[genpatton7]

The 880'is not a warm sounding headphone. Very bass-light as was just mentioned, so perhaps a different use of the word warn than most of us here might use. The 1990 is a big step up from the 880 in every way other than physical comfort. Not that it is uncofortable, but heavier than the 880 and tighter.

Probably, by warmer sounding, I mean the 880 is more veiled and has a smoother presentation as compared to the 1990 (A pads). The 880 is not a warm headphone by itself. Unquestionably, the 1990 has more body than the 880 in the lows & mids.

 

[proto]

New review up: http://www.techradar.com/reviews/beyerdynamic-dt-1990-pro
Matches my findings pretty well 

 

[Wesbound]

  New review up: http://www.techradar.com/reviews/beyerdynamic-dt-1990-pro
Matches my findings pretty well 

 
The reviewer talks about recessed mids....what do you guys (1990 owner) think about that? 

 

[proto]

   
The reviewer talks about recessed mids....what do you guys (1990 owner) think about that? 

Well, compared to my Sennheiser HD600, DT 1990's mid are not as aggressive (but the difference is actually quite subtle). Then again, the mids are what HD600 is mostly about, so that shouldn't come as a surprise. But I think the comment about recessed mids has more to do with DT 1990 having more body to them because of the stronger base and the air that the extended treble offers. Sure, the curve might be slightly V shaped with balanced pads, but because of the incredible clarity and separation of DT 1990, the mids are still in pleasant balance with everything else. Overall I like their presentation even with vocals and have been listening to all flavors of them from Diana Krall to Steve Earle with happy face. After listening to them the HD600 sounds just boring and dare I say it, veiled.

 

[Wesbound]

Thanks for the reply Proto.

 

[HiFiGuy528]

  New review up: http://www.techradar.com/reviews/beyerdynamic-dt-1990-pro
Matches my findings pretty well 

 
Wow! the intrusive ad hangs my web browser. Too bad... I would have read the review.
 
DT1990 travels well too! Used it on my holiday in Spain.
 

 

[Subhakar]

   
Wow! the intrusive ad hangs my web browser. Too bad... I would have read the review.
 
DT1990 travels well too! Used it on my holiday in Spain.
 
 

 
Tried it with any tube amps at home?

 

[Mad Max]

  Can the 1990 pads be used on the 1770? If yes what do they do to the sound of the 1770?
Thanks!

 
Certainly.  Probably hurt the sound, just like putting DT880 or DT990 velours on a DT770.
 
 
 
 

  How can dt880 be warm and thin at the same time?

 
These things are not mutually exclusive.

 

[Slaphead]

Wow! the intrusive ad hangs my web browser. Too bad... I would have read the review.

DT1990 travels well too! Used it on my holiday in Spain.

Nice one, but really, wouldn't the DT1770 have been a better option in that kind of environment?

 

[Greggo]

And now Mr Guttenberg has weighed in on these as well:
 
https://www.cnet.com/news/perfectionists-beyerdynamic-dt1990-pro-headphones/
 
I wonder if it is just how we all hear a bit different or perhaps some amplifier interactions, but I hear the Nighthawk as being the slightly darker headphone and the DT1990 Pro as being a tad brighter. At some point I am going to compare them more closely as I have been a big fan and advocate of the Nighthawk as well. Just going from memory, I do remember feeling that the Nighthawk had a wider stage and perhaps a better sense of depth and placement/specificity, but then yielding to the 1990 when it came to all out resolution, fine detail and dynamics. I am too lazy to check, but I think I commented earlier in this thread or perhaps in the Nighthawk thread that I thought absolute perfection for me would be right in between the two headphones from the upper mids on up, but staying with the 1990's signature and performance from the mids on down. I just love the punchiness and clean upper bass / lower mids I get on the 1990.
 
It will be a few more weeks before I have a serious amp on my desk again, but I am still really pleased with my purchase of the DT1990 Pro. Between the quality, packaging/accessories, comfort and of course the performance... these are most definitely in the running for the most satisfying headphone purchase of have ever made, from initial unboxing to first listen to burn in and long sessions. They have met and/or exceeded every expectation I had for them. It is oh so nice when that happens

 

[kman1211]

  And now Mr Guttenberg has weighed in on these as well:
 
https://www.cnet.com/news/perfectionists-beyerdynamic-dt1990-pro-headphones/
 
I wonder if it is just how we all hear a bit different or perhaps some amplifier interactions, but I hear the Nighthawk as being the slightly darker headphone and the DT1990 Pro as being a tad brighter.
 
It will be a few more weeks before I have a serious amp on my desk again, but I am still really pleased with my purchase of the DT1990 Pro. Between the quality, packaging/accessories, comfort and of course the performance... these are most definitely in the running for the most satisfying headphone purchase of have ever made, from initial unboxing to first listen to burn in and long sessions. They have met and/or exceeded every expectation I had for them. It is oh so nice when that happens

In regards to the DT 1990 being darker than the Hawks, it depends on the system. I have found the DT 1990 can sound darker than the Hawks on some system but also brighter on others. I do find the sound of the Beyers less fatiguing than the Hawks. I've been happy with the DT 1990 since I got them too, fully satisfying me, it replaced the Nighthawks for me to be honest. I actually got a Valhalla 2 specifically for the DT 1990, definitely a nice upgrade over my other amps for the DT 1990.

 

[Dephezz]

  I have found the DT 1990 can sound darker than the Hawks on some system but also brighter on others. I do find the sound of the Beyers less fatiguing than the Hawks. I've been happy with the DT 1990 since I got them too, fully satisfying me, it replaced the Nighthawks for me to be honest. I actually got a Valhalla 2 specifically for the DT 1990, definitely a nice upgrade over my other amps for the DT 1990.

So, do u still use dt1770 or did u forget them like a bad dream with all its plastic resonances after purchasing the 1990? 
Lots of reviews about 1990's overall superiority over 1770. I feel deceived by Beyers

 . A lil bit...

 

[Greggo]

  In regards to the DT 1990 being darker than the Hawks, it depends on the system. I have found the DT 1990 can sound darker than the Hawks on some system but also brighter on others. I do find the sound of the Beyers less fatiguing than the Hawks. I've been happy with the DT 1990 since I got them too, fully satisfying me, it replaced the Nighthawks for me to be honest. I actually got a Valhalla 2 specifically for the DT 1990, definitely a nice upgrade over my other amps for the DT 1990.

 
I have been a very big nighthawk fan, but I am leaning in the same direction... My poor nighthawks are at risk of going on the sale forum as I eventually work my way back down to 3 headphones for home listening, one for the office (MDR-1a) and one for the road and points in between (PM-3). Right now my primary 3 for home listening are the ATH-R70x, Nighthawk and 1990, but once I save up for a higher end headphone the 1990 will probably stay and the Nighthawk will probably go. The R70x gets a free pass because it has earned the anti-headphone spot, the one where performance counts, but not as much as light weight and comfort and just a different feeling on the head so that when I get a bit fatigued and I just want something with nice tone and balance and otherwise less critical listening I can have a break. This role used to be the K7XX, but I like the R70x much much better.
 
With the DT1990 I remember comparing with the Nighthawks while listening to some pop music and the synthesized bell sounds (Hall & Oates, Out of Touch) and vocal reverb and symbols were all much more clearly evident and yet still in good balance IMHO on the 1990. It was weird, and I think someone else has posted this as well, but I also felt like the NIghthawks dug just a little bit deeper in the bass but did not have the punchiness, tightness and clean transition into upper bass and lower mids that the 1990 had. And even though the Nighthawks are lighter than the 1990, I like how the 1990 sits on my head just a little bit better. Overall, it is making a very strong case to stick around for a while.
 
Oh, and this is very unfair because I am working from longer term memory here, and also biased by the general fit and comfort factor for me, but I would definitely take the 1990 over the HD650/600 for either home listening or studio listening any day, but the value prop of the HD6XX is another story of course, that seems impossible to beat at the moment.

 

[kman1211]

   
I have been a very big nighthawk fan, but I am leaning in the same direction... My poor nighthawks are at risk of going on the sale forum as I eventually work my way back down to 3 headphones for home listening, one for the office (MDR-1a) and one for the road and points in between (PM-3). Right now my primary 3 for home listening are the ATH-R70x, Nighthawk and 1990, but once I save up for a higher end headphone the 1990 will probably stay and the Nighthawk will probably go. The R70x gets a free pass because it has earned the anti-headphone spot, the one where performance counts, but not as much as light weight and comfort and just a different feeling on the head so that when I get a bit fatigued and I just want something with nice tone and balance and otherwise less critical listening I can have a break. This role used to be the K7XX, but I like the R70x much much better.
 
With the DT1990 I remember comparing with the Nighthawks while listening to some pop music and the synthesized bell sounds (Hall & Oates, Out of Touch) and vocal reverb and symbols were all much more clearly evident and yet still in good balance IMHO on the 1990. It was weird, and I think someone else has posted this as well, but I also felt like the NIghthawks dug just a little bit deeper in the bass but did not have the punchiness, tightness and clean transition into upper bass and lower mids that the 1990 had. And even though the Nighthawks are lighter than the 1990, I like how the 1990 sits on my head just a little bit better. Overall, it is making a very strong case to stick around for a while.
 
Oh, and this is very unfair because I am working from longer term memory here, and also biased by the general fit and comfort factor for me, but I would definitely take the 1990 over the HD650/600 for either home listening or studio listening any day, but the value prop of the HD6XX is another story of course, that seems impossible to beat at the moment.

I'm honestly debating what to do long term. I really want three main headphones I would focus on, not sure what they would be. The DT 1990 is one of them. I was disappointed with the K7XX personally especially after comparing them to the K712, which for the longest time many people said they were the same, they aren't which finally seems to be coming to light. The K712 is noticeably better. While I rate the K7XX below the HD 600/650, I would not rate the K712 below the Senns, in fact I would rate them equal if not slightly above when well amped. Have yet to hear the R70X. Haven't heard many AT's though.
 
The Nighthawks do sound great but honestly it's like something is missing compared to the DT 1990, it's something about the DT 1990's punchiness and tighter bass plus sweeter mids. Comfort is a little better on the Nighthawks for me, but both are great for me. Problem is the Hawks and Beyers compete for head time some reason. Not sure what directly I should go for complementary headphones to the Beyers. I haven't had a good complimentary pair of headphones since I had both the Nighthawks and the K712 which I found worked very well together as compliments. 
 
I would take the DT 1990 over the Senns myself. Though may grab a HD 600/650/6XX down the road, but likely will go a different route.

 

[kman1211]

  So, do u still use dt1770 or did u forget them like a bad dream with all its plastic resonances after purchasing the 1990? 
Lots of reviews about 1990's overall superiority over 1770. I feel deceived by Beyers

 . A lil bit...

I do like the DT 1770's but my pair has been riddled with quality control issues as mine is from the bad batch, so it's largely not used because of that. The DT 1770 and it's issues of my particular pair is why I got the DT 1990 because I liked the sound of the DT 1770 so much. Though I sometimes wish I waited a bit longer to see how the Amiron compares to them, but didn't know about the Amiron when I got the DT 1990.