[Terriero]

That is so much true, preferences are important.

I found new love towards the D9200, after striking a balance with custom ear pads (again). So resolving (vs upstream) and musical, not only across the whole frequency range, but in spatial and temporal domains as well, while maintaining good harmonic richness and balance.

Speaking about the stock D9200 and personal preferences, I tested extensively the Utopia and especially the Stellia (my favorite Focal, and closed), and also the Clear and the Clear Mg against the D9200 and let's say it's a personal preference, but I could not convince myself permanently choosing any of the Focal over the D9200 for the genres I am listening to.
I think that is OK, as is fine to prefer any of the Focal (or other metallic drivers) over the biocellulose family (Denon, Fostex, Drop, ZMF).

Besides, the Focal pads are excellent and well optimized, hard to improve, whereas the D9200 pads were quite easy to improve, lifting the D9200 into a higher category IMHO (nearly e-stat level, and with better bass slam). That, and the flexibility and headroom of the D9200 when EQ'ing, might flip the balance. IMHO the D9200 has surprisingly big reserves for further optimization or customization.

Things might be different if Focal would decide to make a Stellia with biocellulose drivers, which they would be perfectly capable of doing, but that likely won't happen anytime soon .

Which genres do you listen to? Do you never have issues with the 9200s treble?

 

[zolkis]

Which genres do you listen to? Do you never have issues with the 9200s treble?

Instrumental/acoustic, jazz, small chamber, pop, rock, indie, etc - just your regular musical omnivore, with a preference to acoustic instruments.

The stock D9200 treble is indeed slightly hot (as in the spectrogram) in a region which doesn't bother me as much as e.g. the TH900's treble spike, and I am getting in the age of HF hearing decline, which evens out things, but the stock D9200 were indeed a bit too hot in the treble even for me.
Looks like a compromise both Denon and Fostex ran into with their best drivers, I don't know why, and it's the hardest thing to fix. Maybe a special coating on the domes on the drivers would help, but I am not going there, though I used various coatings for tuning speakers in the past.
But even though the FR has a spike and CSD show some excess energy, for me the dynamic behavior and perception of the treble is not so bad. It fills up music with more light, but not in a hard-sounding way like many other headphones do. But this is definitely a territory of YMMV.

With different (shape of) pads, the treble damping and reflections change (except for the direct waves, of course), giving a slightly different perception - also, since the mids and bass improve and get slightly elevated as well, the treble stands out less, to an extent that is subjectively enough to not pay attention any more. I would not call this EQ, it's more like the sound is not overdamped (EQ'd down) any more in the mids and bass. Anyway, the stock pads have a nice smooth sound, with less bass extension, less mids resolution and more treble.

The best e-stats have more silky smooth treble, but they tend to be also shelved down a bit, so it's hard to compare (except things like the Stax 009, but they are not among the best e-stats any more, IMHO).

The D7200 treble's FR is quite good for this type of driver - I wish the stock D9200 had that, but the end result is very good now.

 

[Terriero]

Thank you very much for your detailed response

 

[Shooter41]

Really hoping to be able to deal with the hot treble with EQ...

 

[Shooter41]

So I just got them (FedEx had 20 min left in their delivery window). First relief is that my Black Dragon balanced cord will plug into them. I knew it was the same kind of plug on the phone end as my Focals but sometimes part of the design will interfere. The plug is not as positive a click-in as it is on the Focals but it works. Comfort seems ok at first fitting. Definitely feels firmer on the ears than I'm used to, yet the pads feel plenty soft if I just feel them with my fingers. Headband feels ok. I will go ahead and say that in the first minute (they're literally still cold to the touch) they do sound considerably better than the Clear Mg's did in their first minute. The Mg's were pretty horrible for the first 12 hrs so that doesn't really mean a whole lot. Now the break-in period begins...

 

[SRKRAM]

So I just got them (FedEx had 20 min left in their delivery window). First relief is that my Black Dragon balanced cord will plug into them. I knew it was the same kind of plug on the phone end as my Focals but sometimes part of the design will interfere. The plug is not as positive a click-in as it is on the Focals but it works. Comfort seems ok at first fitting. Definitely feels firmer on the ears than I'm used to, yet the pads feel plenty soft if I just feel them with my fingers. Headband feels ok. I will go ahead and say that in the first minute (they're literally still cold to the touch) they do sound considerably better than the Clear Mg's did in their first minute. The Mg's were pretty horrible for the first 12 hrs so that doesn't really mean a whole lot. Now the break-in period begins...

I look forward to hearing what you think of the Denons and how they compare to the Clear MGs after a bit more listening. I returned my Clear Mgs pretty much immediately because they sounded so horrible, but perhaps I should have persevered with them a little longer.
I really liked the D9200s right from the beginning, but a large part of the reason for that could have been that I had owned D7200s for quite some time and the D9200s fixed everything which was wrong with them.

 

[Shooter41]

I look forward to hearing what you think of the Denons and how they compare to the Clear MGs after a bit more listening. I returned my Clear Mgs pretty much immediately because they sounded so horrible, but perhaps I should have persevered with them a little longer.
I really liked the D9200s right from the beginning, but a large part of the reason for that could have been that I had owned D7200s for quite some time and the D9200s fixed everything which was wrong with them.

For sure, the Clear Mg's absolutely require at least 12 hrs of break-in and I think Focal recommends 48hrs. It's a must with them more than other headphone I've ever owned. It's worth it, though, as they blossom into a smooth and excellent performer with the best bass I'd experienced thus far.

The 9200's, OTOH, clearly do not need as much break-in time. I got curious after them playing for 2 hrs last night and put them on. They didn't yet sound as good as my Mg's, but they did already sound pretty damn good. Better than any other headphone I've owned or listened to (I borrowed some Sennheiser 800S' once and while they were good, they weren't my cup of tea). I listened for 3 straight hrs, rotating through my 2 parametric eq settings and 1 convolution filter (convolution wins again!) and they seemed to get better as I went. How much of that was me getting used to them and how much was them further breaking in I can't say. What I can say though is that comfort is not an issue. My Mg's have a slight rub of my ear on one side and I only notice it after several hrs. No such issue with the Denons. Their pads remind me of some car seats. Like how some feel unnecessarily firm when you first plop down in them, but when you've been driving for several hours you notice how you're still pretty comfortable and feel like you could go much further.

I let them continue to play after I went to bed and turned them off this morning to give my tube amp a break, so they've got about 11 hrs at this point. When I'm not listening and just letting them play I turn off all eq. I want them to reproduce every frequency they can. When I listen again tonight, I'm going to go ahead and start rotating them with the MG's to better see where I'm at. At this point with the LCD-X '21's I already knew they were not keepers and that's definitely not the case with the Denons.

 

[zolkis]

On break-in time - all wooden cups headphone I owned settled after about 2 years in, when they started to sound their best. Wood needs a long time to settle, even if the raw material was artificially dried and aged before milling out the cups.
The biocellulose drivers, or the edges also might benefit from being played for a long time, but I think most the changes I heard were due to the wood settling in. That doesn't tend to happen with plastic and metal that much.

 

[Terriero]

I look forward to hearing what you think of the Denons and how they compare to the Clear MGs after a bit more listening. I returned my Clear Mgs pretty much immediately because they sounded so horrible, but perhaps I should have persevered with them a little longer.
I really liked the D9200s right from the beginning, but a large part of the reason for that could have been that I had owned D7200s for quite some time and the D9200s fixed everything which was wrong with them.

Which problems did you have with the 7200s that you found solved with the 9200s? Comfort?, recessed treble and mids?

 

[SRKRAM]

Which problems did you have with the 7200s that you found solved with the 9200s? Comfort?, recessed treble and mids?

Recessed mids and rolled off treble.

 

[Shooter41]

Well guys, I'm keeping the Denons, they're really good. At this point I'd struggle to think of something that the Clear Mg's do obviously better. No headphones I'd heard before them had the same quality and quantity of bass that they did, but a few listening hours ago I would've told you that the 9200's were at least their equal. Now I'm ready to say that they actually surpass them. But I'm not a bass-head. Quality (snappy, accurate, real-sounding) bass is what appeals to me. The LCD-X '21's, for instance, have plenty of bass, but it's not the same quality (to my ears) as either the Clear Mg's or the 9200's. I don't feel like the Denons are lacking in quantity of bass, either. Not by a long shot.

I recognized several hours ago that these phones were quite good, but they did sound a little different from my beloved Focals. Though to be honest, they were more alike than they were different. I think a big reason for that is the EQ that I'm applying to them. The whole purpose of using EQ that's based on measurements is to get to an agreed-upon standard of sound, in this case the Harman curve. Harman doesn't appeal to everyone but it does to me. So it makes sense that they would sound somewhat similar when I'm technically modifying both of them to try to achieve the same standard. The obvious question then becomes, "which one does it better?" That can lead one down the rabbit hole of chasing measurements, so I prefer to instead determine which one sounds better in the pursuit of the Harman curve. I think I'm ready to say it's the Denons, at least for me. Wow, that feels almost like heresy to type. But all I have to do is switch back to the Focals and listen to the same track again. To be clear, the Focals still sound very good, but I just find the Denons to be more fun and involving to listen to. I really can't pick out any obvious weaknesses.

One thing I found interesting is that I assumed my EQ was negating or at least taming the Denons somewhat notorious hot treble, so I tried listening without any EQ. To my surprise it seemed to have the opposite effect. I hate to use the cliche' term "veil", but without EQ they did indeed sound veiled. Not at all what I expected. The EQ is allowing the midrange and lower treble range to have a clear, gorgeous, liquid sound that's just a delight to listen to. It's not there without the EQ, not to me.

One final note. I don't really have "go-to" tracks to listen to when I'm trying to evaluate equipment, though I probably should. But while listening tonight I did think of something specific I wanted to check. At the 5:00 point of "3000 Days" by The Pineapple Thief there's some background bass that seems to be pressurizing the headphones to the point that you're "feeling" the bass more than hearing it. That's not very precise wording and I don't think that's what's really happening, but I had always noticed and liked that effect with the Focals so I had to make sure the Denons could at least match it. Short answer, yes, they certainly can.

 

[MatW]

Well guys, I'm keeping the Denons, they're really good. At this point I'd struggle to think of something that the Clear Mg's do obviously better. No headphones I'd heard before them had the same quality and quantity of bass that they did, but a few listening hours ago I would've told you that the 9200's were at least their equal. Now I'm ready to say that they actually surpass them. But I'm not a bass-head. Quality (snappy, accurate, real-sounding) bass is what appeals to me. The LCD-X '21's, for instance, have plenty of bass, but it's not the same quality (to my ears) as either the Clear Mg's or the 9200's. I don't feel like the Denons are lacking in quantity of bass, either. Not by a long shot.

I recognized several hours ago that these phones were quite good, but they did sound a little different from my beloved Focals. Though to be honest, they were more alike than they were different. I think a big reason for that is the EQ that I'm applying to them. The whole purpose of using EQ that's based on measurements is to get to an agreed-upon standard of sound, in this case the Harman curve. Harman doesn't appeal to everyone but it does to me. So it makes sense that they would sound somewhat similar when I'm technically modifying both of them to try to achieve the same standard. The obvious question then becomes, "which one does it better?" That can lead one down the rabbit hole of chasing measurements, so I prefer to instead determine which one sounds better in the pursuit of the Harman curve. I think I'm ready to say it's the Denons, at least for me. Wow, that feels almost like heresy to type. But all I have to do is switch back to the Focals and listen to the same track again. To be clear, the Focals still sound very good, but I just find the Denons to be more fun and involving to listen to. I really can't pick out any obvious weaknesses.

One thing I found interesting is that I assumed my EQ was negating or at least taming the Denons somewhat notorious hot treble, so I tried listening without any EQ. To my surprise it seemed to have the opposite effect. I hate to use the cliche' term "veil", but without EQ they did indeed sound veiled. Not at all what I expected. The EQ is allowing the midrange and lower treble range to have a clear, gorgeous, liquid sound that's just a delight to listen to. It's not there without the EQ, not to me.

One final note. I don't really have "go-to" tracks to listen to when I'm trying to evaluate equipment, though I probably should. But while listening tonight I did think of something specific I wanted to check. At the 5:00 point of "3000 Days" by The Pineapple Thief there's some background bass that seems to be pressurizing the headphones to the point that you're "feeling" the bass more than hearing it. That's not very precise wording and I don't think that's what's really happening, but I had always noticed and liked that effect with the Focals so I had to make sure the Denons could at least match it. Short answer, yes, they certainly can.

I am glad you like them. I'm listening to the D9200 now and I really like it. I don't have an issue with the treble at all. They sound very clear to me, no veil that needs lifting, but I'd be interested in trying your EQ settings, if you don't mind sharing them?

 

[Shooter41]

I am glad you like them. I'm listening to the D9200 now and I really like it. I don't have an issue with the treble at all. They sound very clear to me, no veil that needs lifting, but I'd be interested in trying your EQ settings, if you don't mind sharing them?

Sure, do you have the ability to use convolution? If so I highly recommend going that route and I can try to attach the zip file that will set up the filter for you. If not these are the two parametric setups I found;

 

[MatW]

Sure, do you have the ability to use convolution? If so I highly recommend going that route and I can try to attach the zip file that will set up the filter for you. If not these are the two parametric setups I found;

Thanks for this and your tips on convolution filters through PM. I'll try that later. For now, I plugged in the parametric EQ numbers into Roon and gave it a spin. I can see why you would describe it as lifting a veil, as the main feature of the profile is to lift 2k Hz by about 6 dB. Stock tuning is indeed recessed there. But I actually like that, as it goes well with metal, which I listen to a lot. The recession gives guitars a certain "muddiness", and the EQ makes them a little harsh. But it's nice to have the option of switching between the two sound signatures. The great benefit of EQ is that it multiplies the number of headphones one owns...

 

[slovell]

Does anyone have contact info for oem replacement ear pads from Denon?