[EvertonMint]

  i would think its hard to compare those two other than on price alone
 
one is an on ear and the other is an over the ear far too different imoo 

Really?, I wouldn't have thought that being circumaural wouldn't make much if any difference when compared to supra aural headphones, I suppose there is a possiblilty, but it would be too slight to notice maybe (apart from external noise attenuation).
 
With the Senn's (hd25-1 ii), being as legendary for their sound as they are, and costing barely much more than the CAL2's, a comparison should be made, as like me, people may be looking at the Senn's as a possible purchase/benchmark, but are also interested in the CAL2's, there maybe an advantage to the CAL2's that would allow them to step past the Senn's.

 

[Tom22]

 
Really?, I wouldn't have thought that being circumaural wouldn't make much if any difference when compared to supra aural headphones, I suppose there is a possiblilty, but it would be too slight to notice maybe (apart from external noise attenuation).
 
With the Senn's (hd25-1 ii), being as legendary for their sound as they are, and costing barely much more than the CAL2's, a comparison should be made, as like me, people may be looking at the Senn's as a possible purchase/benchmark, but are also interested in the CAL2's, there maybe an advantage to the CAL2's that would allow them to step past the Senn's.

cause the thing is the supra aurals are smaller right? theres less acoustic space for the engineers to work with compare to the cals which are circumaurals and with more space, you can guess that theres a difference in sound stage to say the least. and even seal too being that on ear its harder to have a perfect seal (the hd25 tries to counter this would higher clamping force) compare to the circumaural that seals completely around.
 
i found this an interesting little read (its like 3 paragraphs) on innerfidelity note i'm not sure myself but it seems to be the general consensus here on headfi that for example comparing say iems to portables (on ears) is like comparing apples and oranges 
 
heres the link for the on ears
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/innerfidelitys-wall-fame-ear-pad-sealed
 
heres the link for over ears 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/innerfidelitys-wall-fame-full-size-sealed

 

[Tom22]

 
Really?, I wouldn't have thought that being circumaural wouldn't make much if any difference when compared to supra aural headphones, I suppose there is a possiblilty, but it would be too slight to notice maybe (apart from external noise attenuation).
 
With the Senn's (hd25-1 ii), being as legendary for their sound as they are, and costing barely much more than the CAL2's, a comparison should be made, as like me, people may be looking at the Senn's as a possible purchase/benchmark, but are also interested in the CAL2's, there maybe an advantage to the CAL2's that would allow them to step past the Senn's.

however i myself if if sound quality is absolutely paramount i would stick with iems and jump to over ears
 
but on ears in general i find don't sound as good with the instrument separation and sound stage is rather small (i found some iems that outperform on ears in terms of soundstage )
 
but on ears are just so dam portable and small yet stylish i find but to each their own
 
also theres tyll reviewed the onkyo on ears (they big for on ears and goes into a bit of how larger space can help with the sound) heres the link and its around 2:40-2:49  he mentions a bit and at 5:39 (he did compare the on ears to over ears here but thats because they were almost large enough to be over ears)
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MN1xIViHEXA

 

[EvertonMint]

Cool, thanks for positng all this, I've got some reading to do

 
The thing is, (because I am curious), surely being circumaural would not make the headphones automatically better than supra's, the driver design/quality (if talking about similar price range) would be a factor on the overall sound quality (soundstage might be a different issue) and presentation?
 
Unless we should strictly breakdown headphone comparison's to only be between circumaural or supra aural, it's an interesting point that you have raised here.

 

[Tom22]

  Cool, thanks for positng all this, I've got some reading to do

 
The thing is, (because I am curious), surely being circumaural would not make the headphones automatically better than supra's, the driver design/quality (if talking about similar price range) would be a factor on the overall sound quality (soundstage might be a different issue) and presentation?
 
Unless we should strictly breakdown headphone comparison's to only be between circumaural or supra aural, it's an interesting point that you have raised here.

thank you i hope i did not come across rude in any way. i have not had experience with the cals or the senn hd 25. i have a limited experience with the dt1350 but i do own the noontec zoros (on ears) on the innerfidelity's wall of fame. while trying out the monster solos (the old and new ones) some demoing of the p5s from b&w
 
and i find that on ears are a little more congested in your head feeling > over ears but this is generalizing and i don't think i should but those are just what i figured

 

[EvertonMint]

no, not at all rude, all good points made 

 
..and now you've got me interested in the Onkyo ES-FC300's..still reading

 

[Tom22]

  no, not at all rude, all good points made 

 
..and now you've got me interested in the Onkyo ES-FC300's..still reading

haha hate to get off topic but hifiguy528 also did a review on youtube you can go check it out, he said is a bit bassy but sounds like something you might like plus the price is a very good too with good styling
 
but cal in general has quite a following here on head fi don't think you can go wrong

 

[kevinchung]

Can anyone compare these to the ATH-M50?

 

[andreamang]

   
I am most likely being to critical but at this price they are not worth it, the thing that made the cals very popular and a community favourite/recommendation was that for the price you could get them at(£50) they sounded amazing. They were such a great budget buy that punched way above its price tag.
 
These however command double the price at £100 and do no have anywhere near enough of a sound upgrade to justify the price. You are paying for the style and updated build quality, at this price tag there are just to many competitors out there. I would take the dt770's over these for the extra £20-£30 they cost.

Something has changed in the sound after burn-in?



Someone who owns them can tell me that they are overvalued or not?
Thank you ...

 
 
 

 

[Lorspeaker]

i felt really guilty....was waiting for a clear verdict on this can for the past month, 
but i succumbed n bought the Mikros90 in a whim...i cant figure out what made me do that..
headfi is a bad place to loiter, it shoot holes in your pockets.

 

[andreamang]

  i felt really guilty....was waiting for a clear verdict on this can for the past month,
but i succumbed n bought the Mikros90 in a whim...i cant figure out what made me do that..
headfi is a bad place to loiter, it shoot holes in your pockets.

I do not understand ... you bought the CAL 2?
I have the CAL + FiiO E10 and I do not know if you should take the second version ...

 

[Lorspeaker]

nah i bot the mikros...sighhh. 
the cal will have to wait..zz

 

[HiFiGuy528]

Live2 also uses Fostex drivers

 

[Belial88]

How do these compare to the 558 (which I understand is the best sub$150 phone) or the sr850 and v6 (best sub 100 phones)?

 

[RoMee]

How do these compare to the 558 (which I understand is the best sub$150 phone) or the sr850 and v6 (best sub 100 phones)?

The 558 is the best sub $150 headphone? Lol...

CAL 2 has bass, 558 don't. If you like bass go with the cal 2 if you don't then go with the 558.