[ardbeg1975]

Thank you! In terms of presentation and soundstage, are they all pretty similar?

Rögnir planar - you almost forget you are listening to a close back.

GH50 JM - good width, but surprising excellent depth for a close back.

I will defer to others on sound stage of GH40 and Rögnir Dynamic.

 

[tonedeafmelomaniac]

No sound comparison

Ok, just brief review

 

[Nostoi]

Finally got my Rognir back. So far, first impression is that I like them more than my VC's so far - which is a really high bar to clear. I'm torn between the dynamic pads and the stock pads. Which pads do you guys prefer (for those of you that have Rognir planars)?

I'm very impressed with Kennerton! They really hit it out of the park with these headphones.

I feel exactly the same; VC will always be dear to me, but they don't hit me on an affective level (and technical level) in the way the Rognir do. I have to say, the Rognir are the only headphone I would think about buying twice to have a spare pair. I'm continually amazed by how open they sound, and also how they combine musicality with such precise imaging, layering, and detail.

As for pads, I'm using Dynamic just because the even things out a little more, but also because they feel more plush and comfortable.

 

[DeweyCH]

Thank you! In terms of presentation and soundstage, are they all pretty similar?

Rognir Planar is the king of soundstage among these.
Rognir Dynamic is a fairly close second.
The GH40 seemed to me to have a bigger soundstage than the GH50 (LSA HP-2 actually, but they should be identical).

Rognir Dynamic has better detail retrieval than either Gjallarhorn model.

GH40 is great sounding with great bass. GH50 has more bass at the expense of a bit of soundstage.

All of these are my experience, and should be taken with a grain of salt the size of a '70's monster receiver.

 

[duranxv]

I feel exactly the same; VC will always be dear to me, but they don't hit me on an affective level (and technical level) in the way the Rognir do. I have to say, the Rognir are the only headphone I would think about buying twice to have a spare pair. I'm continually amazed by how open they sound, and also how they combine musicality with such precise imaging, layering, and detail.

As for pads, I'm using Dynamic just because the even things out a little more, but also because they feel more plush and comfortable.

Exactly. Well put I like the stock pads due to how much they open up, but you lose isolation. I need to keep switching back and forth lol

 

[albertmuc]

I really liked the Rognir Dynamic, in the end I preferred listening to music with the LCD-X, so the Dynamic went back.
I couldn't do much with the GH40, the headphones were infinitely comfortable, the tonality was great, but the bass was applied too thick, the most unpleasant thing for me was the stage without any front localization, somehow 2D. This was my perception, but because we all hear differently….
Ultimately, I understood the GH40 as headphones for on the go, which the GH40 also confirmed with the short, thin cable that came with it.
If in doubt, listen before you buy...

 

[Terriero]

I really liked the Rognir Dynamic, in the end I preferred listening to music with the LCD-X, so the Dynamic went back.
I couldn't do much with the GH40, the headphones were infinitely comfortable, the tonality was great, but the bass was applied too thick, the most unpleasant thing for me was the stage without any front localization, somehow 2D. This was my perception, but because we all hear differently….
Ultimately, I understood the GH40 as headphones for on the go, which the GH40 also confirmed with the short, thin cable that came with it.
If in doubt, listen before you buy...

How do you compare the GH 40 bass to your T 1.3s?

 

[albertmuc]

How do you compare the GH 40 bass to your T 1.3s?

Didn't like the GH40, so I didn't make any conscious comparisons. I prefer the T1.3 so far that there is no need for any comparison. Hardly any headphones I know have the bass volume of a T1.3, only the Z1R had more and in a special quality. Our love wouldn't have failed because of the bass of the GH40 alone, we just didn't find each other. Maybe someone else will have better luck with the GH40.

 

[Roderick]

Ultimately, I understood the GH40 as headphones for on the go, which the GH40 also confirmed with the short, thin cable that came with it.

Strange. My gh40 came with standard kennerton cable. 2 meters and 6,35 connector. That is also the cable they have on their website.

 

[albertmuc]

Strange. My gh40 came with standard kennerton cable. 2 meters and 6,35 connector. That is also the cable they have on their website.

Didn't measure it, probably it seems shorter in my memory because it was comparatively thin (and microphonic). Don't have it with me anymore...

 

[rlawry]

Didn't measure it, probably it seems shorter in my memory because it was comparatively thin (and microphonic). Don't have it with me anymore...

The cable you are describing sounds like the stock OFC copper cable that came with my GH50s. It looks and feels of good quality but is amazingly microphonic. I had to sit like a statue and avoid any movements or contact with the cable to avoid loud scratching sounds and thumps through the earcups. In fact, I often tapped out a bass rhythm on bass-shy recordings. . Why Kennerton supplied this inadequate stock cable is beyond my comprehension. I now have a nice Synergistic Research Foundation cable that is expensive but far better sounding and non-microphonic.

 

[John Massaria]

In Gh50JM-mk2 heaven and I’m not leaving

 

[ithilienrp]

Bog Oak & Purple Heart. Odin and Rognir

 

[Daiyama]

Kennerton is a Russian company, right?
Makes you think…..

 

[Nostoi]

Kennerton is a Russian company, right?
Makes you think…..

Makes you think what?