[blipblop]

Are these a worthwhile item? Or has SONY washed their hands of these as well?

 

[Eagle_Driver]

I own a pair of the CD2000. It's OK, but not as good as some other headphones that sell for the same (street) price as the CD2000. It's supa-comfy, however. But that still doesn't justify the fact that the CD2000 at $200 barely sounds better than the low-end Grado headphones that sell for less than $100, even with a good amp.
And with the discontinuance of the CD3000, the CD2000 becomes Sony's top-of-the-line headphone that isn't a special-order item.

Honestly, if my only choices were between the CD2000 and the Senn 590, I'd pick the CD2000. But with Sennheiser replacing the "bionetic" series with the new 5#5 series, I'm finding the CD2000 even harder to recommend than ever.

 

[Sentral Dogma]

I'm kinda mildly interested in these phones. People always say the cd2000 'suck' for the price, but I've never read any actual descriptions of the sound. So, Eagle Driver, how are the lower end grado's better?

EDIT: scratch that, the search finally went through. I'm finding its hard for my browser to do Head-fi searches, especially when I use the * wild card.

 

[Eagle_Driver]

To be sure, the best thing about the CD2000 is the gorgeous midrange. But the bass is a bit loose and thumpy, and the treble a bit harsh and sibilant. Still nothing like the inaccuracies of the Senn 590's (not to be confused with their much superior replacements, the 595's).

The low-end Grados actually have tighter bass response (but less low-end extension), and bright, detailed highs (though not quite as sibilant as the CD2000 can be). The mids from the lower-end Grados are good, but not quite in the same league with the high-end CD### series Sonys.