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 272

post #4066 of 6804
There are many advantages to having closed headphones. Even tough many of the TH-900 owners use their sets at home, that doesn't mean there isn't noise at home. Many users have roommates, wives, kids, dogs/cats, etc. that create noise and aren't appreciative of sound leakage, especially if one tends to listen in a room where there are others. Sonically, closed headphones can have stronger bass. That is why many headphone companies design a "fun" sounding headphone opt to design a closed headphone. Also, regarding IEMs, many users don't like things inside their ear, thus CIEMS/IEMS being out of the question.
Edited by Greed - 4/27/13 at 8:56am
post #4067 of 6804
Quote:
Originally Posted by kodyaudio View Post

This is TH900 related I promise...

 

I have demoed Beyer T90's open, then ordered TH600's expecting isolation from a closed headphone...

 

(I was considering demoing the TH900's as well)

 

But given the lack of Isolation...  listening in a busy environment s-bucks or hotel lobby "other noises" jack around with sound so whats the point with closed phones?  They dampen/isolate...a little...

 

but why not go with super high end IEM's $1,100ish for busy/noisy environments and then a really high end open headphone for the other uses?

 

I guess after demoing the closed TH600's I have to ask the TH900 group who cares if its closed back?  why not go with open cans?  especially if your going to listen at home anyway....

 

or is closed cans really not for the listener... they are more for the person NEXT THE the listener?

 

Thanks everyone!


I think no one who is into high-end headphones considers closed-back headphones just for their isolation or sound leakage. On the contrary, the design brings things to the table that open-backs lack. That includes the sub-bass rumble that headphones like HD800, SR009, don't have and a strong impact. Also closed-backs have their own sound stage presentations that some might like.

 

I think you're a bit confused since Fostex did not create the TH900 with the intention of noise isolation, for that you can get a multitude of other headphones in the <$500 range from companies like Harmon, Sony and ... Beats.

post #4068 of 6804
Quote:
Originally Posted by dukeskd View Post


I think no one who is into high-end headphones considers closed-back headphones just for their isolation or sound leakage. On the contrary, the design brings things to the table that open-backs lack. That includes the sub-bass rumble that headphones like HD800, SR009, don't have and a strong impact. Also closed-backs have their own sound stage presentations that some might like.

 

I think you're a bit confused since Fostex did not create the TH900 with the intention of noise isolation, for that you can get a multitude of other headphones in the <$500 range from companies like Harmon, Sony and ... Beats.

The nr 1 reason for me buying the TH900 is the fact that they are closed and don't leak (even though they do leak some sound). I just wanted the best all round closed-back cans that were available.

 

Enter TH900.

post #4069 of 6804
Wonder what would happen if someone modded the th900 to be open. But doubt so , think nobody gonna do dat to a 2000 dollar headphone
post #4070 of 6804
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

I happen to own the LCD-3s and think they are the better headphone. But I can't comment on EDM as I don't listen to it, just rock, metal, jazz and classical and with those genres; however I do prefer the LCD-3s. That said, the TH-900s aren't too far back and are the best closed headphones I've heard and find them very satisfying.

 

I agree with Peter on this.  IMO the LCD-3s are head and shoulders above the LCD-2s in every way.  Only heads above the TH-900s and only in some Jazz and all Classical.  The LCD-2s got sold really fast once the LCD-3 and the TH-900s arrived.

 

Would like to listen to the LCD-CB to see how they compare.  (LCD-CB = Closed Backs).

post #4071 of 6804
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

 

I agree with Peter on this.  IMO the LCD-3s are head and shoulders above the LCD-2s in every way.  Only heads above the TH-900s and only in some Jazz and all Classical.  The LCD-2s got sold really fast once the LCD-3 and the TH-900s arrived.

 

Would like to listen to the LCD-CB to see how they compare.  (LCD-CB = Closed Backs).

 

popcorn.gif

post #4072 of 6804
Quote:
Originally Posted by myap2328 View Post

Thx all for your replies to my question. It is much appreciated! So to sum up:

The th900 is brighter
The th900 has more subbass rumble less midbass bloom
The th900 has less midrange bloom

If this is the case, the th900 may not be for me. Because I'm looking for LCD-2 plus slightly more midbass emphasis for electronic music. Any recommendations? (Sorry for being off topic) I actually considered the D7ks but I was really worried about the treble being too hot. Because I find the d5ks slightly fatiguing.

 

Currently expecting TH900 (bought blind or deaf if you want). Already have LCD-2 r1, LCD-3 and D7k. If you're worried about harsh highs with D7k, you might want to consider J$ Real Leather Pads for them, as they will tone the highs down and place even more emphasis on the mid bass.

post #4073 of 6804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Norway View Post

 

Currently expecting TH900 (bought blind or deaf if you want). Already have LCD-2 r1, LCD-3 and D7k. If you're worried about harsh highs with D7k, you might want to consider J$ Real Leather Pads for them, as they will tone the highs down and place even more emphasis on the mid bass.

J$ are out of business, Mark at Lawton Audio sells Angle Pads which are pretty much the same.

Also I am not sure that everyone would agree on described effect, for me on D5K it was the opposite but it was a bit treble shy to begin with so that was a welcome effect I was actually looking for, but from what I've read on D7K it can get overly bright.

post #4074 of 6804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT View Post

J$ are out of business, Mark at Lawton Audio sells Angle Pads which are pretty much the same.

Also I am not sure that everyone would agree on described effect, for me on D5K it was the opposite but it was a bit treble shy to begin with so that was a welcome effect I was actually looking for, but from what I've read on D7K it can get overly bright.


Oh, I didn't know that.

 

I own two pairs of D7k and used Grace Design m903 when comparing them – it has two headphone outputs so I was able to swap between them and those were the effects I heard. Might be my ears sitting upside down though, lol. The pads went off as the bass became too prominent.

 

Here are a couple of shots from the session ;)

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 75

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 75

 

CREATOR: gd-jpeg v1.0 (using IJG JPEG v62), quality = 75

post #4075 of 6804
As new at all this... I was simply under the impression that choosing closed cans was an intentional choice for sound isolation in a noisy environment... So the music sounded better without the noise coming in....

But... Noise comes in anyway... Lessening the audible experience....

So to clarify my question... What's the point of closed cans as a specific category of can?

Why not just pick whatever sounds best to you and if it happens to be closed... Then great... If not... Then that's great too...

What drives people with their th900 to buy them? The sound only? Or we're there other considerations I may be missing....
post #4076 of 6804
Quote:
Originally Posted by kodyaudio View Post

As new at all this... I was simply under the impression that choosing closed cans was an intentional choice for sound isolation in a noisy environment... So the music sounded better without the noise coming in....

But... Noise comes in anyway... Lessening the audible experience....

So to clarify my question... What's the point of closed cans as a specific category of can?

Why not just pick whatever sounds best to you and if it happens to be closed... Then great... If not... Then that's great too...

What drives people with their th900 to buy them? The sound only? Or we're there other considerations I may be missing....

 

I guess you read none of the posts that answer your question earlier. 

post #4077 of 6804

I want to demo TH900 SO bad... especially on the DNA Stratus demo I have with me at the moment...

post #4078 of 6804

Would the Burson soloist sl be adequate to power these beasts to their full potential?

post #4079 of 6804

More than enough

post #4080 of 6804
Quote:
Originally Posted by Truesound View Post

Would the Burson soloist sl be adequate to power these beasts to their full potential?

TH900 are super efficient and could be plugged straight into your smartphone with an adapter. That is not to say they won't benefit from a good amp, but it comes to show that the power requirements for these cans are low.

 

In layman's terms. TH900:

 

  • Impedance @ 1kHz: 25 Ohms
    The lower the impedance the more efficient.
  • Sensitivity: 100 dB
    The higher the sensitivity the more efficient.

 

Compare that to the notoriously inefficient HiFiMAN HE-6

 

  • Impedance @ 1kHz: 50 Ohms
  • Sensitivity: 83.5 dB

 

It is not so much the impedance of hifiman that makes them so inefficient, but rather their low sensitivity.

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