[sokolov91]

Quote:

Originally Posted by astroqm /img/forum/go_quote.gif Thank you sokolov91, because a2000x is more expensive(around 540) than other headphone, like HD600, K701, my budget for amp would be tight. Maybe I can put another 200-300 for amp. Another question: for the same budget can I get better sound from HD600 system for classical music, compare to ATs like your W1000x? Thanks again

Astroqm,

I really cannot answer that question, some people hate sennheiser for classical, others love it... I am particularly taken with my W1000X and think it is a few levels above the HD 600 in terms of audio quality and reproduction. To my ears, it is the best headphone I have ever heard -but I am one of like 2 people who own them here so far. The headphones I have heard are all in my signature.

The HD 600 are nice and relaxed, I use them while studying or when I am tired... other than that the W1000X get all the use for any genre.

With the HD 600 you would want to consider an amp much more because the impedance is 300 ohms. An iPod or CD player would have issues supplying voltage to drive this properly. It will still sound good, but hardly recommended to start with. Higher ohms need more voltage, lower ohm need more current. It would seem current is much easier to get than voltage.

If I were you, knowing what I know now, I would buy the audio-technica model you like best(audition if possible) and then wait, love them and save up for an amp. When/if you feel you want to upgrade, then look into an amp. W1000X is a fine choice and I am sure the A2000X is too. Other headphones to consider are the Denon series as they are pretty efficient too but I have never heard them.

HD 600 + amp>/= W1000X with no amp but W1000X + amp>> HD 600 + amp.

The W1000X really go deep down and get a lot of detail from symphonies and cello/violin/bass that is often not heard in headphones. It makes the music sound very rich and powerful. Grieg will blow your mind

.

W1000X are actually cheaper than the A2000X on www.pricejapan.com

Best of luck!

 

[astroqm]

Quote:

Originally Posted by sokolov91 /img/forum/go_quote.gif The W1000X really go deep down and get a lot of detail from symphonies and cello/violin/bass that is often not heard in headphones. It makes the music sound very rich and powerful. Grieg will blow your mind .

Now I'm really interested in W1000x, I like the sound signature you described. Besides, ATs are easier to drive. Now I just need to make choice between a2000x and w1000x, thanks!

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

Originally Posted by astroqm /img/forum/go_quote.gif Now I'm really interested in W1000x, I like the sound signature you described. Besides, ATs are easier to drive. Now I just need to make choice between a2000x and w1000x, thanks!

Glad I could help. Be sure to post what you decide here!

For what it is worth, here is my review of the W1000X. http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/ath...pdated-474846/

Cheers

 

[Mad Max]

I used to have HD600, and I think it did well with classical, but it is no match for A2000X, not to mention the ATs are easier to drive due to their much higher sensitivity.

 

[Mad Max]

With additional burn-in, this headphone has become more neutral and less fatiguing. It just keeps getting better and better, w00t!

 

[KLS]

@Mad Max, what amp are you using to drive them?

 

[Mad Max]

I have a Compass for now. I blew the money I was saving for an upgrade on these 'phones, lol.
If you are wondering about how sensitive they are, I have to turn down the volume when switching from SR325is to A2000X.

 

[KLS]

@Mad Max, thanks for the reply!

I know this is not a good idea, but how do they sound straight out of a DAP?

 

[Mad Max]

It's okay I guess. My ipod is not very good at driving anything, lol. It should sound better out of something with beefier output, or a portable amp. I know they sound excellent out of my Minibox-E+.

 

[KLS]

@Mad Max, thanks again.

Still in search of some light-weight full-sized headphones

The STAX is calling me too in the mean time...

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

I used to have HD600, and I think it did well with classical, but it is no match for A2000X, not to mention the ATs are easier to drive due to their much higher sensitivity.

Could they be considered an HD600 of sorts? I am looking for a phone that has a similar sound sig, with slightly more bass, and more detail/refinement throughout the entire spectrum.
 
HD 600 are nice, but a bit too smeared compared to the rest of my headphones.

 

[Mad Max]

Quote:

Could they be considered an HD600 of sorts? I am looking for a phone that has a similar sound sig, with slightly more bass, and more detail/refinement throughout the entire spectrum.
 
HD 600 are nice, but a bit too smeared compared to the rest of my headphones.

Oh no, not at all. A2000X is very energetic with much better balance - definitely doesn't have more bass The bass notes punch a bit harder than HD600's yet these ATs have less bass than those senns.
Then the delicious liquid-smoothness...

 
Their mids aren't as laid-back as HD600 nor are they forward. Treble seems to extent to the sky and is sparkly.
Then, last but not least, great speed. They fall short of life-like (at least, with my gear), but it's much, much better than HD600.
My sister described the A2000X as having a "light and fluffy sound". LOL
I don't know about "fluffy", but they are extremely effortless.
 
Needs at least about 500 hours. They change quite a bit during that time, they seem to start off with AD700-like bass and really strong treble that eventually gets fatiguing ~300-400 hours. Afterward the sound calms down and they will be the most balanced sounding headphones you've ever owned.

</rant>

 

[sokolov91]

Quote:

Oh no, not at all. A2000X is very energetic with much better balance - definitely doesn't have more bass The bass notes punch a bit harder than HD600's yet these ATs have less bass than those senns.
Then the delicious liquid-smoothness...

 
Their mids aren't as laid-back as HD600 nor are they forward. Treble seems to extent to the sky and is sparkly.
Then, last but not least, great speed. They fall short of life-like (at least, with my gear), but it's much, much better than HD600.
My sister described the A2000X as having a "light and fluffy sound". LOL
I don't know about "fluffy", but they are extremely effortless.
 
Needs at least about 500 hours. They change quite a bit during that time, they seem to start off with AD700-like bass and really strong treble that eventually gets fatiguing ~300-400 hours. Afterward the sound calms down and they will be the most balanced sounding headphones you've ever owned.

</rant>

Thanks again for your helpful impressions!
 
If you could, hows the detail after the 500 mark? Also, do they seem to bite/punch at all frequencies? The W1000X sound very alive in the sense that guitar strings sound like they are actually being plucked/strummed and resonating somewhere, all drums have nice punches and thuds to them... like as well as sounding accurate instruments "feel" accurate -they have life and a presence. Is that what you mean by energetic? If so I think that is a great quality in any headphone.
 
If I continue to persue dynamics they are definitely on my list... they are so gorgeous too . Not that my W1000X leave me hard done by at all ^____^

 

[Mad Max]

Not sure. Since I bought them, they've been showing lots and lots of detail. They certainly make HD600 sound kind of muddy.
 
Yup, the "life and details" you get with W1000X will be just the same with A2000X. These 'phones don't have as big a soundstage as HD600, though, but it is much more precise and refined. I'd say the width is a bit bigger than my SR325is. I can't comment on depth, I'm not that good at perceiving it, but they have some depth whereas my Grados do not at all.

 

[sokolov91]

 
Quote:

Not sure. Since I bought them, they've been showing lots and lots of detail. They certainly make HD600 sound kind of muddy.
 
Yup, the "life and details" you get with W1000X will be just the same with A2000X. These 'phones don't have as big a soundstage as HD600, though, but it is much more precise and refined. I'd say the width is a bit bigger than my SR325is. I can't comment on depth, I'm not that good at perceiving it, but they have some depth whereas my Grados do not at all.

Excellent > : )
 
Yeah I have been finding the sound-stage odd with the W1000X. It sounded absolutely huge when I first got them, and for a closed can it is still very large, but it seems to vary a lot based on the recording... which I guess is a good thing. Funny you should mention you are not good at perceiving depth, because 2D left/right sound stage is not the best with the W1000X, but 3D depth is truly stellar. The precision and definition you speak of is exactly this. There is a bit more to the depth they offer, but I won't embarrass myself trying to put it into words .
 
HD 600 compared to the W1000X, and many other headphones are indeed muddy, but enjoyable still. Since I got a new amp I do find them more balanced and better than ever though.
 
I agree with you that the SR325i (owned for 3 years, since sold) does not have good depth at all, everything is up front haha. I don't think the 2D is any good either, but with the right recordings, the synergy is insane. Particularly grunge (nirvana, hole) imo.
 
Also, I hope you are seeing the W1000X comparison as an AT to AT comparison and nothing else. They are the only AT headphone I know so it is what I am using as a reference, not in any way trying to say one is better than the other. I am expecting the A2000X to have all the traits of the W1000X, but a different sig and maybe a dif tone. Which is exactly why I am interested haha.
 
Lastly, the speed you speak of seems to be backed up by technical data too. The waterfall graph of the A2000X is very good for a dynamic headphone, from what I can gather.
 
Cheers,
 
Soko