DT880/2005 v. DT880/2003
Aug 3, 2007 at 7:27 PM Thread Starter Post #1 of 27

pataburd

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 1, 2003
Posts
6,326
Likes
788
Location
Rural New York State
To my ears, the DT880/2005 sound like they've definitely lost high end extension (and to some degree, low end extension) compared to their (2003) predecessor. They sound more like the ATH-A900LTD, with everything sort of heaped up in the middle, except they lack the "sweetness" of the 900LTD. (With 350 hours of break-in, reported from the guy I swapped with, they should be broken in.)

Those open, seemingly boundless highs--what I liked so much about the DT880/2003--are apparently no more w/the 2005 iteration.

Anyone else feel/hear this way?
 
Aug 3, 2007 at 7:51 PM Post #2 of 27

Pibborando

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Mar 3, 2006
Posts
728
Likes
10
Everything you just said is like the opposite of what it should be. Are you living in some kind of alternate bizarro world? The '05 DT 880s have been reported consistently as being a bit brighter and bassier than the '03 model, and EVERYONE knows the A900s have a recessed midrange! I mean, those cans are crazy bright and have ridiculous bass.

What's going on here...
 
Aug 3, 2007 at 7:59 PM Post #3 of 27

sacd lover

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Aug 31, 2002
Posts
8,190
Likes
33
I have owned both versions of the 880 and I agree with you the treble is less emphasized. But, I have a different taste and I like the less emphasized highs of the new model. The new model also seems to have more bass richness and overall is a much better balanced headphone .... IMO. That said, the headphone while quite good was still a touch sibilant to my ears.
frown.gif
 
Aug 3, 2007 at 11:29 PM Post #4 of 27

pataburd

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 1, 2003
Posts
6,326
Likes
788
Location
Rural New York State
Quote:

Originally Posted by Pibborando /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Everything you just said is like the opposite of what it should be. Are you living in some kind of alternate bizarro world? The '05 DT 880s have been reported consistently as being a bit brighter and bassier than the '03 model, and EVERYONE knows the A900s have a recessed midrange! I mean, those cans are crazy bright and have ridiculous bass.

What's going on here...



The DT880/2005 I have may not be fully broken in (although I doubt it, if the former owner's reported 350 hours is correct), but the high frequency extension of the 2003 model definitely isn't there for me, ZERO airiness. My 2003 model never sounded "bright" or sibilant--the 2005 do.
 
Aug 3, 2007 at 11:35 PM Post #5 of 27

xinoxide

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Dec 16, 2006
Posts
571
Likes
12
the 880 '05 keeps sounding more and more like something i want on the sides of my face, id take that any day over having mamory jugs on the sides of my face.

these are next on my to-get list before i die, right under the edition 9's, and a girlfriend
very_evil_smiley.gif
 
Aug 4, 2007 at 1:35 AM Post #6 of 27

fishski13

Member of the Trade: SolderWorksAudio
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Posts
1,908
Likes
40
pataburd,
i just returned my '05 dt880. in my set-up, they sounded boring, a bit too bright, lacking tonal color, and zero bass with jazz and classical (although the bass was bit better with bassier music). i think with a bit more meat on the bones, they would have stayed. i'm keeping the Proline 2500 and am exploring a cable upgrade to see how much i can squeeze out of these phones. sonically, they jive really well with my ancillaries, and most of all, they have a wonderful ability to make music involving with a lively presentation.

PACE
 
Aug 4, 2007 at 4:20 AM Post #7 of 27

pataburd

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 1, 2003
Posts
6,326
Likes
788
Location
Rural New York State
I heartily agree with upstateguy (from another thread). There's something "pointy" and annoying about the DT880/2005's treble; more lower-to-mid treble energy compared to the 2003 model, but the ultra high and simultaneously ultra smooth treble has conspicuously vanished. The treble sounds hard, rolled off, sheared off even. While the DT880/2005 treble is spritely, it's not airy and, at least for me, not nearly as immersive and engaging as the DT880/2003.

Gone, too, is the deep, broody, plowing and expansive--almost breathing--bass. The 2005 bass is "humpy" like a bubble in tension that never bursts and fails to release what is pent up inside.

In short, while the DT880/2005 has filled in the mid and upper bass, together with the lower/mid treble (relative to the DT880/2003), their sound has become--to my ears, anyway--"constipated," edgy, pokey and jabby, but not open, not enveloping, not alluring like its predecessor.

I'll give my 2005 version another 100 or so hours (on top of their reported 350 hours already logged w/the previous owner), but as of now I am sorely disappointed, and sorely in want of the "good ol'" and in my opinion, "better ol'" DT880/2003!
 
Aug 4, 2007 at 4:34 AM Post #8 of 27

pataburd

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 1, 2003
Posts
6,326
Likes
788
Location
Rural New York State
Quote:

Originally Posted by fishski13 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
pataburd,
i just returned my '05 dt880. in my set-up, they sounded boring, a bit too bright, lacking tonal color, and zero bass with jazz and classical (although the bass was bit better with bassier music). i think with a bit more meat on the bones, they would have stayed. i'm keeping the Proline 2500 and am exploring a cable upgrade to see how much i can squeeze out of these phones. sonically, they jive really well with my ancillaries, and most of all, they have a wonderful ability to make music involving with a lively presentation.

PACE



Fish,

I prefer the Proline 750 to the DT880/2005 (and the PL2500, BTW). The RAL Cryo-Silver Reference cable really takes the Prolines to their positive limits, too, IMHO, deepening and better defining the bass (among other things). : ) Although I hear more tonal color w/the DT880/2005 than w/the PL750, the DT are now too upper mid/lower treble forward and mid/upper bass prominent for my tastes. I think the PL750, in addition to being more visceral and direct than the DT880/2005, are also more honest in terms of letting you hear a song's recording characteristics.

My DT880/2005, short-lived as they are, may be on the chopping block soon. Once the K701 w/the RAL cable mod arrive, the Beyers will most likely be the first to go. In short, the DT880/2005 have been a huge disappointment for me. I'll take the 2003 version any day.

PatABurd
 
Aug 4, 2007 at 4:47 AM Post #9 of 27

pataburd

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 1, 2003
Posts
6,326
Likes
788
Location
Rural New York State
To Whom It May Concern:
I'm addressing treble (and bass) extension--not energy/quantity here. Yes, I agree that the the DT2005 are brighter: due to a comparative excess of lower/mid treble, but they are not extended in the treble. I also agree that there is more bass: comparatively more upper/mid bass, but not low, extended bass. In short, the "reach" across the frequency spectrum is appreciably less w/the DT880/2005.
 
Aug 4, 2007 at 11:18 AM Post #10 of 27

fishski13

Member of the Trade: SolderWorksAudio
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Posts
1,908
Likes
40
Quote:

Originally Posted by pataburd /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Fish,

I prefer the Proline 750 to the DT880/2005 (and the PL2500, BTW). The RAL Cryo-Silver Reference cable really takes the Prolines to their positive limits, too, IMHO, deepening and better defining the bass (among other things). : ) Although I hear more tonal color w/the DT880/2005 than w/the PL750, the DT are now too upper mid/lower treble forward and mid/upper bass prominent for my tastes. I think the PL750, in addition to being more visceral and direct than the DT880/2005, are also more honest in terms of letting you hear a song's recording characteristics.

My DT880/2005, short-lived as they are, may be on the chopping block soon. Once the K701 w/the RAL cable mod arrive, the Beyers will most likely be the first to go. In short, the DT880/2005 have been a huge disappointment for me. I'll take the 2003 version any day.

PatABurd



dt880 tonally more colorful than PL 2500? i don't doubt your findings, it's just interesting how we all hear differently and how different associated electronics can yield different results. i can imagine the Beyers sounding quite nice with a tube amp.

as a former double bass player, i couldn't get anything satisfing from the Beyers. also the top end was too piercing and spot-lit, but the midrange was great. ultimately though, i focus on the ability of a piece of hi-fi to create music, not surgical renditions of so called neutrality. if they Beyers had more "meat on the bones" and "let their hair down" a bit, they maybe would have stayed.

i plan on buying either the Silver D or Blue D from Drew next week. i like the idea of a 30 day guarentee so if one doesn't work out, i can try the other.

PACE
 
Aug 4, 2007 at 12:35 PM Post #11 of 27

pataburd

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 1, 2003
Posts
6,326
Likes
788
Location
Rural New York State
Fish,
Go for the silver! : ) Are you getting the detachable Proline cable? I've got the RAL silver cable; it would be great to hear Drew's Proline cable, too!
Patrick
 
Aug 4, 2007 at 1:36 PM Post #12 of 27

tbonner1

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Mar 13, 2002
Posts
1,565
Likes
10
Thanks Pataburd.

Sorry you are not happy with the 2005 DT880. My findings align closely to yours and I too was disappointed.
 
Aug 4, 2007 at 3:56 PM Post #14 of 27

fishski13

Member of the Trade: SolderWorksAudio
Joined
Nov 2, 2004
Posts
1,908
Likes
40
Quote:

Originally Posted by pataburd /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Fish,
Go for the silver! : ) Are you getting the detachable Proline cable? I've got the RAL silver cable; it would be great to hear Drew's Proline cable, too!
Patrick



yes, detachable. i'm thinking Silver too.

PACE
 
Aug 4, 2007 at 4:49 PM Post #15 of 27

pataburd

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 1, 2003
Posts
6,326
Likes
788
Location
Rural New York State
Quote:

Originally Posted by d-cee /img/forum/go_quote.gif
it's because of the high end of the '03 DT880s that I love them so much

/me cradles his best $150 ever spent on a can



Me, too. I think the low end extension was much better, too, with the DT880/2003.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top