pick the TH900. Although I regard both phones as having unique colourations, I can envisage tiring of the W3000ANV's sooner. The TH900 is also supremely comfortable for me.
Edited by unspool - 11/5/12 at 3:53am
post #2205 of 8042

I am looking forward to this week.  My TH-900s should arrive and I'll be able to compare them to the LCD-3 and LCD-2 r2.  I've also owned the D7000s, so looking forward to how these improve upon that design and experience.  Recent post from you guys has only served to increase my anxiousness.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Fostex TH900 Impressions & Discussion Thread