[ldj325]

I attended the recent NorCal regional meet this past Saturday in the Bay Area. This is a continuation of my comments on the meet. (found here: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/showth...35#post3227735
)

I had a chance to do an interesting little experiment at the NorCal meet this past Saturday involving 3 of the 4 Edition 9s in attendance. MaloS had his fairly new Edition 9s but they are the only ones I didn't listen to. I also don't know the number of burn in hours on his but I do know he got them fairly recently.
(Also as a side note I believe that there were only two Edition 9s at the International meet in April--what are now my pair and another pair that Ultrasone had. I believe that neither pair was burned in, mine for sure had low hours on them.)

I was in the High End Room at this meet with a well known amp builder (not Ray Samuels) and another owner of Edition 9s. I overheard an unfavorable comment about the Edition 9 sound signature that didn't match my experience of the Edition 9s. I went to listen to the pair that was there (turns out with about 125 hours on them) and I didn't think they sounded very good at all (in comparison to what Edition 9s can sound like). To my ears they had a slightly wooly, inarticulate, and somewhat boomy bass. There was hash in the mid-range, and they lacked the quality of silky smoothness of sound and overall integration of sound that is one of the hallmarks of the Edition 9 for me. So I had them listen to mine (with at least 500-600 hours or more on them) and the amp builder said (which we all agreed with) that "those don't even sound like the same headphone."

So the three od us set there and A/Bed the unburned ones against mine with the same exact source/volume level on the amp-just substituting one headphone for the other in the jack. All three of us felt it wasn't even close as a general perception, there was a very apparent difference for the better with my Edition 9s. Later Voltron came by with his Edition 9s, the estimate was something beyond 125 hours but not 400--maybe 200 was mentioned but I can't recall exactly. This time 2 or three of us heard a difference but less noticable between mine and his. Especially the first one was closer to comparing a 2500 to an Edition 9 (maybe not that much, but enough to make them sound like mine were a higher grade model in the Ultrsone line). This was very apparent to all of us.

In honesty I can't say for sure that the differences were due to the different levels of burn in, but I suspect that this is the case. It is possible that there could be a quality control issue with different Edition 9s and I was the lucky winner. But the qualities I had heard in both cans, but most noticably in the less burned in Edition 9, are qualities that I had also experienced earlier in my Edition 9 (and also two 750s that I've taken through burn in). Another thing that I've noticed is that especially in the first 75-100 hours there can be some harsh brightness in the highs that later disappears.

IME at about 200 to 250 hours the sound becomes consistently good, but I don't think the burn in is complete. That is because from approx 250 to 400 hours there is a subtle change that is still very important to the overall "mature" sound of the Edition 9s. This change seems to me to be a subtle refinement of the sound so that it become more silky. This is accompanied by a better integration of sound throughout the soundstage. It like finishing off a piece with a pleasant, lusterous shine.

So unless you've heard a fully burned in (400 hours or more) Edition 9, you haven't really heard what the Edition 9 is capable of.

 

[Dexdexter]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ldj325 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I attended the recent NorCal regional meet this past Saturday in the Bay Area.

And...?

 

[slwiser]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ldj325 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I attended the recent NorCal regional meet this past Saturday in the Bay Area.

I see you have yet to get the message about the UE9s as well. I guess we will have to live with our beautiful delusions.

I enjoyed you impressions on the other thread.

From my quick reading and I may have missed it, but could you provide a little more detail on various amps while using your balanced UE9s? You were quite extensive in your discussions of the headphone comparison but little on how the amps compared and how your UE9 responded. I would appreciate this information with the UE9 being the centerpiece.

 

[pageman99]

Anybody listen to the UE9's with the Beta22? Balanced?

Thanks for any impressions.

 

[Quint]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pageman99 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Anybody listen to the UE9's with the Beta22? Balanced? Thanks for any impressions.

I’m listening to a pair of ED9s balanced out of an RSA B-52, and the sound is mightily impressive. Not quite as magical as the R10/B-52 combo, but still pretty damned good. The biggest changes I noticed by going balanced were increased resolution, an even better low end, and audibly superior soundstaging. Some say balancing the ‘9s doesn’t do much, but I beg to differ on that point.

 

[ldj325]

Quote:

Originally Posted by pageman99 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Anybody listen to the UE9's with the Beta22? Balanced? Thanks for any impressions.

I looked for the balanced Beta 22, but couldn't find it. Someone mentioned that they didn't think that amp made it to the meet. But I listened to the Edition 9s with the single-ended Beta 22. I loved the amp and the combination. The Beta 22 was so very fast and clean, and neutral without being boring. And the Edition 9s kept up very nicely. When I am in a place to afford a high quality balanced SS amp, the Beta 22 will be right at the top of the candidates. I also like the Edition 9s with the Ray Samuels house sound through both the Apache and the B-52. If I wan't getting my Supra XLR, I'd probably go for a B-52 1st and then decide between the balanced Beta 22 or the RudiStor RPX-100 or, money no object, the high end RudiStor RPOXX (?). And the RSA Apache ws nice with the Edition 9s too. No bad choises in that bunch.

 

[ldj325]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Quint /img/forum/go_quote.gif I’m listening to a pair of ED9s balanced out of an RSA B-52, and the sound is mightily impressive. Not quite as magical as the R10/B-52 combo, but still pretty damned good. The biggest changes I noticed by going balanced were increased resolution, an even better low end, and audibly superior soundstaging. Some say balancing the ‘9s doesn’t do much, but I beg to differ on that point.

X2, especially on balancing

 

[ldj325]

Quote:

Originally Posted by slwiser /img/forum/go_quote.gif I see you have yet to get the message about the UE9s as well. I guess we will have to live with our beautiful delusions. I enjoyed you impressions on the other thread. From my quick reading and I may have missed it, but could you provide a little more detail on various amps while using your balanced UE9s? You were quite extensive in your discussions of the headphone comparison but little on how the amps compared and how your UE9 responded. I would appreciate this information with the UE9 being the centerpiece.

I think like a lot of other folks, I am just recovering from Saturday (1-2 AM at the meet for me). And I've been up all night typing these responses, as meger as they are--you slave driver.

 

[MaloS]

Mine was at 270 hours, could have asked =] The one in the SP amp room was still fairly bright, I agree, but in the face of all other headphones in the room save the Qualia, it was still the best.

 

[slwiser]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ldj325 /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think like a lot of other folks, I am just recovering from Saturday (1-2 AM at the meet for me). And I've been up all night typing these responses, as meger as they are--you slave driver.

No hurry, how about tomorrow.

Thanks

 

[mdarnton]

Mine have gone through some nasty times. When I can't stand to listen to them, I hook them up to my FM receiver for a couple of days, and they seem to push through to another phase. I have no idea how much time is on them now, but at the moment they're sounding pretty nice. For a while I was worried that the mids were recessed, but now that the high end is smoothing and the bottom solidifying, the middle is standing out better.

 

[ldj325]

Quote:

Originally Posted by mdarnton /img/forum/go_quote.gif Mine have gone through some nasty times. When I can't stand to listen to them, I hook them up to my FM receiver for a couple of days, and they seem to push through to another phase. I have no idea how much time is on them now, but at the moment they're sounding pretty nice. For a while I was worried that the mids were recessed, but now that the high end is smoothing and the bottom solidifying, the middle is standing out better.

This erratic journey with burn in seems to be a trait of Ultrasones in general. IME the erratic swings start to smooth out at around 150 hours and then just get progressively better with most of the obvious deficiencies clearing up around 200-250 hours, with the level of subtle refinement to follow 250-400+ hours. So keep going.

 

[Arcfan]

as was discussed in many posts before, the Ed9 burn in seems to take a lot less than the proline 750s...

 

[ldj325]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arcfan /img/forum/go_quote.gif as was discussed in many posts before, the Ed9 burn in seems to take a lot less than the proline 750s...

I'n my experience with both the 750 (2X) and the Edition 9, I wouldn't consider either completely burned in before 400 hours--so they are about equal in total time. Admittedly, the changes prior to 200-250 hours are the most significant for both. I'd say the changes 250-400 hrs are more significant for the Edition 9 as it is a more refined headphone that demonstrates the subtle changes better. But this could also be that it's been a long time since my last burn in of the 750s.

What I would say is that while going through burn in, the Edition 9s sounds a lot better in the process than the 750 as is a more refined and better sounding HP to start with.