[kelly200269]

@imran27, thanks for the quick reply, I've never heard the T1 gen2 but have the T1 gen1 and HD800 and have heard the HD800S. I've been looking at the DT-1990 and Amerion but still haven't decided on if they would be something that I don't have with my other headphones. I actually like my DT-990 premium since its a fun sound and with the BH Crack driving them its a nice never fatiguing sound.

I've just read your later(est) post. If you have the T1's, they're very similar to the T1.2's. The second generation just have a little more bass extension, that's all. In other respects, the T1/T1.2 sound pretty similar.
And if you also own the HD800's, then you're already able to compare and contrast.
I would imagine that your 990's have a very similar sound signature to the 1990's, with the later being more refined, especially in the upper regions. Otherwise, I would imagine that they share a very similar sound signature. I found this when I moved from 770's to 1770's. They both shared a very similar sound signature, with the 1770's exhibiting more refinement.

 

[DavidA]

@kman1211 , @kelly200269 thank you both for those detailed replies.
I guess if the 990's are similar to the 1990's might have to look more closely at the Amiron since it would be the most different from the T1, 800 and 990's.

 

[GoodRevrnd]

I own/use the T1.2, HD800 and 1990's.
They are very different in character and sound signature. And even though they're from the same 'family', the T1.2 and 1990's are like 'chalk & cheese'. Very different.
The HD800's have the widest soundstage of the lot, and are brilliant when listening to classical music. The other two aren't bad with classical either, but the Senny's are untouchable with respect to scale and soundstage. BUT they are quite weak/anaemic where bass is concerned. I don't like listening to anything other than classical with the Senny's, which make them a bit of a one-trick-pony IMO. However, nothing touches them for this use.
The T1.2 have a very pronounced midrange, and really take some getting used to. In fact, they can sound quite objectionable if you're not used to them. The soundstage isn't as wide as the HD800, but the tonality is similar. However, the pronounced mids make voices sound incredible, and they are my fist choice for jazz/vocal genres. They are better than the HD800's in this respect.
BUT the 1990's are simply incredible all-rounders. They do well in playing all types of music. The bass is deep and extended, and just as well-rounded (if not more so) than the T1.2. There is a slight 'V' signature to their sound, and the mids are a little recessed compared to the T1.2's, but the upper-registers are just as refined. They really rock-out with rock/pop especially, and really get your feet tapping! They are also acceptable playing classical too, with a very decent soundstage.
I'm lucky enough to have different cans for different genres, but if someone said to me that you can only keep one pair, it would have to be the 1990's. They're great.

Perfect. I was concerned the HD800 bass would be too anemic and it sounds like that's the case. To clarify, do you think T1.2s actually have a pronounced midrange, or is it mostly flat and people are just used to V shaped cans? I don't mind a touch of coloring to my cans if it's just a mild extension in bass--I just don't think I want anything beyond that.

@imran27, are you referring to the T1g1, T1g2, or both? I was unclear how T1g1s compared to 1990s, but got the impression from other comments around the web that T1g2s are quite colored compared to 1990s. You also commented they compare with the LCD2. My understanding is those cans have very good imaging but a pretty narrow soundstage. Is it more accurate to say that the 1990s excel at imaging but are fairly middle of the pack in soundstage?

 

[imran27]

Perfect. I was concerned the HD800 bass would be too anemic and it sounds like that's the case.

@imran27, are you referring to the T1g1, T1g2, or both? I was unclear how T1g1s compared to 1990s, but got the impression the T1g2s are quite colored compared to 1990s. You also commented they compare with the LCD2. My understanding is those cans have very good imaging but a pretty narrow soundstage. Is it more accurate to say that the 1990s excel at imaging but are fairly middle of the pack in soundstage?

I was referring to T1 gen2.

Yes, LCD2 have wider soundstage, but the airiness, separation is much better on 1990A. LCD2 is very sweet sounding, 1990A on the other hand is very transparent and accurate.

Yes, 1990 is awesome when it comes to imaging and airiness.

Also, when it comes to effortlessness of presentation, I find 1990 to be the best. It has an astounding combination of airiness and imaging.

You don't feel anything pressing onto your ears. With LCD2 you feel a lot of air being blown on to your eardrums, it sometimes hurts during bassy notes.

I listened to a lot of different headphones after buying 1990 to find if I regret buying them, heard LCD2/3, Stax L300, T1.2, EL-8 Ti, HE400S, T5p, Ultrasone Edition 15.

No regrets. It's just blissful…

 

[Merkurio]

OK, this is completely unexpected situation derivated of my last complains about the DT-1990's comfort, but I hope it will be interesting for someone who has both headphones.

I'd ordered a pair of HD 600 from Amazon in order to try the HD 6XX family's comfort (due my intention to try the HD 660 S, whenever they were available again), and recieved them today.

The box is great and I personally like the design of the HD 600 more than the HD 650, but the materials and build quality simply cannot match with the exuberating presentation of the Beyer's DT 1990, nothing to be surprised at this point.

The clamping force is a bit on the strong side (similar to the DT 1990, which have been my main concern), but thankfully the cup shape -along with the lighter weight- is simply more comfortable to my ears during the hours transcurred.

Now the *SHOCK* part, I was expected these sounding worse than the DT 1990 at the first heard (HD 6XX "veil", lack of dynamics, boring, and many other adjectives that I read along the time) but I simply haven't found that downgrade. On the opposite, I was suprised by discovered how good they sound! I expected close to none bass, but the quantity and quality are absolutely in the "check" box (a bit less, but similar to the DT 1990 with A pads), the mids are slightly more natural and engaging, and the relaxed yet-detailed treble is similar to the DT 1990 (altough not as energic). I notice the soundstage is very similar to the DT 1990, even with the slighly more forward mids!

I have the feel that I came looking for cooper and I find gold with these Senns...

Don't get me wrong, the DT-1990 is still a superb headphone with all the virtues we've been discused before, with better bass (more noticeable with the B pads), more dynamic and energic, plus it's astonishing well designed and crafted, but the HD 600 seems to be (for my surprise) in the same level at their own way, despite the price difference. Definitely another great all-rounder, and they sound terrific at low-listening levels!

Maybe have I found what I'm looking for? We'll see.

 

[Raketen]

(HD 6XX "veil", lack of dynamics, boring, and many other adjectives that I read along the time)

I think the 'veil' reputation is specific to the hd650 which didn't sound that veild to me the few times I heard (do remember seeing some comment about 'veil' being particular affliction of the early production runs, though a lot of recent owners still seem to recommend modding 650).

 

[bana]

Looking at getting the DT-1990 but only if I can run it balanced with a Pentaconn 4.4mm connector into my Sony 1Z.
Any suggestions for cables?

 

[cardeli22]

Looking at getting the DT-1990 but only if I can run it balanced with a Pentaconn 4.4mm connector into my Sony 1Z.
Any suggestions for cables?

I don't think so as it only feeds into one side of the headphones via mini xlr like the AKG headphones. You would probably need to mod the headphone to have it be balanced.

 

[lugnut]

Looking at getting the DT-1990 but only if I can run it balanced with a Pentaconn 4.4mm connector into my Sony 1Z.
Any suggestions for cables?

Nope, would have to have someone install a mini xlr connector on the the other side. This is why I bought the Beyer Amiron because it has dual input connectors. Bought balanced cable and am very happy with the Amiron.

 

[bana]

Nope, would have to have someone install a mini xlr connector on the the other side. This is why I bought the Beyer Amiron because it has dual input connectors. Bought balanced cable and am very happy with the Amiron.

Ok, good to know, so I would have to get the Amiron or look at something else like the HD660s.

There should be standards for connections on headphones, life would be so much easier!

 

[d1spatch]

I am curious about the 660S and the DT1990. I use Yamaha MT220s right now with Sonarworks plugin to mix and master, and my mixes translate pretty well. I am looking to add an open back headphone though, and these two are the most intriguing to me.

Perhaps the HD600/650 would be good choices as well? If it were Jazz/Rock/Pop I'd go with the 600s, but I also do a lot of EDM so I need good bass response and articulation.

I feel like the tighter bass response of the 660s would be helpful, but it is hard for me to say without having heard the 600 or 650.

What are people's thoughts?

 

[DavidA]

I am curious about the 660S and the DT1990. I use Yamaha MT220s right now with Sonarworks plugin to mix and master, and my mixes translate pretty well. I am looking to add an open back headphone though, and these two are the most intriguing to me.

Perhaps the HD600/650 would be good choices as well? If it were Jazz/Rock/Pop I'd go with the 600s, but I also do a lot of EDM so I need good bass response and articulation.

I feel like the tighter bass response of the 660s would be helpful, but it is hard for me to say without having heard the 600 or 650.

What are people's thoughts?

might also want to consider the Amiron, EL-8, HE400i and SR225e if looking for a single headphone to do it all. While I don't think there is a single headphone that can do it all some do come closer than others. For me the headphone that does most thing right is a Ypsilon R1 custom build because it sound great, easy to drive, very light weight, and you can customize it to your liking.

 

[d1spatch]

might also want to consider the Amiron, EL-8, HE400i and SR225e if looking for a single headphone to do it all. While I don't think there is a single headphone that can do it all some do come closer than others. For me the headphone that does most thing right is a Ypsilon R1 custom build because it sound great, easy to drive, very light weight, and you can customize it to your liking.

Can't say I've heard too many people recommend mixing and mastering on those headphones you mentioned other than maybe the Grados.

 

[DavidA]

Can't say I've heard too many people recommend mixing and mastering on those headphones you mentioned other than maybe the Grados.

I don't do any mixing and mastering but I've seen a few friends use MDR-7506, HD600, HD650, LCD-X, and a few other Sony, Audio Technica and Grado SR series.

 

[d1spatch]

I recently purchased the DT1990 Pro's without having had an opportunity to demo them (couldn't find them locally). Given the fairly consistent comments here and elsewhere I was pretty confident that they'd be a good fit. I really like the Beyerdynamic 'house sound' in general and have owned a few sets over the years (DT 250 /250ohm, DT 990 Pro, DT 880 Pro, and, more recently, DT 880 Premium /600ohm). Each has its limiting factors but by and large all provided fantastic sound at a very reasonable price.

Though the DT 250's don't have much common ground here I must say that I just plain love this headphone. Very neutral and unflattering without sounding cold.

I'll limit my comments to the 1990's 'B pads' as most of my listening was with these. All listening was done with the 1990's plugged into a Schiit Jotunheim amp.

The DT 990 Pro's mids were always a bit more recessed than I'd like and could be a bit sibilant at times but they're fun to listen through and hand a nice soundstage. The DT 880 Pro's exhibited sibilance similar to the 990 Pro's but they sounded more balanced - mids not quite as recessed and a bit less bass. The soundstage was less spacious but still enjoyable. The DT 880 Premiums were, for my liking, the best of three. I still preferred the more spacious soundstage of the 990 Pro's but the treble was a bit smoother than both the 990 Pro's and the 880 Pro's. I'm not treble sensitive and so the 8K treble peak has never been a problem for me.

As users began to post comments on their DT 1990 Pro's I could tell that these were going to appeal to me. What I gleaned from most comments was that the 1990 Pro's provided a similar soundstage to the 990 Pro's and a more balanced frequency response than the 880 Pro's/Premium's with better dynamics and a less pronounced treble peak. These seemed by description to be everything I wanted out of the 880 Premium's. My initial impressions of the 1990's is that they a far more than a 'better DT 880'. The DT 1990's are clear and articulate, and resolve an amazing level of detail.

I can say with reasonable certainty that the DT 1990 Pro's and the Sennheiser HD650's are the only headphones I will ever need. Want - now that's another matter altogether.

What would you say the differences are between the HD650 and the DT1990s? Both of those two I am trying to decide between for a mixing headphone.