Beyerdynamic DT 1990 PRO - Beyer's open-back mastering headphone
Nov 26, 2019 at 10:46 AM Post #2,671 of 4,782
Just get the JDS Labs Atom.
Measures almost the same (inaudible differences, both have basically 0 distortion), have more than enough power to drive the 1990s, and it's relatively inexpensive.
I'm super happy with mine.
 
Nov 28, 2019 at 1:05 AM Post #2,672 of 4,782
I love the DT1990. This is so nice with my audio chain, I must say. Modi 3 is more than sufficient as a DAC feeding the ZDS.
 
Nov 30, 2019 at 8:08 AM Post #2,673 of 4,782
IMG_20191130_134736.jpg
 
Dec 5, 2019 at 11:21 PM Post #2,674 of 4,782
...
*Speaking of the HD 650, I've noticed that the talk now is that they sound better and less "veiled" (*sigh*) with new pads, while a few years ago people were saying the exact opposite. This just deepens my suspicion that many people have little-to-no idea what they're talking about.
Nope, they've no idea. I don't even believe in the "Sennheiser veil". DT440 has a veiled sound to my ears, HD6x0 sure do not.
I don't like heavily worn pads on HD6x0. I somewhat liked my first HD650, then I loved it more after putting new pads on it (it was a second-hand headphone). Really "revitalized" the sound. Still got great condition pads on my current HD650.

Also, the comment about HD650 bass intruding into the midrange is just lol
Only HD25 is like that among Senns. Maybe he had bass boost on or was listening to a bass heavy track of some kind?
 
Dec 6, 2019 at 1:22 AM Post #2,675 of 4,782
Nope, they've no idea. I don't even believe in the "Sennheiser veil". DT440 has a veiled sound to my ears, HD6x0 sure do not.
I don't like heavily worn pads on HD6x0. I somewhat liked my first HD650, then I loved it more after putting new pads on it (it was a second-hand headphone). Really "revitalized" the sound. Still got great condition pads on my current HD650.

Also, the comment about HD650 bass intruding into the midrange is just lol
Only HD25 is like that among Senns. Maybe he had bass boost on or was listening to a bass heavy track of some kind?

I personally found the DT 440 to sound hazy which also made them sound veiled to me, never liked that headphone, one of my least favorite Beyers, may have some potential if modded right though (got some impressive results out of its older higher impedance sibling the DT 831); Beyer drivers in general are good to excellent and are my go to choice for modding.

Never found the HD 600/650 veiled personally even with worn pads, the headphones can bit too soft on some systems and aren’t the last word in terms of resolution but they are not what I’ll called veiled personally, never found them deficient in clarity. If anything I find the HD 650 to have better clarity than the HD 600 while I often heard the opposite mentioned.
 
Last edited:
Dec 6, 2019 at 8:14 AM Post #2,676 of 4,782
Nope, they've no idea. I don't even believe in the "Sennheiser veil". DT440 has a veiled sound to my ears, HD6x0 sure do not.
I don't like heavily worn pads on HD6x0. I somewhat liked my first HD650, then I loved it more after putting new pads on it (it was a second-hand headphone). Really "revitalized" the sound. Still got great condition pads on my current HD650.

Also, the comment about HD650 bass intruding into the midrange is just lol
Only HD25 is like that among Senns. Maybe he had bass boost on or was listening to a bass heavy track of some kind?
I'm not a big believer in the Sennheiser "veil," and now people like to talk about their "graininess" which I find an even more dubious claim. I will say, though, that of my headphones, the HD 650 are the pickiest about the amp. I love my DT 1990 and PM-3 with my tubes, but something happens to the HD 650 that... Uugghh. Awful. Like, zero detail and 100% mids. And I used to have a FiiO E11 that made the Senns sound like a dog farting into a tin can. It wasn't a power issue, I don't think, because every cell phone I've ever tried with the HD 650 is just fine.
This makes me wonder if people that hear graininess/veil are just having compatibility issues.

Anyway, this is a thread about the DT 1990. Long live the DT 1990!
I originally got the DT 1990 because, as @kman1211 said above, the HD 650 just sounds too soft sometimes. This recording has some nice natural guitar and vocal distortion that the HD 650 just made to sound too pleasant, or something. Too easy going. The DT 1990 does not have that problem at all. This is a headphone that can really excite.
 
Dec 12, 2019 at 2:16 AM Post #2,677 of 4,782
Hi Head-Fi community!

I'm new here and I joined to share my thoughts about the Beyerdynamic DT 1990 Pro.

I own this beautiful pair for a month now and I'm really satisfied with the sound quality and their solid design.
Since yesterday I've switched to the analytical A pads and it's definitely sn interesting difference.

Although I'm not sure what it takes to bring out their full potential. Right now I'm running a minimalist setup of Schiit Fulla 3 (entry-level Amp/DAC combo device). Would I notice a considerable difference with Magni 3+/Heresy (amp) or Jotunheim (amp/DAC)? Or maybe a tube solution like Vali 2 (amp) or Lyr (amp/DAC).

I must add that I'm from Europe and use the standard EU powerplug devices so it might make some other company amps more difficult for me.
 
Last edited:
Dec 12, 2019 at 3:28 AM Post #2,678 of 4,782
Geez. Am I the only one that uses the balanced pads? Seems like there used to be more parity between the two, but now most prefer the analytical pads. I've never even bothered trying the A-pads because I've never felt the need. For one thing, I lurve dat bass.:L3000: (<< That's very obviously not a DT 1990, but he doesn't care; he's bopping along to the bass)

No sir, you're not alone in this. I prefer the B pads - full stop.
 
Dec 12, 2019 at 11:46 AM Post #2,679 of 4,782
Hi Head-Fi community!

I'm new here and I joined to share my thoughts about the Beyerdynamic DT 1990 Pro.

I own this beautiful pair for a month now and I'm really satisfied with the sound quality and their solid design.
Since yesterday I've switched to the analytical A pads and it's definitely sn interesting difference.

Although I'm not sure what it takes to bring out their full potential. Right now I'm running a minimalist setup of Schiit Fulla 3 (entry-level Amp/DAC combo device). Would I notice a considerable difference with Magni 3+/Heresy (amp) or Jotunheim (amp/DAC)? Or maybe a tube solution like Vali 2 (amp) or Lyr (amp/DAC).

I must add that I'm from Europe and use the standard EU powerplug devices so it might make some other company amps more difficult for me.
recently bought Sabaj D5, pretty happy so far, this can be the upgrade you're looking for. You can buy from amazon or Aliexpress in both cases they ship from Europe so fast and no import tax.
 
Dec 13, 2019 at 10:25 AM Post #2,680 of 4,782
Is anyone using a Schiit Loki equalizer with the DT 1990? I'm seriously considering one. The EQ points look ideal, I would try +3dB @ 20Hz and -6dB @ 8kHz.
What do you think?
 
Dec 13, 2019 at 7:24 PM Post #2,681 of 4,782
Is anyone using a Schiit Loki equalizer with the DT 1990? I'm seriously considering one. The EQ points look ideal, I would try +3dB @ 20Hz and -6dB @ 8kHz.
What do you think?
Yes! I am using the Loki with the DT1990 and most of my other headphones. I am somewhat of a basshead so I have the bass knob turned to 5 o'clock and the mid-bass knob to 3 o'clock and the other 2 are at neutral. This really makes these headphones so much more engaging to me. I am using the Loki with an Emotiva BasX A-100 amp and a Topping D50 dac and the combination is fantastic. I wouldn't be without the Loki. It doesn't make bad headphones sound good but it makes good headphones sound much better.

I realize most people on this forum use software EQ but I stream with a Chromebook and there aren't any good EQ apps for it. The Loki is perfect for my uses. I can't recommend it enough. One of my best audio purchases in the last 8 years.
 
Dec 14, 2019 at 2:17 AM Post #2,682 of 4,782
Is anyone using a Schiit Loki equalizer with the DT 1990? I'm seriously considering one. The EQ points look ideal, I would try +3dB @ 20Hz and -6dB @ 8kHz.
What do you think?
Another Loki user here. I use the Loki to add some low end to all my headphone and it works well. It's simple and you can adjust the major EQ points. Sort of like tone controls on an old receiver. You can't fine tune every frequency like a parametric EQ but thanks okay with me. The most I use it for is to add some sub bass, smooth out the low end to mid frequency transition, and do the same with the upper mid to lower treble transition point. I'm not at all worried about losing transparency. For me it's a nice trade off to be able to add some fullness to the sound of some of my headphones. I think if you got one you'd like it. Most Loki owners do. For me, it's the best tweak I've made to my system.
 
Dec 14, 2019 at 9:06 AM Post #2,684 of 4,782
Thanks for all the Loki replies, it looks like it's worth a try. I have to say though, as a long-time audiophile, the thought of an equalizer is still a little horrifying. :triportsad:
My last attempt to improve the DT 1990, with Dekoni Elite Velour pads, was a total failure.
 
Dec 14, 2019 at 11:01 AM Post #2,685 of 4,782
The Loki question seems to have two parts. A) does it degrade the 1990’s sound and B) will it make the appropriate adjustments to its tuning? I can’t answer A, but B seems pretty straightforward.

Here is a raw frequency response graph for the 1990s (Oratory1990) with the analytical pads on:

upload_2019-12-14_10-49-22.png


To it I’ve added an approximation of the balanced pads as a purple line, based on Rtings' measurements. If a frequency response graph is totally meaningless to anyone, frequency or pitch from bass to treble is on the left/right axis and loudness is on the up/down axis. The broad green line represents one concept of what an accurate/flat/neutral frequency response should be. So in theory, wherever the orange or purple lines rise above the green line the DT 1990 is making that frequency range too loud. And wherever the orange or blue line falls below the green line the 1990s are making that frequency range too quiet. (But in fact the green line's bass elevation on the left and the upper mids rise on the right that peaks around 3 to 4 kHz are both highly subject to personal preference.)

I’ve also shown the four Loki control points as red arrows. We know what frequencies they centre upon. We know how much they can increase or decrease loudness — more than enough for this task. What we don’t know is how broadly each control point’s effect extends (which is known as the Q factor in EQ-speak). But it seems likely they have a wide effect rather than a narrow one, extending at least half way between one control point and the next.

The 20 Hz or sub-bass control point (left-most dial) is just fine. You can raise or lower it to taste and depending on whether you’re using the analytical or balanced pads. The 8 kHz or right-most dial is also ideally situated to tame the 8 kHz loudness spike that bothers a certain percent of the population. That said, it will probably influence a wider range of frequencies than would be ideal.

But the middle two dials are sub-optimally placed for adjusting the DT 1990. What we really want is a control at 200 Hz with a broad range of effect (Q factor) and another around 3 to 4 kHz with a moderate range of effect. But the provided 400 Hz and 2 kHz controls are too far from the required frequencies. So they are as likely to improve some frequencies while at the same time making other frequencies worse when used with the DT 1990. How problematic, if at all, that is for you will likely vary from track to track and genre to genre.

Going back to your first point you wrote:

> The EQ points look ideal, I would try +3dB @ 20Hz and -6dB @ 8kHz.

As long as you are only looking for a two-band adjustment, the Loki's control set should be ideal, except that the 8 kHz dial will likely have too broad an effect. The middle two dials may tempt you to play with them, but chances are you'll end up leaving them alone.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2019-12-14_10-23-46.png
    upload_2019-12-14_10-23-46.png
    196.6 KB · Views: 0

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top