[autoexec]

DT 1350 beats GR07's SQ anytime. The mids are just spectacular compared to the more polite mids of GR07. I know it's self-preference but I really think DT 1350 is much more accurate. The only advantage of the GR07 I can think of is the fit. Given it is an in-ear, it usually is easier to get the right fit compared to the portable headphone DT 1350 for the first time.

 

[mrAdrian]

I think they share about the same sound signature: deep rumbling subbass, linear bass performance, smooth mids and highs. The DT1350 however corrects the over hot treble of the GR07 (no big issues), improve on the already impressive detail retrieval, transient etc.

 

[autoexec]

If you listen to alot (or addicted maybe) of guitar-oriented soungs, especially metal, you'll notice how the midrange really shines on DT 1350.

 

[mrAdrian]

You have any grado's? How do you think they compare?

 

[AstralStorm]

Quote:

I still stand firm that these are awesome upgrades of the GR07 sound signature.

Yes and no. Both share different resonant flaws while keeping the general signature.
DT1350 is even more far in mids, but has no 6k sibilance. However instead, it has the more annoying (in my opinion) 14 kHz ringing, which sounds dry and harsh and a major antisparkle dip (8-10k).

 

[autoexec]

Quote:

Yes and no. Both share different resonant flaws while keeping the general signature.
DT1350 is even more far in mids, but has no 6k sibilance. However instead, it has the more annoying (in my opinion) 14 kHz ringing, which sounds dry and harsh and a major antisparkle dip (8-10k).

 
Is yours from the recent batch? Mine is from the older batch and there is no way I'm hearing it the way you do especially in the mids department. More far in mids than GR07? That's impossible. (old DT 1350 / GR07 1.1)
 
EDIT:
You meant mid-bass? If that's the case then yes, it has less mid-bass than the 'kind of' fun sounding GR07. I'm talking about mids alone. Where the guitars are usually in.

 

[Inks]

Funny according to IF's graph there is actually a peak at 8-10k, the mentioned 14k spike is there but doesn't look big. These have been shown to have weird control-quality issues though. 

 

[AstralStorm]

Quote:

Is yours from the recent batch? Mine is from the older batch and there is no way I'm hearing it the way you do especially in the mids department. More far in mids than GR07? That's impossible. (old DT 1350 / GR07 1.1)
 
EDIT:
You meant mid-bass? If that's the case then yes, it has less mid-bass than the 'kind of' fun sounding GR07. I'm talking about mids alone. Where the guitars are usually in.

My GR07 (v1.0?) has more mids all throughout 300 - 3000 Hz here. Also more lower highs at 4-6k and slightly more 8-10k sparkle as well. (It was made right after they decided to include more tips.)
 
That DT1350 is SN 12205. As I said, mine sounds dark and a bit weird. Funnily enough, (burned in) AKG K550 sounded pretty much exactly the same as my DT1350.
 
What really "kills" both of these for me are relatively large annoying resonances (5.5k spike of doom in GR07, 14k spike of annoyance in DT1350) and fit. (GR07 somewhat scrapes my ear as there are no long tips and it needs deep fit; DT1350 is a bit finicky with placement, gets hot and sweaty with use.)
 
My new Beyerdynamic T70p (SN 03324) is clearly far superior to both on all counts. (But not clearly superior to SE-5 if both are equalized - much less bother though. Unequalized - it's the best I have ever heard, very close to end result after equalization.)

 

[mrAdrian]

I don't find the t70p to be that special tbh, bass was far too weak and i suspect if someone digs that type of sound sig they could've gotten same results with the 70x 's from akg?

 

[AstralStorm]

Interesting. My T70p happens to have linear bass. Quantity is much like my DT1350, but without the 160 Hz dip, very slightly less subbass perhaps, better quality - no overly long high bass/low mid decay. Slightly less visceral due to over the ear vs on ear, also faster.
 
Neither has any bass boost.
 
(Correction: SE-5 actually has many resonant spikes, at 3.5k, 5k, 6k, 8k and 14-15k; actually more noticeable totally than GR07. Not nice really even if equalized. T70p is far better behaved, as is Brainwavz B2. Bass is superb still, slightly superior to T70p, but just a tiptoe behind DT1350.)
 
Disclaimer: when I compare headphones, I tend to compare them after equalization - it's more fair that way.
 
(Oh, and I forgot to mention I found HE-400 distorted sounding, grainy. HE-500 was far, far better - I confused the number above.)

 

[roadcykler]

Quote:

My GR07 (v1.0?) has more mids all throughout 300 - 3000 Hz here. Also more lower highs at 4-6k and slightly more 8-10k sparkle as well. (It was made right after they decided to include more tips.)
 
That DT1350 is SN 12205. As I said, mine sounds dark and a bit weird. Funnily enough, (burned in) AKG K550 sounded pretty much exactly the same as my DT1350.
 
What really "kills" both of these for me are relatively large annoying resonances (5.5k spike of doom in GR07, 14k spike of annoyance in DT1350) and fit. (GR07 somewhat scrapes my ear as there are no long tips and it needs deep fit; DT1350 is a bit finicky with placement, gets hot and sweaty with use.)
 
My new Beyerdynamic T70p (SN 03324) is clearly far superior to both on all counts. (But not clearly superior to SE-5 if both are equalized - much less bother though. Unequalized - it's the best I have ever heard, very close to end result after equalization.)

This is the graph from Headphone.com so I'm wondering why they don't show a spike at 14K?  It would also be helpful to know, how many of the people reporting dips/spikes at certain frequencies do so after seeing a graph like this? Maybe they have calibrated ears. 

 

 

[Focker]

Quote:

This is the graph from Headphone.com so I'm wondering why they don't show a spike at 14K?  It would also be helpful to know, how many of the people reporting dips/spikes at certain frequencies do so after seeing a graph like this? Maybe they have calibrated ears. 

 

 
 
Yep, that's one of my big issues with a lot of head-fi'ers...even Tyll echoed my comment on the forum when I said something similar. People use the objective data such as FR graphs to determine their subjective impressions of the headphones....always gotta be mindful of the fact that there are people who do that. 

 

[autoexec]

Quote:

 
 
People use the objective data such as FR graphs to determine their subjective impressions of the headphones....always gotta be mindful of the fact that there are people who do that. 

 
That.

 

[AstralStorm]

Yes, such people are quite wrong. Graphs are not tuned for your HRTF, especially in higher frequencies. (> 2kHz)
The couplers aren't that precise, tuned or repeatable at the highest end and lowest end either.
Frequency response is best used for comparison purposes.
 
However, CSDs (waterfall) do describe resonances and decay very accurately. (Except subbass - use square wave response instead.)
 
Please use the unsmoothed HeadRoom measurements. (Subtract 1 from the graph ID. Also, Tyll has his own on Innerfidelity.)
 

 
The spike is only slightly visible here (right after the huge dip), but it's much more visible in CSDs. It's definitely quite audible and annoying to me.
(Courtesy of purrin - it's not my pair or HeadRoom's, but it holds for all of them I think.)

 

[elvergun]

Quote:

DT 1350 beats GR07's SQ anytime.

 
 
This might be true, but only by a little.  The GR07s are very capable...and for $100 less than the DT1350s.  I consider the DT1350s to be a good side-grade, or a different form factor, to the GR07.