[RockStar2005]

I was hoping when connected to USB the direct drive system would transform them into a great sounding wired headphone. But to my ears there was little improvement to the sound over Bluetooth. Even the volume levels stayed the same. Maybe there's something in the settings I could change to bring out more sound when connected to USB.

Ok. I've always heard a bump in both quality AND volume when going wired, but yeah, maybe the fact that they're 100% digital has something to do with the volume not changing? It's just great to see that we're getting closer and closer to making Bluetooth sound AS good as wired. I would prefer to be wireless, but I would NOT enjoy it as long as I feel there is a NOTICEABLE difference in quality. On speakers at a party or picnic, BT is just fine. From the distance you're at plus all the outside noise, the difference isn't discernible IMO. But with headphones on (esp closed-back), and the isolation they bring, it's a whole different story. The EQ has to change too, which tells you right there they have to be approached differently. I have the custom EQ I use (per my review) on my 99s, but when I'm in my car, I just change the EQ on Poweramp to the "Rock" preset as that opens the sound up a bit more. But listening to "Rock" on the 99s can be painful. It is more bassy and a bit too sharp at times. Though I DID base my 99's custom EQ that I created off of "Rock" (as a starting point). lol

 

[Slim1970]

Ok. I've always heard a bump in both quality AND volume when going wired, but yeah, maybe the fact that they're 100% digital has something to do with the volume not changing? It's just great to see that we're getting closer and closer to making Bluetooth sound AS good as wired. I would prefer to be wireless, but I would NOT enjoy it as long as I feel there is a NOTICEABLE difference in quality. On speakers at a party or picnic, BT is just fine. From the distance you're at plus all the outside noise, the difference isn't discernible IMO. But with headphones on (esp closed-back), and the isolation they bring, it's a whole different story. The EQ has to change too, which tells you right there they have to be approached differently. I have the custom EQ I use (per my review) on my 99s, but when I'm in my car, I just change the EQ on Poweramp to the "Rock" preset as that opens the sound up a bit more. But listening to "Rock" on the 99s can be painful. It is more bassy and a bit too sharp at times. Though I DID base my 99's custom EQ that I created off of "Rock" (as a starting point). lol

Being able to adapt to the surrounding sounds like what the AKG N90's do over Bluetooth. They sound like fascinating headphones to say the least. But that technology comes at a cost. The DSR9BT's aren't capable of this but I am starting to appreciate the digital drive system incorporated in them. I expected a difference in sound over USB but that really didn't happen until I adjusted the settings. Before that they sounded the same, which tells me the digital drive technology is working as described.

The Meze 99's interest me a lot. But I have the B&W P9 Signatures that work phenomenally as a portable can. I'm currently breaking in my wooden Denon AH-D7200's and they are sounding better and better. Both are EQ friendly btw. In the end, we are talking about Bluetooth and the DSR9BT's with their digital drive system ARE getting us closer to wired sound.

 

[RockStar2005]

Being able to adapt to the surrounding sounds like what the AKG N90's do over Bluetooth. They sound like fascinating headphones to say the least. But that technology comes at a cost. The DSR9BT's aren't capable of this but I am starting to appreciate the digital drive system incorporated in them. I expected a difference in sound over USB but that really didn't happen until I adjusted the settings. Before that they sounded the same, which tells me the digital drive technology is working as described.

The Meze 99's interest me a lot. But I have the B&W P9 Signatures that work phenomenally as a portable can. I'm currently breaking in my wooden Denon AH-D7200's and they are sounding better and better. Both are EQ friendly btw. In the end, we are talking about Bluetooth and the DSR9BT's with their digital drive system ARE getting us closer to wired sound.

Yeah........they are QUITE expensive! lol

Yes, it makes sense b/c the USB cable is all digital, and the headphone itself is too. I've played with settings before aside from EQ. The results vary. On my smartphones in the past I would use like surround sound and upscaling options etc and they'd sound good. But then when I got better headphones and/or better DAPs/smartphones I noticed those option actually make the sound worse. Even like with the beta version of Poweramp I'm using it has a Hi-Res output option. I stopped using it cuz it was SUPER buggy, but I don't miss it b/c I realized that all it was really doing was increasing the volume. I noticed NO apparent increase in quality. I don't know if I had done what you did on your PC (increasing the resolution setting) if I would've felt that it made better instead of just louder. But whatever. It's all subjective. lol I am happy that they have been performing so well. If I ever bought them though I'd feel like I wasn't getting my money's worth cuz I'd be too tempted to use the USB cable lol, and then I'd feel like I could just get better wired ones perhaps for around the same price. The REAL question though is even when wired can the ATs match or beat the 99s? lol

Yeah I've read great things about the P9 Signature 'phones. They are VERY well-rated, and beautiful too! Yeah, if I had the P9s, I'd prob not go for the 99s either. I mean, I guess there is a CHANCE you'll still like the 99s better, but that's a pretty big gap in price ($309 vs. $899) to be expecting THOSE kind of results. And the sound signatures don't sound too far apart either. Both I've read or can say (99s) are a bit on the warm side, but still provide plenty of detail. I guess that would be yet ANOTHER interesting comparison review to read! lol

I owned the P7s for a little while and they were really nice and I loved the design, but I felt they were a bit too bassy and also lacked the soundstage of my old AKG K550 headphones and esp of the 99s. I loved how the ear pads came on & off magnetically though (I believe the P9s are the same way). Very nice design feature once again!

Oh NICE on the Denons! Let me know how that goes. They look really nice too. I credit Denon for indirectly getting me interested in the 99s actually. The first headphones I saw with wooden ear cups were one of the recent Denon headphones. I thought they were really nice looking! Then I read that wood has better acoustic properties than the other materials used on headphones (metal, plastic, even leather I think?)...........and now here we are. lol I also own a Denon receiver as part of my surround sound system. Yeah, at this point I will not go back to using anything but custom EQs. Esp when you're spending hundred of dollars, I think you really have to be willing to calibrate to get your money's worth.

 

[RockStar2005]

Got a FINAL response from AT on these headphones. Sounds like it IS a digital driver that converts to analog to make sound at the last moment, so it's not a DAC since DACs aren't found in drivers as far as I know. Pretty amazing technology if you ask me. (Note: AT's response is in italics.)

Spoiler

Hi ......,



Please see below for additional information on your request.



Yes it is complex. From what I understood from your initial e-mail, the Dnote chip is able to produce sound (at the last moment) from the signal it receives. But IF an analog conversion is still taking place, it's done so only once vs. the traditional (DAC) way via Bluetooth where a DAC is needed to make sound. Even in a "DAC" situation, the signal is only actually converted once as far as I know when talking Bluetooth. The signal bypasses the DAC in the source device b/c at that point there is no need to convert it to analog yet as BT is digital. The signal reaches the speakers and headphones and then the DAC there converts it. Unless I'm wrong, and there are more than one conversions or chances for distortion to be introduced into the signal that I'm not aware of??


There is no traditional DAC in this headphone, the Dnote chipset processes the unmodified digital signal from the source into density controlled pulses which energizes the voice coil creating the analog signal from the driver. The “conversion” takes place at the driver.


Also, you said "The digital pulses generated by the chipset directly excite the voice coil(s) of the driver to move the diaphragm forward and backward to create the sound waves heard by the user. " This actually doesn't sound like a conversion is even happening at all, but more like a new way of producing sound that doesn't involve analog. So I guess the REAL question is, can sound be produced without analog involvement?? It sounds like you're saying yes, but I guess your tech dept would know for sure.


A traditional DAC is not used, so the signal is not in an analog form until you hear the output from the driver. That is why we say the conversion takes place at the driver. You are correct in recognizing that this is a different way of producing sound through the Dnote technology of Trigence.



Thanks,



Kurt

Hope this helps clear any misconceptions about how these headphones work.

 

[SRKRAM]

They say that there are four voice coils. It's probably got one coil which handles the longest excursions and is driven by the most significant bits, and the other coils are modulated by the lesser significant bits, each literally modulating successively finer details on top. The actual D-A conversion is likely delta-sigma, and saying that the D-A conversion happens in the driver is really just marketing-speak.

I wonder if it increases the moving mass of the driver noticeably, which would be a bad thing.

 

[RockStar2005]

They say that there are four voice coils. It's probably got one coil which handles the longest excursions and is driven by the most significant bits, and the other coils are modulated by the lesser significant bits, each literally modulating successively finer details on top. The actual D-A conversion is likely delta-sigma, and saying that the D-A conversion happens in the driver is really just marketing-speak.

I wonder if it increases the moving mass of the driver noticeably, which would be a bad thing.

Hi Mark,

So you're sayin' it DOESN'T happen there? Then how is the (analog) sound produced then?

Not sure on that. Hopefully not if it's bad.

 

[LajostheHun]

Sound that we can "hear" is not analog but acoustic, transducers that produce the acoustic output needs electronic input which is often interchanged with "analog". The technology behind this tech has been explained earlier in this thread I believe, or one of it's companion ones.

 

[RockStar2005]

Sound that we can "hear" is not analog but acoustic, transducers that produce the acoustic output needs electronic input which is often interchanged with "analog". The technology behind this tech has been explained earlier in this thread I believe, or one of it's companion ones.

Oh ok. I guess that makes more sense than analog.

It definitely wasn't in this thread. But either way, I guess AT really accomplished something extraordinary with this new technology. Perhaps one day I'll check it out.............

 

[SRKRAM]

There are couple of very informative videos on the technology on the Trigence website:
https://www.trigence.com/videos

Here's a Trigence patent:
https://encrypted.google.com/patents/EP2187657A1?cl=und

Earlier I posted a link to a Carion video. There's quite a nice description on their website. It also uses Trigent Dnote technology:
http://www.clarion.com/gb/en/products-personal/fds-system/technology/

 

[SRKRAM]

Hi Mark,

So you're sayin' it DOESN'T happen there? Then how is the (analog) sound produced then?

Not sure on that. Hopefully not if it's bad.

Most DACs are delta-sigma and output a stream of 1s and 0s, and modulate the density according to the digital input value. There's usually a lowpass reconstruction filter which, simplistically, smooths the output into an analogue waveform. You could say that this filtering is where the digital to analogue conversion actually happens. Trigence say that this filtering is done by the voice coil of the speaker, so they say that this is where the D-A conversion happens.

Using very high oversampling rates can eliminate the need for analogue filters, as Chord do, so with the same logic you could say that the speaker if performing the D-A conversion there as well. Trigence have some patents around this. I haven't read them, but perhaps they're able to do away with the analogue filter at lower oversampling rates when they use multiple voice coils.

 

[York Tan]

Does anyone know how the DSR9BT compares to the SR9? Would any of these be the successor to the MSR7?

 

[Unknown364]

Hello
Im debating between the DSR7BT , DSR9BT,
I only heared the MSR7 before from AT family line.
How do the 7bt and the 9bt compare? I like very clean sound.
It will be used with high res flac files and some mediocre mp3 also, most of the time via usb on the pc and some bluetooth also.
Is the 9bt worth the extra money? how do their sound really compare?

Thank you

 

[RockStar2005]

New review on the DSR9BT. I particularly liked that the author felt they sounded better than more expensive headphones like the B&W P9!

 

[Slim1970]

New review on the DSR9BT. I particularly liked that the author felt they sounded better than more expensive headphones like the B&W P9!

Having both and listening to them I'm going to have to disagree with this author's assessment of the DSR9BT's being better than the B&W P9's and the Denon D7200's for that matter. The B&W P9's are much more dynamic and livelier sounding than the DSR9BT's. The bass is fuller and has more impact while maintaining high frequency clarity. Listening to the P9's is like being in a concert because the music is so defined. The D7200's aren't as lively as the P9's but they still present music better than the DSR9BT's. The best analogy I can give is if the musicians were on a stage the P9's are in the first row while the DSR9BT's are a few rows back. They make you want to just pick up your gear and head to stage. They are SO close to getting a high five from the artist.

The DSR9BT's are very musical headphones especially for a wireless. When compared to other wireless headphones they may be the best. They make my B&O H9's sound a bit congested by comparison. The B&W P7W's is a little closer fight. The DSR9BT's aren't as bass heavy as the P7W's so they make listening to music more enjoyable I feel. But I do like how the P7W's add body to the music and that's the one thing I would change about the DSR9BT's. I wish that were as dynamic sounding as the P7W's. I like their bass definition and texture, the mids are smooth and the highs are very detail. But if they could take those sound qualities and move them forward a bit then I think they could compete with some of the best wired headphones.

 

[bidn]

They're both available from Audiocubes. Pricey but who knows they might be worth it.

I'll wait for more feedback and esp. comparisons with the Momentums, the B&W P7 and the Beoplay H9, which are considered to be the best sounding wireless cans out there.

FYI, I have posted here my comparative impressions of the P7 Wireless and of the ATH-DSR9BT, replying to Martynet who had opened a special thread "Audio Technica B&W P7 Wireless - VS - Audio-Technica ATH-DSR9BT":

https://www.head-fi.org/threads/b-w-p7-wireless-vs-audio-technica-ath-dsr9bt.843557/#post-13673495