[Seraphi]

Quote:

Difficult to compare since the AD2000 is an open headphone and the W3000ANV is closed where some of the back wave gets piped back to the front through vents around around the driver. Also the AD2000 has early bass rolloff, so this contributes to it sounding fast as well.
 
When I had the AD2000, I disassembled the W3000ANV driver and listened to it. It sounded just as fast as the AD2000, but had more resonances.
 
Here is a comparison of the impulse responses. AD2000 vs. W3000ANV baffle (cup removed). I guess the AD2000 could be slightly faster at accelerating. Although I can't be sure. My rig isn't high rez enough to get down to the nitty gritty. The W3000ANV certainly has more issues with decay at specific frequencies.
 

Thanks Purrin, that's interesting to know. I would have liked to see how removing the cups would change the perception of speed and sound signature if this was not a limited model. Also out of curiosity, how does the W3000ANV's speed compare to the Fostex TH900's?

 

[purrin]

The impulse responses above were comparing the AD2000 (very open enclosure as you know) with the W3000ANV driver removed from the cups.
 
Below is an IR comparison with the W3000, AD2000, and TH900 (all in their enclosures):

 
This explains why quite a few consider the TH900 is so special. It must be those biocelluse thingies. The acceleration of decay of the TH900 is even faster than the AD200, which is one of the fastest. The TH900 does have other issues, but nothing minor EQ couldn't fix.

 

[Seraphi]

Quote:

The impulse responses above were comparing the AD2000 (very open enclosure as you know) with the W3000ANV driver removed from the cups.
 
Below is an IR comparison with the W3000, AD2000, and TH900 (all in their enclosures):

 
This explains why quite a few consider the TH900 is so special. It must be those biocelluse thingies. The acceleration of decay of the TH900 is even faster than the AD200, which is one of the fastest. The TH900 does have other issues, but nothing minor EQ couldn't fix.

Wow... Coming from the Denon D2000, the W3000ANV sounded like a racecar to me. The fact that it is even faster has just peaked my already high interest in the TH900s. I just hope that it doesn't get discontinued or have a price increase...

 

[MacedonianHero]

The one thing that I really appreciate about the W3000ANV is that I feel that I don't have to compromise anything when listening to a closed headphone. I've felt that compromises were made (to varying degrees) with all of my previously owned closed cans, but no more.

 

[purrin]

The Denon's aren't that horribly "slow" in the IR. They just have a ton of muddy bass which my guess is lots of distortion. The measured distortion of the W3000ANV bass at 50Hz is incredibly low. As low as the Audezes, but with the addition of the cup reverb and reflections.

 

[Skylab]

The one thing that I really appreciate about the W3000ANV is that I feel that I don't have to compromise anything when listening to a closed headphone. I've felt that compromises were made (to varying degrees) with all of my previously owned closed cans, but no more.

Indeed. Only the W3000ANV and the Sony R10 have pulled that off for me.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

Indeed. Only the W3000ANV and the Sony R10 have pulled that off for me.

 
As much as I enjoyed my other closed headphones I kept feeling I wish I could go back to my other open headphones. Not so with the W3000ANVs. Listening to Smashing Pumpkin's new album now and I'm not switching these off for anything.

 

[shimmer n roar]

Quote:

It's not only the mesh design. It also has a black rubber circle inside partially blocking the mesh cup.

 
i didn't know the ear cups contained that as well. it covers a lot of the mesh area. that could explain why the t1 sounded more closed than open to me - especially compared to the hd800 and grados. i might have to revise my description to "semi-closed".

 
Quote:

The impulse responses above were comparing the AD2000 (very open enclosure as you know) with the W3000ANV driver removed from the cups.
 
Below is an IR comparison with the W3000, AD2000, and TH900 (all in their enclosures):

 
This explains why quite a few consider the TH900 is so special. It must be those biocelluse thingies. The acceleration of decay of the TH900 is even faster than the AD200, which is one of the fastest. The TH900 does have other issues, but nothing minor EQ couldn't fix.

 
purrin, how does the w3000anv compare to the th900 as you hear them?

 

[moodyrn]

Quote:

Indeed. Only the W3000ANV and the Sony R10 have pulled that off for me.

 
Quote:

 
As much as I enjoyed my other closed headphones I kept feeling I wish I could go back to my other open headphones. Not so with the W3000ANVs. Listening to Smashing Pumpkin's new album now and I'm not switching these off for anything.

I'm just as happy now as I was when I first got them. I have been searching for a closed  can for years that had to fit a certain criteria, and I have went through a ton. I wanted something that had to have at least decent isolation(check). Something that was not only wood, but was just simply gorgeous to look at(check). And most of all something that sounded as good as flagship open headphones. The only closed can I ever listen to that could pull of the feat at not just being good for a closed can like sooo many others, but also performs as good as any open flagship was the r10. Well not only has the w3000anv pulled off that feat, but also fit ever criteria I ever wanted for my dream pair of closed cans. I still think the r10s are a little better overall, but I also think they are ugly. So I will own these until the day I die or someone manages to steal them from me. All of the benefits of a closed can without non of the compromises.

 

[isaacyeo]

I'm just as happy now as I was when I first got them. I have been searching for a closed  can for years that had to fit a certain criteria, and I have went through a ton. I wanted something that had to have at least decent isolation(check). Something that was not only wood, but was just simply gorgeous to look at(check). And most of all something that sounded as good as flagship open headphones. The only closed can I ever listen to that could pull of the feat at not just being good for a closed can like sooo many others, but also performs as good as any open flagship was the r10. Well not only has the w3000anv pulled off that feat, but also fit ever criteria I ever wanted for my dream pair of closed cans. I still think the r10s are a little better overall, but I also think they are ugly. So I will own these until the day I die or someone manages to steal them from me. All of the benefits of a closed can without non of the compromises.

I realised that after burn in, my w3000 became slightly warmer. Dont know whether is it just me

 

[purrin]

Quote:

 
i didn't know the ear cups contained that as well. it covers a lot of the mesh area. that could explain why the t1 sounded more closed than open to me - especially compared to the hd800 and grados. i might have to revise my description to "semi-closed".

 
 
purrin, how does the w3000anv compare to the th900 as you hear them?

 
Both are colored headphones. It usually takes a little time for me to to acclimate between the two. I consider both genre limited. Don't want to go into detail what my preferences and sonic priorities are, but if you've been around HF, you would probably know.
 
W3000ANV has a wonky midrange that some may find seductive but others disturbing. Good articulation and detail. Not nearly as clean sounding as the TH900. Slight mid-bass bump, but doesn't seem to reproduce the sub bass loudly. Evident but very smooth treble. I apply no EQ to the W3000ANV. There seems to be a cohesiveness about the W3000ANV - how its "unique" tone, the reverb, the colorations of the wood, the mid-bass, all play together seemingly to the vision and intent of a designer. (It's possible that AT could just have slapped random pieces together and it just happened to work.) Despite the W3000ANV's colorations, if a line were drawn between all the peaks and dips of its response, it would probably be fairly flat looking. I guess that I'm trying to say that taken as a whole, it does sound balanced, even if isolated individual areas, i.e. midrange, are wonky. But darn, on those tracks that work with it, the the W3000ANV is just sublime. Makes you forget about all the technicalities. I mainly use my 'stats now, but on occasion I come back to this to appreciate it. Every time I think about selling it, I haven't been able to, at least not yet. (I had a much easier time selling the HD800, but the 'stats rendered  that headphone redundant, and I never liked the hot treble on it anyways, even with the mod.)
 
The TH900 is super clean and clear sounding. Articulation, "speed", detail extraction are simply in a another class compared to the W3000ANV. I would dare say that these technical characteristics are unsurpassed by any other closed headphone except for the R10. The TH900 has massive bass, especially down low. Comparable to D5000 in volume, but of much superior quality. It's tighter with less distortion and muddiness. Way too much bass for me on certain records. Also, the treble has a peak around the sibilance area. It's tolerable for me, but barely, and only because the TH900 has such other strong qualities which make up for this deficiency. The treble is more rough compared to the W3000ANV. Also less notable is a low-mid suckout which makes male vocals or lower female vocals sound less solid or anchored. On a suitable track, the TH900s present such a purity and beauty of sounds. (Yeah, they do a little bit of that R10 thing.) I'm not afraid to say that I apply simple EQ to the TH900: bass -5db (shelf) and the peak -5db (narrow band). I'm still waffling on whether I want to get these as I have my 'stats. Their $2K price will probably make me balk. But I do need a dynamic can with good technicalities to make the most of the BA.

 

[vlach]

Quote:

 
W3000ANV has a wonky midrange that some may find seductive but others disturbing.

 
That midrange presentation you describe (which i've heard many others describe) is the only thing making me hesitate with the purchase. I don't want the guy who sells them after a few hours because i can't live with them...
 
Maybe its a love/hate relationship with these?

 

[Skylab]

In my limited auditioning of the TH900 at last weekend's Chicago meet, I could not get past the fact that they truly sound like a headphone where the "Loudness" button has been engaged. Sometimes impressive, other times just plain too much bass and treble, and kind of a distant sound to the mids. For me there was no comparison - while both are colored to be sure, I find the W3000ANV to be much, much more pleasing. But of course, YMMV, and I very admittedly spent all of about 20 minutes with the TH900.

 

[shimmer n roar]

Quote:

 
Both are colored headphones. It usually takes a little time for me to to acclimate between the two. I consider both genre limited. Don't want to go into detail what my preferences and sonic priorities are, but if you've been around HF, you would probably know.
 
W3000ANV has a wonky midrange that some may find seductive but others disturbing. Good articulation and detail. Not nearly as clean sounding as the TH900. Slight mid-bass bump, but doesn't seem to reproduce the sub bass loudly. Evident but very smooth treble. I apply no EQ to the W3000ANV. There seems to be a cohesiveness about the W3000ANV - how its "unique" tone, the reverb, the colorations of the wood, the mid-bass, all play together seemingly to the vision and intent of a designer. (It's possible that AT could just have slapped random pieces together and it just happened to work.) Despite the W3000ANV's colorations, if a line were drawn between all the peaks and dips of its response, it would probably be fairly flat looking. I guess that I'm trying to say that taken as a whole, it does sound balanced, even if isolated individual areas, i.e. midrange, are wonky. But darn, on those tracks that work with it, the the W3000ANV is just sublime. Makes you forget about all the technicalities. I mainly use my 'stats now, but on occasion I come back to this to appreciate it. Every time I think about selling it, I haven't been able to, at least not yet. (I had a much easier time selling the HD800, but the 'stats rendered  that headphone redundant, and I never liked the hot treble on it anyways, even with the mod.)
 
The TH900 is super clean and clear sounding. Articulation, "speed", detail extraction are simply in a another class compared to the W3000ANV. I would dare say that these technical characteristics are unsurpassed by any other closed headphone except for the R10 or Qualia 010. The TH900 has massive bass, especially down low. Comparable to D5000 in volume, but of much superior quality. It's tighter with less distortion and muddiness. Way too much bass for me on certain records. Also, the treble has a peak around the sibilance area. It's tolerable for me, but barely, and only because the TH900 has such other strong qualities which make up for this deficiency. The treble is more rough compared to the W3000ANV. Also less notable is a low-mid suckout which makes male vocals or lower female vocals sound less solid or anchored. On a suitable track, the TH900s present such a purity and beauty of sounds. (Yeah, they do a little bit of that R10 thing.) I'm not afraid to say that I apply simple EQ to the TH900: bass -5db (shelf) and the peak -5db (narrow band). I'm still waffling on whether I want to get these as I have my 'stats. Their $2K price will probably make me balk. But I do need a dynamic can with good technicalities to make the most of the BA.

 
thanks purrin for the detailed comparison, which is very much appreciated. just one more question if you don't mind, how did the bass definition and texture compare?

 

[shimmer n roar]

Quote:

In my limited auditioning of the TH900 at last weekend's Chicago meet, I could not get past the fact that they truly sound like a headphone where the "Loudness" button has been engaged. Sometimes impressive, other times just plain too much bass and treble, and kind of a distant sound to the mids. For me there was no comparison - while both are colored to be sure, I find the W3000ANV to be much, much more pleasing. But of course, YMMV, and I very admittedly spent all of about 20 minutes with the TH900.

 
does the th900 sound at all similar to the d7000?