[Zaroff]

I'll try to avoid the FOTM syndrome, but as honestly as I can say, the MM400 are no match for the P9. And I love the MM400, I've used only those for a year and a half. But, they sound positively anemic in comparison. A shortcut would be that the P9 do everything on steroids, but with good taste and measure. The soundstage is quite wide in comparison, the bass is hard hitting without being invasive, overdone or bloated. It's fast, precise and quite deep. Clarity is second to none, and so far, I haven't heard one sibilance, including on some dubious recordings I have.
 
Let's see how they'll evolve as burn-in goes on (and yes I'm a believer )

 

[Tony-Hifi]

We have had the P9 burning in now for a few days, and like many we have in the past thought that 'burn in' was just our brains tuning into the sound signature of a new product.
 
But I can safely say that the P9 is definitely improving with usage, the sound-stage is opening up even more and the bass continues to improve, with even greater impact and depth. The clarity, as already mentioned is superb, for me it is the sound separation that what makes this headphone so special, it is among the best I have heard, if not the best, nothing is being lost or drowned out.

 

[White Lotus]

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[pbui44]

Out of interest, what makes you say that?

Because it is now confirmed that the P9 are semi-open back.

I would like to hear more impressions on the soundstage and imaging. If needed, make comparisons with other models.

 

[Tony-Hifi]

From  the information I have seen from Bowers & Wilkins they neither claim the P9 to be closed or open headphones, just circum aural headphones (around the ear, I had to look it up

).
To be fair they do not need to class them as either, it is for us to decide if they fall into either category or not, personally I don't care either way, I just like em!
 
They are not the best in terms of isolation, and at reasonably high volumes your music will leak out. At very high volumes this will be distracting to others around you, but that is a choice for the consumer to make, the B&W audio engineers are trying to make the best possible headphone they can, and are not trying to fall in one category or another.

 

[evolutionx]

Can't wait to receive mine next week.   Has always been a fan of B&W since the fantastic P5.   

 

[JohnC-HiFi]

Here's our take on the B&W P9 Signature...
 

 

[PeteSTRADAMUS]

  I'll try to avoid the FOTM syndrome, but as honestly as I can say, the MM400 are no match for the P9. And I love the MM400, I've used only those for a year and a half. But, they sound positively anemic in comparison. A shortcut would be that the P9 do everything on steroids, but with good taste and measure. The soundstage is quite wide in comparison, the bass is hard hitting without being invasive, overdone or bloated. It's fast, precise and quite deep. Clarity is second to none, and so far, I haven't heard one sibilance, including on some dubious recordings I have.
 
Let's see how they'll evolve as burn-in goes on (and yes I'm a believer )

No thanks to you, but you just made my case for which headphone i purchase next all that much harder now lmao.... I'm itching to give these a whirl. Have you ever heard the TH-900 ???? 
If you or anyone else has heard both cans. How does the bass compare to a TH-900 ??? Thanks much !

 

[jmills8]

How does the bass compare to a TH-900 ???
[/quote] Great question cause I had the TH900 and I loved its bass but its isolation was below average. Yes, how does the bass from the P9 compares to the TH900 ?

 

[Zaroff]

Sorry guys, never heard the TH-900.

 

[Chimichanga]

  We have had the P9 burning in now for a few days, and like many we have in the past thought that 'burn in' was just our brains tuning into the sound signature of a new product.

Going off-topic here, I'm sure there are several lengthy threads about this, etc, I think you were right the first time around. Like any other thing (wine tasting, judging televisions, and headphones of course), taste is cultivated on top of shaky foundations that can be undermined with ease because our senses and perceptions are pliable.
 
Try serving someone cheap wine in an expensive bottle, or asking someone to draw your face with pencil and paper (if they're beginners, they will unwittingly shave most of your head away because we are so tuned to human faces.)
 
I think it matters little if burn-in is real or not, I doubt most people will know that they really don't know. 
 
I'm sure the P9 sounds way better than what I have though!

 

[TheManko]

What struck me as a positive thing about the P9 when I auditioned them, apart from the excellent soundstage and the general massive feel of the sound, was that it didn't have any annoying treble peaks. I haven't heard the TH-900, but I did own the Denon AH-D5000 which was one of its predecessors, and that one has an elevated treble that could sound quite nasty. The P9 was smooth and clean, without sounding rolled off or overly dampened, like for example the Audeze LCD-2. Because the only headphones I had to compare it with in the store was the P7 and Audioquest Nighthawk, I didn't have any other high end headphones to compare it with. The P9 blew those two out of the water to such an extent it was no competition. One thing I can say for sure, is that the P9 avoids most of the horrible issues high end headphones have had in the past.

 

[gelocks]

  I just received mine today.
 
Very briefly, the good: massive sound. Corrects most of the flaws of the P7, which I already enjoyed a lot. The bad: massive leakage (in comparison to both P7 and Denon MM400, as I own both). Isolation is correct, but the leakage of sound to the exterior is important, surprising from a closed back.
 
More later.

 

  Hi Slame,
 
I just put the two headphones together and tried them both out with the same tracks and volume settings, the P9 isolation is not as good as that of the P7. Obviously the sound quality has greatly improved and, but if listening at high volumes you will definitely get sound leakage, and at very low volumes external noise is slightly more prevalent compared to the P7.

 
FAIL!
 
Thanks for the impressions so far.
But seeing "leakage" just steers me away... I work with people close to me and although I don't blast my ears, any leakage == Bad.
I'll be getting the Ether Flow Cs soon and these caught my attention but... yeah....

 

[akg fanboy]

Going off-topic here, I'm sure there are several lengthy threads about this, etc, I think you were right the first time around. Like any other thing (wine tasting, judging televisions, and headphones of course), taste is cultivated on top of shaky foundations that can be undermined with ease because our senses and perceptions are pliable.

Try serving someone cheap wine in an expensive bottle, or asking someone to draw your face with pencil and paper (if they're beginners, they will unwittingly shave most of your head away because we are so tuned to human faces.)

I think it matters little if burn-in is real or not, I doubt most people will know that they really don't know. 

I'm sure the P9 sounds way better than what I have though!

Headphone burn in does not exist as measured by innerfidelity and documented by several sources. Brain burn in, however does exist. 99% of the time, "burn in" is caused by the brain adjusting to the sound. Akg 700 series are the most infamous headphones to have "burn in" and I had a 100+ hour q701 to compare to a new one and there are no sound differences.

 

[akg fanboy]

How does the bass compare to a TH-900 ???

Th900 are bass head headphones. Although the bass is likely accentuated like the typical b&w sound, I don't think they are bass head levels