Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Dunu DN-2000 - Hybrid Impressions Thread (It's Here!)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Dunu DN-2000 - Hybrid Impressions Thread (It's Here!) - Page 50

post #736 of 895
Hi guys, just finished reading the whole thread ( whew ). Would anybody here who has both DN2k and ER4S consider the Dunu an upgrade over the latter? My source at the moment is DX90. Shall be glad for any comments.
post #737 of 895
Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard327 View Post

Hi guys, just finished reading the whole thread ( whew ). Would anybody here who has both DN2k and ER4S consider the Dunu an upgrade over the latter? My source at the moment is DX90. Shall be glad for any comments.

 

A few days ago I just had small discussion with Max Choiral about it.

 

Last Monday me and my friend compared my DN-2000 and ER-4S in a local headphone shop. My friend is a sound engineer, he does movie scoring and some mixing.

I have no intention to discredit ER-4S, but just to be honest, we do think DN-2000 has better sound quality than ER-4S, from natural sound point of view.

 

ER-4S has very good clarity, better than DN-2000.  But me and my friend agree that the clarity is more than what we hear naturally from a live performance. So, it is too clear compared to natural sound. Not only that, from mid-bass to bass area, ER-4S sounds thin. So bass is far from sounding natural. Natural bass sound from whether drum or double bass, is big, not thin like what we hear on ER-4S.  This is a clear indication that ER-4S BA driver simply doesn't have the capacity to move enough air for the lower frequency region. Therefore the dynamic on the low frequency area is poor. DN-2000 having a dedicated dynamic driver for the bass region, has much better bass and midrange compared to ER-4S, although DN-2000 still lacking of bass punch and impact compared to realistic bass.  DN-2000 is not bassy at all, but bass has good body and extension, not thin sounding like ER-4S

 

DN-2000 might not have the clarity of ER-4S, but overall tonality is more natural.  Closer to what we hear on live performance or orchestra.  Soon after we test many earphones and headphones, we moved to other shop to audition some good speakers. We audition 2 good pairs of speakers (Piega Premium 3.2 and other model), and DN-2000 translates better to the speaker sound, compared to ER-4S.

 

Both DN-2000 and ER-4S have good detail retrieval, although on ER-4S the detail seems to be a bit exaggerated.  

Imaging, hands down, DN-2000 is much better, more spacious and 3D, while ER-4S sounds rather flat.

 

Hope it helps.


Edited by earfonia - 7/5/14 at 5:58am
post #738 of 895
Hey , thanks so much Earfonia for a very detailed response. I agree that ER4S is lacking on the bass side. I'm going to pull the trigger and order a DN2000.

Cheers,
post #739 of 895
Quote:
Originally Posted by earfonia View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by wizard327 View Post

Hi guys, just finished reading the whole thread ( whew ). Would anybody here who has both DN2k and ER4S consider the Dunu an upgrade over the latter? My source at the moment is DX90. Shall be glad for any comments.

 

A few days ago I just had small discussion with Max Choiral about it.

 

Last Monday me and my friend compared my DN-2000 and ER-4S in a local headphone shop. My friend is a sound engineer, he does movie scoring and some mixing.

I have no intention to discredit ER-4S, but just to be honest, we do think DN-2000 has better sound quality than ER-4S, from natural sound point of view.

 

ER-4S has very good clarity, better than DN-2000.  But me and my friend agree that the clarity is more than what we hear naturally from a live performance. So, it is too clear compared to natural sound. Not only that, from mid-bass to bass area, ER-4S sounds thin. So bass is far from sounding natural. Natural bass sound from whether drum or double bass, is big, not thin like what we hear on ER-4S.  This is a clear indication that ER-4S BA driver simply doesn't have the capacity to move enough air for the lower frequency region. Therefore the dynamic on the low frequency area is poor. DN-2000 having a dedicated dynamic driver for the bass region, has much better bass and midrange compared to ER-4S, although DN-2000 still lacking of bass punch and impact compared to realistic bass.  DN-2000 is not bassy at all, but bass has good body and extension, not thin sounding like ER-4S

 

DN-2000 might not have the clarity of ER-4S, but overall tonality is more natural.  Closer to what we hear on live performance or orchestra.  Soon after we test many earphones and headphones, we moved to other shop to audition some good speakers. We audition 2 good pairs of speakers (Piega Premium 3.2 and other model), and DN-2000 translates better to the speaker sound, compared to ER-4S.

 

Both DN-2000 and ER-4S have good detail retrieval, although on ER-4S the detail seems to be a bit exaggerated.  

Imaging, hands down, DN-2000 is much better, more spacious and 3D, while ER-4S sounds rather flat.

 

Hope it helps.


I have to say... Out of the box without EQ... Er4s wins.... Both iems with EQ... Depends on the music you listen to.... The treble gets a little lost with the dunu... At first I didn't like the dunu but after some listening (and burning? ¿) and EQ I liked them... The point is that are different beasts... I like to have one iem and just one.... But I'm keeping two this time

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk
post #740 of 895

Posting some impressions after several dozen hours of listening through galaxy s3 (unamped us version without wolfson dac), audio-gd sparrow, and audio-gd power strip>ref 3 reclocker>ref 1>single-ended phoenix. I have settled on using the ear hooks, silver rings, black silicon ear tips, and if I don't try to insert the iem's deep into my ears (I still get a good seal), it is super comfortable, while attempting to insert deeply or the other ear cushion things can cause me a lot of itchiness and pain, so I have to say due to nozzle width of the earphones and the shape and protrusions of the housing, it's not easy to get these earphones to be comfortable, but you do get many options to try to get the earphones to be comfortable.

 

My suspicion that the earphones are very source dependent is confirmed now, and I have to say, it's not only the most neutral, but also the most "unflattering" or most "unforgiving" headphone or speaker I have. Usually my headphones and speakers would always impart characteristics in coloration and soundstage which I can easily hear in whatever music I play and whatever gear I use, but the dn2000 I'd say is very neutral aside from the high frequency rolloff, and I hear so much variety in soundstages with these earphones whenever I change music or gear so that I can't figure out its own soundstage characteristic imparted to music. All I can confidently say is that the soundstage it does produce is very accurate to source and recording, whether the soundstage is huge, tiny, very well-defined, or blurry, these earphones show it.

 

I am only going to briefly describe what the iem sounds like with different gear, because it feels like I'm pretty much just describing the gear I have and not the earphones itself. With galaxy s3, the sound is somewhat thin, pretty decent detail, not fatiguing thanks to high frequency rolloff, can listen to a long time, very good isolation, but people look at me funny because of bright brown circular capsules sticking out of my ears. With sparrow, it sounds congested, too hot or dynamic, like too much low and mid frequency detail, speed, and timbre trying to get through with too small and undefined soundstage, fatiguing to listen at moderate to moderate high volumes, but that's something I've sometimes noticed with the sparrow, just these things are really audible with these earphones. With ref1+phoenix, the sound is very neutral, instrument placement very well-defined, attack and decay very accurate when listening to many different types of music but even though more impactful and defined at high frequencies still somewhat rolled off, nothing stands out as being wrong other than the sense that high frequencies aren't all there, no sense of strident notes, soundstage can be massive or tiny depending on recording, a lot of soundstage and ambiance definition which didn't exist in s3 and was mushed in sparrow, very true to gear and recording.

 

Bass is very flat all the way down to 20hz which I think is very impressive, bass detail, decay, impact, all of it seems quite good, nothing I can point out as bad about it except it may be a wee bit louder relative to mids.

 

High frequency is pretty good at moderate to moderate high volume, but not that satisfying at low volumes with my desktop dac/amps. High frequency rolloff may be good for the intended purpose of iem's of listening through portable devices, and it is definitely a good match with my s3, but when listening to better gear it doesn't sound or feel even across the frequencies unless volume is raised to moderate to moderate high levels, which is comfortable on galaxy s3 and phoenix, but not my sparrow. At moderate volumes I would have to say the highs are satisfactory with my phoenix, maybe not exceptionally airy, complex in timbre, or detailed, but it's there. I'd say if there's an issue with the dn2000 it would be this high freq rolloff and not particularly exceptional high frequency detail, which may turn off high freq fans, but I should reiterate, it does matches well with my galaxy s3, and I suppose portable gear is what iem's have to be designed for, and I don't try to listen for complex high frequency detail when I uses my portable gear.

 

Mids are definitely the best part of the earphones, and although it won't sweep you off your feet with emotion because its so darn neutral and faithfully reproduces soundstage of gear and recording, it is done with incredible naturalness, number of gradients in pitch and volume, effortlessness, and accurate expression even of small microdetail and fast transitions, whether I'm using the $0.02 dac in the s3, sparrow, or phoenix. When listening very critically to vocals, the control and speed of vocal modulations are so accurate and effortless that even though it's certainly not artificially euphonic or timbral like sony pfr-v1, it reproduces sound equally beautiful.

 

In a nutshell and in order of strongest points, I think the dn2000 is very neutral and faithful, letting one hear what's in gear and the recording especially in soundstaging, incredibly natural and realistic mids, flat and very good bass across the board, and rolled off highs that may be well-suited for gear with confused, strident, or energetic highs (hello cellphone), but not a particularly good match with gear with rolled off highs or sufficiently controlled/detailed highs.

 

In dunu dn2000 product description, they say the "DN-2000 is designed for musicians", the term they are looking for is "Reference" or "Studio", and I think these iem's certainly deserve to be called such.

post #741 of 895
Quote:
Originally Posted by haloxt View Post

In dunu dn2000 product description, they say the "DN-2000 is designed for musicians", the term they are looking for is "Reference" or "Studio", and I think these iem's certainly deserve to be called such.

+1 Agree!
post #742 of 895
Quote:
Originally Posted by haloxt View Post

In a nutshell and in order of strongest points, I think the dn2000 is very neutral and faithful, letting one hear what's in gear and the recording especially in soundstaging, incredibly natural and realistic mids, flat and very good bass across the board, and rolled off highs that may be well-suited for gear with confused, strident, or energetic highs (hello cellphone), but not a particularly good match with gear with rolled off highs or sufficiently controlled/detailed highs.

In dunu dn2000 product description, they say the "DN-2000 is designed for musicians", the term they are looking for is "Reference" or "Studio", and I think these iem's certainly deserve to be called such.
I think it strays from neutral quite a bit. The bass is well above neutral, but very linear and somewhat soft, and the peak at 7K is very noticable on cymbals and brass instruments. But I think its worst aspect is that the highs roll off too early, giving the DN-2000's mediocre micro-detail and a lack of air. Those SA-5000's of yours would probably be much closer to reference/studio grade, and a recording done on the DN-2000's would probably sound grainly and a bit bass shy.
post #743 of 895
Quote:
Originally Posted by headphonatic View Post


I think it strays from neutral quite a bit. The bass is well above neutral, but very linear and somewhat soft, and the peak at 7K is very noticable on cymbals and brass instruments. But I think its worst aspect is that the highs roll off too early, giving the DN-2000's mediocre micro-detail and a lack of air. Those SA-5000's of yours would probably be much closer to reference/studio grade, and a recording done on the DN-2000's would probably sound grainly and a bit bass shy.

 

Like other multi drivers IEM, DN-2000 also affected by the output impedance of the source / amplifier.  For DN-2000, low output impedance will improve clarity and transparency, while high output impedance will  reduces the treble, clarity and transparency. Low output impedance of 10 ohms or lower is recommended. So I suggest try DN-2000 with other amplifier / player with low output impedance.  The treble should be improved, and it doesn't roll off early.

post #744 of 895

Just sharing my experience. I am not too technical in terms of audio terminologies so bear with me. 

 

Bought one after reading through the threads, and after using them for a couple of hours, I prefer them over the Shure SE 535 Red Editions.

 

Not that the red editions aren't bad; for day-to-day it served me well for a variety of genre. They are excellent and every time I listen to bassy songs, they never fail to impress me. However as months gone by my taste for music changed especially after I purchased the HE-500 (which I sold after a couple of months because of my other hobbies). I now prefer more midrange and treble than the bass side.

 

I am currently using a DX90 (FW 2.1.0) with a flacs as a base for my quick observation.

 

Bass: When listening to Avenged Sevenfold and Rise Against, the Shure is clearly 'better'. You can hear the punch and the boom and it feels alive. The DN-2000 feels less punchier, but still clear and noticeable and quite flat. I also changed to the foam tips as people suggested and it did help a little. 

 

Midrange: This is where the DN-2000 shines. Frankie Valli, Michael Buble and Rod Stewart never sounded more alive for IEMs. Clear, clean and crisp. I think the Shure falls here because of the V-like sound and the bass overpowering the mid. For me, it's closer to the HE-500 feel just like my SRH1440.

 

Treble: I find the DN-2000 bright, but not too a point where it's harsh and quite sparkly depending on the song. 

 

Overall: I am very happy with the purchase. For somebody who likes vocals, i will suggest this IEM for the price as well.

 

PS: Accessories are awesome.

post #745 of 895
Quote:
Originally Posted by headphonatic View Post


I think it strays from neutral quite a bit. The bass is well above neutral, but very linear and somewhat soft, and the peak at 7K is very noticable on cymbals and brass instruments. But I think its worst aspect is that the highs roll off too early, giving the DN-2000's mediocre micro-detail and a lack of air. Those SA-5000's of yours would probably be much closer to reference/studio grade, and a recording done on the DN-2000's would probably sound grainly and a bit bass shy.

I have noticed the bass can sound quite louder than mids, but I reduced it by using silver rings and not inserting the iem's deep into my ears. Worn that way I think bass is still somewhat louder than mids, but other than being overall louder than mids, I the iem's are quite flat in bass and mids. Agree about the high frequencies micro-detail and air not being that good, especially for low volume listening. I get the feeling the high freq is rather single-tone with dn-2000, I think that might be the 7k peak you mention, but the main issue I see with the high freq is the lack of very high freq tinkle and air as you mentioned before, which I can imagine would make a lot of people who like high freqs to not like the dn-2000. I think the best thing the dn-2000 can contribute to studio use is its ability to show soundstage accurately, which can be useful, in example, in allowing people to more easily hear and improve soundstaging. About impedance, my s3 is 3 ohm, sparrow and phoenix are 1.5 ohm, and I still notice high freq rolloff.

post #746 of 895
Quote:
Originally Posted by haloxt View Post

. Agree about the high frequencies micro-detail and air not being that good, especially for low volume listening. I get the feeling the high freq is rather single-tone with dn-2000, I think that might be the 7k peak you mention, but the main issue I see with the high freq is the lack of very high freq tinkle and air as you mentioned before, which I can imagine would make a lot of people who like high freqs to not like the dn-2000. I think the best thing the dn-2000 can contribute to studio use is its ability to show soundstage accurately, which can be useful, in example, in allowing people to more easily hear and improve soundstaging. About impedance, my s3 is 3 ohm, sparrow and phoenix are 1.5 ohm, and I still notice high freq rolloff.

Hi mate,
Which tips are you using? I found them to be crucial in the dn2000 sound .
post #747 of 895

I used mainly the black ones and based most of my impressions on them, but also like the white tips a lot. The white ones are a bit less detailed, softer, and less fatiguing, can listen a long time. I have tried the foam ones for a few hours and the sound seemed good but they are too big for my ears to wear comfortably. I should be receiving ebay memory foam ear tips in a few days though.

post #748 of 895

Have you tried wide bore tips?

I used the DN-1000 grey tips and they actually opened up the DN2000's sound.

Much more air and space in my experience.

post #749 of 895

I've only tried the tips that came with dn2000 up to now. Could you recommend some aftermarket ear tips for me?

post #750 of 895

I'm not sure coz I haven't tried them.

but I reckon the UE triple fi tips have the same effect.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Portable Headphones, Earphones and In-Ear Monitors › Dunu DN-2000 - Hybrid Impressions Thread (It's Here!)