I found the DT1770 there last year. placed my order on my way home from Berlin. Did the booth again suffer from the Yamaha surround demo right next to it?
Yamaha was quiet. Monster brought in a military transport truck with stupid bass speakers and literally flooded the entire hall. Luckily beyer was positioned tactically with its back towards the commotion. Listening booths had that acoustic foam stuff too. Audeze unfortunately bore the brunt of monster's antics.
Yamaha was quiet. Monster brought in a military transport truck with stupid bass speakers and literally flooded the entire hall. Luckily beyer was positioned tactically with its back towards the commotion. Listening booths had that acoustic foam stuff too. Audeze unfortunately bore the brunt of monster's antics.
Last year the truck was outside the buildings. Even out there it was very impressive and loud. Got me a coffee next to it and took some pictures of the truck.
I wonder if Tyll will get his hands on a pair of DT1990's ever. He might actually enjoy them. In fact, they would fit the wall of fame gap quite nicely if they're good enough. Although, then again, there has been SO many releases recently, he might have his hands all tied up in another review.
I have been comparing the two for some nights now and I have to answer NO to this.
1990 does not have the same sub-bas as 1770. When listening to a Marcus Miller recording or just jazz with acoustic bass the sub-bass clearly fills up more room in 1770 than it does in 1990. So in terms of sound the 1990 tends to be a bit brighter sounding than 1770.
Also for the treble it can at times be a bit sharper in 1990 to an extend where I have been fatigued with bad recordings - with high resolution and good recordings they SHINE though!
For me, I wish I could get the somewhat more forward midrange of 1990 in 1770. Then 1770 would be perfect for me. There is a better intimacy with a vocalist of saxofonist in 1990 and they are presented in front of the other musicians where they are brought more backwards in 1770.
Both headphones have the same kind of Beyerdynamic house-sound. So you should not choose between 1770 and 1990 because they have very different sound signatures. They are riding in the same cart in the mall but I think it is just a matter of one being closed and the other open. This has pros and cons and has smaller effect on the sound.
I have shared a few pictures on our danish forum:
http://hoved-fi.dk/viewtopic.php?f=11&p=95964&sid=0fc9dad915e3d7f01ca30e3890c7cf1e#p95964
I have been comparing the two for some nights now and I have to answer NO to this.
1990 does not have the same sub-bas as 1770. When listening to a Marcus Miller recording or just jazz with acoustic bass the sub-bass clearly fills up more room in 1770 than it does in 1990. So in terms of sound the 1990 tends to be a bit brighter sounding than 1770.
Also for the treble it can at times be a bit sharper in 1990 to an extend where I have been fatigued with bad recordings - with high resolution and good recordings they SHINE though!
For me, I wish I could get the somewhat more forward midrange of 1990 in 1770. Then 1770 would be perfect for me. There is a better intimacy with a vocalist of saxofonist in 1990 and they are presented in front of the other musicians where they are brought more backwards in 1770.
Both headphones have the same kind of Beyerdynamic house-sound. So you should not choose between 1770 and 1990 because they have very different sound signatures. They are riding in the same cart in the mall but I think it is just a matter of one being closed and the other open. This has pros and cons and has smaller effect on the sound.
I have shared a few pictures on our danish forum:
http://hoved-fi.dk/viewtopic.php?f=11&p=95964&sid=0fc9dad915e3d7f01ca30e3890c7cf1e#p95964
Not much wider than 1770. 1990 makes me feel like the music flows more freely and there is no pressure against my ears. Again probably an effect of the closed / open construction. I still have most of the music inside my head, with only some instruments ranging to a bit outside the headphones, with 1990. It might be different for others since heads and ears are different? I found the T70 to have better imaging even though it is closed. So 1990 is (on my head) no HD800-like sound-staging-monster.
EDIT: I hope it does not sound negative! I really like the DT-1990 and everything sounds great when listening with these! But comparing to DT-1770 the 1990 are not that much different regarding soundstage either.
For soundstage I made a nice test some time ago. Was in our Opera House listening to a Puccini opera. Wow what a stage, I thought. The I closed my eyes and concentrated on the soundstage again. Boom, the stage collapsed without the optical support by my eyes. It was like listening through a headphone with Dolby Headphone active. The noises came from different directions, but not from far away. On watching a movie with headphones and Dolby active, I get a very wide stage when watching the movie. Same effect, once I close my eyes, the stage is gone. Maybe it's only me, who knows?
Thank you for your review, rasmushorn. I love the Beyerdynamic sound, and I currently own the T70 250 Ohm. Do you think the DT-1990 will be an upgrade, or just a little different than the T70? I like closed cans for the bass, but I also like the bass accuracy of open headphones.
Thank you for your review, rasmushorn. I love the Beyerdynamic sound, and I currently own the T70 250 Ohm. Do you think the DT-1990 will be an upgrade, or just a little different than the T70? I like closed cans for the bass, but I also like the bass accuracy of open headphones.
I'm thinking, though, that at least for my my needs, the T1.1 may be better. It's currently only $20 more than the DT1990. What I really want is a cross between the original T1 (T1.1) and T1.2, but with the soundstage of the old T1. The ESP950 piques my interest, but there are no modern reviews with comparisons
I used to own the T1 (1st gen.), and sold it for the T70. Sacrilege, I know, but I like bass, and the T70 had the best closed-cup sound I've yet heard. I'm thinking about the DT-1990 because I liked my DT-990s so much. I like the T70 250 Ohm just a tad more than the DT-990 250 Ohm. Plus, the Dt-1990s look so gosh-darned coooool......
I have been comparing the two for some nights now and I have to answer NO to this.
1990 does not have the same sub-bas as 1770. When listening to a Marcus Miller recording or just jazz with acoustic bass the sub-bass clearly fills up more room in 1770 than it does in 1990. So in terms of sound the 1990 tends to be a bit brighter sounding than 1770.
Also for the treble it can at times be a bit sharper in 1990 to an extend where I have been fatigued with bad recordings - with high resolution and good recordings they SHINE though!
For me, I wish I could get the somewhat more forward midrange of 1990 in 1770. Then 1770 would be perfect for me. There is a better intimacy with a vocalist of saxofonist in 1990 and they are presented in front of the other musicians where they are brought more backwards in 1770.
Both headphones have the same kind of Beyerdynamic house-sound. So you should not choose between 1770 and 1990 because they have very different sound signatures. They are riding in the same cart in the mall but I think it is just a matter of one being closed and the other open. This has pros and cons and has smaller effect on the sound.
I have shared a few pictures on our danish forum:
http://hoved-fi.dk/viewtopic.php?f=11&p=95964&sid=0fc9dad915e3d7f01ca30e3890c7cf1e#p95964
So are these as euphoric and musical as the DT 1770? I own a pair of DT 1770s and find them to be the most musical pair of headphones I have owned, but would love that musicality in an open back.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
