New Beyerdynamic Pro X line: DT 700 Pro X and DT 900 Pro X

[Oscarilbo]

It's purely cosmetic. It still holds the connector 100% fine. I'm not worried about it at all. You'll be fine. @Oscarilbo

But isn’t at risk of altering the sound by having a crack in there?

 

[NotJeffBuckley]

I don't consider that purely cosmetic at all, it's potentially structural. With that area not holding, what unconsidered stresses affect other parts of the cup, when the material already seems to be prone to cracking from minimal force - I dunno, it concerns me enough that I pursued and got warranty service on mine that are affected, we all gotta go with our gut.

 

[Metal-Fi]

It is a structural problem (as it is strictly related to the locking mechanism, I guess) but only to a cosmetic extent. In my 700 Pro X, the crack started as a tiny line - almost unnoticeable - then it got slowly worse until it stopped, reaching a length of 5mm approximately. No other issues other than the aesthetic annoyance; that's why I waited months before replacing the headband. Now the same issue has appeared on my 900 Pro X. The funny thing is that I have "babied" the 900s - always used them at home, stored in their bag inside a drawer when not in use - and almost treated the 700s like trash (I use them while training in the gym, just saying), so the use case does not seem to matter that much. Hopefully someone at Beyerdynamic will read our posts and address this issue.

 

[hammersrocco]

Apologies for the log post - which I am making longer. I replied to an old thread before realizing that this is probably the best place to ask what I wanted. Thread that I replied to asked comparing the 1770 to the 700 Pro X and the 770 Pro. Here it comes.

I know I am replying to a very old thread, but thinking is better to pick up from an existing thread. I was looking for feedback on people's experience with the 700 Pro X and I found this thread, so I will answer first the OP.

I own all of them. The DT 1770 Pro is to me, very similar to the 770 Pro. Not a bass monster but a very good amount of bass, right out the box. I got the DT 700 Pro X and I expected them to be similar to the DT 770 Pro. To my surprise, NOT AT ALL. Very very flat, IMHO, which is a sound signature I don't enjoy. Before putting them on sale I decided to give them one more chance.

Now, a bit of an intermission. In the past I owned a pair of AKG k550s. Now, more than flat with no bass, well, they sounded, to me, too hyped up in the highs to the point of being painful. Coincidentally, my friend bought an equalizer around the time I was trying to decide whether to keep the k550s or not. So I hauled the k550s to my friend's house and tried them with EQ. To my amazement, they wouldn't budge. No matter what I did on the equalizer, sound did not change! Up until that point I did not really know that headphones responded differently to EQ. I assumed they all would. K550s were sold.

Which brings me back to the DT 700 Pro X. Even though the 1770 and the 770 Pro are marketed as studio headphones, well, like I said, they are not truly flat. They are, TO MY HEARING, the perfect sweet spot for those of us that favour a little bit more bass.

I don't normally use EQ, but I decided to try equalizing the 700 Pro X in Roon, using their new plugin for headphone eq and my own settings for the parametric eq plugin using Autoeq.app.

Well... in my opinion and conclusion, the 700 Pro X are TRUE studio headphones. Let me explain. To my own logic and intuition, a true studio headphone should be naturally flat but responsive to EQ. In my mind that's what you want if you are recording and/or mastering. You want a signal reproduced with no adornments but you also want the changes you make in the signal chain to be audible.

So that is exactly what the DT 700 Pro X are. Adding different EQ settings, I feel they can approximate both the 1770 and 770 Pro sound signatures. Normally I don't use EQ, so they are not my go to cans for non-Roon listening. But for Roon listening with access to the plugins, I use them quite often, having settled on an eq setting that is kind of adding a bit more high and mid presence to the 1770 (or 770 Pro). My objective was, kind of like a Grado with more bass. Which is a sound signature that is not in my current can selection. So I found them useful that way and was able to keep them.


That said, my question was exactly that - what are your experiences with the 700 Pro X? Do you find my assessment ( flat but very EQ-able) similar to yours? Do you always use them with EQ? Or always without?

thnx!

 

[arielext]

great post! Today I pulled out my DT 700 again for some listening and here I am 4 hours later
At first these clamp like there is no tomorrow but they wear in like a pair of boots. Comfortable for hours on end!
I always eq, but most of the time it is only to bring in a small bass-shelf. Same for the DT 700. 3dB @ 90hz, 0.8q

 

[rayjuodas]

Apologies for the log post - which I am making longer. I replied to an old thread before realizing that this is probably the best place to ask what I wanted. Thread that I replied to asked comparing the 1770 to the 700 Pro X and the 770 Pro. Here it comes.

I know I am replying to a very old thread, but thinking is better to pick up from an existing thread. I was looking for feedback on people's experience with the 700 Pro X and I found this thread, so I will answer first the OP.

I own all of them. The DT 1770 Pro is to me, very similar to the 770 Pro. Not a bass monster but a very good amount of bass, right out the box. I got the DT 700 Pro X and I expected them to be similar to the DT 770 Pro. To my surprise, NOT AT ALL. Very very flat, IMHO, which is a sound signature I don't enjoy. Before putting them on sale I decided to give them one more chance.

Now, a bit of an intermission. In the past I owned a pair of AKG k550s. Now, more than flat with no bass, well, they sounded, to me, too hyped up in the highs to the point of being painful. Coincidentally, my friend bought an equalizer around the time I was trying to decide whether to keep the k550s or not. So I hauled the k550s to my friend's house and tried them with EQ. To my amazement, they wouldn't budge. No matter what I did on the equalizer, sound did not change! Up until that point I did not really know that headphones responded differently to EQ. I assumed they all would. K550s were sold.

Which brings me back to the DT 700 Pro X. Even though the 1770 and the 770 Pro are marketed as studio headphones, well, like I said, they are not truly flat. They are, TO MY HEARING, the perfect sweet spot for those of us that favour a little bit more bass.

I don't normally use EQ, but I decided to try equalizing the 700 Pro X in Roon, using their new plugin for headphone eq and my own settings for the parametric eq plugin using Autoeq.app.

Well... in my opinion and conclusion, the 700 Pro X are TRUE studio headphones. Let me explain. To my own logic and intuition, a true studio headphone should be naturally flat but responsive to EQ. In my mind that's what you want if you are recording and/or mastering. You want a signal reproduced with no adornments but you also want the changes you make in the signal chain to be audible.

So that is exactly what the DT 700 Pro X are. Adding different EQ settings, I feel they can approximate both the 1770 and 770 Pro sound signatures. Normally I don't use EQ, so they are not my go to cans for non-Roon listening. But for Roon listening with access to the plugins, I use them quite often, having settled on an eq setting that is kind of adding a bit more high and mid presence to the 1770 (or 770 Pro). My objective was, kind of like a Grado with more bass. Which is a sound signature that is not in my current can selection. So I found them useful that way and was able to keep them.


That said, my question was exactly that - what are your experiences with the 700 Pro X? Do you find my assessment ( flat but very EQ-able) similar to yours? Do you always use them with EQ? Or always without?

thnx!

In my experience, it was the opposite. Dt700 pro x had considerably more bass than my dt770 pro cans. To the point that I sold them, as the bass overwhelmed the rest of frequencies. On top of that, they also did not have enough 'sparkle' in the highs, and some details like hi hats were lost in the mix. So no, not really flat cans at all, in my view. Dt900 pro X are much better in my view, but they are open cans, of course.

 

[hammersrocco]

In my experience, it was the opposite. Dt700 pro x had considerably more bass than my dt770 pro cans. To the point that I sold them, as the bass overwhelmed the rest of frequencies. On top of that, they also did not have enough 'sparkle' in the highs, and some details like hi hats were lost in the mix. So no, not really flat cans at all, in my view. Dt900 pro X are much better in my view, but they are open cans, of course.

Indeed - all hearing is different! , so I do respect your opinion and believe your impressions. Your description makes me think more of the DT 17XX GO from Drop (which I own too) rather than the 700 Pro X, however !

BTW, I also own the DT 900 Pro X and TO ME, without EQ those are way to bright for me. Those I don't dare to use without EQ AT ALL, while I admit that even my long post I forgot to mention, that some recordings FOR ME were better than others on the 700 Pro X without EQ.

Hope the comments keep coming... see what the consensus is - thnx for the reply