[NobleSix]

try the AKG K701/702s they are really good for classical music 

 

[drummerman]

Quote:

 
I'll bother replying so that people aren't misinformed about these graphs due to your failure to comprehend them. Seriously, RPGWiZaRD, this thread might benefit you quite a bit.
 
For everyone else, open the links in neighboring tabs. Don't move them and just cycle between them.
 
Here is a typical V-shape sounding headphone:
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/AudioTechnicaATHM50.pdf
 
Here is the HD-800 (not exactly neutral but far better than the M-50):
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SennheiserHD800.pdf 
See the difference?
 
Anyway, back on topic....OP, Denon2000 should be ok but I would highly recommend a more neutral headphone like the HD600 or FA-003.
 

They both emphazize/surpress differenct aspects of response. I think it would be difficult to call one more neutral than the other.
 

 

[zibra]

Im sorry but I dont want to go at war with cables and mods topic. I hear what I hear and all my equipment is DIY. What measurement gives you if you dont amp HP properly. NAD and AKG701 or HD600 would be strange idea for me. you listen to peaks, dips instead of search synergy for whole setup and enjoy music.
And yes, audio hobby IS based on subjective feelings.
 
Quote:

A very, very subjective comment indeed.
 
'Technically' and we are talking measurements here, they (Denons) are up there with the best dynamics, even before you start to 'cure' them with different pads and ... ahem ... cables.
 
regards

 

 

[purrin]

 
Quote:

They both emphazize/surpress differenct aspects of response. I think it would be difficult to call one more neutral than the other.
 

Those graphs are not reliable. The HD600 graph seems reasonably correct. The D2000 is definitely not neutral. Way too much bass and tizzy at top.
 

 

[Acix]

Quote:

 
Those graphs are not reliable. The HD600 graph seems reasonably correct. The D2000 is definitely not neutral. Way too much bass and tizzy at top.
 

From this graph looks like the D-2000 bass is great, what is concern me the most in the hole around 2.5 - 3Hz is too much musical information there to be lost.

 

[Ham Sandwich]

Quote:

 
Those graphs are not reliable. The HD600 graph seems reasonably correct. The D2000 is definitely not neutral. Way too much bass and tizzy at top.
 

A CSD of the D2000 would be interesting to see.  Might explain how/why they sound like they have more bass than the frequency graph shows.  I suspect there's some very slow decay of some of the bass frequencies or something else funny and slow going on down in the bass.
 
The D2000 is tizzy in the treble as well.  Tizzy and peaky in the cymbals.  I minimized the tizzyness by using an amp that sucks (AV123 x-head).  The sucky amp toned down the tizzy and peaky nature of the treble.  Another sucky amp that seems to tone down the treble is the HIFiMAN EF2.  Proper good amps, like say an Asgard, make the D2000 treble too peaky and tizzy for my taste.  The D2000 has some quirky sonic traits.  

 

[TMRaven]

I find the frequency graph pretty correct on the D2000's bass.  D2000 has less bass quantity than my white box m50, but it might seem like it has more than it actually does because it hits hard and goes real deep.  I think a lot of people aren't used to that supreme bass extension.  Their bass doesn't sound large in quantity at all, it just sounds deep.

 

[Silent One]

Quote:

Here you go:
 
http://www.head-fi.org/t/574226/educating-yourself-about-audio

Thanks for the illuminating hand...

 

[LFF]

Quote:

I find the frequency graph pretty correct on the D2000's bass.  D2000 has less bass quantity than my white box m50, but it might seem like it has more than it actually does because it hits hard and goes real deep.  I think a lot of people aren't used to that supreme bass extension.  Their bass doesn't sound large in quantity at all, it just sounds deep.

That's not supreme bass extension. That's supreme bloat.

 

[LFF]

Quote:

Thanks for the illuminating hand...

My pleasure!

 

[purrin]

I don't have D2000 or HD600 data. But the D7000 and HD650 are fairly close. The D7000 is actually much better behaved in the bass (compared to D2000) and HD600 much more linear in the highs. These are special plots I don't usually post.
 
 

As some people mentioned, there is a depression in the midrange and some odd treble behavior (both D2000 and D7000 have this - I've heard them both.)
 

 

 

[TMRaven]

Quote:

That's not supreme bass extension. That's supreme bloat.

No, it is not.

 

[LFF]

 
Quote:

No, it is not.

It's hard to judge your opinion when your profile isn't even filled out.
 
I have heard the D2000 many times and it has bloated bass and recessed mids which accentuate the bloated bass. The D2000 needs some serious modification to sound great and if you want your D2000 to sound great, I would be happy to recommend a great modder who tuned them for a friend of mine. Stock, they sound ok, bordering on just plain bad with certain material. There are headphones that cost $70 that sound better stock than the D2000.
 

 

[TMRaven]

Nah no thanks.  Any audiophile who recommends things that 'tighten' bass up just means they want to reduce the bass.  If I mod them, it'd be to replace the cable if anything, but I wouldn't pay a ridiculous amount of money just for an 'audiophile' cable.  It's a silly contribution.  If he can do it for say-- under 100usd, then I might be up for it.  

 

[LFF]

Quote:

Nah no thanks.  Any audiophile who recommends things that 'tighten' bass up just means they want to reduce the bass.  If I mod them, it'd be to replace the cable if anything, but I wouldn't pay a ridiculous amount of money just for an 'audiophile' cable.  It's a silly contribution.
 
 

I agree about the cable. I believe the big part of the mod done by another member was changing the cups, improving the acoustics inside the cup and adding a bit more space. The bass became tighter and more accurate and it extended well beyond 30Hz at normal volume level. Test tones indicated it could hit 23Hz at normal volume level. This isn't to say it had less bass...it had better extended bass and the mids were much more accurate and not recessed at all. There is a big difference between bloated bass and deep, low accurate bass. A quick example of such a headphone with deep, low accurate bass would be the HE-500.