- Joined
- Jan 9, 2003
- Posts
- 4,296
- Likes
- 2,947
Everyone who was at the meet, please post your impressions here! I'll hopefully add more impressions when I get the time. Thanks again to Josh (cybertron) for hosting this meet! Everyone at the meet was very very cool and I was glad to meet every one of you. I wish I had had more time to both socialize and try gear - 4 or 5 hours wasn't nearly enough to do everything I wanted
Anyways, below are a few of my impressions (to be expanded later):
Grado RS-1 w/ flat pads:
These were the first things I went for. As an owner of the sr225 (my first grado) for over a year, I really liked its presentation for rock, but hated how the sr225 couldn't get any of the little things right. With bowls, the cans are way too bright and bass is nice and snappy but rolled-off. With flats, things get a little muddy/dark overall and bass is powerful but a bit loose. The vwaps strike a decent balance, but it's still a tradeoff on many fronts. Furthermore, the sr225 is IMO horrible for most acoustic instruments, and some vocals. There's a frequency in the upper midrange/lower treble that's horribly mangled/overempahsized, and this makes things sound peaky and unnatural unless there's many other intruments simultaneously playing to help cover it up.
With the RS-1s w/ flats I first put on the Rush CD "Fly By Night" that I'm very familiar with. It was immediately apparent that the bass was both powerful, deep, AND tight. The overall balance was nice, perhaps slightly warm and lush without getting too thick or muddy. Resolution is clearly superior to the sr-225; it's not a minor difference. Didn't listen with acoustic solos (should have), but didn't notice a problem with peaky-ness during my session. The RS1-s were driven by a Rega Planet 2000 and an RA-1 amp.
Grado SR-200 w/flats
First impression, I was amazed at how airy these cans sounded. Especially with strings, individual notes had an amazing sense of space around them. Instruments and notes were extremely well separated, much more so than the sr-225. Bass is deep and powerful and tight like the rs-1, however I didn't have enough comparison time to determine which was better. In terms of overall quality, the RS-1 and sr-200 are much MUCH closer to each other than the sr-225. In terms of sonic signature, the sr-200 is more of a departure from the other two, with a very clean, airy, and neutral sonic signature. Very impressive, especially considering the price MagusG paid for them! I preferred vocals on the rs1 - vocals were the only thing that I wasn't thrilled about on the sr200 - they seemed a little pushed back and drier compared to the rs1. However, the airiness of the sr200 was very seductive for strings. I'd have a very hard time choosing between the rs1 and sr200, but I might have to give the edge to the rs1 here.
Meridian 588
Before today I was a member of team "source third". Well, I still believe the transducer is by far the most quality-sensitive link of the audio chain, but this player has converted me to team "source second". I'll be honest, I haven't heard too much difference between the sources under $1.3K that I've tried. Sure the integrated soundcards and crappy PCDPs sound obviously awful, but anything approaching a decent design and build quality has sounded a lot like the other stuff. I've noticed a bigger sonic difference from swapping amps. The Meridian is another story altogether. I first listened to a piano piece out of the 588 -> PPA w/ STEPS and diamond buffer -> HD650 + Zu, and I immediately knew I'd never heard piano sound that REAL before (well, except in real life, LOL). At first I was sure I was hearing an SACD (no way CD sounds that good), but then I found out the 588 only plays redbook, and I was actually hearing the redbook layer of a hybrid SACD
Still skeptical, I tried deperately to eliminate the Meridian as the cause for this sonic beauty. During the rest of the meet I tried many familiar CDs on both the Meridian rig and my own rig (Jolida JD100a -> RKV Mk II -> HD650 + Zu). I even tried swapping out the RKV in my rig for the PPA; it was clear the PPA wasn't doing the magic (I slightly preferred the RKV in my rig - it's smoother sounding). To the best of my determination, the 588 is just playing in a higher league than my Jolida or BelCanto DAC2. First, it has noticeably more detail/resolution than any other source I've heard. Things that sound smeared on my sources (like a few faint piano notes buried within a busy musical passage) are rendered crytal-clear on the 588. Second, the smoothness of the 588 is amazing. How it can extract so much more detail AND be so much smoother than the other sources is beyon me, but that's what made the 588 special to my ears. When comparing with the other sources, I found myself turning the volume up louder to try to compensate for the lacking details vs the 588. When I did this, I noticed a harshness and glare that irritates my ears. The 588 can give more details while not irritating my ears in the slightest. Also, it's got a significantly airier presentation than the other sources. The layers of music are so much better separated on this source. This was my favorite piece of gear at the meet. Basically, I'm in love. I have GOT to get a Meridian 588. NOW.
Etymotic er-4s
I heard these out of an ipod -> line-out dock -> sr-71, with foamies. First impression was "ouch", cramming things down my ear canals is just really uncomforatable. I can't see myself using these in the long run. However, isolation was really great. I couldn't hear a THING going on around me. Sonically, these were not quite my thing. I was expecting to be impressed by the legendary ety detail, but after listening to the rs-1, meriadian, and 650 + zu, the etys came up short. Also, they sounded slightly dry and analytical, with little bass impact. At least they weren't quite as dry and analytical as the AKG K401 was to my ears. The etys didn't sound terrible, but they're not something I would consider for home or office use. Maybe I shouldn't have spoiled my ears before trying these, heh.
AKG K401
These were really not my thing. Driven from my jolida -> RKV. Too dry and analytical; plus bass is really lacking compared to the grados and HD650. I could not enjoy this as a home headphone. Soundstage was large & expansive, similar to my AKG K340, but this was the only thing they had in common, IMO. Actually I think the K401 sounds a lot more like the K271s than the K340. The K340 is very lush with a smooth-as-silk liquid midrange and much more detail than the K401 or K271s. My stock cabled K340 has a lot more bass than the other AKGs, and though it's not the tightest bass in the world it is euphonically pleasing for orchestral pieces. This was the last - and least expensive - headphone I listened to at the meet, so like the etys I probably didn't give these guys a fair chance.
Anyways, below are a few of my impressions (to be expanded later):
Grado RS-1 w/ flat pads:
These were the first things I went for. As an owner of the sr225 (my first grado) for over a year, I really liked its presentation for rock, but hated how the sr225 couldn't get any of the little things right. With bowls, the cans are way too bright and bass is nice and snappy but rolled-off. With flats, things get a little muddy/dark overall and bass is powerful but a bit loose. The vwaps strike a decent balance, but it's still a tradeoff on many fronts. Furthermore, the sr225 is IMO horrible for most acoustic instruments, and some vocals. There's a frequency in the upper midrange/lower treble that's horribly mangled/overempahsized, and this makes things sound peaky and unnatural unless there's many other intruments simultaneously playing to help cover it up.
With the RS-1s w/ flats I first put on the Rush CD "Fly By Night" that I'm very familiar with. It was immediately apparent that the bass was both powerful, deep, AND tight. The overall balance was nice, perhaps slightly warm and lush without getting too thick or muddy. Resolution is clearly superior to the sr-225; it's not a minor difference. Didn't listen with acoustic solos (should have), but didn't notice a problem with peaky-ness during my session. The RS1-s were driven by a Rega Planet 2000 and an RA-1 amp.
Grado SR-200 w/flats
First impression, I was amazed at how airy these cans sounded. Especially with strings, individual notes had an amazing sense of space around them. Instruments and notes were extremely well separated, much more so than the sr-225. Bass is deep and powerful and tight like the rs-1, however I didn't have enough comparison time to determine which was better. In terms of overall quality, the RS-1 and sr-200 are much MUCH closer to each other than the sr-225. In terms of sonic signature, the sr-200 is more of a departure from the other two, with a very clean, airy, and neutral sonic signature. Very impressive, especially considering the price MagusG paid for them! I preferred vocals on the rs1 - vocals were the only thing that I wasn't thrilled about on the sr200 - they seemed a little pushed back and drier compared to the rs1. However, the airiness of the sr200 was very seductive for strings. I'd have a very hard time choosing between the rs1 and sr200, but I might have to give the edge to the rs1 here.
Meridian 588
Before today I was a member of team "source third". Well, I still believe the transducer is by far the most quality-sensitive link of the audio chain, but this player has converted me to team "source second". I'll be honest, I haven't heard too much difference between the sources under $1.3K that I've tried. Sure the integrated soundcards and crappy PCDPs sound obviously awful, but anything approaching a decent design and build quality has sounded a lot like the other stuff. I've noticed a bigger sonic difference from swapping amps. The Meridian is another story altogether. I first listened to a piano piece out of the 588 -> PPA w/ STEPS and diamond buffer -> HD650 + Zu, and I immediately knew I'd never heard piano sound that REAL before (well, except in real life, LOL). At first I was sure I was hearing an SACD (no way CD sounds that good), but then I found out the 588 only plays redbook, and I was actually hearing the redbook layer of a hybrid SACD
Etymotic er-4s
I heard these out of an ipod -> line-out dock -> sr-71, with foamies. First impression was "ouch", cramming things down my ear canals is just really uncomforatable. I can't see myself using these in the long run. However, isolation was really great. I couldn't hear a THING going on around me. Sonically, these were not quite my thing. I was expecting to be impressed by the legendary ety detail, but after listening to the rs-1, meriadian, and 650 + zu, the etys came up short. Also, they sounded slightly dry and analytical, with little bass impact. At least they weren't quite as dry and analytical as the AKG K401 was to my ears. The etys didn't sound terrible, but they're not something I would consider for home or office use. Maybe I shouldn't have spoiled my ears before trying these, heh.
AKG K401
These were really not my thing. Driven from my jolida -> RKV. Too dry and analytical; plus bass is really lacking compared to the grados and HD650. I could not enjoy this as a home headphone. Soundstage was large & expansive, similar to my AKG K340, but this was the only thing they had in common, IMO. Actually I think the K401 sounds a lot more like the K271s than the K340. The K340 is very lush with a smooth-as-silk liquid midrange and much more detail than the K401 or K271s. My stock cabled K340 has a lot more bass than the other AKGs, and though it's not the tightest bass in the world it is euphonically pleasing for orchestral pieces. This was the last - and least expensive - headphone I listened to at the meet, so like the etys I probably didn't give these guys a fair chance.
