[Spad]

Quote:

Originally posted by FCJ Spad, Any reason why you didn't use the Meta with the Sonys?

Actually there is a reason. I wasn't trying to do an indepth comparison of the headphones, just a quick-and-dirty head-to-head out of idle curiosity. I had compared them to my satisfaction previously, so I was really just doodling around.

As you likely know, it's vitally important when A/B-ing components, that volumes be matched as precisely as possible and switches between them be made quickly. Because the EJ1000's remote functions while the line-out is in use, I was able to easily set things up without even leaving my recliner. (A major consideration in all my 'scientific' endeavors.) Since the CD3Ks sounded better even when driven from the PCDP's headphone output, there was really no reason to switch them to the META. Had they sounded worse, I would have made the switch to determine what role the amp played in the outcome.

This, if anyone reads between the lines, is actually more about the impact of their relative sensitivity than the sonic merits of either headphone. The point being, of course, that the CD3000 can be driven to more than adequate levels even from the latest (read 'wimpier') PCDPs. So perhaps, all things being equal, headphones with higher sensitivity ratings are inherently better choices.

 

[FCJ]

Quote:

Originally posted by Spad This, if anyone reads between the lines, is actually more about the impact of their relative sensitivity than the sonic merits of either headphone. The point being, of course, that the CD3000 can be driven to more than adequate levels even from the latest (read 'wimpier') PCDPs. So perhaps, all things being equal, headphones with higher sensitivity ratings are inherently better choices.

All else being equal, heaphones with higher sensitivity may appear to sound better than heaphones with low (and the Beyers are low) sensitivity at similar listening levels. Once you compensate volume levels for this difference, however, all bets are off. Could that be what happend in your comparison?

 

[Spad]

Quote:

Originally posted by FCJ All else being equal, heaphones with higher sensitivity may appear to sound better than heaphones with low (and the Beyers are low) sensitivity at similar listening levels. Once you compensate volume levels for this difference, however, all bets are off. Could that be what happend in your comparison?

Of course not, FJC. I thought I made that clear. Even at the same volume level, the headphone being driven by the amp has the significant advantage of much greater dynamic headroom. And had the connections been reversed, the DT880s could not have reached a matching level.

The point here is that, again--all else being equal--the 'phone with the greater sensitivity has an inherent advantage if for no other reason than it can go where the less sensitive headphone cannot. For example, practically all portable players can drive the CD3Ks (or R10s, for that matter), but almost none can handle the DT880s and fewer still the K501s. The obvious conclusion, therefore, is that the Sonys are more versatile. Not that they necessarily sound better, mind you, but simply that they are usable with a wider range of equipment.

As you know, this isn't necessarily a big deal, and sensitivity has nothing whatever to do with the ultimate sound quality of a headphone. However, if you lack the power to drive them adequately (a common situation when pairing portable gear with low-sensitivity HPs) the finest headphones provide little more than a "stench in the ear."

I know in most cases I'm preaching to the choir here, and I'm surprised by the response to this thread. I thought these things were axiomatic in this neck o' the woods.

 

[FCJ]

Quote:

Originally posted by Spad Of course not, FJC. I thought I made that clear. Even at the same volume level, the headphone being driven by the amp has the significant advantage of much greater dynamic headroom. And had the connections been reversed, the DT880s could not have reached a matching level. The point here is that, again--all else being equal--the 'phone with the greater sensitivity has an inherent advantage if for no other reason than it can go where the less sensitive headphone cannot. For example, practically all portable players can drive the CD3Ks (or R10s, for that matter), but almost none can handle the DT880s and fewer still the K501s. The obvious conclusion, therefore, is that the Sonys are more versatile. Not that they necessarily sound better, mind you, but simply that they are usable with a wider range of equipment. As you know, this isn't necessarily a big deal, and sensitivity has nothing whatever to do with the ultimate sound quality of a headphone. However, if you lack the power to drive them adequately (a common situation when pairing portable gear with low-sensitivity HPs) the finest headphones provide little more than a "stench in the ear." I know in most cases I'm preaching to the choir here, and I'm surprised by the response to this thread. I thought these things were axiomatic in this neck o' the woods.

Thanks for clarifying. I agree completely, although I'm not sure if anything is ever axiomatic. . . .

You're right about something else--the 880s are really tough to drive.

 

[Spad]

Quote:

Originally posted by FCJ You're right about something else--the 880s are really tough to drive.

But, oh do they sound sweet when they're cookin'! I'm listening to a little Ponty with the 880s as I write, which is quite a feat considering all the finger poppin' going on.