[s1rrah]

I've been listening to the GSX 1000 most of this week, strictly in regards to gaming.  I like it.  With decent open headphones, the 7.1 emulation is fairly remarkable (I've mostly used Koss Porta pros and they are outstanding with the GSX 1000).  With closed cans (Bose Triports), the 7.1 "effect" is drastically diminished.  I can't comment towards the GSX 1000's use as a 2.1 music listening device as I simply have no interest in that usage scenario.  But the fact remains, for an emulated 7.1 headphone solution, it's a fun bit of gear to play with.  I also love the simple, highly effective industrial design of the thing and that everything is enabled as soon as you plug it in to the USB port (no software necessary).
 
All that said?
 
I still can't justify the cost.  Believe it or not, the same Koss Porta Pros sound 80 to 90% as good as the GSX 1000 when simply using the very affordable, Razer Synapse surround software (which I've used off and on for a couple years).  The difference is there, but it's so subtle that there's no way I could rationalize a $200+ dollar expense for the GSX 1000.  The GSX is notably more clear and resolving and the spatial "effects" are more pronounced with the GSX ... but the Razer Synapse surround software is almost as good ... 
 
So the GSX is going back to Amazon in a few days, fun experiment but not a keeper.  
 
I wonder what the OSSIC headphone will bring to the table when it releases?

 

[Sinery]

  I've been listening to the GSX 1000 most of this week, strictly in regards to gaming.  I like it.  With decent open headphones, the 7.1 emulation is fairly remarkable (I've mostly used Koss Porta pros and they are outstanding with the GSX 1000).  With closed cans (Bose Triports), the 7.1 "effect" is drastically diminished.  I can't comment towards the GSX 1000's use as a 2.1 music listening device as I simply have no interest in that usage scenario.  But the fact remains, for an emulated 7.1 headphone solution, it's a fun bit of gear to play with.  I also love the simple, highly effective industrial design of the thing and that everything is enabled as soon as you plug it in to the USB port (no software necessary).
 
All that said?
 
I still can't justify the cost.  Believe it or not, the same Koss Porta Pros sound 80 to 90% as good as the GSX 1000 when simply using the very affordable, Razer Synapse surround software (which I've used off and on for a couple years).  The difference is there, but it's so subtle that there's no way I could rationalize a $200+ dollar expense for the GSX 1000.  The GSX is notably more clear and resolving and the spatial "effects" are more pronounced with the GSX ... but the Razer Synapse surround software is almost as good ... 
 
So the GSX is going back to Amazon in a few days, fun experiment but not a keeper.  
 
I wonder what the OSSIC headphone will bring to the table when it releases?

A 300 USD headphone with a bunch of sensors and 8 drivers from a kickstarter company that has never done audio before?
Yeah it's gonna suck.

 

[raband]

   
I wonder what the OSSIC headphone will bring to the table when it releases?

 
I'm tipping a fair bit of scorn..

 

[s1rrah]

   
I'm tipping a fair bit of scorn..

 
I'm real curious to be honest (re: Ossic) ...
 
And certainly no scorn on my part re: the GSX 1000 ... it's just not the "game changer" I've been looking for in regards to Surround Headphones for a long time now.  Simply not worth the money over software based solutions which sound almost as good and that can be had for $30 bucks.
 
GSX 1000 is a lovely bit of design work, though ... I was tempted to keep it for that reason alone ... but $230 bucks man ... just couldn't trick myself in to it this time around ...
 
Joel

 

[raband]

 
GSX 1000 is a lovely bit of design work, though ... I was tempted to keep it for that reason alone ... but $230 bucks man ... just couldn't trick myself in to it this time around ...
 
Joel

 
For me the GSX1000 gives me frontal queues that no other solution I've tried/owned has been able to.
 
I imagine that for some reason my ear shape, internal wiring etc is that little bit different that the most common models used for HTRF don't really suit me.
 
Whatever model/base they use on the GSX suits me so much better. It's still not perfect (I probably now get 30 degrees each side towards the front) but I'm actually hearing things towards the front of me at last.
 
IF the Ossic (with it's Anatomy Calibration) is able to give me even better then I'd definitely be on board. As the post above me said though - sensors, multiple drivers, head tracking, 10 hour battery, full 3d sound - all for $500 (after the $200 pre-order discount)???? Yeah, nah - I'm happy to be surprised and blown away, but am tipping it'll fall well short of anything groundbreaking or even useable other than a "hey, try these out".

 

[Jenslol]

  No problem.
 
Yes, the 700X beats the X2s tactically because of its better imaging and better/clearer highs and supposedly the 900X beats the 700X for the same reasons and so on through the AD series.
 
I don't know anything, I haven't heard the AD series.
I know only what other people think and I deduce that you'd have to be a madman to complain about too much bass on any of them - seeing as you're not bass sensitive anyway.
 
Will the GSX provide a tactical advantage over an excellent DAC and AMP in [game title]?
Maybe.
It won't improve imaging.
For me in EA SWBF the difference was "Man I'm getting shot from the right." and "Man I'm getting shot from the right and it doesn't feel fatiguing because I hear appropriately much of it in the left cup, this sure is nicer."
 
You can't really get the proper experience through youtube: compression, poor recording, no game sense and what not - hell he might have the wrong settings.
 
If you get an easy to drive headphones I recommend getting the GSX and if you don't love the virtual 7.1 return it.

 
Thank you again. Gsx orderd. Bythe way why I was thinking 700x was a better choise for me was because of this 
https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/4vwsml/comparing_the_shp9500_hd558_and_ad900x_from_a/
 
he is saying the opposite of what you saying and a con on the 900 "Soundstage is actually a downgrade from the cheaper 700/700x's. The 700x's are a better value from a purely gaming perspective and I consider them to the ultimate soundwhoring headphones. The 700/700x's are more precise and positional accuracy is razor sharp when compared to the more echoey 900x's. My old 700's were not enjoyable for music however, and I wanted a better all-arounder so that's why I chose the 900x's."
 
Also I read people saying the ad700 is the "supierier" one as the ATH-ADG1X is build on the 700x and that was made also strict for "esport gaming" 
thougts?

Ordering asap! 
 
Will be intresting testing the GSX with the ad700/900/ and my headset hyperX revolver to see much of an upgrade it is

 

[Sinery]

   
Thank you again. Gsx orderd. Bythe way why I was thinking 700x was a better choise for me was because of this 
https://www.reddit.com/r/headphones/comments/4vwsml/comparing_the_shp9500_hd558_and_ad900x_from_a/
 
he is saying the opposite of what you saying and a con on the 900 "Soundstage is actually a downgrade from the cheaper 700/700x's. The 700x's are a better value from a purely gaming perspective and I consider them to the ultimate soundwhoring headphones. The 700/700x's are more precise and positional accuracy is razor sharp when compared to the more echoey 900x's. My old 700's were not enjoyable for music however, and I wanted a better all-arounder so that's why I chose the 900x's."
 
Also I read people saying the ad700 is the "supierier" one as the ATH-ADG1X is build on the 700x and that was made also strict for "esport gaming" 
thougts?

Ordering asap! 
 
Will be intresting testing the GSX with the ad700/900/ and my headset hyperX revolver to see much of an upgrade it is

Maybe the 900X is the black sheep of the family, I can't know.
But I do know people are biased as ****.
Which is why you must look at many different sources as to form an as accurate image as possible.
 
As I said, often you gain imaging at the loss of soundstage.
 
The 700X is the most popular, famous, and the value option of the series.
Nor surprising that's gonna be the one to slap a mic on and call it a pro gaming headset.
 
So where did you order the stuff?
Because headphone prices suck in Sweden... unless you're lucky enough to long for some oddballs that are priced well.
Philips invading the normie sites rrreeeee.

 

[Jenslol]

  Maybe the 900X is the black sheep of the family, I can't know.
But I do know people are biased as ****.
Which is why you must look at many different sources as to form an as accurate image as possible.
 
As I said, often you gain imaging at the loss of soundstage.
 
The 700X is the most popular, famous, and the value option of the series.
Nor surprising that's gonna be the one to slap a mic on and call it a pro gaming headset.
 
So where did you order the stuff?
Because headphone prices suck in Sweden... unless you're lucky enough to long for some oddballs that are priced well.
Philips invading the normie sites rrreeeee.

Yeah well if the bass on 900x is heavier then on the 700x then thats why people think so.
 
I think ill try order from amazon US somehow, is it impossible you think?

 

[Sinery]

 

Yeah well if the bass on 900x is heavier then on the 700x then thats why people think so.
 
I think ill try order from amazon US somehow, is it impossible you think?

For the 700X there's only a 260 sek difference with shipping, don't bother.

 

[Jenslol]

  For the 700X there's only a 260 sek difference with shipping, don't bother.

True

 

[rudyae86]

 

Yeah well if the bass on 900x is heavier then on the 700x then thats why people think so.
 
I think ill try order from amazon US somehow, is it impossible you think?

lol you have to be very subjective when it comes to peoples opinions or reviews on headphones, especially when comparing headphones within the same line of products (specifically the AD or A series from Audio Technica)
 
if you believe that the 900X has more bass than the 700x, you might be dissapointed. Truth is that it is hard to measure what "more bass" is.
 
An example would be the Fidelio X2 and the Fidelio X1, I have both. As many have said over the past 2 or 3 years, the X2 fixed the little "problems" the X1 had, in terms of sound signature. But many think that the difference is substantial that it would be noticeable......it is but not to how people make it to be. The bass in the X2 is marginally less prominent compared to the X1, while the soundstage of the X1 was wider but that of the X2 a bit smaller. Now, you tell me, how does that description sound to you? (pun intended)
 
From here on out you can start making your assumptions, as in, how much bass the the X2 have? will I notice it less? how much is less? how much is smaller?
 
 
You really can't measure it with words. Although it can be measured by graphs, our ears are our true instruments of measure and only we/us can determine what has more bass or what has more sounstage or what has better imaging.
 
in other words....
 
If you really want to choose between the AD900X, A900X, AD700X, A700X....you would need to buy all 4 and try them on for hours at a time to determine what each one is capable of and what your preference it may be. That is the only way you can determine, what is the best headphone for you.
 
Now that does not mean you should disregard people's opinions, but using the average of people's opinions should help you base an intelligent idea of what you might expect from such headphone.
 
So for me to help you out on this dilemma, purchasing 2 headphones of which you think you will likely want for your primary usage from a store/vendor with a good return policy is your best bet.
 
if you can't afford 2 of them, stop eating junkfood, stop buying unnecessary stuff you don't really need in order for you to be able to get those 2 headphones you are willing to try.
 
But this is the only way you can figure out which one you will prefer more over the other.
 
Also fyi, don't expect miracles and hope to get a KD over 9000 because headphones could make a difference....lol no it doesn't work that way.

 

[digitalid]

I was wondering, if I configure speakers in windows to Stereo 2.0 in 24bit, I can still use my GSX 1000 with all the EQ settings and 7.1 mode enabled. I don't hear the difference between that and setting speakers to 7.1 16 bit and using the same settings in the GSX 1000. Should there be a perceivable difference? Thanks.

 

[shankly1985]

  I was wondering, if I configure speakers in windows to Stereo 2.0 in 24bit, I can still use my GSX 1000 with all the EQ settings and 7.1 mode enabled. I don't hear the difference between that and setting speakers to 7.1 16 bit and using the same settings in the GSX 1000. Should there be a perceivable difference? Thanks.

Not sure how you have managed to make this happen? When I select Stereo and then 24bit - 2.0 HD shows up on the GSX unit and I cant select anything else. Too get the 7.1 option back I need to remove the 24bit sample rate.

 

[Sinery]

  I was wondering, if I configure speakers in windows to Stereo 2.0 in 24bit, I can still use my GSX 1000 with all the EQ settings and 7.1 mode enabled. I don't hear the difference between that and setting speakers to 7.1 16 bit and using the same settings in the GSX 1000. Should there be a perceivable difference? Thanks.

You theoretically lose all advantage from the virtual 7.1 because you just remix stereo rather than downmixing 7.1 into enhanced(virtual 7.1) stereo.

 

[digitalid]

Ah I see, I think I got confused because I set the reverb on max and could hear the sound around me. I see now it was missing depth and directionality.
Thanks for your help!