I agree with Markl on this one, you need a better amp. I'm listening to the 2002s through the Grado HPA-2 amp and the combo is fantastic. If you have plenty of money then this shouldn't be a problem.
Even though it's a new ***ed up fad, please refrain from stating that the Sennheiser HD600 are vieled and thin. I am completely against that statement, they are lush with detailed highs, maybe not as so as others, but they certainly don't hide anything!!!
Spad can make a statement about the W2002 or any other headphone without a better amp. I know of a few receivers that can drive headphones well (particularly early 90's Pioneer models, they sound great with the HD600). He might not experience the full extent of them, but he's still getting most of the sound that they're capable of. Granted this room for improvement could make a big impact, but it's not going to sound (tone) any different, just cleaner, more impact, and what not.
Hangin' with the monkeys. Member of the Trade: Lawton Audio
Joined
Jun 22, 2001
Posts
9,130
Likes
54
I've always felt that way about the HD600. You'd feel that way too if you ever heard the Sony CD3K or R10 or W2002.
"Spad can make a statement about the W2002 or any other headphone without a better amp."
Of course he can. But we readers also have a right to discuss those comments.
"but he's still getting most of the sound that they're capable of."
Disagree pretty strongly there. Good amps make a huge difference in my experience. I'm sure the Corda is a fine amp. I bet it will sound much better than his receiver.
I've heard the CD3000, didn't like them, they sounded bright and bass was exaggerated. I don't seem to like any Sony products exception of SCD-333ES), and it's not a bias either.
Amps do make a difference, but they're not going to completely change how a headphone sounds, they'll make improvements, but it will still sound similar to how it did before.
I felt that "those readers" were dismissing his comments just because he doesn't have a top rate amp.
This is really getting amusing. Does anyone actually read postings?
These are the closing lines of my original statement:
Quote:
The equipment involved in this installment was a Sony S550es DVD optically connected to a Yamaha RX-V1000 with Sennheiser HD600s and Audio Technica ATH-W2002s.
Future installments will use a Sony 605esd CDP using Monster ICs to a Corda HA-1. If it seems warranted, I'll add Ety 4s to the mix.
I used my media room a/v receiver for about 30 mins, knowing full well that this would not reveal any final results. Every minute of the 21 hours of burn-in and auditioning since then has been with a Corda HA-1.
Thanks for all the advice to use a good amp, but you're really preaching to the choir, gentlemen.
Originally posted by joelongwood
I honestly don't think you would feel that way if you heard the CD3000s with an Earmax Pro. Just my opinion, of course.
Well then, you going to let me borrow yours or what?
Originally posted by acidtripwow I agree with Markl on this one, you need a better amp. I'm listening to the 2002s through the Grado HPA-2 amp and the combo is fantastic. If you have plenty of money then this shouldn't be a problem.
Explain to me exactly what I would really gain in using a Grado HPA-2 over my Corda HA-1 and I'll seriously consider it.
Regarding having plenty of money: By any practical measure, I suppose I would be considered financially comfortable. But there is more than one way to read such a statement. Even if only a single dime, you too will someday have more money than time.
I have the CD3000 and an Earmax Pro, and they sound okay together, but still not as good as the Senn 600.
As for the suggestion that Spad should use a "good amp", I was using them with a Maxed Out Home (which I assume qualifies as a "good amp") and I was getting similar sorts of findings to Spad. I don't think his amp is the issue.
Granted this room for improvement could make a big impact, but it's not going to sound (tone) any different, just cleaner, more impact, and what not.
That is just plain WRONG!!!
I had tried the HD600 with the headphone jack of my dvd player, a power amp, JMT, RA-1, X-Can V2 with two different tubes and two different powe supplies, and the HA-4. It sounded very different with each amp! No other headphone that I own or have tried has done this as much, I must say as the HD600. The HD600 is EXTREMELY amp depended, more so than any other headphone. By that I don't mean in the same way that the AKG 501 needs a lot of power, but in the FACT that the HD600 sounds so DIFFERENT depending on which amp you use.
Here's a test, next time there one of these meetings, try the HD600 with as many different headphone amps as you can, by different companies of course, and you will understand just how much difference an amp can truly make with these headphones.
These are my first remarks after a more reasonable run-in time of 22 hours. The equipment involved is the aforementioned Sony 605ES CDP, an audiophile class home unit of some years ago, fed by 5-year old Monsters to a Corda HA-1. The music was all from regular CDs (some purposely old, others very new) and included a wide variety of jazz and classical selections.
Among the more instructive issues for me is the unanticipated change that burning in these phones brought about. I wish everyone could experience this. It would definitely lay to rest any remaining controversy regarding whether or not it is helpful. In the case of the W2002, it's more than helpful--it's amazing. They went from something I wasn't sure I wanted to keep to something I want to lick!
As I mentioned earlier, the soundstage is considerably broader than I've experienced with other phones without any of the artificiality induced by so-called 'enhancers.' This creates an 'airy' effect and contributes to a greater sense of space around the performers while maintaining an appropriate sense of distance and depth. I find it very convincing, particularly with classical ensembles where the trend is toward minimal miking.
The bass . . . ah, the bass. It's simply the best I've heard on a 'phone. It extends as low as the Ety 4s, but with a visceral impact that I didn't think possible in a headphone. This feature alone is almost enough to move the W2002s to the head of their class--and I'm no bass nut.
The overall sound, the combination of clarity, tonal balance, speed, and the ability to resolve complex textures, rivals and may even exceed, that of the Etymotics. I'm a dyed-in-the-wool Ety fan, but I sincerely believe I'm not exaggerating.
I know some will be pleased and some disappointed--even angered--by these comments. They represent my honest opinion, but nevertheless simply that: an opinion based on limited exposure and subject to change. For the moment at least, I can say with reasonable certainty that the W2002s will be my phone of choice.
Wow. Thanx for the update. I still find it hard to believe burn-in made such a difference as well. Your first post in this thread was not too compelling in the AT's favor.
Glad to hear that they really did burn-in well for you.
Hangin' with the monkeys. Member of the Trade: Lawton Audio
Joined
Jun 22, 2001
Posts
9,130
Likes
54
I've been burning mine in for a total of 110 hours now. When I hit 150, I will stop and say they are "done".
I begrudgingly admit that these headphones have definitely benefitted from burn-in, but I think that a lot of that has been mental. Bass justr gets better and better. The W2002 is not AFRAID of any recording. I just cannot drive them into clip through my Melos no matter how hard I push them. You could end up listening to these headphones at much too high a volume.
The W2002 is not without faults, though. I've posted my reservations elsewhere and for the most part they remain only slightly improved through break-in.
Spad,
Here are my thoughts on the bass from another thread. I'd be curious to get your take:
"I've just had an epiphany about the the bass response of these headphones. I think I've reacted so positively to the w2002's bass not because it goes so incredibly low, although it is as low as any other good headphone I've heard, but because of the way my ears react to the actual physical feeling of the bass. The W2002 provides a sort of "ear massage" with the ultra smooth and effortless, yet energetic bass. The way it resonates is very stimulating and pleasing to the ear.
All this has made me speculate about the true purpose and function of the DADS system. So, its basically an enclosure behind the diaphragm. I suspect this enclosure is trapping air in some manner and releasing it in a very specific way to create the feeling of impact. This is my theory at least. This adds to the "stimulation" of the ears *as if* they were reacting to *real* low bass sound waves in the open air.
Remember when I said that the R10 is the "Disappearing Headphone", because of the extreme comfort of the phone combined with the "invisibility" of the drivers? Well, I'd say the W2002 goes in the opposite direction and is a very stimulating headphone with a powerful driver closer to the ear than in the R10. Combine that with DADS system, and--pow! impactful, stimulating, present, bass.
Maybe DADS system is sort of like those weird discs they hawk in HT mags that sit in your chair and vibrate in tune with the bass, so you get more of the bass feeling. I'm not saying DADS is that cheesy, because I actually like the effect and really enjoy my bass-heavy CDs with the W2002."
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.