DUNU DN-2000J -- More Than Evolution?

tomscy2000 said:

 
Neither? It has enough weight not to sound anemic, but it's not super lush. For the record, I've never believed the DN-2000 was ever especially lush.

Click to expand...

Good to know, thanks. I was afraid that it would be a little thin sounding based on what I've read in reviews of the 2000J prototype, but it looks like the retail version won't be that way.

So is the bass response any faster/tighter?

lalala6 said:

  Good to know, thanks. I was afraid that it would be a little thin sounding based on what I've read in reviews of the 2000J prototype, but it looks like the retail version won't be that way.

Click to expand...

 
My guess is that some people suggested they fill in the mids a bit more. I think it's a suitable compromise.
 

bayonetwork said:

  So is the bass response any faster/tighter?

Click to expand...

 
I've only compared the prototypes against the DN-2000, but they were definitely faster and tighter, with better resolution/texture.

Great to see you received a pair, Tom. Excellent photo quality as well my friend. Not sure if its been asked yet, (I can see some questions about note weight) I'm wondering if there's been any emphasis to the mid-range, this time round. I find DN-2000 quite smooth, a little too relaxed for my preferences, sometimes it sounds like there's a safety veil there, makes me use overly high volumes trying to extract detail and clarity. Does DN-2000J share the same aspect or is there a little more vividness there, possibly higher detail or clarity levels?  

Yep. And in comparison to the DN2000, I hope the mids are more forward this time. Thanks and congrats on getting your pair. 

h20fidelity said:

  Great to see you received a pair, Tom. Excellent photo quality as well my friend. Not sure if its been asked yet, (I can see some questions about note weight) I'm wondering if there's been any emphasis to the mid-range, this time round. I find DN-2000 quite smooth, a little too relaxed for my preferences, sometimes it sounds like there's a safety veil there, makes me use overly high volumes trying to extract detail and clarity. Does DN-2000J share the same aspect or is there a little more vividness there, possibly higher detail or clarity levels?  

Click to expand...

My perception of the DN-2K exactly! I do hope tomscy2K or someone else soon will be able to share their experience about this. It would be extremely interesting. Thanks!

marcusl said:

  Yep. And in comparison to the DN2000, I hope the mids are more forward this time. Thanks and congrats on getting your pair. 

Click to expand...

+1 more foreward mids would be great, but from what I've heard and read the chances are pretty low and there is a high chance that the mids on these are even more slightly recessed....

I cannot do a direct comparison to the DN-2000 at this moment in time because I don't have one. I can only state that, in my years of listening to all matter of IEMs, along with a direct comparison to the UERM, is that the DN-2000J is very, very good. Once I get the chance, I will compare the DN-2000J directly with the DN-2000, as well as the K3003 (reference filters).
 
A few notes on the sound, to address peoples' concerns:
 

1. To me, there's plenty of bass to go around, and because the response is quick and textured, I don't ever feel the bass plods along.
2. The overall "arc" of the bass is that it is very mildly mid-bass centered --- nothing problematic. I find the bass quantity itself to be slightly less than that of the Titan 1, which has been in recent months the media darling for DUNU. The way I hear the DN-2000J is that it is thicker in bass note than the Titan 1, but retains texture and detail.
3. I believe the midrange is laid-back on the DN-2000J, but subtly so. There are no issues with clarity. In some ways, the midrange is more forward in position than my UERM, but because the UERM's midrange response profile is more accurate, it manages to articulate vocal nuances better. And FYI, the UERM's midrange isn't considered "forward" by any means.
4. Note weight is not thick, but is not completely thinned out. It is most definitely thicker than that of the DN-2000J prototypes I've heard, but I can't call it "thick" by any stretch of the imagination, and I prefer it that way --- not a fan of the molasses sound.
5. If I had to make an analogy, I'd liken the weight of the DN-2000J to a pair of good KEF Reference series speakers. Personally, I'd enjoy things a bit more with weight the way a good pair of Tannoy Prestige GR speakers give off, but the KEF Reference voicing is very much so modern and crisp, and well-defined --- less smooth and forgiving than that of the Tannoy, but not annoying so at all. (BTW, in speakers, I much prefer a more relaxed sound signature, whilst in IEMs, I prefer crisp, precise, and analytical).
6. The defining characteristic of the DN-2000J is that the "bite" of the midrange is super crisp (with silicone tips). It cuts through that initial impulse like a laser beam. The overall feeling to the vocal range and its harmonics is that the DN-2000J imparts very overt detailing, similar to that of the Titan 1, but because DN-2000J is able to characterize this detail with better depth and dimension, the added detail does happen to "enhance" the atmosphere of music --- a quality which I felt the Titan 1 struggled to pull off.
7. Is there sibilance? Yes, but not much. It's more a bit of harshness, so that bit sits beyond the typical range of sibilance. Even so, I think it's controlled enough such that it crops up only now and then. Contrast this with the K3003, which is constantly teetering on the brink of sibilance (but strategically pulls back on the damage).
8. If people prefer to have a smoother response, they can use the Comply tips, as they do audibly help tame the peaks, and smooth out the overall feel of the DN-2000J. Using the Ts-500 on the DN-2000J gives me the best sound for long-term listening, and really is quite pleasant.
9. I'm trying to listen for distortion; sorry, can't hear any. Then again, I tend not to listen all that loudly.
10. I have not heard any T-PEOS product, so I cannot comment on them. I really have not been a fan of hybrids --- if people look at my posts, I generally do not have good things to say about the Astrotec hybrids, and even didn't exactly find the K3003 ultra-worthy (though I have grown to respect it greatly as a groundbreaker in multiple areas). Thus, I've really been more of an anti-hybrid evangelist, and have only found the Sony XBA-A3/Z5, as well as the current crop of DUNU hybrids (1000/2000) to be acceptable in overall performance and value.
11. I can't claim to have had a ton of experience with the DN-2000, but I've had enough to state by instinct that the DN-2000J is an improvement in many aspects of the sound. At only $35 more than the DN-2000 at MSRP, the DN-2000J might actually end up completely cannibalizing sales of the DN-2000. Perhaps people who prefer smoothness of sound might prefer the DN-2000 (but I have a feeling they'd just completely go in another direction), but other than that, the DN-2000J should be a no-brainer over the DN-2000.
12. The closest direct competition to the DN-2000J should be the XBA-A3, and while I liked the XBA-A3, the DN-2000J is more refined, and more detailed, while being less U-shaped.

tomscy2000 said:

 

1. I can't claim to have had a ton of experience with the DN-2000, but I've had enough to state by instinct

Click to expand...

Given how quickly the human brain adapts to new things both good and bad, I'm of the opinion that if you aren't taking objective, controlled measurements - then you at least need to at least be A/Bing the IEMs in question on the same source with as many variables eliminated as possible.

I don't think "stating by instinct" constitutes a reliable ground for some of the direct comparisons and conclusions you've made with the 2000 thus far. Not to say you are right or wrong, but given that for example the K3003 and DN-2000 rate on the joker's subjective scale as 9.4 and 9.3, it's safe to say that any differences compared to the J would also be quite small - so to draw actual conclusions based on previous listening and "not a ton of experience" seems mildly questionable. I do look forward to hearing about some A/B comparisons from you and others when they make their way around though.

Personally I wouldn't mind some more sub-bass extension without any mid-bloat to match, and more soundstage width would be nice if they could do it without losing clarity. The ever present 8K spike in the knowles driver could do with being toned down too, but unfortunately I think the soundstage and spike are hard to change without a change in physical design and BA choice.

>I find the bass quantity itself to be slightly less than that of the Titan 1

ooooh....mmm so not nearly altone or h300 levels?


>I have not heard any T-PEOS product, so I cannot comment on them. I really have not been a fan of hybrids --- if people look at my posts, I generally do not have good things to say about the Astrotec hybrids,

oh wait. um, just PM EMPJ, really curious what you think re sub-bass and bass response on those

>Is there sibilance? Yes, but not much. It's more a bit of harshness, so that bit sits beyond the typical range of sibilance.

8-10k?



>he defining characteristic of the DN-2000J is that the "bite" of the midrange is super crisp (with silicone tips). It cuts through that initial impulse like a laser beam. The overall feeling to the vocal range and its harmonics is that the DN-2000J imparts very overt detailing, similar to that of the Titan 1, but because DN-2000J is able to characterize this detail with better depth and dimension, the added detail does happen to "enhance" the atmosphere of music --- a quality which I felt the Titan 1 struggled to pull off.

I see - thank you for the detailed impressions.
idk though, having sold my 2k and owning a titan1 i'm not quite tempted to buy a 2kj

>Personally I wouldn't mind some more sub-bass extension without any mid-bloat to match, and more soundstage width would be nice if they could do it without losing clarity. The ever present 8K spike in the knowles driver could do with being toned down too,
wound't +1

>but unfortunately I think the soundstage and spike are hard to change without a change in physical design and BA choice.


but rather the 5-10k range not quite sound stage, but soundstage inclusive. (but also , brightness, sibilance, attack, etc)

I know, it's off-topic, but since there're a lot of people that talk with people from Dunu here...
 
they plan to release a new DN-900 too?

udi said:

  Given how quickly the human brain adapts to new things both good and bad, I'm of the opinion that if you aren't taking objective, controlled measurements - then you at least need to at least be A/Bing the IEMs in question on the same source with as many variables eliminated as possible.
I don't think "stating by instinct" constitutes a reliable ground for some of the direct comparisons and conclusions you've made with the 2000 thus far. Not to say you are right or wrong, but given that for example the K3003 and DN-2000 rate on the joker's subjective scale as 9.4 and 9.3, it's safe to say that any differences compared to the J would also be quite small - so to draw actual conclusions based on previous listening and "not a ton of experience" seems mildly questionable. I do look forward to hearing about some A/B comparisons from you and others when they make their way around though.

Personally I wouldn't mind some more sub-bass extension without any mid-bloat to match, and more soundstage width would be nice if they could do it without losing clarity. The ever present 8K spike in the knowles driver could do with being toned down too, but unfortunately I think the soundstage and spike are hard to change without a change in physical design and BA choice.

Click to expand...

 
I'll most likely be sending them off to get them measured reliably, but I can't do that until I finish listening. I have trained myself to be fairly reliable about being consistent with my impressions, but I agree that you can't take me at my word. I still feel confident that the 2000J is a markedly better performer than is the 2000, but at the same time, not everyone will agree, even if measurements show an "improvement" somewhere. To me, the DN-2000 is already in the realm of "good enough", and that means there are bound to be people who like it better than the 2000J.
 
I did just A/B against the K3003 with Reference filters. Will write more on that, but TL;DR I thought the K3003 was better than what I heard.

ohhh boy can't wait for the k3003 comparison

Forgot to mention: I examined the difference between the white and grey tips --- the grey tips have foam inside them for more isolation (like the Sony hybrid tips). The stock ones from the DN-2000 are included separately inside the package, hidden away. The new stock tips have the DUNU logo printed on top, kind of nifty.

Pictures first. Write-up in a few hours.