beyerdynamic DT 1990 PRO

General Information

Open-back studio reference headphones for mixing and mastering Handcrafted in Germany 250 ohms, 45-mm dynamic Tesla neodymium driver Single-sided, detachable cable with mini-XLR connector Soft, replaceable ear pads and headband for long, drawn-out studio sessions Included accessories: two pairs of velour ear pads with different sound characteristics (analytical and balanced), two pairs of cables (3 m straight and coiled cable), premium hard case Exceptional Studio Headphones For decades now, professional users all around the world have placed their trust in beyerdynamic studio headphones. They remain the number one choice for music producers, sound technicians and broadcast users and are a firmly established piece of equipment in studios worldwide. The DT 1990 PRO reference headphones combine these decades of expertise in headphone technology with the latest Tesla driver technology in an open-back design. Thanks to its high-resolution and well-balanced sound the DT 1990 PRO sets new standards, not least in terms of design and workmanship. Made in Germany As with all beyerdynamic professional studio headphones, the DT 1990 PRO is also handcrafted in Germany. Backed by high-quality materials and meticulous workmanship, this high-end product is a long-term investment. High-Resolution Sound Power and precision are critical requirements when it comes to sound reproduction. The efficiency of our latest Tesla driver technology is characterised by accurate resolution and high output...

Latest reviews


100+ Head-Fier
Beyerdynamic DT1990 Pro Review - Cranking up that treble knob
Pros: - build quality and sturdiness
- design of the back cups
- cable quality feels like ones used for commercial A/V setups
- accessories it came with are great (case, cables, extra set of pads w/different tuning)
- reasonably comfortable for a few hours with the analytical pads
- very capable technicalities (detail retrieval, speed, imaging, head stage)
- bass and treble extension are great
- decent stock tonality of balanced pads
- takes EQ well and great tonality and timbre when EQ'd
Cons: - clamp force is about moderate to slightly higher than average
- balanced pads are not as comfortable long term than analytical pads (more stiff)
- really bad stock tonality of analytical pads
- treble emphasis bleeds into midrange - making timbre just wrong

I've seen in different forums mixed reactions of the Beyerdynamic DT1990 Pro. Ones who own them praise them (obviously), while others seem to resent them because of the infamous "Beyer treble" banner hanging over a good number of models they have (particularly the DT series). So this made me curious and got a pair.

You might be curious why I rated it as 3-star above? For a quick summary, it's because its stock tonality and timbre (two qualities I put significant weight on when considering headphones) I find are terrible in stock analytical pads, and only decent when using stock balanced pads.

Does this mean I hate them? In stock tuning - yes I find them terrible. But if you go to the EQ section, you'll see something different (also on the pros section above).

I will go over quick points about the build, design, comfort and accessories. I will then go over the sound quality and technicalities, as well as whether I would recommend this or not and which crowd may like this or not.


Build and Design

  • Build is excellent in my books. There is no creaking, squeaking with the metal holding the cups as well as the slide adjustment. Better than the M50 and M70X build given those two are almost entirely plastic.
  • Great use of plastic (I think it's plastic) on the cups with the sort of matte finish. I love this feel as it's less to retain fingerprint marks or sweat.
  • Design looks like a premium studio monitor. Better than the Audio Technica M50 and M70X. I love the mesh grills shown on the plastic cup slits - makes it look elegant in a way.
  • Only issue is the wires coming out of the headphone slider. This is the only thing for me that is a knock off the overall premium design. I suppose this had to be done given it's only using a single side connection to the mini-XLR cable.


Note: For reference, I have average sized ears and likely average sized head
  • Headband has good padding. No hotspots on my head after 2 - 3 hours of listening
  • Weight is 370 grams, so depending on which headphone you're coming from, this can take some getting used to (i.e. Sennheiser HD650, Audio Technica M50/X). For me, the weight is a non-issue compared to other headphones I currently own.
  • There's moderate clamp force out of the box, meaning it will be noticeable even after an hour or two of listening.
  • Ear pads are velour and I believe are memory foam for both Analytical and Balanced pads. I find both pads reasonably comfortable, despite being somewhat stiff. The amount of cushion takes off some of the moderate clamp force, but only time will tell before the foam loses cushioning. There are sonic differences between the pads and we'll get to that later.


Packaging is great. It comes with the following:
  • 2 cables (1 x straight 3m, 1 x coiled 5m) - both mini-XLR to 3.5mm with a 6.3mm adapter for each cable
  • Large hard case that can carry all the accessories
  • Analytical and Balanced pads
Personally, I like the cable quality. It is similar to the XLR cables used for A/V equipment, albeit a bit thinner. It doesn't kink or bend easily and feels durable. Overall, packaging and accessories get a great rating from me.



I will get right off the bat with this, the only other Beyerdynamic I've demoed (very briefly), is the DT 770 - and that was many monsoons ago. So I have no recollection nor ideas of how the Beyer house sound would be. That being said, there are people throwing shade at this particular model because of the 8kHz peak (seen in measurements), alongside with others trying them firsthand and finding them "sibilant".

To clear some context, I looked up the definitionof "sibilant" and found that it meant creating a "hissing" sound like that of (ss) or (sh). From what I've gathered in audio forums, sibilance usually connotes a sound characteristic that triggers our ear sensitivities (person dependent) - similar to some people who can't tolerate high pitched glass tones or metal clunks. But others have said that sibilance refers to the frequency response region of 5khz to 8kHz (sometimes even higher) that deviates higher than a particular target curve.

With these in mind, I don't have a definitive meaning to refer to for sibilance. So for the remainder of this write-up, I will go with frequency response reference. Whether I find it triggers my treble sensitivities or not (or yours for that matter), is something I'll indicate moving forward.

Tested on: JDS Element, iFi Micro BL
Average volume listening: ~60 - 75 dB

For frequency response reference, you can see the RAW measurements for both Analytical and Balanced pads from autoeq graphs.

Given there's two pads with variations in the sonic signature, I will be distinguishing the Analytical pads (AP) to the Balanced pads (BP). Between the two, I find I like the balanced pads better when stock.

Overall sound signature:

This is an aggressive sounding headphone for sure, not in the least laid back. If you're coming from something like the HD6X0 series, this is on the opposite side of the signature spectrum. This may not be something great for work since it tries to grab your attention with the emphasized treble and bass punch.
  • AP: bright-neutral. Bass and midrange are pretty linear. Over-sharpened treble that gives extra shimmer and sizzle in the drums and instruments in the upper-midrange to treble region.
  • BP: warm sounding. The mid-bass and upper-bass are a bit accentuated while upper midrage is slightly recessed. There is still a treble sharpness, but it's more subdued compared to the analytical pads.



Good extension up to ~40 Hz. More impact than AP. Mid bass to upper bass (around 200Hz large hill) is accentuated, thereby making the midrange warmer sounding. But overall, bass is tight and fast, but I feel the decay may be too quick to my liking.


Decent extension, but rolls off much faster to my ears at ~50Hz. Fairly linear, but there's a small hill going up 200Hz that sort of makes the midrange warmer than neutral. However, this is not as accentuated as the BP, so it has a *hint* of warmth, but still fairly linear overall.



Pretty linear to my ears. There is enough weight to both male and female vocals. I did not hear any shrill or shoutiness from upper female or falsetto male vocals, but there is a sharpness quality in the consonant range (addressed in the treble region) - so higher pitched vocals tend to have this dryness quality. For the most part, instruments like electric guitars and acoustic, as well as piano tones in this region sound tonally correct. The rawness of electric guitar decay, and the sharp attack from tom toms and snare drums are definitely engaging. Vocal transition of words are smooth and cohesive.


Fairly linear, as evident on graphs and in-line with the bass region, save for the rise above 1kHz. Male and female vocals (save for higher female pitch) are about equal in level, with good weight for each. Acoustic, piano and stringed tones in the midrange area have good weight, but is overshadowed by the treble peaks. Distorted instruments from synthesizers and snare drums don't lack attack or bite, so there is that rawness quality intact.


I will start off by saying that based on FR measurements on the 8kHz peak, these *would* be considered sibilant - regardless if it annoys you or not. This peak doesn't trigger my treble sensitivities. It might for you, and this is something you'll have to discover when trying multiple headphones. Personally, I find the Focal Clear's 6kHz and 9kHz peaks more annoying and triggering my treble sensitivities. The worst offender for me by far is the TH-X00 Mahogany. Although I will say that it only happens for certain modern recordings, not for all.

Despite the DT1990's treble not triggering my ears, I still find the treble overly sharp that renders the consonant range and instruments hitting this region as unnatural - thereby ruining the timbre of vocals whenever this treble region is covered in a track. There is this raspy/sizzle/lispy quality in the treble that can't be completely removed, but the balanced pads lowers this by a good margin - although not entirely fixing it.

With this treble quality, I see some owners describe the DT1990 as being very "revealing", "detailed" and "transparent" of a recordings' flaws. I would disagree with this notion. This type of over-sharpened treble does not extrude "flaws", but in fact masks detail because of this 8kHz peak. I welcome such people to try using a Parametric EQ software like Equalizer APO on your current headphone, apply a Peak filter at 7734 Hz and crank it up to something like 9 dB - you'll get the same effect. This is not real detail, it gives a false sense of detail. If you compare it to something like the Focal Clear, it should be obvious that the Clear does not need such a peak to have excellent detail retrieval, resolution and clarity. The best analogy for this is that an over sharpened image does not exactly mean the camera captured the finer details of a captured shot. What it does is giving an illusion of capturing the micro-details in a photo.

Over-sharpened treble does not indicate great detail retrieval and clarity. The inverse of this statement I find is also true, great detail retrieval and clarity does not indicate over-sharpened treble.

If you reduce that peak, the initial reaction would be "oh it's losing what makes the DT1990 brilliant". Well, this is a flaw and if you compare it to something that has a better tonal balance and more natural rendition of vocals and instruments like the HE-500, HD600, Focal Clear, or even a HE-400i, you'll notice the difference and understand which has a more realistic audio reproduction. This peak ruins the tonal balance of the DT1990. It's a matter of perspective.

With that all said, I suppose you have an idea how I find the treble for these, so more details below.


Not as airy (nor bright) as the AP, but it does not sound congested. The treble is not as overly sharpened as the Analytical pads either. Looking at graphs, there is a dip around 4kHz - 6kHz region, which lends it better to my ears and I don't find the treble as overly sharp and fatiguing. I find this treble better and gives a more accurate treble tonal balance than the AP. However, the 'SSS' region, or 8.5kHz is unaffected. With the dip at this region, this would likely become more prominent to a listener that is affected by this peak - which Resolve from the headphone show seems to be an example of. Further, there is still some of the sizzle quality in the consonant range and for cymbals and hi hats, but better than the AP in this regard.


Has a more airy feeling than the BP. However, there is a rise at 5kHz - 6kHz as shown in the measurements (which seems to align with my hearing), lending to the giant peak at 8kHz that gives the treble an over-sharpened quality which makes instruments and vocals hitting this region as being shimmery/raspy/lispy/sizzling in quality. I can't tell whether it's solely because of the frequency response that gives this quality, or it is also because the pads fail to dampen resonances in this region given there's only 4 holes on the AP. Regardless, the AP adds that sharpened treble quality that negatively affects the timbre of vocals and instruments in the midrange.

===== Technicalities =====

Detail Retrieval:

Good for the price. About on par with the HD650 from recollection. This technicality is also about the same on both pads. One point though, I find there is less masking effect with the 6kHz dip, so I can sort of determine micro-details slightly better on the BP than the AP. The AP's treble region to my ears masks the details in the midrange on a complex passage. But this is nitpicking and it may not ring true for someone else. I would say these have average detail retrieval and resolution for its price.

Speed and Dynamics:

Speed is good for a dynamic driver. About on par with the Focal Clear when I do a quick A/B test. I feel it lags only by a hair when compared to my other planar headphones, but this point isn't very noticeable and better represented by an impulse response graph comparison. Dynamics on the other hand, is good. There is a good range between the softest and loudest point, but mainly noticeable at higher listening volumes. I feel it beats out the HD650 here (can't do a A/B test now because I've since sold it), but I feel it lags just slightly behind the Focal Clear.

Imaging and Head Stage:

I will admit, these are not technical aspects I pay a lot of attention to. My main test track for this is Hotel California MTV Live performance given I've listened to that song hundreds of times, so I'm familiar with it's positioning and layering. So for imaging this gets a pass. Nothing exceptional, and no shortcoming that's noteworthy. It's not a 3 blob space, but fairly even distribution of tracks/instrument pieces across the left-center-right pan. Head stage width is about average to slightly above average - meaning stage width reaches my shoulders and can move past it a bit.

One thing I noticed is that the center image is closer to my face using BP. When compared the BP DT1990 to the Clear, the Clear has it's center image further away, making instruments and vocals seem more distant. So in a sense, the DT1990 has a more intimate stage with the BP. The AP has a further center image so it has a more even spacing of pieces in a track.


Good timbre from bass to midrange on both pads. Upper-midrange to treble region is where it gets skewed. To my ears, the BP gives a more accurate timbre despite the 'SSS' region still being sharp. The AP has it's treble cranked up too much, bleeding into in the midrange that voices become a bit lispy or raspy. Hi hats and cymbals shimmer more prominently that it tends to mask other instruments in busy tracks.

EQ and my profile:

The DT1990 appears to take EQ well. You can look up oratory's EQ to match the Harman curve if that's what you find pleasing.

Now, there are those who say EQing the treble peak at 8kHz ruins the sound signature or other technical aspects of the DT1990 such as sound stage, resolution, etc. To my ears, dropping that 8kHz peak does make the signature slightly darker and losing the airy feel, but NOT at the expense of losing resolution nor making the head stage smaller. At the same time, vocal and instrument timbre becomes a lot more correct and realistic to my ears - beating out the HD600 and Focal Clear.

For people curious on my EQ profile for Equalizer APO:

Preamp: -6.6 dB
Filter: ON PK Fc 17 Hz Gain 3.5 dB Q 0.69
Filter: ON PK Fc 43 Hz Gain 1.0 dB Q 0.61
Filter: ON PK Fc 19961 Hz Gain -2.5 dB Q 0.1
Filter: ON PK Fc 911 Hz Gain 1.0 dB Q 1.52
Filter: ON PK Fc 7734 Hz Gain -8.5 dB Q 2.5
Filter: ON PK Fc 10000 Hz Gain 1.5 dB Q 2.01

With this EQ applied, I would rate it at a 4 or even a 4.5 star. Overall timbre is more realistic, the tonality is better tuned, and the technicalities goes toe-to-toe with the Focal Clear in stock form.


Quick Comparisons:

Audio Technica M70X:
- Why compare it with a closed back studio monitor? Mainly because of similarities in the midrange and treble region. The DT1990 wins on bass hands down. For midrange, the DT1990 is more linear, while the M70X has this extra weight on upper-midrange that gives female vocals more body (once I EQ'd the treble down). Over-sharpened treble is fairly similar - giving vocals and instruments in the upper midrange an unnatural quality, but I would still say the DT1990 has the more sharper 'SSS' sounds than that. Build quality also goes to the DT1990.

Sennheiser HD650/HD6XX:
- The DT1990 is like the opposite of the HD650/HD6XX. One is aggressive and sharp sounding, while the other is laid-back and smooth sounding. If you wanted a compliment to the HD650/HD6XX, this is a contender albeit with asterisks. For build, I give the nod to the DT1990, but the HD650/HD6XX has proven to be durable - this is just my pick if I were to choose based on that factor.

Focal Clear:
- Unfair fight at $1499 MSRP, but I think it's still worth comparing. Clear definitely has the better treble tonal balance in stock form. But to my ears, the 6kHz peak is more annoying than the 8kHz DT1990 peak - YMMV. Bass and midrange are similar. Dynamics and bass impact goes to the Clear. Head stage goes to DT1990, but imaging I might give the nod to Clear by a hair. Detail retrieval is a toss-up between the two; the DT1990 is very competent here. Design I think is also a toss up, do you prefer elegant fashion over elegant studio look? Build quality, I might give the nod to DT1990 by a hair because there's less creaking. Comfort, Clear has a half step lead.



For around $600 price at MSRP, is this headphone something I can easily recommend personally? No, this has a lot of check marks before I can recommend them, especially at that price where competition is high. You have the likes of cheaper options like the Sennheiser HD6XX and Hifiman Sundara to contend with.

If you're not ready to EQ, then this is not something I'd easily recommend. If you are, then these are very competent and IMO goes toe-to-toe with the Focal Clear in almost every category from a sound quality perspective. In fact, I sold my Clear when I finally found an EQ profile that I find is better than the Clear - plus overall cost of maintenance is cheaper so it's a no-brainer in my case.

This is not to say that you won't enjoy these in stock form - some owners already indicate liking it stock or mixed with [name their type/brand of dac/amplifier setup here]. I'll keep it simple, I'm not one to go about using and recommending tube amps despite their popularity in this forum. You can ask the DT1990 thread for that and others who explore that space.

I'd rather stick with a good SS amp and EQ as a more cost-effective option :). So this is something at the top of the list of "Try before you buy".

Who do I think would like these in stock form? Maybe a few potential candidates who meet any of the following:
  • Someone coming from V-shaped lower tier headphones
  • Someone not sensitive to an 8kHz peak (SSS region)
  • Someone that likes a fairly neutral sound signature and is willing to EQ
  • Someone coming from the lower DT series like the DT880 or DT990 and looking to upgrade
Of course, this is one random member's opinion. Take it with a huge grain of salt.

[Pictures may come at a later date when I get to it]
Last edited:
It appears you bought the wrong Beyerdynamic. The Amiron is voiced for consumers and has the more euphonic presentation that you seem to prefer. The DT 1990 Pro, especially with Analytical pads, is designed for professional users, who want to hear everything in the mix. Unfortunately this exposes any weakness in the ancillary gear as well. I guess that's what I prefer, because I consider the DT 1990 a great headphone. I don't care for the muffled HD 650 sound at all.

I only use the Analytical pads, as I prefer the faster transient response (attack/delay) vs. the Balanced pads. Contrary to your experience, I (and others in the DT 1990 thread), find the Balanced pads more likely to exaggerate sibilants than the Analytical pads. Some people suggest using Dekoni Elite Velour pads, but I find the dulled transient response of these ruins the sound, and they are more likely to exaggerate sibilance than the Beyer pads.
Not sure about "buying the wrong Beyerdynamic" statement. I gave my reason of why I bought it if you read the end of the very first paragraph, if you care to check again.

Sure the DT1990 is marketed as "reference headphones for mixing and mastering (open)" as per their site. I get that. But the tuning of the treble is completely wrong that it actually masks details - not expose them. This is the notion I disagree with majority who express that - and you seem to be on that camp. If you compare the stock tuning of the Focal Clear to the DT1990 - the Clear presents detail retrieval a lot better and does not mask it, unlike the DT1990's treble tuning. Like I said in my write-up above, try cranking up the 7.8kHz peak to any headphone up by 10 dB and you'll get the same treble effect that the DT1990 Analytical pads has. This is not "exposing weaknesses in the ancillary gear", it is an exposed weakness in the gear (DT1990) itself.
As also I said above, turning down that treble peak removes the masking effect and presents micro-detail as good as even the Focal Clear - which is already an established resolving headphone. With that peak, it masks those micro-details. It doesn't make sense how this treble tuning is conceived as "exposing flaws" when the tuning they set here is a flaw in itself.

What you mentioned about the Balanced pads exaggerating the sibilant seems to mirror Resolve's experience - and I can kind of understand why. Looking at the FR graphs between the two, the Analytical pads has a small peak between 5kHz - 6kHz prior to the rise at 8kHz, thereby compensating some of the treble brightness that a single 8kHz peak can convey. On the Balanced pads, it is free from that 5kHz - 6kHz peak, thereby highlighting only the 8kHz - which can be bothersome to those who are treble sensitive to them.


New Head-Fier
Beyerdynamic DT 1990 PRO - Sound Engineering Workhorse!
Pros: Very comfortable
Robust build
Very efficient
Sound being very detailed
Cons: Hinge makes cracking noises
Your ears can get pretty warm
Treble peak not for everyone
For work only.
Beyerdynamic headphones are known for being heavily used in studio production. This time we’re presenting to you their newest iteration of an audio workhorse – DT 1990 Pro priced at $599!


Typical for Beyerdynamic we’re getting plenty of accessories. First up, huge and thick case for travel with plenty of space for other gear like field recorders for example. 2 sets of cables, one coiled and one straight, both 3m long, ended with Mini-XLR and additional set of pads.
If I’m supposed to describe those cables. They are nothing special. Thick rubber, well made, typical design for studio-focused cans.

That additional set of pads isn’t just for replacement though. DT 1990 Pro comes with Analytical as well as Balanced pads. Analytical ones gives you much flatter frequency response where Balanced ones are for making 1990’s little more exciting with added low-end. Both sets are velour.

Build quality

I wouldn’t describe 1990’s as premium in terms of build quality. I’d rather use term – robust. They feel pretty solid in the hand, yet moving parts tend to make some cracking noises from time to time. Although don’t think that they’ll break anytime soon. I know at least 5 pairs that my friends have that went through literal hell. Sitting on them, dropping off of a staircase from level 4, trying to bend them backwards, throwing them with anger at the wall because of lost round in CS:GO. They survived all of that.


1990’s are VERY comfortable. You can sit in them for long hours without any sort of pain or headache and that’s all because of huge amount of foam in headband as well as very big velour pads. Your ears will be wrapped up in them very comfortably. There’s only one issue with them. Heat. They can also get your ears pretty warm after an hour or two.


When I saw DT 1990 Pro for the first time I had only one thought in my head:
I’ll buy them strictly for work. – and it actually turned out to be true.

If we’re talking about previous series, DT990 despite it being well known in a studio I also know a lot of people who daily drive it as their personal pair for musical experience. I don’t think there’s such case with 1990 Pro because to me it sounds like Beyerdynamic really cranked audio production aspect to 11.

You can describe 1990’s in 3 words: detail, detail and last but not least… DETAIL.
There’s so much detail that many of my tracks just sounded like recorded sessions of some people and instruments instead of a wholesome musical experience that combination of those specific parts can provide. You exactly hear where specific instrument is in the track, you hear if their microphone they recorded it with was properly set, you hear if mastering of the track simply sucks or not. Those headphones just approach every single tune just like your CPU in a computer does calculations. There’s just big list of ones and zeroes it has to compile. 1990 just have a big list of soundwaves to provide to our ears and that’s all it has to do. They are also my pair for Gaming and gotta say I was becoming paranoid for first few days because in military simulations where sound effects are just very well made everything was so distinctive that I thought someone is throwing a grenade under my character every single minute.

Speaking about driver and drive’ability – simple. It’s Tesla. It has 250 ohms of impedance yet they are very power efficient and pretty much can be powered even with budget DAPs. It’s just that they will really gain in overall sound quality if you plug them to something nicer.

Talking about other aspects, soundstage isn’t particularly large which is to be expected in studio cans. Mentioning frequency response, lows and mids are pretty much dead flat. Speaking about treble though well… it’s Beyerdynamic. There always has to be a treble peak, although I’ve never had a problem with that. Only sounds to me like it adds even more detail to whole package.


Beyerdynamic DT 1990 Pro is a very specific pair for specific users. You’re supposed to use them for work and that’s exactly what they are made for. If you prefer a pair that helps music being more sensible and more emotional, go look somewhere else. These cans job is to show every single aspect of what you gonna throw at them and they are very good at it. $599 is pretty penny, not gonna lie, although I think about it more as an investment because I don’t think those will break anytime soon.

Gear used during this review as an accompanying equipment:
  • Audio sources – Cayin N3 Pro, Luxury & Precision L4, Audient iD4
  • Headphones – Shure SRH840, Audio-Technica M60x, Beyerdynamic DT770 Pro, Beyerdynamic DT 1770 PRO, Hifiman Sundara
For more audio reviews visit
Last edited:


Pros: - build quality
- presentation
- detail
- clarity
Cons: - highs can be fatiguing and sibilant
- clamp force and comfort may depend on the size of the wearer’s head.
I recently had the dt 1990, and after having them for around 3 weeks I was able to determine their strengths and to who exactly they were targeted for. I’ll keep it short and simple while making comparisons to the largely revered Sennheiser hd 600.

- Simply amazing. From the earpads, to the box, to the cups, this headphone was built to last. The pad change was a bit frustrating but is a small price to pay for the build quality one receives. Clamp force may not be suitable for unusually large heads.

Targeted Audience- professionals, people who want to mix with them. Definitely NOT for the casual afternoon listener wanting to relax.

- The semi closed nature helps create a nice bass thump. Slightly less punchy than the hd 600, but with significantly more impact and presence.

Mids- a slight downgrade from my hd 600. The dt 1990 do not have the smoother more pleasant mids of the hd 600. Instead they are a bit further out of the headphone and into the cups.

Highs- Here lies the controversy. If anyone complains about “treble veil” from hd 600, they should definitely move to these. Highs are significantly more present, and brighter. I’d argue just slightly too bright and peaky in certain parts. This aspect was definitely made for pros in mind who want to hear the sibilance and highs.

Overall, an excellent offering by beyerdynamic. But I’ll state it again, this is a headphone you concentrate with not a headphone to relax with at the fire place.