greggf
1000+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2006
- Posts
- 1,313
- Likes
- 252
I just got, and just as quickly bundled up and sent to markl for his Positive Feedback review process, the JVC HP-DX1000 headphone. So while I have some impressions of the sound, they are by definition preliminary, and of headphones that were in no way burned in yet.
Well, they aren't an HD650 upgrade - although they are certainly very high grade cans.
Remember up front that they ARE closed cans. Not very closed - they let in more ambient sound than the DT770, for example. But they do have the characteristic closed can sound and feel, a kind of hollowness or closed-in feeling that actually serves some kinds of music well.
The DX1000 are the most beautiful and best-built headphones I've ever seen. Although large, they're gorgeous, and although quite lightweight, they're built very, very solidly. I can't help but think that a lot of the $800 that they cost goes into the wood and magnesium and nice faux-leather pads. And while they DX1000 are very comfortable, I find the HD600 or HD650more so.
To describe the sound is hard to do. Do I think that they sound like an upgrade of the HD650 or 600? No. They sound very different from any Senns. With either the HD650 or the HD600, there's actually more of a sense of bass and warmth than with the JVCs. This kind of surprised me, since the JVCs had been described as seductive and sensual cans. They actually came off as cleaner and crisper, with some of the airy treble of the AKG701 that set off fatigue, to me, in longer listening sessions.
When I compared the treble of the two Senns with the treble of the JVC, the Senns actually seemed to have more treble energy, and it was sharper in nature. The JVC treble sounds greater, but it's not; what it is is much more extended and much, much more delicate. Ethereal is the word.
Bass-wise, the Senns seem to have more bass, but what I think is going on is that the Senns have more upper bass. This is especially true with the HD650, of course, and is one of my major complaints with that can. By contrast, the JVC, I believe, goes way deeper and much cleaner, which, paradoxially, can make its bass seem lighter than the Senns.
The bottom line, Senns vs. JVC, is that I get the impression that the Senns have more of everything, but that, in actual fact, the JVC DX1000 has more of the "real everything," if that makes any sense.
I was expecting to hear a honky midrange at times in the JVCs, since other listeners had, but I heard none of it. It was in the midrange that the Senns and JVCs were closest in nature, but still there were differences. Again, the JVCs seemed airier and more refined, but it was very hard to tell from brief listening to a non-broken-in set.
The soundstage was weird, probably in a good way. On some CDs, it sounded identical to the Senns. On others, it threw a much wider and deeper soundstage, a soundstage of almost epic proportions, even bigger than that of the K701, but with none of the "wandering musicians" or "I'm scared because I'm lost in the black void" feeling that the K701 sometimes give some listeners. Imaging was rock solid, but it sure varied from CD to CD and from cut to cut.
Overall, I have good feelings about the JVC DX1000. I have no idea yet, and won't for some time, whether they'll suit me long term. They sure seem worth their asking price, which pleased me greatly. These are beautiful headphones.
The JVC are idiosyncratic headphones. They have a unique sound, like a ridiculously refined DT770. On some CDs, they're like Quad stats, able to do what no other headphones can do. On other CDs, you'd be better off with a mundane HD580 because of the value differential.
I can't help but think that these phones would love tubes. That's for others to say. I also can't help but think that more folks need to get their hands on these, because they sure are interesting, far more interesting than anything else that I've had in the world of head-fi.
Well, they aren't an HD650 upgrade - although they are certainly very high grade cans.
Remember up front that they ARE closed cans. Not very closed - they let in more ambient sound than the DT770, for example. But they do have the characteristic closed can sound and feel, a kind of hollowness or closed-in feeling that actually serves some kinds of music well.
The DX1000 are the most beautiful and best-built headphones I've ever seen. Although large, they're gorgeous, and although quite lightweight, they're built very, very solidly. I can't help but think that a lot of the $800 that they cost goes into the wood and magnesium and nice faux-leather pads. And while they DX1000 are very comfortable, I find the HD600 or HD650more so.
To describe the sound is hard to do. Do I think that they sound like an upgrade of the HD650 or 600? No. They sound very different from any Senns. With either the HD650 or the HD600, there's actually more of a sense of bass and warmth than with the JVCs. This kind of surprised me, since the JVCs had been described as seductive and sensual cans. They actually came off as cleaner and crisper, with some of the airy treble of the AKG701 that set off fatigue, to me, in longer listening sessions.
When I compared the treble of the two Senns with the treble of the JVC, the Senns actually seemed to have more treble energy, and it was sharper in nature. The JVC treble sounds greater, but it's not; what it is is much more extended and much, much more delicate. Ethereal is the word.
Bass-wise, the Senns seem to have more bass, but what I think is going on is that the Senns have more upper bass. This is especially true with the HD650, of course, and is one of my major complaints with that can. By contrast, the JVC, I believe, goes way deeper and much cleaner, which, paradoxially, can make its bass seem lighter than the Senns.
The bottom line, Senns vs. JVC, is that I get the impression that the Senns have more of everything, but that, in actual fact, the JVC DX1000 has more of the "real everything," if that makes any sense.
I was expecting to hear a honky midrange at times in the JVCs, since other listeners had, but I heard none of it. It was in the midrange that the Senns and JVCs were closest in nature, but still there were differences. Again, the JVCs seemed airier and more refined, but it was very hard to tell from brief listening to a non-broken-in set.
The soundstage was weird, probably in a good way. On some CDs, it sounded identical to the Senns. On others, it threw a much wider and deeper soundstage, a soundstage of almost epic proportions, even bigger than that of the K701, but with none of the "wandering musicians" or "I'm scared because I'm lost in the black void" feeling that the K701 sometimes give some listeners. Imaging was rock solid, but it sure varied from CD to CD and from cut to cut.
Overall, I have good feelings about the JVC DX1000. I have no idea yet, and won't for some time, whether they'll suit me long term. They sure seem worth their asking price, which pleased me greatly. These are beautiful headphones.
The JVC are idiosyncratic headphones. They have a unique sound, like a ridiculously refined DT770. On some CDs, they're like Quad stats, able to do what no other headphones can do. On other CDs, you'd be better off with a mundane HD580 because of the value differential.
I can't help but think that these phones would love tubes. That's for others to say. I also can't help but think that more folks need to get their hands on these, because they sure are interesting, far more interesting than anything else that I've had in the world of head-fi.
