Ath-ad2000 or w5000

Oct 19, 2006 at 4:59 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 30

ironbut

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 1, 2003
Posts
970
Likes
13
After reading ASR's excellent review of the ad2000, I'm game to try a pair of Audio Technica's. I love their products. From the posts I've read, it sounds like they both have excellent bass and midrange and a very engaging and enjoyable presentation. I listen to classical and acoustic jazz mainly. Do any of you guys have both and could you compare the two? I don't really need a closed can so for me, it's all about the sound ( although I wouldn't have a problem owning a beautiful can like the 5000's!
 
Oct 19, 2006 at 5:13 AM Post #2 of 30
Well if you have a small head, the W5000 may not seal (and hence not sound proper). Conversely, if you have a large head, the AD2000 might squeeze too hard (based on what I've read).

I've not heard the AD2000, so I can't really help you in that regard, other than to say that I love my W5000
biggrin.gif
(as if you already couldn't tell)
 
Oct 19, 2006 at 5:24 AM Post #4 of 30
I think the AD2000's are a much better value. They're about $480 as compared to the W5000's at about $740 (both based on pricejapan.com prices). For my tastes, I could be perfectly happy with either of them in terms of sonics, and I suspect that (if pressed) most Head-Fi'ers would feel the same way.

Although some people may have a slight preference for one or the other, nobody would really argue that either one of these headphones is "clearly" superior to the other. Or maybe they would, but then there will be just as many people who are willing to make the same argument in favor of the other one!

So what it really comes down to is your particular tastes and preferences, and no matter what type of music you may listen to, only you could make that determination. There are several threads that discuss each of these headphones, and in some cases, direct comparisons are offered. But IMO this wouldn't be of much help to you, no matter how many llittle nit picky idiosyncrasies people are able to point out to you. The fact remains, they both are excellent headphones in their own ways and which you might like better is nearly impossible to say until you give them both a listen.

This is why I'd suggest to start with the AD2000 merely because it is less expensive.
 
Oct 19, 2006 at 5:53 AM Post #5 of 30
I would've posted "OMG, MINI-MEET!!!" but my AD2K just left me for several weeks, sorry.
tongue.gif


I don't know about jazz, but IMO classical is not an ideal genre for the AD2K. It doesn't have the treble sparkle to make strings sing - if that's what you're after, I suggest looking into another headphone. Which one I can't say, all the headphones I own have ended up underwhelming for classical when I've put them to the test. (It does sound great for brass or woodwind-focused orchestral though.)
 
Oct 19, 2006 at 6:01 AM Post #6 of 30
I had both and sold the AD2000 and kept the W5000 purely based on my sound preference. Unfortunately, as Iron_Dreamer hinted, headband on W5000 is one of their worst design. Fortunately (or unfortunately) I have a big head
blink.gif
I do love the AD2000 fit with almost Senn vice grip
280smile.gif


For me AD2000 was not as engaging as W5000. With W5000...I am in the music and get lost in it. I can wear it for hours. I will say AD2000 is not too picky about what amp you use with it. W5000 can be very picky regarding upstream synergy.
 
Oct 19, 2006 at 6:13 AM Post #7 of 30
im curious too as i have a pair of 900ltds then moved up to ad2000. now i wanna try a pair of w5000. I really concerned about fit tho, bass is one of the most important features of a can to me. Its gotta go deep and slam.
 
Oct 19, 2006 at 6:16 AM Post #8 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by coolshot
im curious too as i have a pair of 900ltds then moved up to ad2000. now i wanna try a pair of w5000. I really concerned about fit tho, bass is one of the most important features of a can to me. Its gotta go deep and slam.


The W5000 has plenty of slam and reasonably good extention. It's the solidity and warmth which is lacking from the bass.
 
Oct 19, 2006 at 6:39 AM Post #9 of 30
As you can see from my sig, I too have A900LTD. If you remove some mid bass veil on A900LTD and extend the bass and treble frequencies, and more refined sound, then you have general ideal for W5000 sound. In order for W5000 to really shine you need a high current amp with good source and it takes a long time for burn-in process.

Regarding the fit of W5000, recently when I hosted all AT cans micro-meet, we had two W5000s where the two headband sizes were slightly different.

Quote:

Originally Posted by coolshot
im curious too as i have a pair of 900ltds then moved up to ad2000. now i wanna try a pair of w5000. I really concerned about fit tho, bass is one of the most important features of a can to me. Its gotta go deep and slam.


 
Oct 19, 2006 at 6:43 AM Post #10 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl
The W5000 has plenty of slam and reasonably good extention. It's the solidity and warmth which is lacking from the bass.


Change your source and amp.
smily_headphones1.gif

Don't blame the poor 'fones for being faithful.

Curious.

What do you think of the bass delivery of the SRX mk.III?
 
Oct 19, 2006 at 6:48 AM Post #11 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by kuma
Change your source and amp.
smily_headphones1.gif

Don't blame the poor 'fones for being faithful.



The 4070 is faithful. The W5000 is thin.

Quote:

Curious.

What do you think of the bass delivery of the SRX mk.III?


Once you adjust for the volume difference between the mids and the bass+treble, it's quite nice, but it will only ever be an electrostatic.
 
Oct 19, 2006 at 6:57 AM Post #12 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl
The 4070 is faithful. The W5000 is thin.


Ok.
I still don't think the bass of W5k is thin. It has less decays than others, perhaps. But I don't hear *thin* from my W5k.
Everyone's definition of good quality bass varies, I guess.

Quote:

Once you adjust for the volume difference between the mids and the bass+treble, it's quite nice, but it will only ever be an electrostatic.


Yet your reference for the bass is *electrostats*?
It might be a tad weak on the transient impract compared to the conventional dynamic 'fones, but with the right ancilaries, I thought they delivered beautiful tuneful bass which was quite articulate.
 
Oct 19, 2006 at 7:52 AM Post #13 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by kuma
Yet your reference for the bass is *electrostats*?


Ironic, ne? Actually though, the 4070 doesn't really sound that "electrostatic". It neither has that sweetness, nor the wispyness that stats are famous for, nor the aggressiveness or cyclingness of dynamics. They just make sound.

Quote:

It might be a tad weak on the transient impract compared to the conventional dynamic 'fones, but with the right ancilaries, I thought they delivered beautiful tuneful bass which was quite articulate.


Oh, electrostatics are certainly tuneful, sweet, and extended. They just don't engage you with the music. The reverse is true for your typical dynamic, which just sort of thumps and reverberates. Doing both is quite the mission.
 
Oct 19, 2006 at 3:48 PM Post #14 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by Asr
I don't know about jazz, but IMO classical is not an ideal genre for the AD2K. It doesn't have the treble sparkle to make strings sing - if that's what you're after, I suggest looking into another headphone. Which one I can't say, all the headphones I own have ended up underwhelming for classical when I've put them to the test. (It does sound great for brass or woodwind-focused orchestral though.)


I would agree with this. Violins can sound a bit metalic at times. The midrange needs some juducious eq'ing as well, to my ears. The lows on the AD2000's are deep and spacious, certainly the most natural and effortless bass I've heard for acoustic music.
 
Oct 19, 2006 at 5:27 PM Post #15 of 30
Quote:

Originally Posted by Carl
The 4070 is faithful. The W5000 is thin.


No, the bass of the W5ks is certainly not thin. I've never heard the Stax4070s, so I can't compare them, but in my setting the W5ks produce a great bass, with good definition, decay, and more than sufficient quantity. In fact their bass goes as low as 20 Hertz, yes I really heard that on a test CD.
IMHO the upper midrange is the critical range of W5ks, you really have to build your system around the W5ks or do some pad modifications to tame the midrange.
I haven't heard that the AD2000s have the same midrange problem, so they might be easier to amp.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top