Ask and ye shall recieve.
This is a review I did a while back copied from the permanent section above. I have since gone on to try the W2002 and the Sony R10, and those adventures are documented up there as well.
Face off: Senn HD600 with Clou Cable Blue vs. Sony CD3000 (long).
Intro:
Yeah, it's a long review, but I feel there is insufficient information on these boards about the CD3000s. I really had no sense of what to expect. Therefore, a long yet thorough review should be a forgivable offense and may actually help someone.
Associated Equipment:
Source: Denon DVM3000 DVD Changer
Amp: Berning MicroZOTL with NOS tubes
Musical Taste:
"Rock"-- some alternative rock, some classic rock, some punk, some electronic, some 60's soul music.
Backstory:
I've compared my beloved HD600s to all the major competitors in their price range with the exception of the K1000 from AKG. Grado RS1 sounded "fake" and colored to me. The ER4S was an excellent phone, but the ergonomics just wouldn't work for me. So, now I have ordered the Sony CD3000 just to satisfy myself that there is no better phone available than the HD600. I've had the Sonys for a little over a week, they have about 70 hrs. of burn-in, and I have logged over 30 hours on them. I've owned the Senns for over a year, and owned the HD580 for years before that.
Review:
If you consider the HD600 and the Grado RS1 to be two opposite ends of the high-end headphone spectrum, the Sony CD3000s are closer in sound to the Senns. Anyone who says "all Sony phones suck", either has a hidden agenda, a bias against Sony, or simply hasn't heard these phones. They are definitely in the same league in terms of performance as the ER4S, RS1, and HD600.
Ergonomics:
Extremely comfortable, but not as snug as the HD600s. I like the clamping action of the Senns. Don't attempt to boogie with the Sonys on-- they'll move about. Not as heavy as they look. Absolutely no isolation whatsoever-- they pass every bit as much noise out as the open HD600s. I do not like the covering on the Sonys cord-- it's flimsy and frail. The earcups are HUGE, so you will look like a total headphone dork (which, let's face it, you are). The large earcups enable the drivers to be set at an angle so the sound approaches your ears more like regular speakers (presumably to assist with imaging). I was able to turn the ZOTL down quite a bit compared to the level of the HD600s.
Soundstage/Imaging:
Much, much "larger" soundstage than the HD600s. You are moved to front row center. The sound is more "immediate" and "faster" than the HD600s. Left to right imaging exceeds that of the HD600s which already did a great job. Electronic effects that drift around make an unbroken line when they move left to right-- it's very realistic with no "hole" in the middle. I've never found a headphone yet that had a compelling sense of "depth", and the Sonys are no worse than any other phone in this respect. Verdict: a slight edge to the Sonys.
Treble:
This is the make-or-break area with any phone for me. If the treble is abrasive, spitty, gritty, or piercing-- I'm gone. Ditto if the sound is stifled, claustrophobic or muffled. I always found that the Senns with a tube amp did the highs better than any other set of phones I've owned. Listening to the Sony's has now made me aware that the Senns are slightly etched and hashy in comparison. The Sonys have an amazing clarity that makes horns, trumpets and female vocals sound just fantastic.
There is a lot more treble energy with the Sonys. In my system with my amp, this sounds clear and smooth, although a touch "sweet" compared to the HD600s. I don't mind the extra "sweetness", but it's a coloration that can be too much with poorly recorded, "tinny"-sounding music. It's fabulous on well-recorded records though, top notch. However, this comes at a price: I notice my ears ring a little after a long session with the Sonys. Verdict: I like the treble on the Sonys on most recordings over the HD600s.
Mids:
Slightly more midrange "presence" than the somewhat "hollow"-sounding Senns (possible hump in the Sony's midrange?). Detail and resolution is equivalent to the Senns, although I would say the Sonys are a bit "warmer" and "richer" sounding than the relatively sterile HD600s. You can't go wrong with the mids of the Sonys-- they're clean and appealing and draw you in to the sound. Verdict: I prefer the Sony's mids over the 600s.
Bass:
Most likely due to the larger drivers, the Sonys have much more kick and punch than the 600s. There is more bass information, but I still question if it really goes as low as the 600s. I don't think it delivers the lowest registers as well as the 600s. Drums, however really come to life on the Sony's. The low bass of electronica albums sounds pretty tight and convincingly deep. Verdict: a draw between the bass of the 600s and the Sonys.
About My Results:
My amp, the ZOTL has a very laid-back character with an incredibly smooth and easy presentation. I wonder how the Sony's would sound with solid-state? Would the sweet highs be a bit too much? Might the sound get a touch brittle and hashy?
Final Remarks:
I never saw the utility of owning more than one set of cans, but I'm leaning toward keeping both phones. I would take the Sony's out to listen to well-recorded modern discs and recently remastered older CDs. It's not so good with older "brittle"-sounding or poorly recorded discs. It may also not perform quite as well as the HD600 on very intense tracks where there are lots of loud instruments playing simultaneously. For those, the Senns seem to work better and keep sound separated and distinct.
Overall, very impressed with the Sony CD3000 and wouldn't hesitate to recommend it. In some areas I believe it bests the HD600.
Cheers.
markl
From dhwilken:
"Could you elaborate a bit about the 600s maybe working better w/ complex passages? Are you saying that, though detail and resolution seem to be equal, the 600s are somehow better at instrument separation?"
Because the HD600 puts you at a distance from the music, to my ears, it is better able at adding more and more instruments without the sound "bleeding" together. The HD600 is very controlled and reserved compared to CD3000s. The CD3000 does an awesome job of separating sounds, just not quite as good as the Senns. This is why I say the midrange of the CD3000s is slightly "warmer" than the HD600. However, when there is only one instrument playing, the CD3000s are scary good and fully detailed.
From Vka:
"Well, you get a larger soundstage at the expense of an artificial one. What I mean mean by that is the sound tend to echo and reverberate in a way. "
I agree with Ross that there is no echo effect detectable to my ears. I remeber reading about this in another review, so i was looking for it.
"I don't agree with your sweetness though as I find the HD-600 treble sweeter although it has less of it.
To me, the CD-3000 sounds articulate although a bit in the dry side. If you want sweet treble, I suggest trying out the
Grado HP-1 and RS-1 as they have some of the sweetest treble period. "
Don't have the Grados to compare with, but to me, the top end of the Sonys is "sweeter" than the 600s. I would say the Sonys sweetness approaches the line where it might bother some people (including me), so maybe that's why the Grados always sounded "fake" to me!
"I disgree here strongly as I find the mid in the Sony to be its weak spot. It is by no mean warm at all. In fact the reason I say this is because the CD-3000 mid is overpowered by its strong treble and bass. even with my warm DCT-1, I still find the
CD-3000 a bit dry for my taste. Didn't have the magic midrange of the HP-1 "
Again, no HP1 (and no DCT-1, damn the luck!) to compare with. I am only comparing to HD600 which has a "scooped out" midrange. Compared to the HD600, the Sonys definitely provide "more" midrange to my ears.
"I would like to add that although there is more bass information, the bass is by no means accurate. What I hear is that the bass reverberate all over the place due to the closed chracteristic of the phone. There is MORE bass because the sound tend to stay longer. "
I've tried, but I just don't hear those reverberations. Either way, drums sound awesome (Thump! Thwak!). More realistic than the HD600s for drums. Bass notes and electronic synth bass notes aren't as "tight" and controlled as they are with the 600s though. There is more warmth with the Sonys, so it's a trade-off.
Ross,
Congrats on the Earmax Pro. I used to own one which I sold to pay for my ZOTL. Check my profile and you'll see all the amps I've owned-- the Earmax Pro is my favorite. I sold it because it had trouble driving anything other than the Senns (which it did BEAUTIFULLY). No idea how it will react to the load presented by the Sonys, but good luck! BTW: get a pair of Sylvania Gold Brand 12AT7s (from Upscale Audio) to replace the stock tubes. These tubes are OUTSTANDING in the Earmax Pro, and will give you a bass experience that will rip your head off! Best headphone bass ever, period (and I ain't no dum-bass, either).
BenG:
"Phones that try to emphasize certain frequencies the most usually sound the worst and become the most tiring after long listening sessions."
I want to emphasize that my comments about the Sonys treble is relative to the somewhat recessed (can we all agree on that?) HD600. The Sonys have more energy than the Senns, but they aren't yet to the range where this would bother the average person. Again, as pointed out by others in this thread, it is the treble that just may seduce some people. No, its not tiring or fatiguing to me.
Tomcat:
"There seems to be consensus about the considerable "treble energy" of the Sony's. markl mentions it in his review, and Ross has mentioned it in his initial review at HeadWize. I think this is true and I have my problems with it."
There was another thread about the importance of source with Sonys high-end phones. I agree. My CDP (a nice Denon DVD player, actually) is very precise, flat and mellow with no digital "hash". It is not a "crispy" metallic sounding machine. Furthermore, the ZOTL is similarly even, clear, and relaxed. In my review, I questioned whether a solid state amp would suit the Sonys. For example, I bet the Sugden Headmaster (based on the reviews) would be a BAD combination with the CD3000s. I would go tubed with these cans, but I would go tubed in general, so I'm biased. I think a good source and good source material (again noted in the review) are also crucial to getting the best out of these phones. Bad, tinny recording won't sound good on the Sonys.
markl
Just a quick follow up for completeness sake. My esteem for these phones contiues to grow the more I listen.
The CD3000s have officially replaced the HD600 as my weapon of choice. I think my mental "break-in" period with the CD3000 is over. This is an addicting sound that just gets more enjoyable.
When I trade back and forth between them, I just can't believe how "muffled" and distant the HD600 sounds. I start lusting for the Sonys again after a few minutes with the 600s and off they go! I'm getting where I prefer the Sonys on almost any recording, good or bad. It does much better on many more CDs in my collection than the HD600. I would say they are good all-around phones for almost any musical style.
I think I can confirm that you will need a good source with these. It's quite a revealing phone with unmatched palpability. If you're feeding them doo-doo, they're gonna give you the clearest picture of doo-doo you've ever seen. You've just got to hear good, full-range modern recordings on these phones! Pretty amazing.
If anyone is considering the CD3000s I recommend the ZOTL as an amp. Great combination-- synergy!
markl
