[number1sixerfan]

I agree they're similar but the CA-1a does two important things for me which means I keep them around. The bass as you mention, specifically the way it impacts. And the openness as in the sensation of there actually being nothing on my ears.

The CA-1a has that openness because of the cups with literal holes in them but the Expanse does not thanks to the AMTS making it feel (not sound) more closed. The way the CA-1a both sounds/feels completely open yet hits hard in the bass is a combo I've yet to find elsewhere. The X9000 has the same openness but not quite as much impact. I've put on some EDM songs on the CA-1a and it gave the sensation that the bass was actually coming from my room, as if the walls were the cone of the subwoofer. It was impressive. Spatial audio effects from the Steelseries GG app aided this "room bass" effect as well, as I've mentioned around here before, that's a fun app to play with.

Oh and I'd only be able to sell the CA-1a for "just" $1500. When most of my headphones would sell for $2k plus, it seems like less motivation to sell the CA-1a.

By the way, have you written down your thoughts on Expanse vs Susvara anywhere? Would love to read that after I AB test with mine. I bought a Susvara recently specifically just to test against Expanse and then sell one. They both fight over that same neutral timbre all around good slot in my collection. I just had this irksome thought in the back of my mind that I might prefer the way Susvara does that over the Expanse so I had to get one and try. I've yet to come to a conclusion. Waiting to AB until my PSM156 arrives this week so I know I have the cleanest baseline. Electricity in my house has been getting worse.

Yup, these two things you mention are the only things the CA-1a has over the Expanse imo. A bit more openness and expansive staging, and harder hitting bass (but not really subbass and perceived quantity of bass). And for me, kind of in the exact same boat with the proposition to sale the CA-1a, even the same for my Sr1a--they're such affordable offerings that I'm not so inclined to sell, rather just revisit them from time to time (this more so applies to the Sr1a, I definitely enjoy the CA-1a enough still to listen often).

I did pretty thorough comparison between the Expanse, Utopia, Caldera and Susvara. I'm sure I have them somewhere in my thread lol. For starters, I just don't hear the bass of the Expanse the same way others do, and that's ok. For me, bass is simply not the strong suit of the Expanse, and I have used a plethora of amps, including my speaker amps which have been phenomenal with even the hard to drive Susvara. And it isn't just my system, the performance at the DCA booth felt the exact same to me. Now again to be clear here, there are so many other things they excel in that for me, make up for that. But I say that because for that reason, to me, the Susvara are the more complete headphones, as in every other aspect they both really excel and it will just largely come down to preference.

-Both highly resolving.
-Both great extension in the highs.
-Susvara a bit better spacing/layering
-Expanse imo a bit better and smoother tonality (which was very impressive to me)
-Susvara a bit better bass overall, certainly for bass impact and a bit ahead subbass wise
-They sound pretty different so I can see how some would prefer one over the other, both very good

All of these are just from my POV, not stating as absolutes, so I would just try to A/B them if you can.

Mine is still up for sale , as much as I agree with you. Just hate clutter.

I find both the Stealth and Expanse to be a significant step up in clarity, and with slightly better resolution. Even the bass I find better on Expanse, but this is only since getting the HM1. I actually found the Raal to hit harder and be slightly better on the Oor stack.
Can't tell if the Raal need more voltage than the HM1 has or if it was just that the DCA cans need more current than the Oor had.

I think they're pretty close resolution wise, in terms of how revealing they both are. But there is a pure clarity that seems a bit more apparent with the Expanse--and this is the case against many others in comparison. And I find the raal a bit more finicky with amping, while the Expanse is a bit more consistent, although it does improve a bit with higher power and quality continuous current (nice improvement w/my speaker amps, CFA3, etc.). Still I find the CA-1a to bit a bit harder hitting regardless of amplification. Overall though, my CA-1a is sitting a bit more.

 

[gammi]

I just don't hear the bass of the Expanse the same way others do, and that's ok. For me, bass is simply not the strong suit of the Expanse

-Susvara a bit better bass overall, certainly for bass impact and a bit ahead subbass wise

This is interesting to me that people perceive the bass impact of these so differently, I wonder what's causing it?

I did some A/B-ing last night and found I actually thought the Expanse had more bass impact than the Susvara, seems I'm in the other camp on that one. I do agree the Susvara is more spacious though. I think part of that comes down to them physically being more open than the Expanse, as in when no music is playing.

One interesting thing with the bass impact though, when I would take the headphones off while a song was playing, I could feel the bass of the Susvara vibrating in my hands and moving the air. I didn't get this on the Expanse. You would assume this would translate to more bass impact on the Susvara since it's seemingly moving more air but sure enough I went back and forth and every time felt the Expanse had more bass.

 

[HONEYBOY]

This is interesting to me that people perceive the bass impact of these so differently, I wonder what's causing it?

I did some A/B-ing last night and found I actually thought the Expanse had more bass impact than the Susvara, seems I'm in the other camp on that one. I do agree the Susvara is more spacious though. I think part of that comes down to them physically being more open than the Expanse, as in when no music is playing.

One interesting thing with the bass impact though, when I would take the headphones off while a song was playing, I could feel the bass of the Susvara vibrating in my hands and moving the air. I didn't get this on the Expanse. You would assume this would translate to more bass impact on the Susvara since it's seemingly moving more air but sure enough I went back and forth and every time felt the Expanse had more bass.

Yeah so many variables at play here including sensitivity to headphone position among others, but one critical factor to consider is that our perception of bass isn’t merely a matter of what’s there, but also what our brain is skilfully adding to the experience.

One strategy often utilized is the “missing fundamental” phenomenon. Our brain’s have the capacity to perceive a full bass sound even when the lowest bass frequencies are not physically present. Instead, it uses the harmonics (higher frequency components) to reconstruct these missing bass notes.

I recall when I had Stealth, Susvara, and Expanse around that I thought Stealth and Susvara had more sub-bass with Expanse having more mid-bass, consistent with the intentional bump in the mid-bass DCA made in the Expanse. Mid-bass frequencies are more readily felt and heard where as sub-bass frequencies are more felt than heard. This was my experience where Stealth and Susvara provided a more vibrating and rumbling sensation with the Expanse being a tad more visceral in impact.

Am sure a lot of the discrepancies can be explained via Physics, biology, and a bunch of psycho acoustic trickery that’s beyond my pay grade to explain.

 

[number1sixerfan]

I recall when I had Stealth, Susvara, and Expanse around that I thought Stealth and Susvara had more sub-bass with Expanse having more mid-bass, consistent with the intentional bump in the mid-bass DCA made in the Expanse. Mid-bass frequencies are more readily felt and heard where as sub-bass frequencies are more felt than heard. This was my experience where Stealth and Susvara provided a more vibrating and rumbling sensation with the Expanse being a tad more visceral in impact.

I think it's hearing and describing differently at play, but I also think it's mainly that we're referring to different things. The Expanse definitely has the mid-bass hump, which is enjoyable. If that's what someone is referring to, I get it. When talking about "bass" generally, I think most are referring to sub-bass and visceral impact mainly felt in the lower region of the sound. It's in that category where it's been really consistent for me across amps and other headphones. I also felt the Stealth had improved lower bass over the Expanse, but not by much.

But back to @gammi's original question as to why there is so much discrepancy, I think that itself points to potential gaps/issues for that specific topic that aren't simply accounted for by fit or other variables, as you just don't see that level of inconsistency for other headphones/brands (to this degree even between fans of a product). I did extensive research on the Stealth vs. Expanse bass to try and get an honest idea, and I just eventually gave up, as it was just all way too contradictory lol. Thankfully I was finally able to just hear them for myself.

 

[steve468]

This is interesting to me that people perceive the bass impact of these so differently, I wonder what's causing it?

I did some A/B-ing last night and found I actually thought the Expanse had more bass impact than the Susvara, seems I'm in the other camp on that one. I do agree the Susvara is more spacious though. I think part of that comes down to them physically being more open than the Expanse, as in when no music is playing.

One interesting thing with the bass impact though, when I would take the headphones off while a song was playing, I could feel the bass of the Susvara vibrating in my hands and moving the air. I didn't get this on the Expanse. You would assume this would translate to more bass impact on the Susvara since it's seemingly moving more air but sure enough I went back and forth and every time felt the Expanse had more bass.

There’s a few headphones which I hear just very differently than the head-fi “consensus”, if there is such a thing. But the Expanse…it’s like I’m hearing a different headphone. To me the bass is HUGE, impactful, resonant. The most perfect representation of bass guitar I’ve ever heard. Lack of impact and dynamics? Expanse gets me closest to that feeling of being at a concert, feeling the bass and guitar as much as seeing.

It's obviously only a psychological trick and I might just be tricking myself. I can't explain it at all. Best I can come up with is the Expanse is so transparent that the texture on the recording comes through better.

I haven't heard Susvara, but just got a Caldera -Caldera have better impact, but are not as transparent and somehow not as snappy as Expanse.

I've been thinking about this concept of snappy vs impactful in relation to what I hear with Expanse, but it's a pretty half baked idea. I have no idea how to describe it or measure it anything. It's like a different category of impact that Expanse excels in. And maybe I'm the only one that hears it this way.

 

[gammi]

Maybe one of these days I'll buy myself a pair of MiniDSP EARS and measure impulse/decay between the two. Should give more insight into how they impact.

 

[gammi]

Really cool video and it has some Expanse applicable info in it like the driver knurling I was unaware of. Also if anyone feels the Expanse is too "full" they might love the E3 since it has less in the 100-250Hz area. I'm looking forward to trying this in a few months at NYC CanJam

 

[gammi]

Just watched the headphone show video where they did their tier list. All three of them ranked the Expanse quite low which I found surprising.
I wonder what it is about the Expanse that some don't like it and others love it. Many who have heard lots of TOTL headphones rank the Expanse up at the top and others completely dislike it. Is AMTS that sensitive to people's heads?

 

[Spawn300Z]

Stop worrying about what people rank the headphones they have used or reviewed at. This what you need to worry about.

Does the headphone have synergy and sound good with your current system? If it doesn’t is it worth tweaking/building a system around the Headphone.

 

[gammi]

Stop worrying about what people rank the headphones they have used or reviewed at. This what you need to worry about.

Does the headphone have synergy and sound good with your current system? If it doesn’t is it worth tweaking/building a system around the Headphone.

Worried? What gave you that idea? I've said in here multiple times that the Expanse is perhaps my favorite all around headphone.
I'm simply discussing. You know, the purpose of a forum...

I find the Expanse seems to be the most controversial/variable headphone and I'm curious why.

 

[Spawn300Z]

Worried? What gave you that idea? I've said in here multiple times that the Expanse is perhaps my favorite all around headphone.
I'm simply discussing. You know, the purpose of a forum...

I find the Expanse seems to be the most controversial/variable headphone and I'm curious why.

My apologies. I may have misinterpreted your post. There is always a lot of discussion about the ranking off Ear Speakers. Most tend to forget the systems synergy has a lot to do with it.

Just like when I say the most underrated Flagship Headphone is the AKG K812 Pro. I believe it’s better than the HD800S. A large number would disagree and but has never really compared them. Just go by the reviewers or rankings.

 

[Resolve]

Worried? What gave you that idea? I've said in here multiple times that the Expanse is perhaps my favorite all around headphone.
I'm simply discussing. You know, the purpose of a forum...

I find the Expanse seems to be the most controversial/variable headphone and I'm curious why.

This is down to HpTF effects (the headphone transfer function, NOT HRTF). Headphones behave differently on different heads, and some headphones vary more substantially than others. The HD 800 S for example performs very consistently across different heads, while the HD 650's behavior changes more depending on the head (there are stronger examples but this is ultimately down to the design of the headphone and the HD 800 S vs HD 650 exemplifies that). The Expanse is one that has fairly significant behavior variation depending on the head that wears it. So the response some of us get at the ear drum is very different from the intended or measured response. But as Golden mentioned, there's no reason to assume it wouldn't be excellent for others for the very same reason.

 

[SolarCetacean]

Worried? What gave you that idea? I've said in here multiple times that the Expanse is perhaps my favorite all around headphone.
I'm simply discussing. You know, the purpose of a forum...

I find the Expanse seems to be the most controversial/variable headphone and I'm curious why.

DCA headphones seem to have very little seal tolerance. No seal means no bass. That's probably a contributing factor for the variation in impressions. In the E3 (headphone) thread, Dan Clark mentioned that the AMTS is designed to be tuned via positioning, so you can move the headphone around to adjust its tonal balance. The issue is if the "best" position isn't comfortable, then the entire experience will be suboptimal.

Another is probably the listener's priority on dynamic punch and impact. Dan Clarks tend not to do well at this attribute due to the amount of damping. If people really index on that punchiness and "pop" of the sound, then they probably won't like the Expanse. Some other people don't mind, or prefer, this reduced punchiness, so they won't deduct points based on it.

On tonal balance, I can see it going either way. Dan Clarks in general have really... neutral tonal balance, so if someone heavily indexes on tonal balance, they'll probably love the Expanse, unless they don't like the boost at 200 Hz. But people who like a brighter and more sparkly performance would probably find the Expanse dull in tonal balance.

On openness, I can see people who value a more open sound not liking the Dan Clark. This is where preference plays a pretty big role, because I know some people prefer the more exact rendering of soundstage and imaging of the Expanse, but other people prefer having that sense of space and openness in sound, even if it's exaggerated over what's in the recording.

For me, I thought the Expanse was fine, the best of the current-gen Dan Clarks (not having heard the E3 yet). I did not think it lacked bass. It did not feel as blunted in bass attack and decay as the Stealth or the Aeon 2 Noire. Note that I listened to it on a WA22 tube amp, so I probably heard it in an electrically underdamped state rather than with its intended damping factor. I suspect that I generally prefer a slightly underdamped sound as most of my real-life experience with music is in highly open and reverberant spaces. But I did not think it sounded as open as I like my music to sound. I'm one of those people for whom there is no such thing as too much openness. So the Expanse's relative lack of openness is a larger mark against it than it would be to another listener.

 

[gammi]

This is down to HpTF effects (the headphone transfer function, NOT HRTF). Headphones behave differently on different heads, and some headphones vary more substantially than others. The HD 800 S for example performs very consistently across different heads, while the HD 650's behavior changes more depending on the head (there are stronger examples but this is ultimately down to the design of the headphone and the HD 800 S vs HD 650 exemplifies that). The Expanse is one that has fairly significant behavior variation depending on the head that wears it. So the response some of us get at the ear drum is very different from the intended or measured response. But as Golden mentioned, there's no reason to assume it wouldn't be excellent for others for the very same reason.

The man himself, thanks for the reply.

Another is probably the listener's priority on dynamic punch and impact. Dan Clarks tend not to do well at this attribute due to the amount of damping. If people really index on that punchiness and "pop" of the sound, then they probably won't like the Expanse. Some other people don't mind, or prefer, this reduced punchiness, so they won't deduct points based on it.

This is one thing I've never really noticed. Perhaps I'm due for a listening comparison (at the risk of coming out the other side liking the Expanse less) between the Expanse and maybe Utopia since it's generally regarded as punchy. I'd also like to try out dynamic EQ that you've been talking about to adjust dynamics and see the difference.

I've often felt the Expanse is one of those sounds good with anything headphones, perhaps it's the blunted dynamics giving it a more generally acceptable sound.

I think I need to get some in-ear mics and start doing my own CSD/impulse response tests...
EDIT: I bought a MiniDSP EARS lol. Will get in-ear mics eventually too.

 

[AlfredE]

Interesting - everybody trying to defend a Headphone which maybe under the most excellent conditions and if everything falls in Place given the right stellar constellation might sound as good as other excellent headphones except that for the Expanse one you have to but over-TOTL something just that you can maybe hear music that actually sounds good.