Dear Delanda,
I really appreciate your input as I am well aware that you've tested both these cans before and that you know them well. I now have a problem. The 890's are impossible to find in my country. Lou will not sell me his. And Philips is now touting the HP 910s here. If they are really inferior then Philips is being really irresponsible towards its customers. I am aware that the 910s don't even include the very neat headphone stand nor the detachable cord! How could Philips act this way? Shocking!
How do you know the 910's drivers are inferior? They are supposed to have quicker, tighter bass as well as better detail in the higher octaves along with better frequency response (I know about the recessed midrange). Whereas the 890s are supposed to have slower, looser bass (e.g. yelding 'wompas' instead of 'womps'). The 890s advantage over the 910s being its wider soundstage which is provided by its angled driver acoustic chamber design and not by the drivers themselves. There were no headphone models from Philips featuring 50mm drivers prior to the HP 890s, so how do you know the HP 910s drivers are older?
I'm sorry about being so direct with my questioning here but much of the info I've just mentioned I read in your own review of those cans, so I'd like you to correct me where I'm wrong and provide additional info on how exactly the HP 910s sound worse than the 890's since the sound is what's most important here. As for build quality I know the 890s are better but I'm not sure about the ergonomics which there could perhaps be a small HP 910 advantage there?
Again, thank you Delenda very very much for your input, and I would really appreciate you shedding further light on this issue lest I make a bad purchase here. Maybe I should just stick to my HP 800s?
Cheers,
Alex Altorfer