[Excalibruh]

Have mine paired with the SMSL M6 and loving it, legit makes me emotional listening to it.

 

[Scutey]

Felikis audio & Alo audio = great sounding for the Dt1990 pro!

Nice set up, I'm guessing the amp is an Espressivo?.

 

[tracyca]

Nice set up, I'm guessing the amp is an Espressivo?.

Yes indeed, the Espressivo mk2. I love this amp.

 

[Scutey]

Yes indeed, the Espressivo mk2. I love this amp.

I've not heard this amp myself but as it's a Feliks Audio amp it's bound to be good!, I have an Elise and when used with the DT 1990 the sound is wonderful!.

 

[Darksoul]

OK, I'm pretty much set. After much perusing, I've decided to get the Lake People AMP RS 08 to feed these bad boys. It has everything I'm looking for, standard and balanced outputs, an OBSCENE amount of power and an alleged natural signature. I'm looking to make this amp my last power supply purchase in a while, maybe in ever. I'm hoping I can feed even the most power hungry planar magnetic headphones with this, along with giving my DT-1990 their do in power. Now the inevitable question: has anyone here used the RS 08 with the DT-1990?

 

[ferraro25]

I'm thinking about getting a DT-1990 Pro, as my two current favorite headphones have problems that I think the DT-1990 might improve upon, while retaining the characteristics I like from both of them. I realize that my two favorite headphones are both closed and that the DT-1990 is an open headphone. I have many open headphones, such as: Focal Elear (lacks treble, not worth $1000); Sennheiser HD-650 (boring, slight lack of treble); AKG K701 (lacks bass, boring), Audeze LCD-2 pre-fazor (doesn't have treble [on most recordings], weighs too much), Stax SRS-2050 II Basic System (broken headband, not portable, and has the flattest "frontal imaging" ever).

My problems with the Beyerdynamic DT-770 Pro 80 Ohm are:

1. They get muddy/congested very easily when a lot is going on. This is a very big issue with the headphone for me.
2. Bass could be a bit tighter and less "one-note."

The things I like about the DT-770:

1. Very comfortable!
2. I like the bass-midrange-treble balance, and although I recognize that people who know what they are talking about don't consider it to really be "neutral," it sounds that way to me (+ added bass response).
3. Bass extension

My problems with the AudioTechnica ATH-M50x are:

1. Bass is a bit too much on the thumpy side - it can sound "cheap" to me.
2. Wearing comfort. The ridges of my ears hurt after using the headphone for about an hour.
3. The midrange is a bit thin - very noticeable on voices.
4. Very small, flat headstage.

Things I like about the ATH-M50x:

1. Very fun, involving sound (and I am perfectly fine with a lot of treble - I tend to hate headphones that have "tamed" treble).
2. They do not seem to get congested (but this is probably due in part to the thin midrange).
3. Bass extension

I tend to use the M50x more than the DT-770, as I love the "fun" and significantly less congested (when a lot is going on) sound.

My DAC/amp is the FiiO E10K. I will not be upgrading this. I have two desktop amps that I don't use: a Woo Audio tube amp and a FiiO desktop amp that has crossfeed that cannot be disabled.

So, would the DT-1990 mostly improve upon the problems and be a mixture of the things I like from each headphone? Is the main issue with the DT-1990 the exaggerated sibilance? Thanks.

 

[Sekka]

I'm thinking about getting a DT-1990 Pro, as my two current favorite headphones have problems that I think the DT-1990 might improve upon, while retaining the characteristics I like from both of them. I realize that my two favorite headphones are both closed and that the DT-1990 is an open headphone. I have many open headphones, such as: Focal Elear (lacks treble, not worth $1000); Sennheiser HD-650 (boring, slight lack of treble); AKG K701 (lacks bass, boring), Audeze LCD-2 pre-fazor (doesn't have treble [on most recordings], weighs too much), Stax SRS-2050 II Basic System (broken headband, not portable, and has the flattest "frontal imaging" ever).

My problems with the Beyerdynamic DT-770 Pro 80 Ohm are:

1. They get muddy/congested very easily when a lot is going on. This is a very big issue with the headphone for me.
2. Bass could be a bit tighter and less "one-note."

The things I like about the DT-770:

1. Very comfortable!
2. I like the bass-midrange-treble balance, and although I recognize that people who know what they are talking about don't consider it to really be "neutral," it sounds that way to me (+ added bass response).
3. Bass extension

My problems with the AudioTechnica ATH-M50x are:

1. Bass is a bit too much on the thumpy side - it can sound "cheap" to me.
2. Wearing comfort. The ridges of my ears hurt after using the headphone for about an hour.
3. The midrange is a bit thin - very noticeable on voices.
4. Very small, flat headstage.

Things I like about the ATH-M50x:

1. Very fun, involving sound (and I am perfectly fine with a lot of treble - I tend to hate headphones that have "tamed" treble).
2. They do not seem to get congested (but this is probably due in part to the thin midrange).
3. Bass extension

I tend to use the M50x more than the DT-770, as I love the "fun" and significantly less congested (when a lot is going on) sound.

My DAC/amp is the FiiO E10K. I will not be upgrading this. I have two desktop amps that I don't use: a Woo Audio tube amp and a FiiO desktop amp that has crossfeed that cannot be disabled.

So, would the DT-1990 mostly improve upon the problems and be a mixture of the things I like from each headphone? Is the main issue with the DT-1990 the exaggerated sibilance? Thanks.

It does sound like you would like the DT1990, I would say they did get muddy/congested (based on my definition, which would be a lack of clear separation in complex passages) easily like the DT770, and yes they exaggerate sibilance (which may or may not be below your point of sensitivity) because of the large treble spike, but other than that they seem to meet most of your preferences. I'll say if you found the DT770 and M50x treble to be fine, you would be fine with the DT1990's treble. The bass was exceptional in all aspects and the signature was definitely on the fun side, comfort good as well. Midrange was decent with analytical pads, slightly recessed with the balanced but less so than both the M50x and DT770. Also, even if there might be some congestion, I'd say there is less than the M50x and I'm surprised you didn't find them to have an issue with that.

 

[megabigeye]

I'm thinking about getting a DT-1990 Pro, as my two current favorite headphones have problems that I think the DT-1990 might improve upon, while retaining the characteristics I like from both of them. I realize that my two favorite headphones are both closed and that the DT-1990 is an open headphone. I have many open headphones, such as: Focal Elear (lacks treble, not worth $1000); Sennheiser HD-650 (boring, slight lack of treble); AKG K701 (lacks bass, boring), Audeze LCD-2 pre-fazor (doesn't have treble [on most recordings], weighs too much), Stax SRS-2050 II Basic System (broken headband, not portable, and has the flattest "frontal imaging" ever).

My problems with the Beyerdynamic DT-770 Pro 80 Ohm are:

1. They get muddy/congested very easily when a lot is going on. This is a very big issue with the headphone for me.
2. Bass could be a bit tighter and less "one-note."

The things I like about the DT-770:

1. Very comfortable!
2. I like the bass-midrange-treble balance, and although I recognize that people who know what they are talking about don't consider it to really be "neutral," it sounds that way to me (+ added bass response).
3. Bass extension

My problems with the AudioTechnica ATH-M50x are:

1. Bass is a bit too much on the thumpy side - it can sound "cheap" to me.
2. Wearing comfort. The ridges of my ears hurt after using the headphone for about an hour.
3. The midrange is a bit thin - very noticeable on voices.
4. Very small, flat headstage.

Things I like about the ATH-M50x:

1. Very fun, involving sound (and I am perfectly fine with a lot of treble - I tend to hate headphones that have "tamed" treble).
2. They do not seem to get congested (but this is probably due in part to the thin midrange).
3. Bass extension

I tend to use the M50x more than the DT-770, as I love the "fun" and significantly less congested (when a lot is going on) sound.

My DAC/amp is the FiiO E10K. I will not be upgrading this. I have two desktop amps that I don't use: a Woo Audio tube amp and a FiiO desktop amp that has crossfeed that cannot be disabled.

So, would the DT-1990 mostly improve upon the problems and be a mixture of the things I like from each headphone? Is the main issue with the DT-1990 the exaggerated sibilance? Thanks.

I think you might like the DT 1990. I was going to go point by point and list my thoughts on each, but a) I've not heard most of the headphones you've listed, and b) I got bored. Let it suffice to say that I think the DT 1990 will check almost all of your boxes. The only exceptions might be the headstage and "congestion" (depending on how you're defining that), which is not very large, though it does open up some (significantly?) with my Bottlehead Quickie+Quicksand setup. I'd disagree with Sekka, above, in that I've never found the mids to be the least bit muddy. If you like the mids on the HD 650, you might find the DT 1990's mids to be slightly withdrawn.
My main worries are actually your preferred amp/DAC, though again, I've not actually heard it. The DT 1990 are pretty resolving and unforgiving and like (though don't require) a fair bit of power-- I'd be afraid that the E10K might not drive them satisfactorily and that the DT 1990 might show the amp's faults and weaknesses.

 

[Sekka]

I think you might like the DT 1990. I was going to go point by point and list my thoughts on each, but a) I've not heard most of the headphones you've listed, and b) I got bored. Let it suffice to say that I think the DT 1990 will check almost all of your boxes. The only exceptions might be the headstage and "congestion" (depending on how you're defining that), which is not very large, though it does open up some (significantly?) with my Bottlehead Quickie+Quicksand setup. I'd disagree with Sekka, above, in that I've never found the mids to be the least bit muddy. If you like the mids on the HD 650, you might find the DT 1990's mids to be slightly withdrawn.
My main worries are actually your preferred amp/DAC, though again, I've not actually heard it. The DT 1990 are pretty resolving and unforgiving and like (though don't require) a fair bit of power-- I'd be afraid that the E10K might not drive them satisfactorily and that the DT 1990 might show the amp's faults and weaknesses.

I didn't say the midrange was muddy. I followed up my thoughts on the midrange with the comparison to the M50, but I wasn't referring to the midrange specifically. The soundstage and slight bass emphasis lead to some congestion in complex passages, but I wouldn't say the midrange is related to that. That should have followed my initial statement for it to be more clear what I was referring to.

 

[megabigeye]

I didn't say the midrange was muddy. I followed up my thoughts on the midrange with the comparison to the M50, but I wasn't referring to the midrange specifically. The soundstage and slight bass emphasis lead to some congestion in complex passages, but I wouldn't say the midrange is related to that. That should have followed my initial statement for it to be more clear what I was referring to.

Ah. Okay. I must've misread both your and ferraro25's posts. Sometimes I'm illiterate.

Sorry for the misunderstanding!

 

[Me x3]

I'm thinking about getting a DT-1990 Pro, as my two current favorite headphones have problems that I think the DT-1990 might improve upon, while retaining the characteristics I like from both of them. I realize that my two favorite headphones are both closed and that the DT-1990 is an open headphone. I have many open headphones, such as: Focal Elear (lacks treble, not worth $1000); Sennheiser HD-650 (boring, slight lack of treble); AKG K701 (lacks bass, boring), Audeze LCD-2 pre-fazor (doesn't have treble [on most recordings], weighs too much), Stax SRS-2050 II Basic System (broken headband, not portable, and has the flattest "frontal imaging" ever).

DT1990PRO might work, altough you can just get the original AKG K712PRO earpads for 1/5 of DT1990PRO's price and transform your AKG K701 into an "AKG K711". These pads make the sound warmer/fuller along with a slighly more incisive treble.

 

[LiranV]

I did a test where I've generated a 40Hz tone with Audacity. Played it in increasing volume, and at some point (pretty high volume) I started getting a rattle (like popping sounds) but only in the right cup.
Anyone else noticed this problem? Should I contact Beyer?

 

[lrsdrn]

Tubes do give the dt1990 pro a more full bass, depending on the tubes. I have telefunken 6922 tubes set up and it sounds great.

Sounds like it could very well be dirt on the driver - they are quite sensitive.

 

[Darksoul]

I'm in trouble. I'm loving my DT-1990, but lately I've taken an interest on the Audeze LCD-X, I really don't need another a full sized headphone...but I kind of want a planar magnetic on my collection. I've looked all over the place and I haven't seen too many comparison between the DT-1990 and the LCD-X. Can anyone share some insights on the LDX-X when compared with the DT-1990.

 

[Fetou]

I'm in trouble. I'm loving my DT-1990, but lately I've taken an interest on the Audeze LCD-X, I really don't need another a full sized headphone...but I kind of want a planar magnetic on my collection. I've looked all over the place and I haven't seen too many comparison between the DT-1990 and the LCD-X. Can anyone share some insights on the LDX-X when compared with the DT-1990.

I have the DT1990 and will be receiving the LCD-X on Monday. I can give impressions to the best of my (limited) ability.