[james444]

  I'm certainly no expert, but over the years I've experimented with EQ quite a bit and I never noticed it having an impact on - for example - detail retrieval, resolution, speed and dynamics. I think your belief in FR is exaggerated. Sound reproduction is a lot more complex than perfect FR.
 
FR will of course effect the overall signature of the sound (warmer, brighter, forward, etc.) but characteristics such as resolution, speed, dynamic responsiveness, etc.is the effect of other design choices, or so I would believe. If this wasn't case wouldn't it be meaningless to have, for example various kinds of driver types? We could then settle with a single IEM and simply apply EQ after our preferences.
 
I'm absolutely convinced the DN-2000J would still be more competent than the DN-2000 even if it would have the exact FR of the DN-2000J.

 
I've been thinking along the same lines for many years, and even went so far as to challenge master-EQer @Joe Bloggs in that regard.
 
If you want to read the story of my crushing defeat

, it's here: review-tour-somic-mh412-viper4android-the-put-up-or-shut-up-review-and-tour

 

[Aero Dynamik]

 

  I'm certainly no expert, but over the years I've experimented with EQ quite a bit and I never noticed it having an impact on - for example - detail retrieval, resolution, speed and dynamics. I think your belief in FR is exaggerated. Sound reproduction is a lot more complex than perfect FR.
 
FR will of course effect the overall signature of the sound (warmer, brighter, forward, etc.) but characteristics such as resolution, speed, dynamic responsiveness, etc.is the effect of other design choices, or so I would believe. If this wasn't case wouldn't it be meaningless to have, for example various kinds of driver types? We could then settle with a single IEM and simply apply EQ after our preferences.
 
I'm absolutely convinced the DN-2000J would still be more competent than the DN-2000 even if it would have the exact FR of the DN-2000J.

 
I've been thinking along the same lines for many years, and even went so far as to challenge master-EQer @Joe Bloggs in that regard.
 
If you want to read the story of my crushing defeat

, it's here: review-tour-somic-mh412-viper4android-the-put-up-or-shut-up-review-and-tour

Well, if my venerated IEM guru james444 says it's all about FR, then it is all about FR!
 
My most sincere and deepest apologies for displaying my ignorance in such a blatant and disrespectful way! 

 

 

[Brooko]

Thanks James.
 
Aero - I won't go into it in too much detail - as it'll only take the thread off track.  But go back to the original poster's question:
 
Quote:

Should I buy the 2000 for less than $200 or buy the 2000j instead ? Is it really a big improvement ?

 
to which you replied
 

 The tuning share similarities but the competence of the DN-2000J is hugely greater than that of the DN-2000. 

 
The point I was making was that:

1. They don't actually share a lot of similarities in the tuning.  The graphs show that clearly.  I own both pairs - they are very different.
2. The points you made about perceived detail retrieval, resolution, dynamics, and sound stage are largely a by-product of the different tuning (ie frequency response).

 
Yes the titanium dynamic effectively seems to make a difference to transient speed.  But take any bass enhanced dynamic driver - cut it's mid-bass, and a little of the sub-bass too.  Watch what happens to your impression of the change. Less decay (which mostly occurs in mid and lower bass with dynamics), and:

• The earphone appears to be faster because it has less decay
• Detail appears to be better as there is less masking of other frequencies - highs are easier to hear
• Dynamics are better because you can more easily hear contrast

 
Now add to that the peaks in the presence range at 2K and more importantly 5-7K and that is what heightens the clarity, and which we also perceive as widening the sound stage. If you look at the actual earphones, there is an extra vent on the 2KJ which is probably also having an effect, but I doubt whether the crossfeed component is actually changed.
 
Anyway - I do agree with you that perceptually I would class the 2KJ as being superior for my tastes.  But most of this has to do with the tuning.

 

[d marc0]

Hi guys,
 
My review of the DN-2000j is up:
http://www.head-fi.org/products/dunu-dn-2000j/reviews/14352
 

 
 

CONCLUSION: After spending quite a bit time with the DN-2000j, I can truly say that it is worthy of its flagship badge. The competitive pricing that DUNU has introduced matched with the DN-2000j's excellent performance that can easily stand against top-of-the-line IEMs priced well above its category puts this company ahead of the competition. If you are looking for an IEM that performs like a top-of-the-line flagship but won't cost a fortune, look no further. This IEM may require a bit of work to reduce the lower treble emphasis but like what they all say: "Patience is a virtue". If you have the patience in finding the right tips, the right amount of listening volume, and maybe a bit of mod in the long run... the DN-2000j will more than satisfy your needs. Not only that, it is also more than capable in making you experience what a top-of-the-line IEM sounds like.

 

[Aero Dynamik]

^ Very nice review! Thanks d marc0!

 

[WhatToChoose]

Hey guys, just one question: Do the dn2000j have ANY siblance at all? I think sibilance is a deal breaker, since I had the RHA T10s, and everytime a singer said an "s" word it was like this:
 
Instead of "Started at the bottom"
 
It was "SSSHHHHHHHtarted from the bottom"
 
So....any of that in ANY amount with the DN2kjs?
 

 

[Hapster]

Hey guys, just one question: Do the dn2000j have ANY siblance at all? I think sibilance is a deal breaker, since I had the RHA T10s, and everytime a singer said an "s" word it was like this:

Instead of "Started at the bottom"

It was "SSSHHHHHHHtarted from the bottom"

So....any of that in ANY amount with the DN2kjs?

 

I'm even more impressed that they changed the lyrics too.

 

[Aero Dynamik]

  Hey guys, just one question: Do the dn2000j have ANY siblance at all? I think sibilance is a deal breaker, since I had the RHA T10s, and everytime a singer said an "s" word it was like this:
 
Instead of "Started at the bottom"
 
It was "SSSHHHHHHHtarted from the bottom"
 
So....any of that in ANY amount with the DN2kjs?
 

I'm not bothered by any sibilant sounds at all but I believe this has been reported as a problem by a few posters so better look elsewhere I guess.
 
Good luck!

 

[Aero Dynamik]

 

Hey guys, just one question: Do the dn2000j have ANY siblance at all? I think sibilance is a deal breaker, since I had the RHA T10s, and everytime a singer said an "s" word it was like this:

Instead of "Started at the bottom"

It was "SSSHHHHHHHtarted from the bottom"

So....any of that in ANY amount with the DN2kjs?

 

I'm even more impressed that they changed the lyrics too.

Yeah, I say; stay away from the RHA T10s! 

 

[Paulus XII]

I'm even more impressed that they changed the lyrics too.

 
lol

 

[Aero Dynamik]

 

  I'm certainly no expert, but over the years I've experimented with EQ quite a bit and I never noticed it having an impact on - for example - detail retrieval, resolution, speed and dynamics. I think your belief in FR is exaggerated. Sound reproduction is a lot more complex than perfect FR.
 
FR will of course effect the overall signature of the sound (warmer, brighter, forward, etc.) but characteristics such as resolution, speed, dynamic responsiveness, etc.is the effect of other design choices, or so I would believe. If this wasn't case wouldn't it be meaningless to have, for example various kinds of driver types? We could then settle with a single IEM and simply apply EQ after our preferences.
 
I'm absolutely convinced the DN-2000J would still be more competent than the DN-2000 even if it would have the exact FR of the DN-2000J.

 
I've been thinking along the same lines for many years, and even went so far as to challenge master-EQer @Joe Bloggs in that regard.
 
If you want to read the story of my crushing defeat

, it's here: review-tour-somic-mh412-viper4android-the-put-up-or-shut-up-review-and-tour

I sort of smile to my self with abashment when looking back at my own post:
 
"I'm absolutely convinced the DN-2000J would still be more competent than the DN-2000 even if it would have the exact FR of the DN-2000J."
 
I've basically thought about FR in a rather one-dimensional way; basically as the SPL for any given frequency. Thinking a bit more multidimensional about it, it's obvious that any sound wave has a life, i.e. it's born in a certain way, it lives in a certain way, and it dies in a certain way and it does so in an environment surrounded by other frequencies. In this light if two phones have the exact same FR they will indeed sound identical. Whether the driver is titanium coated or made of chequered sheet is irrelevant as long as both generate the same FR. So far, so good!
 
However, we can't know for certain that two different phones can clone each other's FR. If for example the dynamic driver of one phone is titanium treated and the dynamic driver of the other phone isn't, we can't take for granted that both phones can clone each other's FR.
 
Now, this is just a guess, but I believe the DN-2000 is unable to clone the entire FR spectrum of the DN-2000J as its dynamic driver is titanium treated. Vice versa, I believe the DN-2000J is able to clone the entire FR spectrum of the DN-2000 as its dynamic driver isn't titanium treated. I.e. I'm sure the DN-2000J can be tuned to sound (more or less) identical to the DN-2000 but not the other way around. Do note however that in real life I feel pretty confident that the DN-2000 can be tuned to sound like the DN-2000J close enough to at least fool me more or less completely.
 
So, with a madman's insistence I argue and feel pretty confident that the DN-2000J is a more competent phone than the DN-2000!
 

NOW...​

​

 ​

 

[Uberclocked]

  Now, this is just a guess, but I believe the DN-2000 is unable to clone the entire FR spectrum of the DN-2000J as its dynamic driver is titanium treated. Vice versa, I believe the DN-2000J is able to clone the entire FR spectrum of the DN-2000 as its dynamic driver isn't titanium treated. I.e. I'm sure the DN-2000J can be tuned to sound (more or less) identical to the DN-2000 but not the other way around.

You're falling pretty hard for marketing there.

 

[Aero Dynamik]

 

  Now, this is just a guess, but I believe the DN-2000 is unable to clone the entire FR spectrum of the DN-2000J as its dynamic driver is titanium treated. Vice versa, I believe the DN-2000J is able to clone the entire FR spectrum of the DN-2000 as its dynamic driver isn't titanium treated. I.e. I'm sure the DN-2000J can be tuned to sound (more or less) identical to the DN-2000 but not the other way around.

You're falling pretty hard for marketing there.

I realize that's what it may look like. The truth though is that it is the only technical driver difference I'm aware of, and nota bene if you read carefully I'm guessing!
 
What I'm guessing is that the DD of the DN-2000J has better speed (is able to start and stop faster) than that of the DN-2000. That is, that the DD of the DN-2000J is more BA like in this particular respect but of course still being a DD pumping more air.
 
Now as you state that I'm "falling for marketing" I take it you may have information that indicates that the titanium treated DD doesn't improve the driver's technical capabilities. If so, please share! If not, then, well...

 ​

​

 

 ​

 

[PixelSquish]

  I realize that's what it may look like. The truth though is that it is the only technical driver difference I'm aware of, and nota bene if you read carefully I'm guessing!
 
What I'm guessing is that the DD of the DN-2000J has better speed (is able to start and stop faster) than that of the DN-2000. That is, that the DD of the DN-2000J is more BA like in this particular respect but of course still being a DD pumping more air.
 
Now as you state that I'm "falling for marketing" I take it you may have information that indicates that the titanium treated DD doesn't improve the driver's technical capabilities. If so, please share! If not, then, well...

 ​

​

 

 ​

the J is also smaller than the original 2000 - which means there can be multiple differences with the guts of these two models. it also has a newer "four core cable" as well which may affect things.

 

[Aero Dynamik]

Spoiler: Wrniang: Soilper!

Originally Posted by PixelSquish /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 

  I realize that's what it may look like. The truth though is that it is the only technical driver difference I'm aware of, and nota bene if you read carefully I'm guessing!
 
What I'm guessing is that the DD of the DN-2000J has better speed (is able to start and stop faster) than that of the DN-2000. That is, that the DD of the DN-2000J is more BA like in this particular respect but of course still being a DD pumping more air.
 
Now as you state that I'm "falling for marketing" I take it you may have information that indicates that the titanium treated DD doesn't improve the driver's technical capabilities. If so, please share! If not, then, well...

 ​

​

 

 ​

 ​

the J is also smaller than the original 2000 - which means there can be multiple differences with the guts of these two models. it also has a newer "four core cable" as well which may affect things.

Well, we'll just have to wait and see what Uberclocked has to say about it. Perhaps size and cable is just marketing too!?