[JML]

My W1000s arrived today. I'm listening briefly, and then letting them burn in over the next few days.

The only discernable physical differences between these and the W100 is the shape and color of the wooden earcups and the colors of the rest of the cans. The W100 metal & plastic is a champagne gold, and the W1000 is a coppery red gold. The silk cord cover on the W100 is brown, and on the W1000 it is black. The rest is identical.

I have to disagree with Bangraman's earlier postings about the ear pads. The pad pattern is identical for the W100, W1000, and W2002, except for the location of a seam. Same padding, same everything. So I'm ordering the leather ones right now (which is what I have on my W100).

It's too early to report on the sound differences because of how they change during burn-in. The early sound reminds me of what I remember from the new W100, but the bass response is clearly ready to go deeper and the highs seem more extended. A bit ragged right now, not as mellow or as intimate as the W100, but the transparency and soundstaging is there. The DADS system does add that bass slam and impact, I can feel the transients better. I've changed the shape of the twin springs, to make the cans fit a bit tighter (Tomcat referred to this as the "JML Conehead Mod").

I don't foresee selling my W100, though. They look so nice together!

More next week.

Wheeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[screwdriver]

i bougth the ATH W1000 too and it made me sell my beyer DT770pro and my AKG K501 .

sold them coz the w1000 is better and it is F&%$*#@ expensive . i even have to sell my cmoy too.

well thats how it is with this hobby right .

 

[nanahachi]

JML, i really look forward to reading your comparisons. i know many will echo that same thought, but its true. Take you time, enjoy the process, and share it all when youre done.

And of couse, it wouldnt hurt if you took some pics of the beauties

 

[elnero]

Looking forward to hearing your comments JML.

 

[bangraman]

JML, I really don't know what I was thinking... I'd take the earpads off and the W2002 lips appeared bigger. I've just taken the pads off and lined them up side by side and there is no difference. Was I on drugs? I don't know. Perhaps I was getting confused between the A1000 and the W1000... No idea.

 

[Gergor]

Quote:

Originally posted by bangraman JML, I really don't know what I was thinking... I'd take the earpads off and the W2002 lips appeared bigger. I've just taken the pads off and lined them up side by side and there is no difference. Was I on drugs? I don't know. Perhaps I was getting confused between the A1000 and the W1000... No idea.

It's a sign that you had way too many A-T...

 

[bangraman]

A-T O-D...
You could be right...

 

[JML]

Quote:

Originally posted by bangraman JML, I really don't know what I was thinking... I'd take the earpads off and the W2002 lips appeared bigger. I've just taken the pads off and lined them up side by side and there is no difference. Was I on drugs? I don't know. Perhaps I was getting confused between the A1000 and the W1000... No idea.

Ah, Bangraman, let's just say you owe me the $10 shipping.

 

[RoninDiesel]

question about the ath w-k's...how much bass am i losing compared to the dt-770's. how would you rate each of them pro's/con's.

 

[bangraman]

Quote:

Originally posted by JML Ah, Bangraman, let's just say you owe me the $10 shipping.

Oh there's a clear difference in the pads... What I meant was no difference in the area they sit on on both phones.


Ronindiesel, the W1K provides the least bass, although my memories of the W100 are fading away. And comparing the W1000 to the DT770, there is well... no comparison. The W1K works well for more 'refined' music like jazz, classical, etc, providing real detail and agility, but I've found even some classical music like opera requires more grunt than the W1K can provide. That said it's a much better phone than the DT770 for classical and jazz generally. If you're looking for a higher resolution version of the DT770, go CD3000.

 

[JML]

I have not heard the CD3000, except during the Headroom Tour last summer, and I've not recently auditioned any of the Beyers for an extended period. But I want to inject a note of caution about perceived response of any headphone at the frequency extremes. There are too many variables here to avoid listening to your music, using your system, and your ears. Source material, transcription equipment (i.e., "players"), amps, and, perhaps most of all, the placement and fit of the cans to your ears. And it should be clear to anyone other than a casual reader of this site that there major differences among those posting -- some of us would undoubtedly cringe at what another thinks is "real bass" or "extended treble." Sometimes I have heard equipment that other raved about that I thought reproduced only pure mud and ear-piercing needles.

IMHO, any good headphone or loudspeaker first has to allow for most of the musical information to come through, and that's the midrange. The rest of the frequency range has to be balanced around that midrange, and there are tradeoffs and compromises with all these imperfect pieces of equipment. Transducers that do this stand the test of time for a long time, like the Maggies, Rogers LS3/5A, Spendor, and Quad speakers.

I like the ATs because they're, well, very musical headphones that do a very good job of reproducing "real" music from voice, acoustic instruments, and live recordings. They're all very transparent, image quite well, and draw you into the music so you're not listening to the equipment but to the artist. At least to my ears they do! (And I do think the bass kicks butt!)

 

[zeplin]

To further comment on JML's thoughts about the W1K's bass...
FWIW, Compared to my HD600's, which are powered by a Cosmic and Sony D-350, the W1000's bass has just as much slam and is a bit more accurate. The HD600's bass sounds a little uncontroled and seems to last longer during bass notes compared to the W1000's. They both have slam, but each present it in a slightly different way...obviously

I prefer the W1000's bass because it doesn't sound like it is affecting any other portions of the spectrum...which I now see the HD600's are guilty of some of the time...and because they are capable of slightly deeper, controlled, and more clear bass notes!!!

 

[soupy]

i will not upgrade to a w1000, i willl not upgrade to a w1000, i will not upgrade to a w1000, i will not upgrade to a w1000, i will not upgrade to a w1000, i will not upgrade to a w1000, i will not upgrade to a w1000, i will not upgrade to a w1000, i will not upgrade to a w1000....AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

 

[bangraman]

You're kind of right about the bass. It's very tight, and very controlled. The W1K does better than the CD3K in the lower registers for feeling as though the performance as a while is nicely stuck together while still giving good separation of what I like to call the onion layers of the music.
And as has been said, this is a source thing. For example the META is considerably basser and warmer (also a cacophony of static in comparison, as well as decreased resolution) than my tube set-up which I was using for the comparison. And that's just the amp.
However the W1K was the noticeably bass deficient, or I should more accurately say has an abbreviated bass that has a tendency to skulk behind the mix, out of all the phones I was listening to (W2002, CD3K, A1K, W1K). Full details to come in my long delayed comparison which is approaching something nearing completion.


As for other phones I've had to compare with, I don't think I need to roll out that list again...

 

[Tomcat]

Quote:

Originally posted by JML (...) and draw you into the music so you're not listening to the equipment but to the artist.

Exactly, Jan! That's what it's all about.
Quote:

More next week.

I am looking forward to it!
Quote:

Wheeeee!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Congratulations!