[nick2020]

As I have mentioned many times, the HD800S is very musical despite what many other people say and I feel very content with it being my single only headphone for all the music genres I listen to.

It sounds equally great both off my solid state amp and OTL tube amp.

It just does so much right to my ears and I love it more each day. Anyway enough about the HD800S since this is the ADX5000 thread hehe....

Yes... I agree.

My oppo pm-2 will be only for some needed-to-be-in-focus vocals since now.

About adx5k, i do respect this technology and do respect the sound signature of these cans a lot (as well).

I believe for percussion-rich music this signature is just perfect (probably for many other genres as well, e.g. some vocals...).

Let me also say again that i could not took both 800S and 5k to home , burn-in them equally, and finally compare in a silent room.

I may be now slightly biased against 5k as a proper tool for instrumental (classical) music based on a non-burned-in 5k i have auditioned.


In any case, these two are nearly perfect sound reproducing machines in any case.
You feel it at once... from the first seconds of auditioning.

 

[speCD]

Recently tried an Audio Sensibility Impact SE cable on my ADX. This 7N OCC copper cable really sets the phones free. The stock cable, while having a forward vocal presentation and sparkling trebles, feels a bit congested and distorted. The Impact SE provides heavier bass, spacious mids, and more treble details. The soundstage becomes more holographic with all spaces connected by natural, extended decays. Vocals are more distant, but they feel more natural and detailed to me. Overall, a more organic, liquid, and "let music come to you" kind of presentation.

 

[nick2020]

Recently tried an Audio Sensibility Impact SE cable on my ADX. This 7N OCC copper cable really sets the phones free. The stock cable, while having a forward vocal presentation and sparkling trebles, feels a bit congested and distorted. The Impact SE provides heavier bass, spacious mids, and more treble details. The soundstage becomes more holographic with all spaces connected by natural, extended decays. Vocals are more distant, but they feel more natural and detailed to me. Overall, a more organic, liquid, and "let music come to you" kind of presentation.

Hello,

Assuming an ideally nice recording (pleasing you in every single aspect, and the one you'd better heart in "live"..) the possible coloration (or "character") to it may be added by (in the order of influence):

- speakers/headphones
- dac
- amp (some will put amp first)
- balanced/unbalanced connectivity, cleaning power
- decoder, pc processor, analog cables, digital cables, drivers for usb connection, etc.

(Just a note about "clean power": greek statues are still beautiful... having lots of time-induced damages, and with colors wanished...)


So...

Cables will be probably "sound" better if REALLY bad ones were used before

Are you sure you are hearing what you described?

 

[speCD]

Hello,

Assuming an ideally nice recording (pleasing you in every single aspect, and the one you'd better heart in "live"..) the possible coloration (or "character") to it may be added by (in the order of influence):

- speakers/headphones
- dac
- amp (some will put amp first)
- balanced/unbalanced connectivity, cleaning power
- decoder, pc processor, analog cables, digital cables, drivers for usb connection, etc.

(Just a note about "clean power": greek statues are still beautiful... having lots of time-induced damages, and with colors wanished...)


So...

Cables will be probably "sound" better if REALLY bad ones were used before

Are you sure you are hearing what you described?

Have you ever tried quality cables in different materials with the same headphone?
Yes, to me the difference was very apparent.

 

[nick2020]

Have you ever tried quality cables in different materials with the same headphone?
Yes, to me the difference was very apparent.

Well, I believe it may be audible only with very expensive equipment, i.e. when all the components are perfect already , except the cable.

In the future i may try (even i dont have adx5k).

 

[speCD]

I almost returned my ifi ipurifier3 right after some initial A/Bs, but the ADX saved it. Insane cans.

Was going for a sophisticated optical-based usb isolator to guard my usb DAC from PC noise , but shipping challenges created by the pandemic killed the idea. So I got the ipurifier3 hoping for a tiny bit of improvement.

The DAC is a Scandinavian Bladelius usb DAC, quite old but was known for its clarity, smoothness, and rich mid. It has it's own asynchronous implementation and galvanically isolated bus power. Paired with an AQVOX linear psu with power line blocked on the usb cable, the DAC sounds amazing.

No wonder, no significant differences were heard with the ipurifier in the loop.

Plugged in the ADX5000 (with 7N occ copper cable), wow, everything's revealed now. Depends on the configuration of the connection (no ipurifier, ipurifier after psu, ipurifier before psu, ipurifier before psu with ipurifier's power-out pin blocked), the ADX changes its sound drastically.

With no ipurifier, the ADX sounds effortless with transient details floating and filling the entire sound stage. They feel like estats in this configuration.

Putting the ipurifier after the psu (psu powers the ipurifier, ipurifier powers the DAC), the sound is awful - floating details were totally gone, mid becomes fuller but in the same time quite fatiguing. Putting the ipurifier before the psu is a little better.

The configuration made me keep the ipurifier is the last one - ipurifier before the psu with ipurifier's power-out pin blocked (so the psu powers the DAC solely).
With the ADX, the sound difference was so clear and pleasing - energetic, punchy, rich, and clean. Imaging is more defined but fuller-bodied. Floating details can still be felt, but are kind of giving their ways to richer mids. Treble is still as extended as before. For classical music, I still prefer the estat-like signature without the ipurifier. But this mod made pop and vocal music very enjoyable with the ADX.

These are small tweaks in the upper-stream, but the ADX, like a chameleon, changed so much with each configuration. When listening through them, I'm not sure if I'm hearing to the phones or the system directly - this is why I think these cans are insane.

 

[FYFL]

I almost returned my ifi ipurifier3 right after some initial A/Bs, but the ADX saved it. Insane cans.

Was going for a sophisticated optical-based usb isolator to guard my usb DAC from PC noise , but shipping challenges created by the pandemic killed the idea. So I got the ipurifier3 hoping for a tiny bit of improvement.

The DAC is a Scandinavian Bladelius usb DAC, quite old but was known for its clarity, smoothness, and rich mid. It has it's own asynchronous implementation and galvanically isolated bus power. Paired with an AQVOX linear psu with power line blocked on the usb cable, the DAC sounds amazing.

No wonder, no significant differences were heard with the ipurifier in the loop.

Plugged in the ADX5000 (with 7N occ copper cable), wow, everything's revealed now. Depends on the configuration of the connection (no ipurifier, ipurifier after psu, ipurifier before psu, ipurifier before psu with ipurifier's power-out pin blocked), the ADX changes its sound drastically.

With no ipurifier, the ADX sounds effortless with transient details floating and filling the entire sound stage. They feel like estats in this configuration.

Putting the ipurifier after the psu (psu powers the ipurifier, ipurifier powers the DAC), the sound is awful - floating details were totally gone, mid becomes fuller but in the same time quite fatiguing. Putting the ipurifier before the psu is a little better.

The configuration made me keep the ipurifier is the last one - ipurifier before the psu with ipurifier's power-out pin blocked (so the psu powers the DAC solely).
With the ADX, the sound difference was so clear and pleasing - energetic, punchy, rich, and clean. Imaging is more defined but fuller-bodied. Floating details can still be felt, but are kind of giving their ways to richer mids. Treble is still as extended as before. For classical music, I still prefer the estat-like signature without the ipurifier. But this mod made pop and vocal music very enjoyable with the ADX.

These are small tweaks in the upper-stream, but the ADX, like a chameleon, changed so much with each configuration. This is why I think these cans are insane.

I call them microscope.

 

[kith86]

I almost returned my ifi ipurifier3 right after some initial A/Bs, but the ADX saved it. Insane cans.

Was going for a sophisticated optical-based usb isolator to guard my usb DAC from PC noise , but shipping challenges created by the pandemic killed the idea. So I got the ipurifier3 hoping for a tiny bit of improvement.

The DAC is a Scandinavian Bladelius usb DAC, quite old but was known for its clarity, smoothness, and rich mid. It has it's own asynchronous implementation and galvanically isolated bus power. Paired with an AQVOX linear psu with power line blocked on the usb cable, the DAC sounds amazing.

No wonder, no significant differences were heard with the ipurifier in the loop.

Plugged in the ADX5000 (with 7N occ copper cable), wow, everything's revealed now. Depends on the configuration of the connection (no ipurifier, ipurifier after psu, ipurifier before psu, ipurifier before psu with ipurifier's power-out pin blocked), the ADX changes its sound drastically.

With no ipurifier, the ADX sounds effortless with transient details floating and filling the entire sound stage. They feel like estats in this configuration.

Putting the ipurifier after the psu (psu powers the ipurifier, ipurifier powers the DAC), the sound is awful - floating details were totally gone, mid becomes fuller but in the same time quite fatiguing. Putting the ipurifier before the psu is a little better.

The configuration made me keep the ipurifier is the last one - ipurifier before the psu with ipurifier's power-out pin blocked (so the psu powers the DAC solely).
With the ADX, the sound difference was so clear and pleasing - energetic, punchy, rich, and clean. Imaging is more defined but fuller-bodied. Floating details can still be felt, but are kind of giving their ways to richer mids. Treble is still as extended as before. For classical music, I still prefer the estat-like signature without the ipurifier. But this mod made pop and vocal music very enjoyable with the ADX.

These are small tweaks in the upper-stream, but the ADX, like a chameleon, changed so much with each configuration. This is why I think these cans are insane.

I know right, i also now consider to sell my hd800 i have also have doubt since i;m not in proper setup right now, but damned, the adx is so good already, it's seems adx made my hd800 sounds like hd650. after using adx, switch again to hd800, i slightly feel veiled or muffled, i hate to let my hd800 goes, but adx is just really that good.

 

[speCD]

I call them microscope.

Indeed!

 

[FYFL]

I know right, i also now consider to sell my hd800 i have also have doubt since i;m not in proper setup right now, but damned, the adx is so good already, it's seems adx made my hd800 sounds like hd650. after using adx, switch again to hd800, i slightly feel veiled or muffled, i hate to let my hd800 goes, but adx is just really that good.

The only way I would go for HD800 anything is if they addressed few issues that bothered me. Seems like they are trying to do exactly that in their upcoming DropHD8XX but there’s no way I would put $ down now on “unknown” and wait till Nov. to get it.

ADX can enrich your listening experience or make it a nightmare. And it’s not necessary fault of inferior gear IMO. I think you can strike out with less exotic gear if your get ingredients just right. Exotics gear doesn’t guarantee you any success with ADX5K. If majority of components with certain qualities and sound signature lean certain way? That’s what you are going to get. Like in cooking. A pinch of salt can make a great dish, an awesome one. A pinch too many, and it’s ruined.

 

[speCD]

I know right, i also now consider to sell my hd800 i have also have doubt since i;m not in proper setup right now, but damned, the adx is so good already, it's seems adx made my hd800 sounds like hd650. after using adx, switch again to hd800, i slightly feel veiled or muffled, i hate to let my hd800 goes, but adx is just really that good.

I think a pair of mid-fi phones (personally I'd say Ananda, Elex, or RS2e) can be a better companion to the ADX, on the way to finding your favorite setup.

 

[aravaioli]

New ADX5000 owner here.
I see most of the comparison talks is referenced to HD800(S) but in my view these are closer to the K812 which so far has been my favourite analytical model (with the Clear being the favourite on the other side). I listen only acoustic music, jazz or flamenco, which supposedly is the genre in which the ADX do best. Thus far the jury is still out whether I'll keep them or stay with the K812. They are really close and not worth owing both. Under close scrutiny the AKG may sound a little less open with a bit more of bass from 50-60 hz, of equal excellent quality. I also have the Ananda going for that type of frequency response but those, as good as they are, do not compete in detail and especially soundstage depth, which is what the other 2 do really well. I had at some point the HD800 and sold them after I got the K812 which persuaded me that the HD800 sounded too "distant" for my enjoyment: probably ideal for orchestral music, which I do not listen. The K812 receive little attention these days but they have not been outclassed yet by anyone: they may not be your absolute favourite but it is hard to say that others do critical listening much better than them. It also helps that I paid just 400£ for them (used, and so are the ADX).

 

[speCD]

New ADX5000 owner here.
I see most of the comparison talks is referenced to HD800(S) but in my view these are closer to the K812 which so far has been my favourite analytical model (with the Clear being the favourite on the other side). I listen only acoustic music, jazz or flamenco, which supposedly is the genre in which the ADX do best. Thus far the jury is still out whether I'll keep them or stay with the K812. They are really close and not worth owing both. Under close scrutiny the AKG may sound a little less open with a bit more of bass from 50-60 hz, of equal excellent quality. I also have the Ananda going for that type of frequency response but those, as good as they are, do not compete in detail and especially soundstage depth, which is what the other 2 do really well. I had at some point the HD800 and sold them after I got the K812 which persuaded me that the HD800 sounded too "distant" for my enjoyment: probably ideal for orchestral music, which I do not listen. The K812 receive little attention these days but they have not been outclassed yet by anyone: they may not be your absolute favourite but it is hard to say that others do critical listening much better than them. It also helps that I paid just 400£ for them (used, and so are the ADX).

To me it'd be an easy decision based on your impressions and the price you paid for the k812s. The ADX's performance is highly system-dependent.

 

[nick2020]

New ADX5000 owner here.
I see most of the comparison talks is referenced to HD800(S) but in my view these are closer to the K812 which so far has been my favourite analytical model (with the Clear being the favourite on the other side). I listen only acoustic music, jazz or flamenco, which supposedly is the genre in which the ADX do best. Thus far the jury is still out whether I'll keep them or stay with the K812. They are really close and not worth owing both. Under close scrutiny the AKG may sound a little less open with a bit more of bass from 50-60 hz, of equal excellent quality. I also have the Ananda going for that type of frequency response but those, as good as they are, do not compete in detail and especially soundstage depth, which is what the other 2 do really well. I had at some point the HD800 and sold them after I got the K812 which persuaded me that the HD800 sounded too "distant" for my enjoyment: probably ideal for orchestral music, which I do not listen. The K812 receive little attention these days but they have not been outclassed yet by anyone: they may not be your absolute favourite but it is hard to say that others do critical listening much better than them. It also helps that I paid just 400£ for them (used, and so are the ADX).

Good time!
Which version of 812 are you talking about?
Also, did you compare adx5k directly to hd800S (not hd800)?

 

[aravaioli]

I did not know of different versions of the K812, hence I do not know what I have. Since they were bought 2nd hand I really do not know how old they may be.
Nevertheless they are pretty unashamed in the comparison with the ADX5000...
I no longer own the HD800 since I bought them and the "S" version never tempted me.

UPDATE 19.03.2021
After really intense A/B comparison I still consider the 2 very close. The main differences are:
1. The soundstage of the AT is wider, but not deeper
2. The AKG is a better master/editing headphone because it is more revealing and unforgiving.
3. The AT as expected does well also with an OTL amp like the Darkvoice. The AKG is not at its best with that but still plays well. Equally as expected the AKG does well also with a DAP (all I have is a Hyby R6 Pro).

Overall these are so close that is not worth owing both, in my opinion. I will sell one of them and also the Ananda.
My Clear instead can stay.