[jaco61]

...for inserting pics use e.g. www.directupload.net

 

[Shazb0t]

Partially open. They leak like crazy.

couldn't agree more.

That's what I wanted to know. Thanks for the answers!

 

[darmanastartes]

That's what I wanted to know. Thanks for the answers!

Honestly I disagree. I have a very noise-sensitive SO and I have to be blasting my music for her to complain from about six feet away. They leak more than DT770s but not by that much.

 

[MonoOno]

Anyone has some aftermarket cable recommendations they know work for sure? I thought the cables that came with the wireless edition were great but they're already coming apart. The silver cable itself as seemingly detached from the jack but still works.

 

[Pharmaboy]

Anyone has some aftermarket cable recommendations they know work for sure? I thought the cables that came with the wireless edition were great but they're already coming apart. The silver cable itself as seemingly detached from the jack but still works.

Sure do. I ordered my E-Mu Teaks w/balanced cable, but when I decided to sell it, I purchased a SE cable for it from Periaptcables. I was impressed with the build quality, and it sounded just fine to me.

Their SE cables are here: https://periaptcables.com/products/professional-pro

And their balanced cables are here: https://periaptcables.com/products/professional-xlr-pro-xlr?variant=31412789266

(pretty sure the Teaks are "Type II" of the "Type" options)

You can't push the price over $100 for either cable, even if ordering 10 ft lengths. And depending on length, your price may just be 1/2-2/3s of that...

 

[phthora]

I will second @Pharmaboy on his recommendation. I found the stock cable slightly too short for my set-up and discovered the Periapt cable I had for the 400i and 560 also works for the E-Mu Teak. Very nicely built, flexible cable at a reasonable price.

 

[MonoOno]

Sure do. I ordered my E-Mu Teaks w/balanced cable, but when I decided to sell it, I purchased a SE cable for it from Periaptcables. I was impressed with the build quality, and it sounded just fine to me.

Their SE cables are here: https://periaptcables.com/products/professional-pro

And their balanced cables are here: https://periaptcables.com/products/professional-xlr-pro-xlr?variant=31412789266

(pretty sure the Teaks are "Type II" of the "Type" options)

You can't push the price over $100 for either cable, even if ordering 10 ft lengths. And depending on length, your price may just be 1/2-2/3s of that...

I will second @Pharmaboy on his recommendation. I found the stock cable slightly too short for my set-up and discovered the Periapt cable I had for the 400i and 560 also works for the E-Mu Teak. Very nicely built, flexible cable at a reasonable price.

Awesome! Thank you both.

 

[phthora]

I know this flies in the face of current trends, but... I am consistently more impressed by biocellulose drivers than I am by beryllium ones. Or maybe Fostex just nails it, since I've never heard a Fostex I didn't want to buy. Anyway, it makes me wonder why they are not more common.

 

[Pharmaboy]

I know this flies in the face of current trends, but... I am consistently more impressed by biocellulose drivers than I am by beryllium ones. Or maybe Fostex just nails it, since I've never heard a Fostex I didn't want to buy. Anyway, it makes me wonder why they are not more common.

Well, several highly-regarded headphones use biocellulose (AQ Nighthawk Carbon & Nightowl Carbon; ZMF Eikon). I heard the Eikon at great length and was very impressed. I owned the E-Mu Teak and was also very impressed (I sold them due to comfort issues--not sound).

Having said that, I can't identify ways that biocellulose driver headphones are sonically different from other dynamics. I've only heard these 2; and their design, construction, weight, and size are sufficiently different that generalization is impossible.

I think part of the reason biocellulose is less common than man-made materials is cost; the variety of ways to obtain/produce biocellulose (no standard "Production line" exists); also the difficulty of forming this natural material into effective/dependable drivers.

 

[phthora]

Well, several highly-regarded headphones use biocellulose (AQ Nighthawk Carbon & Nightowl Carbon; ZMF Eikon). I heard the Eikon at great length and was very impressed. I owned the E-Mu Teak and was also very impressed (I sold them due to comfort issues--not sound).

Having said that, I can't identify ways that biocellulose driver headphones are sonically different from other dynamics. I've only heard these 2; and their design, construction, weight, and size are sufficiently different that generalization is impossible.

I think part of the reason biocellulose is less common than man-made materials is cost; the variety of ways to obtain/produce biocellulose (no standard "Production line" exists); also the difficulty of forming this natural material into effective/dependable drivers.

Fair points. I didn't realize the difficulty involved with the material itself. Beryllium is said to require a similarly exacting process, but, while it isn't exactly commonplace, you can find beryllium in IEMs as cheap as $50 and full-size cans for a couple hundred.

At this point, I've heard all the Fostex biocellulose variants of this generation, excluding the TH610, as well as the Atticus and Eikon for a brief audition. No AQ stuff yet, but the Nightowl is one night of too much Scotch away from being purchased. Anyway, my impressions may be entirely coincidental or a result of some other factor, but from my experience the bass on a biocellulose driver is amazing: clean, hard-hitting, full, and well-extended. But, without the relative boominess and smear of the beryllium drivers I've heard, the Cascade, Lyra (IIRC), and Periodic Be. The bass on the TH900 is my current ideal.

How did you find the Eikon to stack up against the E-Mu Teak?

 

[Pharmaboy]

Fair points. I didn't realize the difficulty involved with the material itself. Beryllium is said to require a similarly exacting process, but, while it isn't exactly commonplace, you can find beryllium in IEMs as cheap as $50 and full-size cans for a couple hundred.

At this point, I've heard all the Fostex biocellulose variants of this generation, excluding the TH610, as well as the Atticus and Eikon for a brief audition. No AQ stuff yet, but the Nightowl is one night of too much Scotch away from being purchased. Anyway, my impressions may be entirely coincidental or a result of some other factor, but from my experience the bass on a biocellulose driver is amazing: clean, hard-hitting, full, and well-extended. But, without the relative boominess and smear of the beryllium drivers I've heard, the Cascade, Lyra (IIRC), and Periodic Be. The bass on the TH900 is my current ideal.

How did you find the Eikon to stack up against the E-Mu Teak?

Well, consistent with your theory about biocellulose driver bass--the bass on both the Teaks & the Eikon is remarkable IMHO, though somewhat different in character/quality. But there are many differences between them:

Teaks:

• compact design w/moderate earcup volume/size
• low impedance (25 ohms)
  
• overall sound (amp-dependent) is organic, slightly warm, musical
• bass is very nice, impactful, musical, dynamic...but sub-bass is average. The real action is the mid- to upper-bass, which is elevated & excellent
• small peak in upper midrange gives a pleasing little shimmer to the sound; w/the wrong amp, this can become oppressive
• resolution is decent, maybe a bit above average
• soundstaging is average at best
• it scales up to some degree w/increasing amp quality, but nothing dramatic
  • you wouldn't get good results on the low impedance Teaks w/a high impedance OTL tube design

Eikon:

• large earcups, large earcup volume/size
• high impedance (300 ohms)
• overall sound is very slightly warm
• bass is crushing: dynamic, detailed, timbrally accurate, flat all the way down (sub-bass is the best I ever heard)
• the Eikon can sometimes be a bit unrelenting in the upper midrange (amp dependent)...the difference between honest/flat & "in your face"
• this is a high resolution headphone, more accurate to sources, details galore
• soundstaging is sensational for a closed back
• the Eikon scales up significantly/noticeably with increasing amp quality
  • you absolutely would get good results on the Eikon w/a high impedance OTL tube design (I'll soon hear the Eikon on the Woo WA3)

The Eikon is 3X the cost of the Teaks, and this is one of those times where paying more money gets even more quality. IMO, the Eikon is endgame, or close to it; the Teaks are really not endgame, though they're very musical, fun HPs.

These are both terrific biocellulose designs--but they have very little in common besides the driver material & far above-average bass.

 

[Pharmaboy]

(forgot to mention)

Midrange on the teaks is average to slightly above-average...but you're so busy digging the bass & that organic sound that it doesn't seem to matter.

Midrange on the Eikon is large & sonically rich--the best midrange I've heard on any headphone. For a closed back design, the mids are exceptional.

 

[phthora]

Well, consistent with your theory about biocellulose driver bass--the bass on both the Teaks & the Eikon is remarkable IMHO, though somewhat different in character/quality. But there are many differences between them:

Teaks:

• compact design w/moderate earcup volume/size
• low impedance (25 ohms)
  
• overall sound (amp-dependent) is organic, slightly warm, musical
• bass is very nice, impactful, musical, dynamic...but sub-bass is average. The real action is the mid- to upper-bass, which is elevated & excellent
• small peak in upper midrange gives a pleasing little shimmer to the sound; w/the wrong amp, this can become oppressive
• resolution is decent, maybe a bit above average
• soundstaging is average at best
• it scales up to some degree w/increasing amp quality, but nothing dramatic
  • you wouldn't get good results on the low impedance Teaks w/a high impedance OTL tube design

Eikon:

• large earcups, large earcup volume/size
• high impedance (300 ohms)
• overall sound is very slightly warm
• bass is crushing: dynamic, detailed, timbrally accurate, flat all the way down (sub-bass is the best I ever heard)
• the Eikon can sometimes be a bit unrelenting in the upper midrange (amp dependent)...the difference between honest/flat & "in your face"
• this is a high resolution headphone, more accurate to sources, details galore
• soundstaging is sensational for a closed back
• the Eikon scales up significantly/noticeably with increasing amp quality
  • you absolutely would get good results on the Eikon w/a high impedance OTL tube design (I'll soon hear the Eikon on the Woo WA3)

The Eikon is 3X the cost of the Teaks, and this is one of those times where paying more money gets even more quality. IMO, the Eikon is endgame, or close to it; the Teaks are really not endgame, though they're very musical, fun HPs.

These are both terrific biocellulose designs--but they have very little in common besides the driver material & far above-average bass.

Wow! Insanely thorough. Thank you!

I agree with 95% of what you said regarding the E-Mu. This is my lone decent dynamic in a collection of damn good planars, so the Teaks don't sound very resolving to me, but other than that, I think you're spot on. Now, I'll have to read up on the Eikon.

Two quick questions:

Do you hear any distortion or weirdness around 1.5k? I don't normally judge a headphone by its measurements, but there is an odd confluence of increased distortion, dip in FR, and spike in impedance right around that spot in Tyll's measurements.

I've got a couple of big boy amps that will drive anything, but do you think a iFi Black Label putting out 166mW at 600 ohm would suit these headphones?

 

[Pharmaboy]

I never saw Tyll's measurements. To be honest, I don't pay much attention to frequency graphs...the sound I hear rarely conforms to the graph in a simplistic/linear way.

Assuming you refer to the Teaks:

• I haven't heard them in months, but don't recall hearing distortion or weirdness around 1.5K. That's midrange: a lot of music lives there, yet I apparently didn't hear it...perhaps because the amps I have tend to be powerful & slightly warm in that range.
• I haven't heard the iFi black label, but it gets a lot of love on Head-Fi. The Teaks are an easy load...they'd probably sound great on it.
  • FYI, I got crazy/good sound out of the Teaks on the Liquid Carbon v2 (the best bass, treble somewhat pulled down)
  • And both of my DACs are multi-bit designs (Audio GD DAC-19, my backup DAC; and NOS 19, my main DAC).

 

[phthora]

I never saw Tyll's measurements. To be honest, I don't pay much attention to frequency graphs...the sound I hear rarely conforms to the graph in a simplistic/linear way.

Assuming you refer to the Teaks:

• I haven't heard them in months, but don't recall hearing distortion or weirdness around 1.5K. That's midrange: a lot of music lives there, yet I apparently didn't hear it...perhaps because the amps I have tend to be powerful & slightly warm in that range.
• I haven't heard the iFi black label, but it gets a lot of love on Head-Fi. The Teaks are an easy load...they'd probably sound great on it.
  • FYI, I got crazy/good sound out of the Teaks on the Liquid Carbon v2 (the best bass, treble somewhat pulled down)
  • And both of my DACs are multi-bit designs (Audio GD DAC-19, my backup DAC; and NOS 19, my main DAC).

Oops. I wasn't clear. I was asking about the Eikon. Although, if that wasn't immediately clear to you, I suppose that means there's no audible weirdness in the 1-2k range on that headphone.

I usually don't pay too much mind to measurements either; normally, I just look at a FR to see what type of sound signature it has.