Fostex TH900 Impressions & Discussion Thread - Page 193

Quote:

Originally Posted by m2man 

When you are really really drunk you think your Pro900's sound like a TH-900. :-). It's not that hard a leap to make.

You should make a full review on what boose in what quantity gives what effect on which phones and try them all. 

Sorry for your wallet and brain cells.  

ECBA -> TH900 is probably my favorite rig right now.  I haven't heard the ZDSE, though. 

Sometimes I use the Burson Conductor for a livelier sound.

They're not terribly demanding cans, though.  I used to prefer mine with the less-than-stellar Lehmann BCL (veiled compared to ECBA) just because it was the less colored than other amps I had at the time.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmichels 


Tests were done with a Burson HA-160

:/

I really like the LCD3 with Ray's B52 amp. I don't recall anyone here having that combo. The bass is pretty awesome, 

extremely deep and transparent. The high impedance is also a good match for the B52 (and you can get a pretty precise volume level

with the Dact 23 stepper). Very substantive mids (vocals and instruments in that range).

The LCD-3s are more refined and detailed, but the TH-900s are more entertaining. They are definitely more likely to be impressive at first listen than the Audeze headphones.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bmichels 

Yesterday i went to test & buy an LCD-3 to use it With the new "Renaissance DAC/amp" from RedWine Audio that I also plan to purchase.
Tests were done with a Burson HA-160 but...  i was disapointed because (1) I did not get any WHAW effect !  (2) I found it VERY UN-confortable on my head.
--> Is this unusual &  Strange ?  I guess it is personal taste ! ?
On the other hand I tried and liked better a Fostex TH900.  Less dark, (much) more confortable, more lively...
Question is : what will be the very BEST amp for the Fostex ?
Will it pair well With the RWA or will for exemple a Eddie curent Balanced act be better ?
Has someone tried to rewire it With better câbles ? Does this improve it's sound ?
Has someone tried it Balanced with XLR câbles/amp ?
Tanks

There's your issue! The HA-160 barely puts 200mW into the LCD-3s and is a rather poor match for any ortho (or the T1s, HD800s or any other top flight headphone that is even slightly difficult to drive). 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong 

The LCD-3s are more refined and detailed, but the TH-900s are more entertaining. They are definitely more likely to be impressive at first listen than the Audeze headphones.

+1, good summary, in line with my own impressions anyway... Comfort-wise, I think the LCD3s are comfortable, but the TH900 are one of if not -the- most comfortable headphones I have (and I think neither the LCD3s, TH900 or most AT "wing" designs are particularly secure when leaning forward or moving around a lot...)

Quote:

Originally Posted by Currawong 

The LCD-3s are more refined and detailed, but the TH-900s are more entertaining. They are definitely more likely to be impressive at first listen than the Audeze headphones.

Strange, my opinion is actually the opposite. The LCD-3 was more impressive to me at first listen than the TH900. My first impression with the TH900 was that it was a brilliantly designed headphone with superb sound quality, but there wasn't a huge "WOW" factor. With its beautiful appearance it was love-at-first-sight, but not so with the sound.

However, as I listened over and over again, I started favoring the sound of TH900 more than the LCD-3. Although I admit the TH900 doesn't have a wide, spacious soundstage as that of the LCD-3 (or HD800, for that matter), being a closed headphone, it has much better imaging capabilities: the ability to create a central focus, distinguish the sound of each instrument, and pin-point the location of the source of sound, generating a crystal-clear (but not so wide) 3D soundstage. There was a post above that said HD800 had better imaging than the TH900, but I disagree. As wide as its soundstage may be, it doesn't have the pinpoint imaging accuracy of the TH900.

Also, I found the TH900 to be more refined and detailed than the LCD-3, contrary to what you said. This is purely my opinion and I respect yours too, so please don't take it the wrong way. Yes, the TH900 is definitely an entertaining headphone; I would describe it as fun-sounding, musical, or euphonic. But to me, I found the LCD-3 more fun-sounding. That's probably because I tend to listen to rock music a lot for fun sound, and nothing does rock better than the LCD-3, a.k.a. king of dark sound. But for a wide array of genres, from classic, jazz, new age, and so on, I found the TH900 to be a winner overall. The sound was more refined, with supreme detail, so I was kind of surprised to see that you would consider the LCD-3 more refined and detailed than the TH900. The LCD-3 sounded somewhat veiled compared to the TH900, and I'm talking about the "unveiled" version of the LCD-3.

I have to admit that the TH900 however, compared to the LCD-3, has a somewhat artificial sound. It's hard to describe with words, the sound of TH900, as refined as it may be, doesn't sound completely natural. On the other hand, the LCD-3 sounds more organic, closer to real sound. Purely in terms of natural-ness, it's LCD-3 > LCD-2 > TH900 > HD800.

Right now All I have for an amp is a Schiit Asgard. Would you say stepping up my headphone collection to a TH900 is not worth it without a better amp? I really want these headphones. From the sound of them they may be a perfect addition to my collection of headphones. 

cheers 

Quote:

Originally Posted by KCxSmacker 

Right now All I have for an amp is a Schiit Asgard. Would you say stepping up my headphone collection to a TH900 is not worth it without a better amp? I really want these headphones. From the sound of them they may be a perfect addition to my collection of headphones. 

 

cheers 

The Schiit Asgard can drive the TH900 just fine, expect 8-90% of its maximum performance. Of course, in the long run, you'll find yourself investing in better amps in the future...