[Corti]

in relative terms you can simply look at frequency response graphs.
those tell you what tonal difference there are between headphones from a neutral point of view.
sound demos tell you nothing about timbre, soundstage, imaging etc. plus they are coloured by the hp's and gear which you use to listen to those demos.
never understood the point of them. but if they help you, thats fine though.

 

[Kwsizer]

With more than a few of headphones I've found out that graphs are really less indicative than some YTubers' opinions, though.

 

[yabadaba]

in relative terms you can simply look at frequency response graphs.
those tell you what tonal difference there are between headphones from a neutral point of view.
sound demos tell you nothing about timbre, soundstage, imaging etc. plus they are coloured by the hp's and gear which you use to listen to those demos.
never understood the point of them. but if they help you, thats fine though.

Hi, I find frequency response graphs useful and refer to them regularly, but they only tell me where the emphasis will be in a headphone's spectrum of sound and not the tonal characteristics.....how (real) they sound. FR is a measure of the fundamental frequencies and not the various harmonics contained therein. Hence why different headphones with same / similar FR can often sound tonally different and why different types of instrument (and even examples of the same instrument to a lesser extent) playing the same frequency note will sound different. Having said that, sound demos are not always much more helpful, unless they happen to include a set you have already heard - that reference point is crucial, but if it is present then I would say of value. Certainly better than only having a written description, and relying on the words chosen and then your sense of what they convey, to accurately capture what the author intended.

 

[Kwsizer]

Anyway, l think that in the case of the videos l've linked above, one definitely cannot judge how good both the headphones are per se, but if they listen carefully, they can get a rough idea of which one sounds more to their own taste, given the fact that the guy used the same rig and tracks to record the sound.

 

[plakat]

I think there’s maybe the slightest chance to get a faint idea of difference between two very similar headphones this way, but there’s just too much interpretation done along the way: the microphones used, their position, the method of recording, eventual corrections, method of encoding, postprocessing, transfer which may include recoding, listening equipment… each step may exaggerate or remove differences — and all under the disguise of fairness and objectivity.

So all in all it’s a thing with too many caveats to recommend in any way for me. Please don’t take this personal, it sure is not. I value your effort to add something tangible to this discussion and don’t want to make it look bad. It’s just that I have serious reservations against that sort of YouTube content.

 

[beyerlove2]

To be honest, I can hardly point out distinct difference between the 700Pro X and the 900Pro X.

They are quite similar in sound. Yes I know they have different FR graphs and I can actually "feel" the difference.
But how?
Tighter bass drum on 700? yes, but slightly.
Good female vocals on 900? yes, slightly.
Airiness on 900? yes, slightly.

I always choose one over the other only because of the situation. mainly need for shutting out environment noises.

 

[Kwsizer]

Yes, that's more or less the impression I had from reading people's comments and wathcing that comparison (for what I agree may be worth...).
I'm looking for closed back, right now, and I think I'll wait for a price drop or a B.-Stock from some online store, or Beyer directly.
Thank you very much!

 

[rasmushorn]

I have tried to describe my amateur impressions of the DT 900 Pro X and posted them here:
https://www.head-fi.org/showcase/beyerdynamic-dt-900-pro-x.25690/reviews

The "executive summary":

Compared to DT1770, The DT900 has a little bit bigger soundstage and are more open sounding. DT1770 has a naturalness and adds some body to vocals where DT900 can’t fully compete but they are close. Definitely more treble energy in DT900 than DT1770. Can you compare a closed design with an open design in terms of sound? I a not sure it is fair but if DT700 Pro X sounds anything like DT900 Pro X then they are VERY much worth trying.

I have enjoyed the DT1770 for years but there is some extra fun (I didn't expect that from a "studio" headphone) with DT900. They are really dynamic and punchy and crispy with a nice open treble presence.

The best thing is that they are so versatile in terms of source. With their new 48 Ohm driver, they play well directly from my laptop and even with the lightning to minijack LOD from my iPhone, DT900 sounds open, transparent and punchy. If I use one of my amplifiers for instance the EarMen TR-Amp the bass tightens up and the layering and instrument placement in the soundstage becomes even more clear so, they also scale to some extend with better chain.

All in all, the DT900 Pro X has been a super positive surprise. I think they are cheap for what you get here. This could be one of the best sound/price ratio headphones currently on the market.

 

[Kwsizer]

Just pulled the trigger on a DT 700 X B-stock at Beyer's. I'll let you know my impressions when they come in.

 

[bibbs]

Thanks. That's disappointing to hear, because I was looking for that super low hertz rumble.
The song below has a repeating rumble every 1 second, which I believe reach down to as low as 5Hz. (Not sure how much of that is retained after Youtube compression.) The peak of that bass sits somewhere around 30Hz, but I suppose it should sound somewhat different between 1770pro and 700proX.

Of course such low frequency is super rare, but occasionally I'd like to hear (or rather, feel) that sub bass.

im confused.. how can one reproduce 5Hz via digital playback when most commercial digital consumer medium and for that matter playback equipment have 20hz to 20khz frequency range. i'm not trying to offend or cause an argument but if you can tell me the answer i'm most interested.

 

[bibbs]

can people with the DT900 please listen to Florence + The Machine - Lungs album and give their conclusion on vocals please, thanks . i'm in the market for a new set of cans.

 

[arielext]

im confused.. how can one reproduce 5Hz via digital playback when most commercial digital consumer medium and for that matter playback equipment have 20hz to 20khz frequency range. i'm not trying to offend or cause an argument but if you can tell me the answer i'm most interested.

5hz is removed by MP3 and the likes due to the fact we can't hear them. As long as YouTube uses the likes of MP3 it will not be part of that stream. A FLAC and the likes might just have those 5hz tones, but it's more for graphics and moveable drivers then for anything hearable. The human ear is just not capable of hearing those tones. We can hear the air movement the tone might make though (at a higher frequency) and we might *feel* it if played loud enough, nothing a headphone can do.

 

[cel4145]

im confused.. how can one reproduce 5Hz via digital playback when most commercial digital consumer medium and for that matter playback equipment have 20hz to 20khz frequency range. i'm not trying to offend or cause an argument but if you can tell me the answer i'm most interested.

20hz to 20khz has long been the specification standard for equipment. What manufacturers put on their spec sheet.

But some equipment does perform much lower and much higher than that.

That being said, I have no idea what YouTube does.

 

[SkyZippr]

im confused.. how can one reproduce 5Hz via digital playback when most commercial digital consumer medium and for that matter playback equipment have 20hz to 20khz frequency range. i'm not trying to offend or cause an argument but if you can tell me the answer i'm most interested.

Physically, the diaphragm doesn't suddenly stop vibrating outside a certain frequency. It's just that the vibration can be so little that it produces no audible sound. So, a 20Hz to 20kHz frequency range doesn't mean that the equipment output absolutely 0dB below 20Hz or 20kHz, it's just that the manufacturer guarantees the said equipment would perform as intended inside the said frequency range.
(Disclaimer: I have no reliable source for this. I was told so, and i just thought it made sense. Please correct me if I'm wrong.)

As arielext mentioned, we humans are not suppose to be hearing a 5Hz sound. I have zero idea why that low-Hz rumble can sound so different on different headphones. Maybe my ears are not exactly 'hearing it', but rather 'feeling the air pressure' caused by it, but that's just my speculation.

 

[jdlafleur]

I wonder how the 900 Pro X compares to like a T1? Curious to see how the Pro X would stack up