LTUCCI1924
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2002
- Posts
- 6,240
- Likes
- 13
WHAT would you buy The sony CD3000 or the AT W1000 and why?
CD3000 or AT W1000
- Thread starter LTUCCI1924
- Start date
andrzejpw
May one day invent Bose-cancelling headphones.
- Joined
- Jun 25, 2001
- Posts
- 6,636
- Likes
- 10
Well lou, from what I remember, you sold the a1000s for the cd3ks and loved them[cd3000]. I'm not sure if the w1000s would be a large enough change from the a1000s.
screwdriver
Headphoneus Supremus
Lou ,
i owned both and i prefer the cd3000 . it blends well to a lot of music genre and sounds good in all my cd's .
i dont know how to explain but i really prefer the cd3000.
BTW i was using a gilmore V2 when i owned both .
i owned both and i prefer the cd3000 . it blends well to a lot of music genre and sounds good in all my cd's .
i dont know how to explain but i really prefer the cd3000.
BTW i was using a gilmore V2 when i owned both .
thsu02
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2002
- Posts
- 95
- Likes
- 12
Lou,
How are you? I used to own the W1000, until I heard the CD3000s.
The W1000s were some of the most beautiful phones I've ever seen. The wood is gorgeous. They are about the same diameter as the CD3k, but are less deep (wide). The sound, however, always left me wanting more. They seemed a bit thin and un-natural to me. The highs were very clear, but too harsh in my setup. I never lost the feeling that I was listening to a pair of headphones.
The CD3K changed that. They had everything that the W1000 lacked - for me. The bass was more accurate and had good slam. The soundstage is vast, yet imaging remains discrete and accurate. The treble is so sharp and detailed, but not harsh. It feels like you are "there" listening to the music, and not just using headphones.
Sure these things are huge, not pretty, and they do hit the chair when I lean back but I'm not giving these baby's up.
Just my 2 cents.
Good luck and keep us posted
How are you? I used to own the W1000, until I heard the CD3000s.
The W1000s were some of the most beautiful phones I've ever seen. The wood is gorgeous. They are about the same diameter as the CD3k, but are less deep (wide). The sound, however, always left me wanting more. They seemed a bit thin and un-natural to me. The highs were very clear, but too harsh in my setup. I never lost the feeling that I was listening to a pair of headphones.
The CD3K changed that. They had everything that the W1000 lacked - for me. The bass was more accurate and had good slam. The soundstage is vast, yet imaging remains discrete and accurate. The treble is so sharp and detailed, but not harsh. It feels like you are "there" listening to the music, and not just using headphones.
Sure these things are huge, not pretty, and they do hit the chair when I lean back but I'm not giving these baby's up.
Just my 2 cents.
Good luck and keep us posted
asdfeproiu9
Banned
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2003
- Posts
- 658
- Likes
- 10
I'm shocked at how different they seem! No Audio-Technica supporters?
purk
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2001
- Posts
- 11,146
- Likes
- 4,131
Quote:
I agree. If this thread started 4 months ago, there won't be anything accept A1000 or W1000. Funny how things have changed around here. The flavor of this month seem to be the high price RS-1.
Purk
| I'm shocked at how different they seem! No Audio-Technica supporters? |
I agree. If this thread started 4 months ago, there won't be anything accept A1000 or W1000. Funny how things have changed around here. The flavor of this month seem to be the high price RS-1.
Purk
LTUCCI1924
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2002
- Posts
- 6,240
- Likes
- 13
Thanks guys. Its the CD3000 and I really did like the sound and Hugh sound stage. I thought the AT A1000 was much less refine than the CD3000.
purk
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2001
- Posts
- 11,146
- Likes
- 4,131
Lou,
The A1000 is just not right up there w/ the CD3K. There are issues to be improved such as bass, midrange, and such.
The A1000 is just not right up there w/ the CD3K. There are issues to be improved such as bass, midrange, and such.
Uncledan
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2002
- Posts
- 1,934
- Likes
- 11
Even W2002 can not win CD3000. Maybe I like the CD3000's sound more.
(I had both headphones before)
(I had both headphones before)
daycart1
Ceremonial old guy, bifocals and all.All the philosophy he can muster can't solve the mysterious double-post.
- Joined
- Mar 28, 2002
- Posts
- 4,710
- Likes
- 13
Hmm, that's a hard decision; I might just go for the RS-1 instead!
Seriously, I think I'd go for the Sony. If tempted by the woodiness along, the ATs are more appealing.
Seriously, I think I'd go for the Sony. If tempted by the woodiness along, the ATs are more appealing.
wallijonn
Throwin' tantra.
- Joined
- Oct 15, 2002
- Posts
- 7,242
- Likes
- 15
Lou,
I would have loved a chance to work on those RS1s.
add some nice Beyer pads, put them inside the Aiwa AK100, and change the wiring to magnetic oxide coated copper. Separate grounds all the way down, of course.
let's see... you ony do low impedance cans. gee, that only leaves the CD3000. I do not like the sound of AT. 'nuff said. if I had an extra set of DT880s laying around I'd send them to you to listen to for a week.
I would have loved a chance to work on those RS1s.
let's see... you ony do low impedance cans. gee, that only leaves the CD3000. I do not like the sound of AT. 'nuff said. if I had an extra set of DT880s laying around I'd send them to you to listen to for a week.
LTUCCI1924
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2002
- Posts
- 6,240
- Likes
- 13
wallijonn
HI: That is very nice of you to offer to send the 880 to me. Thank you but I don't do 250 ohm cans. LOL. I need the CD3000 to feel normal did I say normal? again or better put back in the music again.
HI: That is very nice of you to offer to send the 880 to me. Thank you but I don't do 250 ohm cans. LOL. I need the CD3000 to feel normal did I say normal? again or better put back in the music again.
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2001
- Posts
- 13,495
- Likes
- 1,830
I've not been convinced by the sound of AT cans (not that i've heard that many)...
...Lou, why the need for low impedance cans? - Surely the Gilmore can adequately power at least 250ohm cans? (Beyers) even my meta42 can power my Senn HD480IIs that are a whopping 600ohm impedance...
Maybe you've explained before, and i've missed it... or maybe its just something you want as an idealism... either way, if you could please re-explain it'll be appreciated
Thanks
Duncan
...Lou, why the need for low impedance cans? - Surely the Gilmore can adequately power at least 250ohm cans? (Beyers) even my meta42 can power my Senn HD480IIs that are a whopping 600ohm impedance...
Maybe you've explained before, and i've missed it... or maybe its just something you want as an idealism... either way, if you could please re-explain it'll be appreciated
Thanks
Duncan
LTUCCI1924
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2002
- Posts
- 6,240
- Likes
- 13
HI: How are you? I guess it is because of my past experience and frustration with my 580s that started it all. Then when I got low ohmage cans it was a joy not to worry about having to drive them. Now that I have the Gilmore V2 it has lots of current and drives low ohmage cans with great authority. Also the CD3000 sound fantastic with my source and V2 that I have no need to get anything else. I just want my CD3000 again. Now I am having trouble finding a pair. LOL.
ablaze
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2002
- Posts
- 1,178
- Likes
- 10
Users who are viewing this thread
