[wcgryphon]

Hey guys, I don't want to start an argument over burn in, but did anyone else experience changes with burn in on their DT 1990?

Mine came stock with the balanced pads, and out of the box I thought they sounded a bit muddy, so I immediately changed to the analytical pads and was very satisfied with their sound. Today (probably 30 hours later), I was queuing up some playlists and thought the DT 1990 sounded boring with the analytical pads. I changed to balanced pads, went over some songs that sounded muddy before, and thought the DT 1990 retained most of the analytical pad cleanliness while sounding more lively. Needless to say, the balanced pads will stay on, and I'll reserve more judgment for later

I've only had mine for a little over a week, no idea how many hours it's been. Tried the balanced pads at the beginning, very noticeable that it got V shaped and lost some mids and went back to the A pads. Put the balanced back on a day or so ago to try them again and it was still very clear they sounded recessed in the vocals. Didn't take more than a few songs to know I wanted to switch back to As. The gain in the bass wasn't worth what I lost in the mids, and the A pads still had plenty of bass to be satisfying. I'll probably try it again in a couple of weeks and see if I feel differently.

Just my personal preference, I might lean towards mids. Been debating whether to get in on the massdrop HD6xx, I've always wanted to try the 600/650 series. Just hard to justify since I already have the DT1990 and they're fantastic with the A pads. It never feels like I'm "missing" anything. Though I do wonder what part could be "better"...FOMO is for real.

 

[dannyvstheworld]

I bought a 6XX simply because in every headphone review it was compared and I realized that I may need to have one to read those reviews..

 

[wcgryphon]

I bought a 6XX simply because in every headphone review it was compared and I realized that I may need to have one to read those reviews..

Too true...hard to gauge audio reviews because I've never heard any of their equipment as comparison.
"These headphones sound great on any of my three $1000+ amps and exotic tubes"
Well I would hope so... but can one of you bastards plug it into a Magni so I can know what the hell's going on?

 

[Hyp0xia]

Looking for an upgrade from my X2's, are these it? I absolutely love the fun nature of the x2's, tried a pair of he-500's recently and they sounded dull in comparison. The bass is what I love about the X2's, i've heard the 1990's have a good low end but does it match the X2's? Are they similar at all in signature? any other recommendations?

The DT 1990 Pro does not have the quantity of bass that the Fidelio X2 has, but it has much higher quality bass as in it makes X2 bass sound like mud in comparison. The DT 1990 Pro is a lot tighter and punchier. The DT 1990 Pro also does have a good amount of bass with the balanced pads, but no other open-back headphone I have yet heard has as much bass as the Fidelio X2. The AKG K7XX and Fostex T20RP Mk3 came close, but I'd argue the Fidelio X2 is a better headphone than either of those and the DT 1990 Pro puts them all to shame.

 

[Chris1975]

The DT 1990 Pro does not have the quantity of bass that the Fidelio X2 has, but it has much higher quality bass as in it makes X2 bass sound like mud in comparison. The DT 1990 Pro is a lot tighter and punchier. The DT 1990 Pro also does have a good amount of bass with the balanced pads, but no other open-back headphone I have yet heard has as much bass as the Fidelio X2. The AKG K7XX and Fostex T20RP Mk3 came close, but I'd argue the Fidelio X2 is a better headphone than either of those and the DT 1990 Pro puts them all to shame.

Yes, agree entirely. I have some bass heavy cans (including the V-moda Crossfade M-100), but the 1990s give a tight, detailed bass that the K7XXs and V-Modas cannot emulate. Plugged into my Chord Mojo, the 1990s give me such a rich, beautiful bass that can go throughout my whole body. So, not the same amount of bass as some, but a better quality bass.

 

[Merkurio]

The bass in the DT 1990 with B pads is outstanding, so deep and well extended all over the frequency range.

Even with the A pads, the bass is much better than anything I'd tried before.

The headphone is a freaking beast in almost all regards, it does everything so well (bass, mids, treble, dynamics and imaging) that I simply can't conceive something more all-rounded for almost any cost, maybe many of the über-tier flagships...

 

[imran27]

The bass in the DT 1990 with B pads is outstanding, so deep and well extended all over the frequency range.

Even with the A pads, the bass is much better than anything I'd tried before.

The headphone is a freaking beast in almost all regards, it does everything so well (bass, mids, treble, dynamics and imaging) that I simply can't conceive something more all-rounded for almost any cost, maybe many of the über-tier flagships...

Absolutely.

In fact I would always prefer DT 1990A over EL-8 or even LCD2 and Stax L300. I am yet to hear something that resolves as good as the 1990, maybe the T1.2 but I'm not really sure. Though, I still prefer 1990A over T1.2, T5p and any Stax/Audeze.

Maybe HiFiMan's could be an option, but haven't heard.

 

[Tim Le]

Absolutely.

In fact I would always prefer DT 1990A over EL-8 or even LCD2 and Stax L300. I am yet to hear something that resolves as good as the 1990, maybe the T1.2 but I'm not really sure. Though, I still prefer 1990A over T1.2, T5p and any Stax/Audeze.

Maybe HiFiMan's could be an option, but haven't heard.

I've had the hifiman he-560, and it's closer to the dt1990 with analytical pads. I haven't found an open back with the same resolution and bass at the dt1990 (balanced).

I'm sure there are some out there, but I'd imagine they cost much more

 

[GoodRevrnd]

How do these rate for soundstage/imaging department versus other heavy hitters?

 

[imran27]

How do these rate for soundstage/imaging department versus other heavy hitters?

Their soundstage is the most precise I've ever heard.

In quantity, even the HE400S has wider soundstage. But when it comes to instrument separation and placement, DT 1990 is damn good, on par or better than LCD2.

The reproduction of soundscape is very real and natural unlike many others that are quite holographic and odd shaped.

Good acoustic/orchestral recordings show off this strength pretty well.

 

[DavidA]

Their soundstage is the most precise I've ever heard.

In quantity, even the HE400S has wider soundstage. But when it comes to instrument separation and placement, DT 1990 is damn good, on par or better than LCD2.

The reproduction of soundscape is very real and natural unlike many others that are quite holographic and odd shaped.

Good acoustic/orchestral recordings show off this strength pretty well.

Have you heard a HD800 or T1? If so how does it compare in sound stage, instrument separation and tonal balance?

 

[imran27]

Have you heard a HD800 or T1? If so how does it compare in sound stage, instrument separation and tonal balance?

Haven't heard HD800, but heard T1.2

T1 is natural so is 1990, but T1 has more hefty in its mids. 1990 have very very slightly recessed mids which are a trade off for accuracy and precision.

Soundstage wise, T1 is pretty wide and still maintains good amount of precision of placement and has recently separation.

I prefer 1990, the quality of soundstage is better. More precise and has better separation between instruments. There is more air to say between instruments and the natural timbre is more felt with 1990 than T1.

T1 is the King when it comes to full bodied mids, male vocals, size of soundstage. It sort of leans towards musicality and 1990 is more towards point blank accuracy with narrower but better soundstage.

I use my 1990 for gaming and movies, I don't think T2 will be better. 1990 provides a damn precise placement of various people speaking, gun shots, cars moving and general ambience.

I think soundstage wise only better thing would be the HD800/800S which are supposedly as precise with even wider soundstage.

For the record, I'm using analytical pads

 

[DavidA]

@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.

 

[kman1211]

@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.

The Amiron is more different than the T1 than the DT 1990. The DT 1990 reminds me more of a corrected T1.2 tonally with more rolled off highs and punchier dynamics. The Amiron has more extended highs than the DT 1990, slightly more laid-back mids, bigger and softer bass, and a more fluid and spacious sound to it than the DT 1990. In terms of fatigue the Amiron and the DT 1990 are the two least fatiguing modern Beyers I've ever tried with the Amiron being a bit less fatiguing of the two. The Amiron doesn't quite have that vividness found in the DT 1990 or T1 though. Least fatiguing Beyers I heard sound wise are the DT 48/480 which are detail and imaging monsters, an acquired taste though and uncomfortable.

 

[kelly200269]

Have you heard a HD800 or T1? If so how does it compare in sound stage, instrument separation and tonal balance?

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.