[knopi]

I have good experience with recabled ESW9 so I would like to try AD2000 which could be exactly what I'm looking for. I always wanted them but sombody prefer AD900 over them so something tells me be careful. I dont heard AD900, they are very nice and for good money, AD900 are surely great cans in their price range but AD2000 should have been one of the best dynamic cans in the market so I hope AD2000 are noticible better.
I dont have a chance try them, I am not Japanese. This is certainly a lot of experienced people with A-T's and quality sources which is very important as well.

Thanks for any advice

 

[krmathis]

Well, what actually do you want to know?
I guess you have read the AD2000 threads out there, so you should be a bit more specific.

 

[uberburger101]

Firstly, how did you find the bass of the ESW9 and AD900?

 

[knopi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by krmathis /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, what actually do you want to know? I guess you have read the AD2000 threads out there, so you should be a bit more specific.

Yeah I read the AD2000 threads, hm it is not easy, I would like some compared. I am interesting if they are truly worth. I would like HD800 but dont want waste my money, there is a potencial risk that they dont have to be impressive as Grado for example on guitars but who know now HD800 not to sell yet (most likely will be different league). Universality is what I want for all genres.

Quote:

Originally Posted by uberburger101 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Firstly, how did you find the bass of the ESW9 and AD900?

I dont heard AD900. ESW9 are more on the dark side but I could not call them dark only in comparison. Bass lack airiness and their more for my taste probably becose of close construction, total it is not bad ESW9 surprised me in many ways, they are pleasent, clear, fun, musical so it is reason why I want try top open A-T's.

 

[scytheavatar]

The AD2000 sounds a lot more Gradoish than the AD900, soundstage is smaller (but still better than what some people here claim it is), there's more speed, more aggression, bass is a lot more visceral than the AD900. Resolution and transparency is significantly better than the AD900. To me it's the RS1 with far superior transparency, far superior resolution, superior soundstage and a more tamed and less impressive highs. I think most of the hate for the AD2000 comes from the fit issues you will have for them on the start, they clamp down on your head tightly, they are uncomfortable and you might find the mids of the AD2000 honky. But those problems disappear after some stretching. Some people will complain too about the AD2000 being nasally, being too colored but that's the ATH sound signature. I think it's hard to argue that the AD900 is less colored than the AD2000. The AD2000 is unmatched as the king of mid-centric, all rounded headphones with a pleasant, fun, musical sound.

To me the AD2000 is certainly superior to the ESW9, especially if you are looking for something brighter, more airy and don't want sacrificing some bass quantity. Whether or not the AD2000 is worth the huge cost depends on how deep your pockets are, some will argue that it's not worth the jump over the AD700/AD900, which isn't completely wrong. But you can argue too that the RS1 is not worth the jump over the SR225/SR325, the ESW10 is not worth the jump over the ESW9, the D7000 is not worth the jump over the D2000 etc. IMHO the AD2000 is worth the jump over the AD700/AD900, unless you value soundstage over everything else in your headphone.

 

[KT88]

IMO the AD900 is much better than the AD2000.

I couldn't notice the AD2000 to be any better in detail/resolution or anything else actually. I did find it to be one of the most uneven headphones I've ever heard, they just sound weird, so weird that I can't even explain it. I've had a chance to test both, and went for the AD900 (and the price difference for me wasn't really an issue).

 

[member1982]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KT88 /img/forum/go_quote.gif IMO the AD900 is much better than the AD2000. I couldn't notice the AD2000 to be any better in detail/resolution or anything else actually. I did find it to be one of the most uneven headphones I've ever heard, they just sound weird, so weird that I can't even explain it. I've had a chance to test both, and went for the AD900 (and the price difference for me wasn't really an issue).

Even with good source the AD2000 doesnt sound right??

 

[FourierMakesFunk]

The AD series are colored in sound so some will call them god sends, others will call them horribly off. The if you read what people say, the AD2000 in many ways out performs the AD900 in many ways, but it is just a different sounding can and might not be your cup of tea.

I myself like my AD1000s for some things (acoustic, some male vocals, orchestral), but I bought them at a huge discount.

 

[knopi]

Ok, thanks for very very similar opinions

I expected it.
There are some potential risks that I do like to avoid. After all, my ears have to be my working instruments so audition is only one reasonable solution which is impossible in this case.

I still beleive that AD2000 are one of the best dynamic headphones out there where depends on personal taste and source of course. Most afraid the comfort!

Misunderstand me wrong I love my MS-Pro they are unique, magic in some songs, speed and has very neutral presentation, with good source are rock! They arent without weaknesses for sure. Everyone want to find his dream headphones, this is a magic of this hobby, unfotunately no cheap.

 

[tensaichen]

When I had the AD2000, I enjoyed the sound a lot more than my AD700. Scytheavatar's impression are pretty close to what I remembered of it. Unfortunately, I have a huge head with glasses, and the clamping got to me. I couldn't keep it on my head for longer than 30 minutes each time, so I had to let it go to another person who would enjoy it more.

 

[donunus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by KT88 /img/forum/go_quote.gif IMO the AD900 is much better than the AD2000. I couldn't notice the AD2000 to be any better in detail/resolution or anything else actually. I did find it to be one of the most uneven headphones I've ever heard, they just sound weird, so weird that I can't even explain it. I've had a chance to test both, and went for the AD900 (and the price difference for me wasn't really an issue).

I also prefer the ad900 to the ad2000

 

[mbd2884]

Quote:

Originally Posted by FourierMakesFunk /img/forum/go_quote.gif The AD series are colored in sound so some will call them god sends, others will call them horribly off. The if you read what people say, the AD2000 in many ways out performs the AD900 in many ways, but it is just a different sounding can and might not be your cup of tea. I myself like my AD1000s for some things (acoustic, some male vocals, orchestral), but I bought them at a huge discount.

You can say that just about any headphone! All the so called Rock Grados are very colored. So are the DT770s and so on. Even my HD650s are colored bit bass heavy.

 

[kg21]

Quote:

Originally Posted by scytheavatar /img/forum/go_quote.gif The AD2000 sounds a lot more Gradoish than the AD900, soundstage is smaller (but still better than what some people here claim it is), there's more speed, more aggression, bass is a lot more visceral than the AD900. Resolution and transparency is significantly better than the AD900. To me it's the RS1 with far superior transparency, far superior resolution, superior soundstage and a more tamed and less impressive highs. I think most of the hate for the AD2000 comes from the fit issues you will have for them on the start, they clamp down on your head tightly, they are uncomfortable and you might find the mids of the AD2000 honky. But those problems disappear after some stretching. Some people will complain too about the AD2000 being nasally, being too colored but that's the ATH sound signature. I think it's hard to argue that the AD900 is less colored than the AD2000. The AD2000 is unmatched as the king of mid-centric, all rounded headphones with a pleasant, fun, musical sound. To me the AD2000 is certainly superior to the ESW9, especially if you are looking for something brighter, more airy and don't want sacrificing some bass quantity. Whether or not the AD2000 is worth the huge cost depends on how deep your pockets are, some will argue that it's not worth the jump over the AD700/AD900, which isn't completely wrong. But you can argue too that the RS1 is not worth the jump over the SR225/SR325, the ESW10 is not worth the jump over the ESW9, the D7000 is not worth the jump over the D2000 etc. IMHO the AD2000 is worth the jump over the AD700/AD900, unless you value soundstage over everything else in your headphone.

Agreed the ad2000 kind of feels like an rs-1 done right to me, even the comfort which is not on par with most other competitors (sennheiser, akg, beyerdynamic, etc.) is still better than any grado. The rs-1 was too bright with too much treble energy, the ad2000 is based around mids which I don't mind being forward. But they do share a lot of similarities.

 

[kool bubba ice]

These headphones needed to say at 500.00. 700.00 seems like a 'rip off' from reading posts.

 

[KT88]

Quote:

Originally Posted by member1982 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Even with good source the AD2000 doesnt sound right??

I've tried a few combination's with and without amps, just not my cup of tea (very much not my cup of tea).