[M-13]

Quote:

All of the descriptions of the AD I have heard, Jude's, the banter within the small beta group I was part of, Purrin's, are pretty consistent. I believe this is the end game closed back for me, which is a huge deal to me - I require closed headphones for 90% of my listening.  I have a pair of HD650's - I've always loved their sound, but it is seldom I get to listen to them.  I've heard the usual suspects among the high end open headphones.  Price and the fact that they are open has kept me from purchasing.  The Alpha Dogs are a closed back that virtually feels open, and virtually sounds open.  It is comfortable, not fatiguing to listen to and has a neutral, reference level signature, all for well under $1,000...

I'm a big fan of the HD650 as well. I regret that the HD800 didn't share its tonality. I'm so happy Dan did this. I was waiting for Audez'e to come out with their closed back, but secretly feared it was going to be priced at $1500+. I think the Alpha Dogs will be my end game as far as closed-back transportable headphones are concerned. The Mad Dog almost did it for me but wasn't quite what I wanted.

 

[noxa]

Was the bass screw available in the pair the beta test group used? And more importantly was it ever adjusted by anyone?

 

[preproman]

Quote:

Green light....

 
I was on the test group as well.  
 
Here are my impressions giving on July 30th.  Although, I don't see them the same as Jude and others.  I still see them as an improvement in every single area when compared to the MD 3.2.
 
I was able to compare both side by side for two days on two different amp for many hours.  Enjoy.
 
 
 
 
Day 1 of the Alpha Dogs 4 hours of listening:
 
I've refrained from reading most of the impressions thus far.  I want to give a honest un biased opinion. 
 
Appearance / Design:
Fist I really like the cups.  I would like them even more if the brass bars were power coated black as well.  It would give a complete stealth look.
 
I'm not a fan of the cable and the connectors.  Dan as you know I just like them to be hardwired with my choice of cable.  But the connectors was sort of tricky for me at first but I got em on.  As I wear them more the cable becomes a non factor.  So all in all the cable is OK..
 
Will there be any writing on these ie.  Alpha Dogs, L / R or just all black?
 
I get a real good clamp so not a lot of adjusting that I have to do.  They fit me just right.  Of course the Alpha Pads are a "HIT".
 
Alpha Dogs vs. Mad Dogs 3.2
 
GS-X mk2 / Master 7- All music listened to at 1:00pm on the volume knob:
 
Diana Krall = Love me like a Man
Rachelle Ferrell = Bye Bye Black Bird
Patricia Barber = Crash
 
All is IMO of course:
 
Both are similar sounding - I noticed a few difference.  I would say first off the Alpha Dogs sound like a more refined Mad Dog.  More linear throughout, even the bass.  I think the Mad Dogs have a tad bit more bass presence, while the Alpha Dogs have the more refined bass as in more clear and clean, just more accurate.  
 
I think the Alpha Dogs are voiced a tab bit brighter - only a tad bit.  So that would make the Mad Dogs the darker of the two. So yes the Alpha Dogs has the most air of the two.  
 
I like the highs better on the Alpha Dogs.  They extend out more when compared to the Mad Dogs.  Also more crisp with more energy.
 
Patricia Barbers vocals are to die for.  They're pretty darn good on the Mad Dogs as well.  The Alpha Dogs just improves on what the Mad Dogs have to offer in every way.  As I listen, I think the mids on the Alpha Dogs are very well rounded and beautifully articulated.  Again, more refined in this regard compared to the Mad Dogs.
 
For a closed headphone the Alpha Dogs are pretty darn revealing not as revealing as some of the open headphones = HE-6 and HD800.  However, better at when compared to the Mad Dogs.
 
The tonal balance is what sets it apart IMO from the Mad Dogs.  While not totally transparent the tonal balance of the Alpha Dogs are really neutral.
 
 
Tomorrow Round 2:  Alpha Dogs vs. Mad Dogs on the F1J / PWD mkII.
 
 
 
Impressions on August 1st.
 
 
Day 2 Alpha Dogs vs. Mad Dogs  4 hours of listening:
 
F1J / PWD mkII - All music listened to at 10:00am on the volume knob:
 
Music:
Lots of Michael Buble live.
 
So yes this amp seemed to bring out the best in both headphones.  Both opened up more than before.  Also again, for me these two are some what close.  However, the Alpha Dogs pulls ahead by a larger margin.
 
The AD at this point and IMO would be stepping into the Reference category of headphones.  Very refined, a real good tonal balance, has a realistic transient response (not on the level as the HD800 and HE-6) but still good none the less.  Not a very large sound stage, but a more real and accurate sound stage on music other than classical.
 
I like the ADs because no specific region of the frequency spectrum stands out.  However, the midrage does keep the warmth.  
 
The overall bass presentation is great, it has great extension and good impact.  This may not be your ideal headphone if your a bass head or you like your bass a little tilted south.  Again, the bass here is reference type of bass tight and focused.
 
The treble has absolutely no grain at all that I can hear - very smooth without being rolled.
 
Overall I will more than likely have both..
 

 

[purrin]

Quote:

If you are calling the TH900 sub-bass "extreme" then how do you describe other headphones with deliberate bass-bias skew of which that would put the TH900 in the shade? 

 
Let me attempt to answer:
 

• That's just wrong.
• XXXX'ed up.
• Teenagers will love that.
• Darth Beyer with all ports open.

 

[aamefford]

Was the bass screw available in the pair the beta test group used? And more importantly was it ever adjusted by anyone?

I was never clear if it was included on the pair I demo'd. At any rate, I did not adjust anything.

 

[miceblue]

Spoiler: Alpha%20Dog%20Impressions

Quote:

Quote:

Green light....

 
I was on the test group as well.  
 
Here are my impressions giving on July 30th.  Although, I don't see them the same as Jude and others.  I still see them as an improvement in every single area when compared to the MD 3.2.
 
I was able to compare both side by side for two days on two different amp for many hours.  Enjoy.
 
 
 
 
Day 1 of the Alpha Dogs 4 hours of listening:
 
I've refrained from reading most of the impressions thus far.  I want to give a honest un biased opinion. 
 
Appearance / Design:
Fist I really like the cups.  I would like them even more if the brass bars were power coated black as well.  It would give a complete stealth look.
 
I'm not a fan of the cable and the connectors.  Dan as you know I just like them to be hardwired with my choice of cable.  But the connectors was sort of tricky for me at first but I got em on.  As I wear them more the cable becomes a non factor.  So all in all the cable is OK..
 
Will there be any writing on these ie.  Alpha Dogs, L / R or just all black?
 
I get a real good clamp so not a lot of adjusting that I have to do.  They fit me just right.  Of course the Alpha Pads are a "HIT".
 
Alpha Dogs vs. Mad Dogs 3.2
 
GS-X mk2 / Master 7- All music listened to at 1:00pm on the volume knob:
 
Diana Krall = Love me like a Man
Rachelle Ferrell = Bye Bye Black Bird
Patricia Barber = Crash
 
All is IMO of course:
 
Both are similar sounding - I noticed a few difference.  I would say first off the Alpha Dogs sound like a more refined Mad Dog.  More linear throughout, even the bass.  I think the Mad Dogs have a tad bit more bass presence, while the Alpha Dogs have the more refined bass as in more clear and clean, just more accurate.  
 
I think the Alpha Dogs are voiced a tab bit brighter - only a tad bit.  So that would make the Mad Dogs the darker of the two. So yes the Alpha Dogs has the most air of the two.  
 
I like the highs better on the Alpha Dogs.  They extend out more when compared to the Mad Dogs.  Also more crisp with more energy.
 
Patricia Barbers vocals are to die for.  They're pretty darn good on the Mad Dogs as well.  The Alpha Dogs just improves on what the Mad Dogs have to offer in every way.  As I listen, I think the mids on the Alpha Dogs are very well rounded and beautifully articulated.  Again, more refined in this regard compared to the Mad Dogs.
 
For a closed headphone the Alpha Dogs are pretty darn revealing not as revealing as some of the open headphones = HE-6 and HD800.  However, better at when compared to the Mad Dogs.
 
The tonal balance is what sets it apart IMO from the Mad Dogs.  While not totally transparent the tonal balance of the Alpha Dogs are really neutral.
 
 
Tomorrow Round 2:  Alpha Dogs vs. Mad Dogs on the F1J / PWD mkII.
 
 
 
Impressions on August 1st.
 
 
Day 2 Alpha Dogs vs. Mad Dogs  4 hours of listening:
 
F1J / PWD mkII - All music listened to at 10:00am on the volume knob:
 
Music:
Lots of Michael Buble live.
 
So yes this amp seemed to bring out the best in both headphones.  Both opened up more than before.  Also again, for me these two are some what close.  However, the Alpha Dogs pulls ahead by a larger margin.
 
The AD at this point and IMO would be stepping into the Reference category of headphones.  Very refined, a real good tonal balance, has a realistic transient response (not on the level as the HD800 and HE-6) but still good none the less.  Not a very large sound stage, but a more real and accurate sound stage on music other than classical.
 
I like the ADs because no specific region of the frequency spectrum stands out.  However, the midrage does keep the warmth.  
 
The overall bass presentation is great, it has great extension and good impact.  This may not be your ideal headphone if your a bass head or you like your bass a little tilted south.  Again, the bass here is reference type of bass tight and focused.
 
The treble has absolutely no grain at all that I can hear - very smooth without being rolled.
 
Overall I will more than likely have both..
 

 
Quote:

Quote:

Green light....

 
Okay, so first here are some stream of consciousness thoughts through an hour of listening to the MD2 with my usual playlist of test music.
 
They are simply better across the board. They still retain much of the stock MD sound but with an appreciable improvement across the spectrum. The improvements that really stand out to me are:
 
*imaging…wow it’s really beautiful and largely refined over the past dogs
 
*tone and timber of the mids…voices are rendered with a new level of realism that takes listening to vocal-centric music to a new level. There is no brightness or harshness at all even with the most challenging female vocals.  I just went through about five tracks of “When I look in your Eyes” Diana Krall. Her voice is noticeably less grainy and richer still. The acoustic bass on these tracks hits with a bit more weight and texture while remaining linear and true to the recording. I’ve listened to this album 50+ times but I’m not sure that I’ve ever enjoyed more than just now. 
 
*As with the original MD the MD2 responds well and scales up nicely with an amp that has more power and refinement. Give it more and it gives you more. The MD2 sounds substantially better on my Sansui 9090 than with the Asgard 2 even with high gain. It’s not a bad or even an unenjoyable experience on the A2 but the experience on the right amp is sublime. I can see the gungnir pairing really well with the MD2, although I haven’t heard that amp.
 
*The new MD really loves a good source. HD Tracks and other 24/96 material is just breathtaking.  DSOTM on SACD with the MD2 = mind blown.
 
More to come...
 

 
Quote:

I also was part of the beta test group, we each got 2 days with them.  Jude's video really describes the sound signature very well.  I'll try a and add a little bit of my impressions.
 
For reference on my comments, my stable consists of HD650's, Mad Dog 3.2, universal/balanced option, and 1964 Ears Quads.  Add to that one of my favorites is the D7000, that I no longer own.  All have some degree of bass boost.
 
There is a reason for the disclaimer above - my first thought was that the bass was a bit light.  I searched out some sine wave files.  The bass is not light.  These dive deep with authority.  I could hear/feel 20 Hz easily.  What they do not do, is what my other headphones all do to some degree - color or warm the bass with a nice boost that adds a bit of fun, but obscures the low mids just a bit.  The Alpha Dogs are a clear, accurate, reference quality headphone.
 
OK, so we got the bass out of the way.  The mids are stellar.  Vocals and acoustic music are intimate, clear, airy.
 
The treble provides full detail, the right bit of sparkle and avoids the brittle edge that often comes with "detail".
 
The signature is neutral, and smooth across the board.  The spectrum blends seamlessly, without any real peaks or valleys that I can hear.  They are very non-fatiguing and comfortable.  As Jude mentioned, the "closed headphone" feeling and sound really disappear.  I was pleased to hear this from Jude, as I had noticed this as well.
 
I am not the best subjective wordsmith, so I'll leave it at that.  The Alpha Dogs are very, very good.  They are a reference class headphone.  I'm getting a pair. 

 
Quote:

Dan was gracious enough to share with me a prototype; and I have to say that I was deeply impressed! The ADs sound totally different than the typical T50RPs mods. They don't even sound like they have the same driver.
 
The AD has more articulation, sounds faster, has better transients, and extracts more micro-detail than the MD. It approaches the HD800. I would say it's more than half-way in between the MD and HD800, more toward the HD800 side. That's how good it is. What's really nice is the bass no longer has that rubbery sound which I have always associated with the stock plastic enclosure of the T50RP.
 
The tonal balance is quite neutral as in a UERM sort of way, which is unlike the MDs which are Audeze'ish (but not as rolled.) There were some minor kinks with the prototype which Dan acknowledged; but I figure these have been worked out by now.
 
In comparison to the TH900, the TH900 is still cleaner with better note separation; but the TH900 is hopelessly colored (not necessarily in a bad way) with extreme sub / low bass and some treble peakage / roughness.

 

 
 
asoidfhaslkdfjas ;kdfjsd;laif
 
My brain just exploded.
 
Now I really want to hear a pair! I didn't like the Mad Dog 3.2's bass presence and dark sound signature...this might just do it for a closed-back headphone. Now if only there were comparisons to the Paradox...

 

[preproman]

Quote:

 
 
asoidfhaslkdfjas ;kdfjsd;laif
 
My brain just exploded.
 
Now I really want to hear a pair! I didn't like the Mad Dog 3.2's bass presence and dark sound signature...this might just do it for a closed-back headphone. Now if only there were comparisons to the Paradox...

 
I did a comparison a while back that included the Paradox, Mad Dog (Dog Pads I think), BMFs and Thunderpants.
 
I like the Mad Dogs better then - for a fun, go to, enjoy - type of headphone.  I like the Paradox for a monitoring, Amp / Dac comparison type of headphone.

 

[alv4426]

Dr. Prepro, I thank thee. Thy impressions have hindered my hopes of saving money.

 

[miceblue]

Quote:

Quote:

 
 
asoidfhaslkdfjas ;kdfjsd;laif
 
My brain just exploded.
 
Now I really want to hear a pair! I didn't like the Mad Dog 3.2's bass presence and dark sound signature...this might just do it for a closed-back headphone. Now if only there were comparisons to the Paradox...

 
I did a comparison a while back that included the Paradox, Mad Dog (Dog Pads I think), BMFs and Thunderpants.
 
I like the Mad Dogs better then - for a fun, go to, enjoy - type of headphone.  I like the Paradox for a monitoring, Amp / Dac comparison type of headphone.

That's the general consensus I see regarding the Mad Dog vs Paradox comparison. But the question at hand is how the Paradox compares to the Alpha Dog now that the Alpha Dog is meant to have a more whatever-the-heck-neutral-means sound signature.

 

[purrin]

Re-read my earlier post and find keyword "rubbery" in reference to other T50RP mods which use the stock enclosure.
 
Also the Paradox is a bit more mellow in the upper mids than the AD. The AD more neutral as in UERM, Yamaha NS10, studio monitor neutral.

 

[HiFiGuy528]

Order placed! Who else is in with me?

 

[swspiers]

Crap! Right when I think I have a solid path to my end-game, this comes up.
 
Sub'd

 

[HiFiGuy528]

All the talk around MD sounding dark, I paired mine up with Meridian Exlporer 50 Ohms version and it is far from dark sounding. I know Warren will back me up on this one.

 

[miceblue]

Quote:

Re-read my earlier post and find keyword "rubbery" in reference to other T50RP mods which use the stock enclosure.
 
Also the Paradox is a bit more mellow in the upper mids than the AD. The AD more neutral as in UERM, Yamaha NS10, studio monitor neutral.

Bah, terminology. >_<
 
I can't really imagine what "rubbery" sounds like. Is that soft and not well-defined? If the Paradox is mellow, does that mean the Alpha Dog has a more up-front upper-midrange? Upper-mids are kind of the sweet spot for a headphone for me since I listen to music genres with strings and female vocals.
 
Quote:

All the talk around MD sounding dark, I paired mine up with Meridian Exlporer 50 Ohms version and it is far from dark sounding. I know Warren will back me up on this one.

A 50-ohm output impedance amp with a 56-ohm impedance headphone makes very little sense to me...

 

[purrin]

Hard to describe, but the bass of the T50RP (and various mods of it using the stock enclosure) has always not been very clear or articulate. I hesitate to use mushy because it isn't. It's more like rubbery.
 
The AD is indeed more up front in the upper mids compared to the Paradox. At least with the prototype I've heard.