[Eagle_Driver]

I didn't care much for the Sony MDR-CD3000 - they're tinny, like many cheap closed-back headphones. But I think I may not like the HD600 or the HD580, either - at least out of my current home equipment. (Sure, the HD600 and HD580 may sound great - but only out of equipment that's astronomically expensive compared to the amount of $$$ that I have ever spent on my ENTIRE home setup.)

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by markl Quote: "But regardless of our differences in opinion on the CD3000 one thing I think we should be able to agree on: the CD3000 will not give you anything close to the sound of the HD600." This is MacDEF's opinion, not a statement of fact. I like the CD3K better than the HD600 with Clou blue. If you're curious, check my review in the permanent section above.

Just to clarify: when I said "the CD3000 will not give you anything close to the sound of the HD600," I was addressing the original question: a recommendation for a closed phone that gives you sound like the HD600. I wasn't making any statement about which was "better" (hence my "regardless of our differences in opinion" phrase) -- I was simply stating that the CD3000 and the HD600 sound VERY different, so you shouldn't look to the CD3000 for "HD600-like" sound. I was talking about tonal balance rather than audio quality.

 

[The Quality Guru]

Quote:

Originally posted by Hirsch Pyrrhus, I do have the A100Ti, but I've only had it a couple of days. I can say that it is a nice sounding headphone, IMO superior to the W100. The frequency balance is much closer to neutral than the W100, IMO, and the midrange is fuller.

Hirsch,

That's interesting how you say the A100Ti's are superior to the W100's. Does the A100Ti have the amount of transparency that the W100 has? How do the two cans compare in other areas of the sonic spectrum?

 

[pyrrhus]

Hirsch,

Have you heard the HD600s? I'd be interested to know how you think they compare to the A100Ti's.

thanks

 

[TimSchirmer]

Just get some ETY's. They might not look as good as W100's, but the sound is nothing short of incredible, not to mention they are portable!

 

[a1leyez0nm3]

i think er4 isnt like the 600.... er4 is much better then 600.

 

[Guyferd]

to be honest I prefer the look of A100ti but I assume that the wooden enclosure will produce better sound with more break in??
The w100 looks a bit like dummy though.. haha no offense.

anyway can someone do a quick review on er-4s vs W100 on..
bass
soundstage
clarity
isolation
naturalness
comfort

thanks

 

[Hirsch]

I need some listening time before I can post real impressions about the A100Ti. There has been some burn-in going on over the weekend (I like the improvement), and I want to let the sound stabilize before saying much more than I already have. I'll post something within the next week or two.

Guyferd, the enclosure of the A100Ti is titanium/fiberglass, the W100 is wood. The W100 does produce better sound with break-in. I've heard two sets of W100's, and both were broken in.

 

[FCJ]

Quote:

Originally posted by Guyferd to be honest I prefer the look of A100ti but I assume that the wooden enclosure will produce better sound with more break in?? The w100 looks a bit like dummy though.. haha no offense. anyway can someone do a quick review on er-4s vs W100 on.. bass soundstage clarity isolation naturalness comfort thanks

I've never heard the W100, but I've had the Etymotic 4s' for about seven years. Here's my impressions

Comfort--Different than any other headphone, because you have to put them in your ear canal. I've had no issue with them, either comfort-wise or seal-wise.

Isolation--They're the best there is at isolation. Nothing comes close.

Naturalness/Clarity--Again, nothing comes close. If I want to hear what is really on a recording, I use the Etys. To my ears they don't emphasize anything in the range, presenting naturally what is in the recording (for better or worse, I suppose, depending on the recording).

Soundstage--Not as good or wide, again to my ears, as the Senn 600s, but still convincing.

Bass--Different, again, from other headphones as you won't necessarily have the bass be as impactful, but it is natural and feels right, imo.

My only real complaint is that the cord is too short, making it a problem using them at home (unless, of course, if the amp is close to you than it shouldn't be a problem). Other than that, they beat the competition, especially for closed phones, easily.

 

[Tomcat]

Quote:

Originally posted by Hirsch The W100 does produce better sound with break-in. I've heard two sets of W100's, and both were broken in.

Hirsch,

it seems you have failed to create that mystical bond with your W100 that happy W100 owners have achieved. You didn't love it and - not surprisingly - it didn't love you back. Have you ever fondled the W100's enclosures in the dark? There, you haven't.

Seriously, after my experiences with the W100, I doubt that any wooden headphone can ever be pronounced "broken-in". I am now convinced that it is possible that wooden transducers will improve indefinitely. This doesn't necessarily mean that you would have ever reached a point where you would have started to like your W100, but that you felt yours was rather harsh and had a lean midrange might have been related to insufficient break-in. Believe me, those are symptoms that have, in my experience, completely disappeared with time. I have had my W100 for about six months now, and while it has been quite enjoyable at 100 hundreds, it has noticeably improved at 300, 500, 700 hours of use. Today, it is extremely forgiving, lush and musical. And its timbrally rich, envelopping and transparent midrange is probably its greatest asset. There is nothing whatsoever lean, peaky or shrieking about its sound (the CD3000, now, that's a different story). And the specifics of the break-in process might play a role as well, what kind of music you play through it and at what level, and whether you wear them while they are playing.

And this fondling thing, of course.

I wish you had kept the W100. The comparison with the A100Ti would have been very interesting.

 

[The Quality Guru]

Quote:

Hirsch, it seems you have failed to create that mystical bond with your W100 that happy W100 owners have achieved. You didn't love it and - not surprisingly - it didn't love you back. Have you ever fondled the W100's enclosures in the dark? There, you haven't.

LOL! and

!

Quote:

but that you felt yours was rather harsh and had a lean midrange might have been related to insufficient break-in.

Personally, I think the midrange of the W100 is lush, transparent, timbrally magnificent, albeit slightly recessed in some instances. I think Shivohum noticed this in his review- then I too noticed it a tad. Though I don't think I would ever be able to call it 'lean' or 'harsh!' If something from the sonic spectrum is 'recessed,' it is not necessarily 'lean' per se, just not quite as forward relative to the rest of the sonic spectrum. IMO, this slight recessed nature of the W100's midrange is not very noticeable, and rteally hardly gets in the way of my enjoyment of the W100! I still love it- even more than the RS-1/RA-1 combo!

 

[beowulf]

Quote:

Originally posted by MacDEF I have to agree with the people in the "HeadRoom Tour" thread who gave the CD3000 bad reviews. I personally found them to be significantly inferior to the HD600 in pretty much every area except for comfort. They were way too bright (not just in comparison to the HD600, but also compared to other "bright" headphones like the Beyer DT831), had poor soundstage, and had "closed-in" bass that was quite unnatural. The DT250 are much closer in sound (and sound quality, IMO) to the HD600 than the CD3000.

The wondeful variety of human opinions. I also don't share MacDef's opinion. To me the 3000 are better than the HD600, and definitely not too bright. Soundstage and detail are excellent, same for bass. When I pick good recordings, I am always, or almost always very pleased.

 

[a1leyez0nm3]

i didnt like either one! (cd3000 & hd600). etys are soo much better. I blow my nose in hd600's general direction.

 

[Tweertinelle]

Quote:

Originally posted by Eagle_Driver That's exactly where I got my ER-4S from [Headroom] - when it still sold for $269. Now it's $299

I pity the grebe who excretes piasters when s/he could be bleeding less ($259, with impolite haggling) at Scientific Plastics, Inc., where custom earmolds may be snatched for an additional thirty gherkins. Do I hear the sound of a ringing till? (Probably not, in what is essentially a hearing aid store -- the other customers lean over and squint when you speak.)

 

[Toe]

Quote:

Originally posted by Tomcat I am now convinced that it is possible that wooden transducers will improve indefinitely.

Wooden transducers?