Welcome to headfi and great first post!! Glad that you're liking the Ether C. It is personally my reference closed headphone and a very engaging experience each time that I use it.
Oh, I agreed with almost all your description except the part about the bright Audeze.
Currently trying them with the flat pads and they're nice, maybe got a little more punch to them, but the awesome sound stage gets a little compressed with the flat pads.
Gonna go back to the angled pads as it's the best balance of imaging, sound stage and dynamics.
Matt, you know what it is... I still can't bring myself to fazor my LCD-3. as I've grown to accustomed to the warm darker sound.
My 3's are one of the rare very late revision non-veiled sounding LCD-3s just before they made the switch to Fazor. I know I'm not alone that likes the voicing of that particular driver.
I enjoy the XC's as well, but prefer my 3's more laid back and warm presentation. It makes the XC sound simbilant and bright in comparison.
What DAP do you guys use with the Ether C?
Sadly, The DP-X1 and Ether C was not a good paring for me...
I've compared the Ether C 1.1 to the HD800S, HD650. I personally found both Sennheisers to out perform the Ether in resolution. The HD800S has a little more body to vocals than the Ether but less bass extension. 650's had more body and a better sense of micro detail and so did the HD800S on the Yggy and numerous amps. I didn't find the Ether C to scale well at all so it did sound better on portable devices. The Ether C isn't what I'd consider warm and the HD800S with it's higher bass distortion and body sounded warmer than the Ether C.
Man, you've been posting in many threads saying the same thing. Headphone "xxx" (MrSpeakers, Audeze, Audioquest) has treble or resolution issues, but not the HD650. Do you like the HD650 or something, lol!
It's a good a good product and I wish I never found the 650 because it outperforms most my flagships. When I make comparisons I always throw the 650 in there as it's my reference for value and resolving capabilities.
Not really, like I said when I make comparisons I always bring the 650 up as it's a reference. My comparisons are always on higher gear though so peoples experience could vary as headphones like the Ether C are designed it run off portable devices while the HD800S and 650 are designed to have a system built around them.
I will say though the Ether C is damn expensive for what it is, really overpriced but it is a beautiful product. I think headphones are getting a bit silly with company's putting crazy prices on their products.
I have the HD600 currently, having tried the Alpha Dogs with plenty of burn in time they just couldn't beat the HD600's. No way. I mean the speed and detail was immensely better but I found the Alpha Dogs masking some high frequency details that the HD600 had. Also the mid treble sounded recessed, in comparison at least.
The HD6x0 is a hell of a headphone... I'm appreciating it more every single day as it makes me smile every time I put music through them after a long day. Just fantastic.
That being said I'm looking forward to the Ether C's which I will be getting in hopefully 2 weeks, which I hope will win my heart over the HD600's due to the closed back design.
If not, I will most likely send back and just enjoy my 600's.
Man, you've been posting in many threads saying the same thing. Headphone "xxx" (MrSpeakers, Audeze, Audioquest) has treble or resolution issues, but not the HD650. Do you like the HD650 or something, lol!
Not really, like I said when I make comparisons I always bring the 650 up as it's a reference. My comparisons are always on higher gear though so peoples experience could vary as headphones like the Ether C are designed it run off portable devices while the HD800S and 650 are designed to have a system built around them.
I will say though the Ether C is damn expensive for what it is, really overpriced but it is a beautiful product. I think headphones are getting a bit silly with company's putting crazy prices on their products.
Not a problem to use the 650 or 800 for comparison to other headphones because they are both staples and have around for quite a few years. My issue is that you are comparing closed to open headphones. They results will always be skewed...apples and oranges.
And the Ether headphones are not "designed to run from portable gear." They were in fact designed and turned with desktop amps and not DAPS. And also they do actually scale tremendously well.
So IMO if you want to make direct comparisons with the criteria you listed, you should swap ETHER C for Ether open.
You can compare any headphone. The only thing preventing open vs closed debates is that open headphones with dynamic drivers will always roll off in the bass and they will always have less restriction in terms of the slight cupping sound closed headphones all seem to share(Some do a better job than others though)
Resolution, detail, micro detail and any other technical aspect of a headphone is all fair game unless like I mentioned you talk are the physical aspects that can't be helped due to design.
Of course you can compare any headphones or any two things for that matter. I can start making comparisons of my ex-wife and current wife at the dinner table, but that would be somewhat foolish also.
Point is mechanics and physics would always separate the signature between open and closed headphones, so it will be more fruitful to compare open to open and closed to closed headphones. IMHO
Not really, like I said when I make comparisons I always bring the 650 up as it's a reference. My comparisons are always on higher gear though so peoples experience could vary as headphones like the Ether C are designed it run off portable devices while the HD800S and 650 are designed to have a system built around them.
I will say though the Ether C is damn expensive for what it is, really overpriced but it is a beautiful product. I think headphones are getting a bit silly with company's putting crazy prices on their products.
And the ETHER C efficiency of 92 dB doesn't lend itself to being 'made for portable'. It does indeed scale well with better amps as I've recently been testing with the Liquid Crimson.
I have the HD600 currently, having tried the Alpha Dogs with plenty of burn in time they just couldn't beat the HD600's. No way. I mean the speed and detail was immensely better but I found the Alpha Dogs masking some high frequency details that the HD600 had. Also the mid treble sounded recessed, in comparison at least.
The HD6x0 is a hell of a headphone... I'm appreciating it more every single day as it makes me smile every time I put music through them after a long day. Just fantastic.
That being said I'm looking forward to the Ether C's which I will be getting in hopefully 2 weeks, which I hope will win my heart over the HD600's due to the closed back design.
If not, I will most likely send back and just enjoy my 600's.
I've found all things in life to be a compromise, and as such I do not see a closed can replacing an open can and vice versa, as there are certain aspects that each hold an advantage over the other. To me, closed provides isolation (I need) and open provides expanded sound stage and openness (I prefer). For that reason I have a set of both. My story goes, my last year set up was based around the HD650 being driven by a mid level DAC and AMP. I also had a set of Mad Dogs as I needed some closed phones to isolate me from the house. I preferred the HD650's but when the house was active, I had to turn to the the dogs to allow me to enjoy my music. I then upgraded the DAC and AMP. The 650's scaled right up and it was a wonderful move, but the problem was, the dogs got left behind. They did not scale up like the 650's. The top and bottom end were muddled, and they could not resolve the detail that the new DAC/AMP was capable of providing like the 650's could. I then set out to find a closed replacement. Weeks and weeks later, I decided to try out the C's. I spent the time burning them in, and really gave them a goood listen. I then went and did an A/B comparison with the 650's. The 650's lost. The mids were still great, the sound stage was wider, but the top and bottom detail was much weaker with less detail and resolution. Noticably so on the top end. Cymbals had less timber. I had created another delema, as I now needed an open can to have the same detail and resolution as the C's and provide the openness and sound stage that I prefer. Short story, I ended up with the HD800s. So when the house is active (most of the time) and I need to get away to some musical nervana, on go the C's. When the house is quiet, on go the 800's. I have my cake, and can eat it too.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
