[pigmode]

Thanks again PianoBlack, for the W100s.

Okay you denizens of W100 threads, don't attack me for my impressions below. It is based in a short audition, but I don't think it's main thrust would change much in the long run.

Quickly and succinctly, my initial impression was that of a sweet sense of tone, and a nice midrange. It brought out some of the best qualities of the AH! Njoe Tjoeb 4000 player and the Melos hybrid amp. As my primary phones are the AKG 501, I am not too critical of bass performance in terms of impact and extension, but the W100 does have a slightly flabby low frequency response. The 501's bass is much tighter.

I was struck by a fundamental difference in the sound of the W100 in comparison to most other headphones with which I am familiar. It seems all of the sound is squeezed in placed, with much less air between instruments than I am used too. This is exacerbated by an extremely forward midrange to mid-bass that comes at you in a most aggressive manner. I think this forward midrange/mid-bass tends to overpower the overall balance of the music. It is also the reason, I think, for this compressed sense of imaging that I mentioned. Its not a bad phone, but its not my cup of tea either. That said, I wish my AKG had those beautiful wooden cups.

 

[The Quality Guru]

Quote:

Originally posted by kelly QG Reverb is added to *almost all* recordings, even the high quality jazz ones that purists go for. The problem is that the musicians are typically recorded in a studio. Studios have padded walls designed specifically to absorb the sound. Otherwise all studio recordings would sound like they were recorded in a tiny room. So, yes, even someone like James Taylor needs it unless you were listening to a live recording--and even then, it's sometimes added. In earlier days of recording, they used to actually (not making this up) send the sound from the engineer's desk into a large auditorium like room where the sound played through a pair of speakers. A mic situated in front of the speakers would then record and send the "reverb-added" sound back to the engineer. Now to be fair, things have gotten a lot better since then and the high end processors they use in studios now can be really good without losing detail or dynamics -- but it's *REALLY* on a case by case basis. So it's not really James Taylor who is in question but which equipment the recording was mixed on and how good of a job the engineer did at *creating* a real space. Alternatively, Chesky (and some others) record literally 10th row center in a good venue -- with no added effects. If you still hear more reverb than you should on Chesky's demo disc, then you can begin to question things. Even then, I'd recommend having another headphone handy for comparison -- even if it's just a lowly Sony V6.

Perhaps I will get the Chesky CD so that I can determine whether or not the W100 is at fault. It's far cheaper than buying another headphone. I'm very seriously consdering ditching the W100 for the RS-1 or keeping the W100 and still getting the RS-1. This resonance/reverberation thing is driving me up the walls, nonetheless, though. Sometimes I think it's undeniably there, other times I think it is just the recording.

Kelly,
If you say that reverberation is added to many artists in the mastering process or what not - even artists that produce acoustic-type no-frills music like James Taylor's - then this really is in the W100's defense, isn't it? (Not that I'm defending the W100 though- I'm on the fence of getting rid of it and am not in the mood to defend it in most instances). If reverb is added to many acoustic studio-made recordings then I really need another good headphone and that Chesky disc. So, is it the recordings or the headphones at fault? Unfortunately, I fear it's the latter that is very likely to blame.

Quote:

I was struck by a fundamental difference in the sound of the W100 in comparison to most other headphones with which I am familiar. It seems all of the sound is squeezed in placed, with much less air between instruments than I am used too. This is exacerbated by an extremely forward midrange to mid-bass that comes at you in a most aggressive manner. I think this forward midrange/mid-bass tends to overpower the overall balance of the music. It is also the reason, I think, for this compressed sense of imaging that I mentioned.

Funny how interpretation of "airiness" and "space between instruments" is interpreted! Vertigo practically said that he loved the W100's instrument spacing, while Pigmode says that it's inferior. Well, whatever. Ears are so very different (and more likely it is the minds that compare what the ear is hearing to what the mind thinks "true sound" is).

 

[kelly]

QG
If you're seeking a recording with no reverb at all, I think you're not going to like the result if you ever find one. The Chesky discs (and particularly the demo disc) differ in that they use the natural reverb of the venue rather than adding artificial reverb in the studio. Some of the better classical recordings do also. Without the reverb you would have a very undefined soundfield and the room would sound flat and lfieless. The question is whether you think the W100 has "too much" reverb. I personally think the W100 can sound a bit echoey which is a trait it has in common with some of the Sony headphones and not something I care for. Others may like it because their equipment is not otherwise revealing of ambience--or at least that's my theory.

What pigmode and vertigo really seem to disagree on here is soundstage which is very interpretive on headphone (more due to psychological reasons than physical differences in people's ears I would think).

Seperate from that issue is, I think, a kind of a dichotomy between focus and texture. Too little focus and some listeners will hear that as better texture in short term listening sessions. The best equipment will tell you both exactly where the instrument is coming from *and* give you the air around that instrument. Again, I don't really think the W100 succeeds at this.

 

[wildmonkeysects]

Hey guys and gurrls:


This thread is an example of why I think Head-fi is such a wonderful place to (mostly) lurk...articulate, tolerant, humorous.
It is sooooo nice to see differing perspectives recognizing each other as relative rather than absolute, as in "...here is what I perceived with this setup..." instead of the angry "...you deaf idiot..." flame wars seen too often elsewhere online.

Gawd(ess) I hope it stays this way.

Will unlurk with something other than off-the-wall snippets when I have something relatively meaningful to add.

cheerio...

WMS

 

[acidtripwow]

Hmmm, maybe it's me but I don't hear that echo echo thing on my W100. I did hear it on the W2002 that I used to own. I really like mine even more now and use them on my portable system. They have more than enough bass for me especially if I run them off my MD where I can adjust the bass boost. I'm just waiting for my Meta42 to come back from the hospital. It died the other day but hopefully it will come back good as new. I like it with all types of music although it probably is better with vocal and acoustical stuff.

 

[pigmode]

I think I should qualify my impressions of the W100. For a while now I haven't listened to any headphones other than my AKG 501, and the AKG does throw notable wide soundstage. Still, I think there is something to the A-Ts very forward midrange that makes it sound different.

 

[millerdog]

here we go:
I've been auditioning these for two days.
On vocal tracks, they shine.
On rock tracks, it sounds like you're listening through a marshmellow.
I really really really wanted to like these cans.
If these were your first set of "high end" cans, they rock.
they just don't rock for me.
Don't get me wrong! These are nice sounding cans. Just depends on what you are listening to.
md

 

[Hirsch]

Quote:

Originally posted by millerdog here we go: I've been auditioning these for two days. On vocal tracks, they shine. On rock tracks, it sounds like you're listening through a marshmellow.

This is exactly what I heard at the DC meet...but not what I heard when I actually owned the W100...those were actually overbright and aggressive despite long break-in.

Confusing headphone

 

[edwinaviles]

Great review Vertigo. A great morning read while drinking my coffee at work!
I had a question to ask of you but you no longer have the headphones. It was a test for the reverb issue.
I was going to ask you to try listening to synth music as a test for the reverb effect on the w100s. Synth music, that doesn't contain samples, should not have any hall effect echoes. They may have reverbs added into the mix. However, some video game music that you and I listen to like the Final Fantasy music should be a good test. Early to mid works by Uematsu, I believe, are reverb free. Nothing by Mitsuda, though. He uses samples on practically all of his stuff.
If someone could try this out, assuming I am correct, this would be very helpful.

Edd

 

[The Quality Guru]

Quote:

On vocal tracks, they shine.

I definitely agree.

Quote:

On rock tracks, it sounds like you're listening through a marshmellow.

LOL! Also so true! For most rock, the sound is really bizarre. Great way of describing it!

 

[acidtripwow]

For those looking for a good closed headphone for Rock then my suggestions are Beyer 770 or the JVC HA-DX3. Both are great headphones for Rock.

 

[Dusty Chalk]

Just thought I'd pipe in here -- there's no way that headphones can introduce reverb. Just thought I'd mention that. They can exaggerate it (by compressing the "presence" range), recreate it accurately, make it audible, make it in audible, muffle it, whatever, but unless you're talking about something else entirely, you need a lot more room (like bathroom size, at least) to get reverb physically. Even electronically, it's bordering on ludicrous.

If you want stuff without reverb, I believe Pan sonic and some of the material on the Rather Interesting... label would qualify, but this is esoteric electronica, I don't expect too many of you to have access to both the W100's and those recordings.

I could create some music of my own that doesn't have reverb...I'll try that some time, perhaps this weekend.

 

[The Quality Guru]

Quote:

Originally posted by Dusty Chalk Just thought I'd pipe in here -- there's no way that headphones can introduce reverb. Just thought I'd mention that. They can exaggerate it (by compressing the "presence" range), recreate it accurately, make it audible, make it in audible, muffle it, whatever, but unless you're talking about something else entirely, you need a lot more room (like bathroom size, at least) to get reverb physically. Even electronically, it's bordering on ludicrous.

It seems your opinions on this differ from Hirsch's, who says that most closed headphones have chamber reverberation because there is nowhere for the sound to escape. You are talking about *chamber* reverberation, correct, not reverberation introduced by the transducer or electronics of the W100? I think it's probably possible for a headphone to create reverb, considering it is a closed space with a cavity in the earcups which could cause reverb. I don't know if you really need a bathroom-sized room to introduce reverb, because I would think the smaller the room (or in this case, the smaller room is the earcup) would be able to intruduce *more* reflections, not less.

Quote:

If you want stuff without reverb, I believe Pan sonic and some of the material on the Rather Interesting... label would qualify, but this is esoteric electronica, I don't expect too many of you to have access to both the W100's and those recordings.

I'd actually be interested in that.

Quote:

I could create some music of my own that doesn't have reverb...I'll try that some time, perhaps this weekend. [/B]

That would be quite cool.

 

[millerdog]

Interesting.
Wouldn't the R10s show some reverb, they being closed cans also?
I think Vertigo brought up a good point. He referenced the type of enclosure. The A9X being brighter than the W100s because of their aluminum chambers? The W100, being wood, softens some sounds?
Chamber design? Design and materials? Design, materials, driver type and ear padding?
Hmmmmmmm.......
I am not a critical listener like you guys. All I know is whether or not one phone sounds better to me than another. I prefer not to get microscopic about my evaluations.
I like to read the reviews, but would never subject myself to try to prove or disprove any observations.
Hell, they are off to Eric anyway!
aloha,
md

 

[PianoBlack]

*mutters* Excellent...excellent. My plan for world domination by W100 confusion has succeeded beyond my wildest dreams. And the world will bow down to me! ME!

Seriously, I completely appreciate the time you (Vertigo-1, pigmode and millerdog) have taken out of your busy schedule to sit down and listen to these headphones. I love reading your reviews--who needs a paperback when you have Suspense! Romance! The Bending of Minds! and even Disillusionment! in this very thread alone?!

Thank you again :
a) for simultaneously devastating and reaffirming my views**,
b) for being the swellest sports I've ever met, and
c) just for being you....awshucks.

Jobs well-done, fellas. Well-done.


yer delinkwent pal,
pianoblack

**[size=xx-small]which remains unbidden from my lips, undulating within my bosom, and unsatisfactory for publication.[/size]