[Graphicism]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif Someone who I trust, says the CD3000 is like a mini R10, & is comparable to the R10 more so then any other headphone he has owned, which includes, the HD800/K1000/SA5000/STAX, etc..

But has he owned a DR-Z6... just saying

 

[leeperry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by crumpler /img/forum/go_quote.gif Maybe you should start a thread on the CD3000s VS SA5000s

nah, it always ends up w/ the same ole naysayers...it's utterly pointless too

I haven't tried the K702, but my modded cd1k isolates very poorly anyway...ah well, if I can snatch a second hand sa3k, I'll swing it w/ some sa5k ear pads

but the narrow SS story kinda bothers me, because the cd3k drivers are mesmerizing on that point.
w/ the right amping/source and modifications, it basically provides you w/ this kind of 300° SS:

but we can always angle the sa5k drivers even further

 

[crumpler]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif but we can always angle the sa5k drivers even further

Wow! I've never thought about angling the headphone drivers! It'll prolly do some modding just before i do intend to change phones. These SA5000s are way too precious at the moment to mod.

I'm now at the 5hr mark and the vocals are indeed beginning to mellow(unharsh) and come forward.

I hope this continues on for many many more hours!

 

[k3oxkjo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graphicism /img/forum/go_quote.gif But has he owned a DR-Z6... just saying

No, but I'll keep my CBS eye out for them...

 

[leeperry]

Quote:

Originally Posted by crumpler /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'll prolly do some modding

hehe yes, there's many modifications possible on headphones to finetune their FR to your taste and increase their imaging width.

BTW a friend of mine just disassembled his Darth Beyer VXD3, I'm sure QQQ will like the photos ^^

this said, I'm still hot for a sa1k using cd3k drivers + sa5k earpads

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by k3oxkjo /img/forum/go_quote.gif No, but I'll keep my CBS eye out for them...

Kevin, you gave yourself away. I was going to mention the DT48 among the phones you own, but then realized, your opinion on this matter demanded credability.

 

[k3oxkjo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif Kevin, you gave yourself away. I was going to mention the DT48 among the phones you own, but then realized, your opinion on this matter demanded credability.

Me? Credability? Surely you jest.

No, I LIKE the DT-48 and reach for them often. What they do is unique to themselves.

Leeperry said this earlier and I wanted to take a closer look:

"the R10 is also said to be quite colored, just like tubes color the sound as well...we all want accuracy w/ a sweet sound basically, but that doesn't really exist"

And I agree on this. The idea of "accuracy" and/or "neutrality" appeals to my technical background, but truthfully I don't think that exists, at least at our present level of practice and understanding.

Consider:

Recordings are all made differently. Most rock albums are a construct of the artist/producer/engineer with no reference in "reality", many Classical recordings use a forest of mic's with the balances determined by the position of the faders and the recordings that are "naturally" recorded use many different mic's and mic strategies. So there is no one universal "inverse transfer function".

With speakers, literal, technically flat reproduction usually sounds quite unnatural. And the same is true of cans.

As another headphone-specific problem, even the reserchers in the field disagree about the compensation necessary due to phones proximity to ear and the fact that they tend to fire directly into the ear canal. Free-field? Diffuse-field? Some compromise in between?

So what would "accurate" be? And accurate to what?

I had an email encounter once with a reviewer for an audio magazine that will remain nameless (OK, Stereophile) who told me that his speakers were so accurate that he "could only listen to 10% of (his) records for sonic pleasure". My reaction is, if this was true, who would WANT a system that did that?

I am not arguing against having standards, I just don't think there is any one-size-fits-all solution, so the ear still has to reign supreme. Along with taste, experience and a certain amount of technical understanding.

So when someone tells me that thier phones or system is "accurate", my spidey sences start to tingle (as a great philosopher once said).

Kevin

 

[leeperry]

my favorite is MOT's who like to tell anyone who wants to listen that their set up is not "resolving"

I used to own a genuine leather DT770/600Ω, there is no question that it was more "resolving" than my modded cd1k...the trebles were crystal clear and any tiny bit of defect(scratch/pop/static) was literallly blowing UP to my ears...it became highly irritating after a few weeks

also, the SS was very narrow and as 2D as can be...OTOH my modded cd1k gives an amazing (unnatural) 3D SS that can go as large as 300 degrees around my head...and it doesn't bother me w/ tiny defects, still PRaT is very very high.

I belive PRaT is about sweet coloring...just like discrete designs or tubes color the sound.

here's what Ray Samuels said about my favorite opamp: REVIEW: Ray Samuels Emmeline HR-2 - SGHeadphones
Quote:

As Mr. Samuels once remarked, the LT1028 is like putting sugar all over your sound. It has a very liquid, sweet, and warm midrange that exhibits sharp bass and treble roll off. Unlike the Analog Devices op-amps, it is not dark. In fact, low level details flow through with greater clarity and definition.

LT1028AC makes you nod your head silly, both majkel and Andrea agree on this...I think it's got to do w/ its amazing low end bass percussion

I honestly don't think that anyone wants a highly resolving set up w/ a very clear "neutral" sound for sheer audio euphonic enjoyment...that's what mastering engineers want, not us.

tubes are the same, they color the sound to death...but they just make it very appealing...distortion is very much needed, but THD/THD+N cannot measure at what order it's taking place anyway. otherwise we'd all be using those 0.00000000001% THD-N LME49990 opamps, that are actually totally unbearable to listen to

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by leeperry /img/forum/go_quote.gif my favorite is MOT's who like to tell anyone who wants to listen that their set up is not "resolving" I used to own a genuine leather DT770/600Ω, there is no question that it was more "resolving" than my modded cd1k...the trebles were crystal clear and any tiny bit of defect(scratch/pop/static) was literallly blowing UP to my ears...it became highly irritating after a few weeks also, the SS was very narrow and as 2D as can be...OTOH my modded cd1k gives an amazing (unnatural) 3D SS that can go as large as 300 degrees around my head...and it doesn't bother me w/ tiny defects, still PRaT is very very high. I belive PRaT is about sweet coloring...just like discrete designs or tubes color the sound. here's what Ray Samuels said about my favorite opamp: REVIEW: Ray Samuels Emmeline HR-2 - SGHeadphones LT1028AC makes you nod your head silly, both majkel and Andrea agree on this...I think it's got to do w/ its amazing low end bass percussion I honestly don't think that anyone wants a highly resolving set up w/ a very clear "neutral" sound for sheer audio euphonic enjoyment...that's what mastering engineers want, not us. tubes are the same, they color the sound to death...but they just make it very appealing...distortion is very much needed, but THD/THD+N cannot measure at what order it's taking place anyway. otherwise we'd all be using those 0.00000000001% THD-N LME49990 opamps, that are actually totally unbearable to listen to

IMO emotion from music comes from the artist not any particular headphone. IMO more neutral headphones brings me closer to the music due to the 'accuracy' of the instruments & mid range.. But getting lost in the music..ala uphoric is also fun & involving, but more in a emotional sense.. Both brings out emotions in me in different ways.. I'd really like to hear the CD3000.

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by k3oxkjo /img/forum/go_quote.gif Me? Credability? Surely you jest. No, I LIKE the DT-48 and reach for them often. What they do is unique to themselves. Leeperry said this earlier and I wanted to take a closer look: "the R10 is also said to be quite colored, just like tubes color the sound as well...we all want accuracy w/ a sweet sound basically, but that doesn't really exist" And I agree on this. The idea of "accuracy" and/or "neutrality" appeals to my technical background, but truthfully I don't think that exists, at least at our present level of practice and understanding. Consider: Recordings are all made differently. Most rock albums are a construct of the artist/producer/engineer with no reference in "reality", many Classical recordings use a forest of mic's with the balances determined by the position of the faders and the recordings that are "naturally" recorded use many different mic's and mic strategies. So there is no one universal "inverse transfer function". With speakers, literal, technically flat reproduction usually sounds quite unnatural. And the same is true of cans. As another headphone-specific problem, even the reserchers in the field disagree about the compensation necessary due to phones proximity to ear and the fact that they tend to fire directly into the ear canal. Free-field? Diffuse-field? Some compromise in between? So what would "accurate" be? And accurate to what? I had an email encounter once with a reviewer for an audio magazine that will remain nameless (OK, Stereophile) who told me that his speakers were so accurate that he "could only listen to 10% of (his) records for sonic pleasure". My reaction is, if this was true, who would WANT a system that did that? I am not arguing against having standards, I just don't think there is any one-size-fits-all solution, so the ear still has to reign supreme. Along with taste, experience and a certain amount of technical understanding. So when someone tells me that thier phones or system is "accurate", my spidey sences start to tingle (as a great philosopher once said). Kevin

Which is odd, since many fans of the DT48 find them to sound very natural.. Different hearing?

 

[k3oxkjo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif Which is odd, since many fans of the DT48 find them to sound very natural.. Different hearing?

I think DT-48 sound natural, too. I just can't reliably and definatively say how natural would measure...

...but like aural pornography, I know it when I hear it.

 

[Amarphael]

Well here's my take on this, As i can compare between my stock and Black Dragon Recabled pairs which I just tested with the HDtracks 24bit “Open your Ears” album and some orchestral music.
Recabled pair has noticeably fuller, weightier sound, defenietly has more bass quantity without losing any texture, on the contrary it gives an even better (!) sense of detail and clarity with the improved dynamics. Also upper mid and treble is a bit smoother, but still has that [size=small]crystallic icing on it, just more natural and without any noticeable roll-off.[/size]
To my ears it's easily obvious that after the recable they achieve a more emotianl and involving musical presentation so it is a worhy investment, though as mentioned before should be considered as the last finishing touch.

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by sokolov91 
As far as all the comments on the SA5K cable.... what's the big deal? its like 6N copper... It is a bit microphonic, but I don't dance whilst listening to it... I highly doubt at this level, a cable will make or break my headphone. I am not really convinced on cables anymore. I recently transfered ALL of my aftermarket cables to my humble speaker set up, and I have honestly not noticed much of a difference... But, then again, I have been listened less frequent with my headphones lately.

The SA5K is hardwired, and this makes me even less likely to recable it.

 

 

[2-i]

[size=10pt]Well, I just got a new pair of SA3000's.  I had an SA-5000 and one driver burned out, I also had issues with the cable there.  I did however love them and tried to find a spare driver for a long time, unsuccessfully.[/size]
 
[size=10pt]When I opened up the SA3k today I noticed the differences, first the plastic frames are flimsier, but do look nice in black!  [/size]
 
[size=10pt]Upon inspecting the drivers I noticed a difference between the back of the 3000's and the 5000 drivers. There is an extra layer of black dampening material glued to the back of the 5K drivers, which is missing from the 3K drivers.[/size]
 
[size=10pt]I believe this membrane in addition to the pads make the difference in sound quality.  What I did was removed the mesh from the back, cut a hole in the middle and glued it to the driver over the white membrane.  This made it sound more balanced and neutral in my opinion, while still very detailed.  It has enough Bass and I don't feel there is need for more.   I am using a HeadRoom Micro, which is bass-heavy compared to other amps, and also manages not to sound harsh with the highs.  I’ll try some tube amps with them too.[/size]
[size=10pt]Since I still have the leather pads and frame from the broken SA-5000's, I put the new drivers back into it.  I am quite happy with the result, even though extra $ was spent.   It was years since my first Sony headphones died and are now resurrected from the closet.[/size]

 

[punkplayer]

I've found that SA5000 could be more "musical" or less stiff if some kind of acoustic foam is placed between the driver and the ears. This could be a great phone for symphonies, not only for rocks.

 

[MDR30]

Quote:

[size=10pt]Well, I just got a new pair of SA3000's.  I had an SA-5000 and one driver burned out, I also had issues with the cable there.  I did however love them and tried to find a spare driver for a long time, unsuccessfully.[/size]
 
[size=10pt]When I opened up the SA3k today I noticed the differences, first the plastic frames are flimsier, but do look nice in black!  [/size]
 
[size=10pt]Upon inspecting the drivers I noticed a difference between the back of the 3000's and the 5000 drivers. There is an extra layer of black dampening material glued to the back of the 5K drivers, which is missing from the 3K drivers.[/size]
 
[size=10pt]I believe this membrane in addition to the pads make the difference in sound quality.  What I did was removed the mesh from the back, cut a hole in the middle and glued it to the driver over the white membrane.  This made it sound more balanced and neutral in my opinion, while still very detailed.  It has enough Bass and I don't feel there is need for more.   I am using a HeadRoom Micro, which is bass-heavy compared to other amps, and also manages not to sound harsh with the highs.  I’ll try some tube amps with them too.[/size]
[size=10pt]Since I still have the leather pads and frame from the broken SA-5000's, I put the new drivers back into it.  I am quite happy with the result, even though extra $ was spent.   It was years since my first Sony headphones died and are now resurrected from the closet.[/size]

Photos would be quite informative.