DUNU DN-2000J -- More Than Evolution?

[Uberclocked]

[actually, I don't want to get into another argument so nvm]

 

[1TrickPony]

I just amped my dn2k with the alo rx and that pretty much did the trick.
Drums, cymbals, tablas, percussions, castanets and tambourines had a lifelike response and decay. Timbre perfect and no sibilance with plenty of air and superb (augmented) resolution.
I can say that if people know what options they have to upgrade their rig, they wouldn't need to flip their dn2000 at all.

I'm a closet treblehead but sibilance is a deal breaker for me.

 

[PixelSquish]

I just amped my dn2k with the alo rx and that pretty much did the trick.
Drums, cymbals, tablas, percussions, castanets and tambourines had a lifelike response and decay. Timbre perfect and no sibilance with plenty of air and superb (augmented) resolution.
I can say that if people know what options they have to upgrade their rig, they wouldn't need to flip their dn2000 at all.

I'm a closet treblehead but sibilance is a deal breaker for me.

so the dn2000's were sibilant before you properly sourced them? confused as to what the point of your post is really.

 

[1TrickPony]

so the dn2000's were sibilant before you properly sourced them? confused as to what the point of your post is really.

Yeah. There was some sibilance even with the dn2000 (not with my titans-1) . Man, I must have spent 100 hours of burn in time plus tons of tip auditions for me to find the sweet spot. Why couldn't I listen to some Beetlebum (Blur) without an ice pick in my ear.

 

[PixelSquish]

Yeah. There was some sibilance even with the dn2000 (not with my titans-1) . Man, I must have spent 100 hours of burn in time plus tons of tip auditions for me to find the sweet spot. Why couldn't I listen to some Beetlebum (Blur) without an ice pick in my ear.

the dn2k or the dn2kJ's?

 

[1TrickPony]

the dn2k or the dn2kJ's?

dn2k.

 

[tomscy2000]

In terms of what affects the sound of the DN-2000/2000J, unrelated to fit and tips, I can identify the following areas (from greatest to least effect, IMHO):
 
(1) Wiring of the BA drivers: the TWFK in the 2000J is almost surely wired parallel without polarity inversion (for low-pass effects). If there are passive components, they would be wired to the FK side. This affects the FR of the 2000J greatly when compared to the 2000.
 
(3) The housings for the 2000 and 2000J are approximated as compressible right circular cylinders, meaning the 'height' of the cylinder affects the half-wave resonance of the driver. However, although the housing is smaller, I am not led to believe that the cylindrical dimensions in the 2000J are very diffierent from those of the 2000. DUNU has said about as much. At most, the half-wave resonances will affect upper treble, which may impact treble extension. The length/diameter of the output port also figures into treble extension and reverse horn effect on acoustic low-passing. However, IIRC, the 2000 and 2000J have identical lengths/diameters. Of course, the housing material also matters, but in this case, the two are the same, AFAIK.
 
(3) Mass of the diaphragm, surface treatment: The 2000J's diaphragm is likely quite a bit lower in mass than is the 2000's, making it more sensitive and lower impedance (fewer coil winds necessary to achieve the same SPL) with perhaps the likely added effect of greater transient speed, but because of the LCP material and subsequent titanium treatment, surface "regularity" and "stiffness" help lower distortion and reduce ringing, amongst other issues of excessive decay.
 
(3) Coil winds, coil material, and ferromagnet material: this has to do with the diaphragm's mass --- if the mass is lower, then the same number of coil winds will impart a stronger impulse for the transducer. If the coil is made of a different type of material, e.g. high-purity CCAW, silver-clad wire, etc. and if the ferromagnet is made with rare earth metals, e.g. neodymium, then the B field generated is of a different intensity and spatial density. The resulting impulse will differ as a result. I don't believe this factors as much into the difference between the 2000 and 2000J because it's unlikely the 2000 uses a sub-par materials for the voice coil and magnet, and any "upgrade" wouldn't necessarily impart a huge difference in SQ. It's not like they're claiming >1T levels of B field strength like the BeyerdynamAK earphone does.

 

[Aero Dynamik]

  In terms of what affects the sound of the DN-2000/2000J, unrelated to fit and tips, I can identify the following areas (from greatest to least effect, IMHO):
 
(1) Wiring of the BA drivers: the TWFK in the 2000J is almost surely wired parallel without polarity inversion (for low-pass effects). If there are passive components, they would be wired to the FK side. This affects the FR of the 2000J greatly when compared to the 2000.
 
(3) The housings for the 2000 and 2000J are approximated as compressible right circular cylinders, meaning the 'height' of the cylinder affects the half-wave resonance of the driver. However, although the housing is smaller, I am not led to believe that the cylindrical dimensions in the 2000J are very diffierent from those of the 2000. DUNU has said about as much. At most, the half-wave resonances will affect upper treble, which may impact treble extension. The length/diameter of the output port also figures into treble extension and reverse horn effect on acoustic low-passing. However, IIRC, the 2000 and 2000J have identical lengths/diameters. Of course, the housing material also matters, but in this case, the two are the same, AFAIK.
 
(3) Mass of the diaphragm, surface treatment: The 2000J's diaphragm is likely quite a bit lower in mass than is the 2000's, making it more sensitive and lower impedance (fewer coil winds necessary to achieve the same SPL) with perhaps the likely added effect of greater transient speed, but because of the LCP material and subsequent titanium treatment, surface "regularity" and "stiffness" help lower distortion and reduce ringing, amongst other issues of excessive decay.
 
(3) Coil winds, coil material, and ferromagnet material: this has to do with the diaphragm's mass --- if the mass is lower, then the same number of coil winds will impart a stronger impulse for the transducer. If the coil is made of a different type of material, e.g. high-purity CCAW, silver-clad wire, etc. and if the ferromagnet is made with rare earth metals, e.g. neodymium, then the B field generated is of a different intensity and spatial density. The resulting impulse will differ as a result. I don't believe this factors as much into the difference between the 2000 and 2000J because it's unlikely the 2000 uses a sub-par materials for the voice coil and magnet, and any "upgrade" wouldn't necessarily impart a huge difference in SQ. It's not like they're claiming >1T levels of B field strength like the BeyerdynamAK earphone does.

Couldn't have said it better myself!
 
(3) Yeah, that's exactly what I meant! 

 ​

 ​

 ​

 ​

Seriously; thank you for this highly technical description of the differences between the DN-2000J and the DN-2000. Not that I understood half of it but it would seem to me that your post clearly indicates that the DN-2000J constitutes a technical evolution compared to the DN.-2000.

 

[Aero Dynamik]

FWIW, I had the AKG K3003 for over a year and enjoyed it immensely. I used it both with the "Reference filters" but mostly with the "High Boost filters". I felt it outperformed all of my other IEMs at the time.
 
I no longer have the AKG K3003 as I sold it so I can't compare it to the DN-2000J directly, but from memory I enjoy the DN-2000J at least as much as I did the K3003, and in some respects I feel the DN-2000J outperforms the K3003. I'm mostly thinking about sound stage (larger, more 3D, holographic, easier to discern distance), resolution, detail retrieval and instrument separation, and I can't really remember any sound aspect of the K3003 as better than that of the DN-2000J. Oh, I think it's easier to listen at loud volumes with the K3003 as the DN-2000J tends to become too "intense" at loud volumes and a tad bit fatiguing in the (very) long run. Anyway, I basically always listen at low volumes so it's no problem. The K3003 is also a fantastic performer at low volumes.

 

[Aero Dynamik]

  [actually, I don't want to get into another argument so nvm]

OK, I won't!

 

[1TrickPony]

so the dn2000's were sibilant before you properly sourced them? confused as to what the point of your post is really.

The point of the post was directed to peeps like Aero Dynamik who can probably go on and write 50 more pages as to how advanced this technology is found on the dn2000j (even though half the technology could pretty much swoosh above his head lol.

Case in point, not everyone is gonna enjoy a bright iem. God, there was this guy named Levi on this forum that bought it and went through a nightmare trying "customize" it down to his liking. He didn't make it. I'd rather read a proper review with a grain grain of salt than spend another 200 hours trying to convince myself this thing is for the average Joe. Oh trust me, Dunu is the one that sets the tone when it comes to hybrid listening when it comes to bang for buck.to each their own.

 

[raybone0566]

I found with d2kj I have to be a bit selective with the music I listen to. Same as when I use my hd800's. They are going to reveal everything in the the recording. That's what's fun about this hobby and owning way more earphones than a normal person should.

 

[Uberclocked]

I found with d2kj I have to be a bit selective with the music I listen to. Same as when I use my hd800's. They are going to reveal everything in the the recording. That's what's fun about this hobby and owning way more earphones than a normal person should.

That and the second mortgage.

 

[james444]

Seriously; thank you for this highly technical description of the differences between the DN-2000J and the DN-2000. Not that I understood half of it but it would seem to me that your post clearly indicates that the DN-2000J constitutes a technical evolution compared to the DN.-2000.

 
I'd say his thread title and OP supports your assumption.

 

 

[Aero Dynamik]

I just amped my dn2k with the alo rx and that pretty much did the trick.
Drums, cymbals, tablas, percussions, castanets and tambourines had a lifelike response and decay. Timbre perfect and no sibilance with plenty of air and superb (augmented) resolution.
I can say that if people know what options they have to upgrade their rig, they wouldn't need to flip their dn2000 at all.

I'm a closet treblehead but sibilance is a deal breaker for me.

I've had a few good amps (and IEMs, see my profile) but never felt they did anything really substantial for the overall SQ of any of my IEMs. I've pretty much given up on amps/dacs and now spend my money on headphones instead.
 
I'm not saying you're not getting a "lifelike response and decay" from your ALO amp. Only you can be the judge of that, but to any newcomers to this hobby I most definitely recommend spending your money on different kinds of headphones first and foremost. If you believe that this or that amp is going to turn your current IEM into something they're not, chances are you're going to be disappointed.
 
EDIT: Just to make sure; of course a descent source is required, but it doesn't have to cost a fortune. I firmly believe a DAP such as for example the FiiO X3 that I happen to have myself is more than sufficient for most IEM needs. Also, descent files is a plus too. I pretty much reject anything below CD quality (16/44) and MP3s with a lower bit rate than 128 kbps.