Separate names with a comma.
The EQ curve should be completely under the 0dB line.
Because you get used to the "V" EQ fast.
Then flat sounds boring, until you get used to it again.
I have been using these for a while now with the B-pads and they are excellent. The A-pads really have no bass at all, however, so stick with the B pads.
I found that the B pads were giving me too much bass,
and seemed to shrink the soundstage unacceptably.
Switching back to the A pads opened up the sound
which became clearer as well. The amount of bass was
fine, and its quality improved > more taut, more visceral.
But I'm still not convinced by these headphones.
They're not quite as good as I thought they would
be, but I do think they provide a very good listen
overall. Also very comfortable, as many have noted.
I recently demoed the DT 1990 PRO and on the whole I liked it. It has the dynamic sound I like with the bass and treble energy. However, I was a little disappointed with the midrange. Is there an alternative I could try with a similar sound signature, but vocals presented a little forward of the music rather than in line with it? I would be willing to consider something with a little less bass if the vocals were more forward. Thanks in advance for any suggestions.
Yes. The T1.2.
In/around the same price, you might want to check out the Shure SRH1840.
Does anyone who have the both the DT1990's and T1.2's and prefer their T1.2's more? I have both but I really struggling on which one to keep?
Would you mind doing a quick comparison of both? Which is better for vocals? Strengths and weaknesses of both? Thanks.
Thanks. Aren't the mids still a bit scooped with the T1.2? I've read that it in a couple of reviews.
I have both.
The T1.2 is better for vocals, and has a bit of an upper mid-range ‘hump’. That makes it great for vocals music , such as jazz, and classical music.
The 1990’s still rule in the lower registers IMO. with a clear, balanced sound signature with a slight ‘U’ sound signature. OK, the mids are a bit more recessed that the T1.2, but for rock & pop, there is no better set of cans IMO. And the 1900’s do jazz and classical OK too.
If I had to choose between the two, I would keep the 1990’s. They’re more versatile, and better value. Yes, the T1.2 sound sublime with certain genres, but the 1990’s are the better all-rounders.
Hope this helps.
I'll have to agree with this. I did like the imaging and the refinement increase on the T1.2, but the DT 1990 was more versatile. Ended up sticking with the Amiron Home as it's just as much of an all-rounder as the DT 1990 but just a bit more mellow.
That's the way I'm leaning as well. The DT1990's just do so many things well and are outstanding for rock and metal music. But they also play other genres well too, which makes them a great all around headphone. The T1.2's are smoother, more musical, more balanced and have great bass. But the bass on the T1.2's is not as punchy or quick as the DT1990's. I also love the dynamic sound of the DT1990's and that makes them hard to part with.
Listening to the DT1990's with the Hugo 2 at moment. Wow, very nice.
Hi, I've had the DT1990 Pros for a few months now and I'm really amazed by them. Just a little history -- my favourite headphones of all time were their predecessor's predecessor, the DT931 (which was replaced by the DT990, as I was told by Beyer). The 1990s take what I recall of the DT931s and just improve on them in every way. For a few years after my DT931s gave out (they lasted nearly 15 years!), my go-to headphones were the Grado PS1000e and the GS1000e. To me, the 1990s (with the B pads) do everything the PS1000e do but with greater clarity and precision (the PS1000es just have a slightly wider soundstage). So, I've sold the Grados and have kept the 1990s.
I just wanted to report some success I've had with an aftermarket cable. When I was looking for a replacement for my DT931s, I briefly owned the AKG 702s. I couldn't get on with them (even tried three different amps -- the Burson HA160, the Solo UL Diamond, and one other I can't remember). I thought an aftermarket cable might help, and my local hifi shop swore by Mogami cables. So, I had a headphone cable made up with Mogami 2549, their most neutral mic cable (my hifi shop recommended these and the 2534, which has better noise rejection but a little treble attenuation). I sold the AKGs but found the Mogami cable this weekend in a box of old stuff, and it connected with the DT1990s perfectly (same mini XLR as the AKGs).
To me, the Mogami 2549 sharpens the imaging, widens the soundstage and evens out the frequency response subtly but discernibly over the stock cable. To me, it also brings out more harmonic detail. For instance, the guitars in GNR's 'You're crazy' on Lies sound more full, the trumpet that comes in on the chorus of Sujian Stevens's Casimir Pulaski Day sounds very real (along with Sujian's voice).
I haven't had much time to test it or A/B it with the stock cable any more than this but I thought it sounded very promising and wanted to share the results...I would guess also that for those who find the DT1990 too 'bright' the alternative Mogami 2534 quad cable might tame those highs a little bit while offer a 'blacker' background (that's the effect they have on my CD player when I use them as interconnects).