[Mhog55]

I have the AT upgraded cable (balanced). Better than stock; I think the bass is a bit tighter and the highs a little smoother, and the construction and materials are far better, but I haven't compared the upgraded cable to the stock cable for any real report; the stock cable is so thin that I worried about it breaking or kinking. The silver-colored connectors on the upgraded cable are not plastic - they're metal. There is an insulator at the A2DC ends (red or black). My braided Impact Audio Cable set for my desktop amp/DAC was $148 (he redid the XLR connector for me, changing it to a Neutrik, and it's on the way back to me now, so I can't post a photo).

The info on the HDC114A/1.2 cables (list $159):

• 1.2 m (3.9') straight Y-type cable
• Audiophile headphone cable compatible with ATH-SR9, ATH-ES770H and ATH-ESW990H headphones
• Cloth-wrapped detachable headphone cable with high-purity copper wire (6N-OFC+ OFC) for precise signal transmission
• Terminated in a balanced 4.4 mm (1/8") gold-plated stereo output mini-plug, L-shaped, and left/right A2DC (Audio Designed Detachable Coaxial) input connectors

There just aren't many "audiophile" A2DC connectors out there, so the cable makers aren't all able or willing to stock parts for cables for AT cans (most of what you see online are for earbuds).

That must be some space age metal material

 

[elnero]

Arctic Cables list the Audio Technica WP900/AWAS/AWTK specifically in their headphone connector dropdown. I was looking at getting a 4.4mm balanced ION for the NightOwl but might do it for the WP900's instead.

 

[Mhog55]

Arctic Cables list the Audio Technica WP900/AWAS/AWTK specifically in their headphone connector dropdown. I was looking at getting a 4.4mm balanced ION for the NightOwl but might do it for the WP900's instead.

I was going to mention Arctic as well. I had one of their cables for my NightOwl, but I sold it with the headphones.

 

[Mhog55]

Have spent about 90 minutes with my new cans. Not ready to leave my impressions just yet. I'd like to ask, for those who own both the wp900 and Beyerdynamic t5p 2nd a few questions. Firstly, does the T5p 2nd have greater bass impact? How does the low end compare? Is it faster.. tighter..hit harder? Secondly, how do the mids compare? Are they more present.. forward.. energetic? Not too concerned about the treble, mostly want to know how the bass and mids contrast.

 

[feverfive]

My buddy just left, and I finally unboxed my WP900. ***WEIRD sensation wearing these; literally first time I've had headphones on my head in almost 6 years (been strictly IEM)***

I got so used to how IEM present sound... I missed this. Hopefully, these can stay in use for the long haul. I tend to get tired of weight & clamping force (not an issue with this set) and sweaty ears. They sure are pretty.

Not sure if burn-in will do much to these (literally am on my first song right now), but I'll still run them in for a good 100 hours, short listening sessions during that as well, before drawing concrete conclusions. Initial impressions though are that I like these.

 

[Ojsinnerz]

Just bought these from a local store at a good discount. I haven't had an Audio Technica headphone since the ESW10JPN from a decade ago, so this should be fun!

 

[feverfive]

Heh, isn't this just an unbranded AT "upgrade" cable? Found at the auction site, asking price: $55USD, about $104 less than the AT branded version at Amazon; same wire specs, I believe.

 

[Mhog55]

Heh, isn't this just an unbranded AT "upgrade" cable? Found at the auction site, asking price: $55USD, about $104 less than the AT branded version at Amazon; same wire specs, I believe.

They look incredibly similar, but I'm not sure if the construction and materials used are the same. Earmax makes some pretty cheap stuff.

 

[Nostoi]

Have spent about 90 minutes with my new cans. Not ready to leave my impressions just yet. I'd like to ask, for those who own both the wp900 and Beyerdynamic t5p 2nd a few questions. Firstly, does the T5p 2nd have greater bass impact? How does the low end compare? Is it faster.. tighter..hit harder? Secondly, how do the mids compare? Are they more present.. forward.. energetic? Not too concerned about the treble, mostly want to know how the bass and mids contrast.

I'd say the T5p has a stronger mid-bass accent but to my ears, bass on WP900 hits harder and is much faster. Much tighter, too. The bass on the T5p is more like a diffused warmth rather than a snappy attack. Mids are more forward on T5p, somewhat more textured. You're undecided on the WP900? Did you try some KNAC era metal on them?

 

[Mhog55]

I'd say the T5p has a stronger mid-bass accent but to my ears, bass on WP900 hits harder and is much faster. Much tighter, too. The bass on the T5p is more like a diffused warmth rather than a snappy attack. Mids are more forward on T5p, somewhat more textured. You're undecided on the WP900? Did you try some KNAC era metal on them?

I just finished another quick 2 hour listen. I was going to provide my thoughts tomorrow, after I spend a few more hours with them. I'm hearing 2 things that are bugging me. 1st being the mids.. A little too pushed back for my liking. More soft and romantic than alive and energetic. Not terrible though. The other is the bass. What I'm hearing is quite flabby, bordering on sloppy. I don't find it quick as you mentioned. Bass on the Msr7b has more speed and tightness to my ears. I got more attack from the low end on the Msr7b, more decay on the WP900. Does this improve throughout burn in? Anyways, I'll write more tomorrow, but I'm beginning to wonder if the Beyerdynamic would have been a better fit for me. Wish I could get a better read on it. Thanks for the reply bud.

 

[Nostoi]

I just finished another quick 2 hour listen. I was going to provide my thoughts tomorrow, after I spend a few more hours with them. I'm hearing 2 things that are bugging me. 1st being the mids.. A little too pushed back for my liking. More soft and romantic than alive and energetic. Not terrible though. The other is the bass. What I'm hearing is quite flabby, bordering on sloppy. I don't find it quick as you mentioned. Bass on the Msr7b has more speed and tightness to my ears. I got more attack from the low end on the Msr7b, more decay on the WP900. Does this improve throughout burn in? Anyways, I'll write more tomorrow, but I'm beginning to wonder if the Beyerdynamic would have been a better fit for me. Wish I could get a better read on it. Thanks for the reply bud.

OK, that's interesting. @Malevolent may give you a different reading of these two headphones, especially in the bass region. I would say the T5p has more detailed and more forward mids, which may be more to your liking (the 2000Ti is also more mid focused). I also find the T5P somewhat more relaxed and smoother. As I hear it, the WP900 has the more energetic signature.

That's curious you hear the bass as flabby. The MSR7B has a much leaner profile, which gives less space for the bass to extend itself, which could give the impression of being tighter. Sloppy and flabby are not the words that come to my mind, though, but we hear things differently. I'm listening to "Speed Demon" by Michael Jackson as I write this, and I hear the bass as punchy and tight. What's your source for the WP900?

Keen to hear more of your impressions.

 

[Mhog55]

OK, that's interesting. @Malevolent may give you a different reading of these two headphones, especially in the bass region. I would say the T5p has more detailed and more forward mids, which may be more to your liking (the 2000Ti is also more mid focused). I also find the T5P somewhat more relaxed and smoother.

That's curious you hear the bass as flabby. The MSR7B has a much leaner profile, which gives less space for the bass to extend itself, which could give the impression of being tighter. Sloppy and flabby are not the words that come to my mind, though, but we hear things differently. I'm listening to "Speed Demon" by Michael Jackson as I write this, and I hear the bass as punchy and tight. What's your source for the WP900?

Keen to hear more of your impressions.

Hiby R5 - compared to my favorite current headphone (58X), I am definitely hearing a looser low end that somewhat lingers in comparison. I know the 58X is a cheap can, but it's the best I've owned for the music we listen to. It really suits my sonic preferences. Essentially, I'd like to find something similar but better all around - a few steps up the ladder. I was hoping this would be the case following suit to the Msr7b, but they really are quite different.

 

[Nostoi]

Hiby R5 - compared to my favorite current headphone (58X), I am definitely hearing a looser low end that somewhat lingers in comparison. I know the 58X is a cheap can, but it's the best I've owned for the music we listen to. It really suits my sonic preferences. Essentially, I'd like to find something similar but better all around - a few steps up the ladder. I was hoping this would be the case following suit to the Msr7b, but they really are quite different.

Yes, WP900 and MSR7B certainly differ in terms of signature. If you can demo T5P and 2000Ti, might be worthwhile.

 

[Mhog55]

Yes, WP900 and MSR7B certainly differ in terms of signature. If you can demo T5P and 2000Ti, might be worthwhile.

I wish I could man, as well as the Aeon 2.

 

[Malevolent]

I just finished another quick 2 hour listen. I was going to provide my thoughts tomorrow, after I spend a few more hours with them. I'm hearing 2 things that are bugging me. 1st being the mids.. A little too pushed back for my liking. More soft and romantic than alive and energetic. Not terrible though. The other is the bass. What I'm hearing is quite flabby, bordering on sloppy. I don't find it quick as you mentioned. Bass on the Msr7b has more speed and tightness to my ears. I got more attack from the low end on the Msr7b, more decay on the WP900. Does this improve throughout burn in? Anyways, I'll write more tomorrow, but I'm beginning to wonder if the Beyerdynamic would have been a better fit for me. Wish I could get a better read on it. Thanks for the reply bud.

I wish I could man, as well as the Aeon 2.

I've just completed a nearly 2-hour listening session between these 3 headphones, so here we go...

Beyerdynamic T5p (2nd Generation)

• They have a strong mid-bass presence, and decent sub-bass rumble. However, decay is slower on the T5p (2nd Gen), so beats aren't very snappy; they tend to linger.
• The midrange is not as scooped as on the WP900, so vocals are a bit more forward. There is more gravitas in the vocals, and male voices have some authority, which is, sadly, lacking on the Audio-Technica headphone.
• Treble is crisp and sharp on the T5p (2nd Gen); however, it tends to get a little strident. This is the only headphone out of the 3 that often veered into sibilant territory.
• There is a diffuse warmth throughout its signature. The T5p (2nd Gen) has good detail retrieval capabilities - about on par with the WP900. However, it is not immediately apparent, thanks to this persistent bloom.
• Imaging is a forte of the Beyerdynamic headphone. Its soundstage is even more impressive, beating the other 2 headphones in width and depth.

Audio-Technica WP900

• The mid-bass on the WP900 is almost as sizeable as the hump on the T5p (2nd Generation). However, it has greater sub-bass rumble, along with the best texture in the lows of the 3 headphones. Transients are fast, with rapid beats and quick decay. It has good impact, the best of the lot, IMO.
• Unfortunately, the WP900 has the weakest midrange in this trio. The "v" on the Audio-Technica isn't so deep, but when switching between the 3 headphones, the lack of vocal prowess is evident, especially with male vocals.
• The treble section is very defined, clear and prominent; it produces a lot of sizzle without appearing harsh. Together with its pronounced bass, the potent highs combine to forge a highly energetic signature.
• The WP900 fared pretty well with resolution and detail retrieval. At first glance, they sounded ostensibly better than the T5p (2nd Gen) in this aspect; this was proven to be false, once you paid greater attention to the Beyerdynamic.
• Imaging was precise, but the WP900 had a very intimate stage, relative to the AEON 2 Closed and the T5p (2nd Gen).

Dan Clark Audio AEON 2 Closed

• They had the "weakest" bass of the 3. However, I would refrain from calling them "bass light"; the entire low-end region had a presence that was a little north of neutral. The beats were almost as snappy as the ones on the WP900, with very good layering and texture.
• Owing to its balanced signature, the AEON 2 Closed has the most forward mids amongst the 3 headphones; it is also the best at rendering some very compelling and authoritative vocals. There was a lot of texture and nuance in the way the Dan Clark headphone portrayed voices.
• Highs on the AEON 2 Closed were the least prominent in this comparison; it was not muted or smooth in any way, but it just didn't dominate the sound as much as the other 2 headphones did.
• The AEON 2 Closed was excellent at resolving detail; you could identify the finer grains in your music a lot easier.
• The soundstage reproduction on the AEON 2 Closed is in-between the T5p (2nd Gen) and the WP900. It wasn't very wide or deep, but it didn't sound too intimate either.

If you need a TLDR, in general, I think the best headphone amongst the 3 is the AEON 2 Closed. The most fun and energetic is the WP900, and that's the one I'd take over the other 2 for my genre-of-choice, EDM. Sadly, the T5p (2nd Gen) is showing its age in this shootout; the excessive warmth masks a lot of detail, and it isn't as "fun" for dance music either.