[nickchen]

...obviously almost none of you still owns that fon, I see nothing but big ATs, Grado woodies or heavily boutiqued HD650s in your sig. What made you sell the CD3K? Any regrets?

Did anyone keep them?

Maybe maybe maybe I can get my hands on a proper CD3K, for a reasonable price - I really liked them for my electronica stuff. As musical experience, they stand somewhat unrivaled in that respect actually.

 

[Blackmore]

Get them, listen to them and maybe keep them, just maybe

I didn't heard them recabled, which must be done, before any judgement, so I have read. I am not that big fan of them, because of some artificial sound and really strange presentation of it as well. Somehow I had the feeling that he comes from the hole or something.

 

[nickchen]

Come on, remain realistic, a CD3K for your longhaired rock stuff is like a DT770 for Monteverdi madrigals

 

[sai-bot]

So you're seriously looking for a CD3K? Upgraditis, upgraditis...

 

[Blackmore]

Yeah, yeah, longhaired rock stuff

To tell you the true, I do not really liked them with rock, if not at all. I found JAZZ the most acceptable and quite good with them. Highs can be picky, but tubes tempted them.
Once again, the hole sounding presentation isn't real, imo. However you may need a total different set up for them.
One thing is important, I didn't had my lovely NAD C542 then, but poor PIONEER DVDP, which is the part of the problem, I guess.
Buy them and you will know. The resale isn't a problem at all.

Quote:

Originally Posted by nickchen /img/forum/go_quote.gif Come on, remain realistic, a CD3K for your longhaired rock stuff is like a DT770 for Monteverdi madrigals

 

[nickchen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sai-bot /img/forum/go_quote.gif So you're seriously looking for a CD3K? Upgraditis, upgraditis...

No, got an surprising "maybe, maybe" offer and almost fainted

Wasn't easy to get into sleep last night.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Blackmore However you may need a total different set up for them.

Fortunally not. They sound fine with my setup - I had an occasion to try them out some time ago.

 

[khbaur330162]

After a rather unfortunate incident I almost had to sell these, but I'm very glad I didn't because music has, at times, sounded better than I've ever heard it before on this rig. I bought a pair of CD3k's modded by Headphile a little over a year ago now. I had them later recabled balanced by APS and am currently driving them out of a balanced Beta22. The modifications done to my pair has made them a lot more well rounded with actual bass! and a treble range that's well extended and detailed, but not fatiguing as what I've read stock CD3k's can be.

My CD3000 holds tremendous sentimental value because it was the headphone that really kick started my hi-fi journey into the direction of spending more money, and that's loosened up my wallet to allow for a level of audio nirvana I would have never known possible.

.

 

[warubozu]

I currently still my 2 pairs of CD3k's, one stock and one Headphile modded. I do enjoy listening to the both of them with all geners of music and they remain as one of my favorite set of cans.

 

[Dorder]

for me it's a pretty simple answer: got a k1000. they both share some simmilarities like wide and realistic soundstage and imaging or a slight treble emphasis and they were both well suited as complement to the hd650, but the k1000 easily excel the cd3k in every area except comfort (they are veery comfy) and bass extension (though imo the sony's bass isn't that extended or well textured compared to the senns). the somehow unrealistic midrange tone on the cd3k might however be my biggest complaint about them.

 

[Iron_Dreamer]

I traded away my Headphile CD3000, because they brightness, which did a good job of pepping up the sound from a lower-end system, was overwhelming when I upgraded my back-end (to a DAC1, and many others, since). I recently had an in-home listen to a CD3000 which I was repairing for a Head-fier, and I was shaking my head wondering how I ever loved such a bright headphone. But it must all have been about system synergy. Hell, I really liked the Grado SR325, but when I made my first upgrade to a decent source, I couldn't listen to them without getting a splitting headache. Go figure.

 

[Pete7]

I had a Headphile CD-3000 for about a year, and then I discovered the Audio-Technica line. First the A950-LTD, and then the W100, which I still have. The AT's are more comfortable IMO- the CD-3000's were like having life preservers on the sides of my head. I also find the W100's have more mid-range and bass for my taste. The only thing the AT's lose out in is soundstage.

 

[nickchen]

Too bright...trading against superior stuff (a 950LTD???

) - that is what I allover had expected. Interesting but typical dissent to the FOTM threads some years ago.

However, I think I'll shoot them anyway, as my system is not that sophisticated and I am a pathological electronicahead, who likes bright presentation. My DT880 sometimes lacks excitement and a shovel of bass, whereas the MS2 involves too much, so...

However, glad to hear that the team CD3K hasn't vanished completely.

 

[Pete7]

A Sony CD-3000(Headphiled or not,had both) is hands down a brighter phone than either the ATH A950-LTD or the ATH W100. No contest in overall brightness there. Wouldn't say either one is brighter than a DT-880 either.

 

[nickchen]

All a question of taste & genres. I personally found both 950 and 950LTD too airless & dull (reminded me very much of my midfi-ish DT531 groovelizer), whereas the W1000 had fine detailling but bothered me with these typical AT upper mids colorations.

 

[warubozu]

I agree that the CD3k's are on the bright side with certain recordings when compared against the AT line up of cans. Some people can tolerate it more than others. I have both of my CD3k's running off of tubes and that has definitely eliminated the brightness for my listening tastes.