It's past time for me to write a proper impressions post. Apologies in advance for the length.
First, it's best to understand my audio philosophy: I don't chase the last 1% of sound, so I'll never see value in lots-of-thousands in audio gear. It's about diminishing returns, so it's completely subjective, but in general, I haven't found anything worth over $1500 worth purchasing (with one exception). Not to say there isn't better above that price-point but I won't see the value of spending 50% more for (what I consider) minuscule improvement. No pinnacle gear for me. It's a matter of value.
I was one of the first dozen or so in the conference room, so it was pretty quiet while I listened to the open headphones, which I listened to first before it got noisy.
RHA:
Best value award
T20i @ $200 is every bit as good as Shure SE535, Etymotic ER4XR, EarWerkz Supra 2 or other comparable IEM's at half the cost. This is huge value. Not the best sounding IEM around, but a great device for the every-day user at a very reasonable price/performance. I was impressed at the value.
MA750 bluetooth was impressive as a bluetooth IEM, but the sound was not as good as Shure SE535, and on an iPhone 6, the connection occasionally dropped. In a year or two, this could be a great little IEM for the price, if they fix the bluetooth drops.
Focal:
Clear: It is a clear headphone and really could sing. I was surprised at how much bass it did actually have when amped with the Questyle. Didn't sound as nice out of my own little Fiio, with the dynamic range collapsing some, but still a stand-out headphone. We switched the Clear off the Questyle and to the other amp (can't recall the make/model) and it was just as good, so it wasn't just the Current Mode Amplification in the Questyle making it sing. At $1500, it's a very good performer. I wonder about fatigue long-term, but I didn't spend more than 10 minutes with it.
Elear: Not even close to the Clear. I put it back down after about 60 seconds of listening. In fact, there are a lot of other headphones I'd get before these in the same $700 price-range.
Sennheiser:
First - they had everything amped to the same source, so this didn't work once other people showed up to the table and wanted it louder/softer, but I got several solid minutes without anyone else listening.
HD660: Interesting. I'm not sure where it is between the 600 and 650, but it's similar and different at the same time. Maybe it's brighter... maybe? Actually, I'm not really sure why this headphone exists unless you make a Coke soda comparison. Is Sennheiser just trying to get a little bit more market share? You wouldn't mistake this headphone for anything but a Sennheiser but I think I'd still stick with the HD600. It's a solid, good headphone and very competitive at it's price, but I just prefer the signature of the 600 better.
HD820: I didn't expect this. For a closed back, it was pretty wonderful. Maybe it's the best closed-back I've heard. It had more bass than I expected. It was voiced very similar to the HD800, so if you like that, you'll like these. The isolation was good and they had a good clamp without being too tight like many complain about the HD600 series. However, here I am with the value proposition saying these are just not that much better than other closed headphones to warrant the extra thousand bucks. Why, Sennheiser, why can't these be $1500? They are great at that price, but not as amazing at $2400.
Abyss
AB1266: Quite possibly one of the best I've heard. Someone said they were sibilant and lacked bass. I disagree on both points. Lost of bass, though it did feel a little loose to me, and not a bit sibilant. Soundstage was wide and deep, and midrange was delicious. Headband was just weird. But, too expensive, so I took them off after a minute, but while the room was still quiet, I was impressed.
Diana: These are really good headphones. Similar voicing to their big brothers but in a more friendly package. great imaging, soundstage, and clear sound were notes I made.
Klipsch
Heritage HP-3: These look and feel nice. You put them on and the first notes evoke a sense these are Klipsch speakers. They are voiced to sound like their Reference series floorstanders and the engineer at the table who did the voicing was pleased they sound like that. That was the goal. The problem is, I don't like the "klipsch sound". It's always been too bright and harsh for me. Klipsch sell a lot of floor-standing speakers because they sell in that value segment under $1500, primarily, so trying to get someone who liked the Klipsch sound to buy these makes sense. Fact of the matter is Klipsch have a powerful distributer and retailer network and you aren't going to hear anything but Beats next to the HP-3 at most outlets, so these are going to sound better, but compared to other cans in the same price range, I think the "Klipsch sound" is a disservice. I'd like to see these measured though and maybe even give them another listen, since it was later in the day and noisy (they are semi-open), but I expect to see them on sale in the sub-$1000 within 6 months and maybe there is a compelling argument for them then.
Heritage Headphone Amp: I like amps with plexi tops. I like to see the electronic goodies inside. that being said, I have no idea if this is a good amp or not. I didn't plug in anything other than the HP-3, but the price is right for it to be compared to other amps in the same range. Maybe it's good gear but would require a proper A/B session to understand. Compared to the other amps at the Klipsch table (Woo Audio Fireflies), this isn't a bad amp. But comparing tube and solid state doesn't warrant more writing. I'm just saying they might be something to consider. Maybe it's worth of modding... ?
Schiit
Magni 3: Why don't I own one of these? It's king of the value proposition. For $100 bucks, it's great. I's better than some amps costing three times as much. Granted, it starts to give away against a few $500+ and many $1000+ amps, but this is $99. Dinner out for the family typically costs more. I want to know what Schiit compromised on with this amp and then mod the @#$% out of it. I couldn't care less about the wall wart. What does this baby sounds like with a 3A linear external power supply, and what about throwing premium resistors and caps at it, and who knows what else? It seems the modders should be all over this little amp. Needless to say, I was impressed at the price/performance of this one.
64 Audio
A12t: Were they good? Yes. Were they worth $2000. Not close. I'd pay $1100 for these on a good day and that's about what they are worth. They are clear with nice mid's and fair bass. I walked away after listening to several songs thinking "meh". I'd buy a set of IEM's at $1k and be just as happy with the sound. I A/B'd with the 18-driver IEM's and yes, they were better, but only slightly. I wouldn't notice the difference in about 5 seconds of listening as the brain settled in to listen. Not worth the upcharge. I also think - and this is just my opinion - that the whole "more drivers = better" is BS. Remember when more megahertz in a processor was better, except it wasn't, or at least that's not the entire story.
Campfire Audio:
Andromeda: Does the shell really have to be so big and industrial? I found the fit OK, but my brother found it annoyingly large. The sound was great. Fast bass punch, liquid midrange and vocals and a little sparkly at the top, but not so much to annoy of become tiresome. I don't listen to IEM's really loud anyhow. According to my notes, these felt... accurate. So they had detail, but were smooth. I really should have put some terrible recordings to the test, but against Queen, AC/DC, Dave Brubeck, Adele, Alison Krauss, etc. they sounded good.
Vega: I'd rather have the Andromeda. The Vega moves more air, but it felt mushy by comparison. It was an inferior sound compared to the Andromeda.
Lyra II: For $700, if I could get the Andromea for $900, I'd get the Andromeda. Are they 50% better.... hmm.... maybe 25% better, but well within a good value still. The Lyra are good headphones, don't mistake that. They fit and compare well in their price range and I wouldn't say they stand out in any specific regard. Like a lot of things, you have to like the voicing to like the sound. Some headphones are intentionally bright, bassy, etc. These IEM's are warm, smooth, and likely a "U" shape curve. Sorry... this is all I have. I was gushing over the Andromeda's still when I took my notes.
Audeze
LCD-2C: I don't see what the fuss is all about. OK, so the headband is better than typical, they are lighter but they sound dark, recessed, and have lost something compared to the LCD-2F(Fazor). I know a lot of people don't like the Fazor, but I think it makes for better music. In full disclosure, I have the LCD-2F's, so I know the sound pretty well, and the 2C's just didn't sound as good. For me, it's not a nuanced difference either. The 2C's at the show were remarkably darker and warmer than my 2F's. Technically, aside from the Fazor, I'd like to know the difference between the two, and Sankar wasn't interested in a technical conversation, feeding me straight-up marketing material. Maybe he was having a bad day, but if he's going to be a jerk at the conference, he should just stay home and not treat people like idiots. That's all I'm going to say about that. On the plus side, he said they should have no problem selling that headband, which I think would make my 2F's wearable. I did harass him about the price of the carbon fiber headband, to which he seemed justified at it's ridiculous price-point. *shrug*
LCD-MX4: These fail the value proposition for me, along with the LCD-4's. I actually like the LCD 4's, but not worth anywhere near what they want for them. They just aren't that good, even if you are chasing the last 1% of musical nirvana. The MX4's are a better value, but still not good enough to choose them vs. other headphones in the similar price point.
Sonarworks
True-Fi: I couldn't get out of these guys what their target curve is. They seemed to not understand what the Harman Target Response Curve was, and couldn't explain what their target was aside from saying "neutral". The problem is, their EQ'ing (and that's all the software does - precision EQing) isn't anywhere near neutral. There is a significant boost in the upper midrange and lower treble with every headphone I tested with (6). While it made the Audeze LCD-2's different, I'm not convinced it was "better". Other headphones just sounded strange with that same boosted upper vocal area, and one was completely un-listenable. Maybe I just don't like the sound they are after? For their show price, it's an interesting toy to play with, but I really struggle to convince myself the sound is better. Vocals are brighter, maybe clearer, and more pronounced, and some fix for too much or not enough bass is evident. I didn't see a $200 headphone made to sound like a $500 headphone, so while - yes - it does change maybe it's just not my thing, baby.
Sony
MDR-Z1R: For closed headphones, these isolate poorly. Lots of bass. Not a bad headphone, but for the price, I'd choose a number of others. For the price, I'd get the Sennheiser HD820's. I listened to these late in the day with a lot of ambient noise and because of the poor isolation, any other observation is pointless. They are good headphones if you forget they are two grand.
Chord
Mojo: It's not new and a lot of people have written about it, but for me the bottom line is - it creates a dark background but at the expense of dynamics. I felt like overall dynamics and headroom were compressed with the mojo. On one song, it didn't make much difference. On the other, it was very noticeable, so source matters. I'm not convinced it's a good deal at $500, but a lot of people seem to like it. In general, I feel like DAC's have quickly expiring and diminished returns after a pretty low price-point and money is better spent on an amp.
I listened to a variety of other gear, but the conditions were such that any conclusion was inconclusive so I won't leave any comments about the other gear because it wouldn't be fair.
