[Mink]

The never ending sub bass?

LOL. Not to my ears

 

[xRaptorxPunisher]

Had these for about 3 weeks now.

Firstly I love the design, gorgeous. Always been a fan of Philip design of the X line up.

Philips what ****, where you drunk when you tuned this? They sound awful, treble is uneven, peaks tinny, mids have no character, voices don't have weight. Bass? This is meant to be the X line up? Did someone put Turtle beach drivers in your cups? I'm not even kidding.

I thought my pair was broken but drivers matched, quite well actually..shocker.

I thought the X1 and X2 was poor at resolution, rough, peaky treble but my god was it fun for certain music. I would'nt have cared if they sounded the same as the X2 because I like the design. The X3 are not listenable to me, I don't find them fun, the Koss Porta pro are better than these. In terms of resolution they're about on par with the original X2, the bright signature will give a sense of fake detail, don't fall for that bullshite, listen to subtle changes in dynamics, small pitch changes, the X3 can't do it. If you own a 6XX which is a more resolving headphone and you want something fun buy a Portable Pro, Ananda, Sundaraheck even an original X1 over this.

It's a shame really I was expecting an X2 with improvements to cohesion, resolution, not whatever you call this. If someone owns this headphones and enjoys it, godspeed, this is just one man's opinion, ears rule the day.

 

[Beagle]

Sadly, I won't be doing a review for these. I have returned them. Or maybe the below is a review, but not what I had wanted to contribute.

I did like the sound. These did not commit the sin of scooping out the lower treble like many planars do. The sounded open, fast, dynamic, bass was tight and had good balance and a bit of punch. I didn't have any problem with sibilants. To my ears, the balance was near just right and no obvious colorations or distortions in any particular part of the range. Again, I loved the openness and clarity that was there becuase the upper mid and lower treble were present. There was a nice sense of space and air, although limited in the upper treble.

What I did have a problem with was I could hear the sound of the material used in the construction. It seemed to linger in the background all over the sound and it stayed in my memory when I took off the phones and stopped listening. Kind of a plasticky overlay to everything. And that was all I could think about in the interim when I was not listening. I think the metal parts of the X2 would have tamed this but they obviously wanted to make this version lighter and more comfortable. So it was one step forward and two steps back.

I also felt a musical disconnect, in that I enjoyed the 'sound' of the X3 but could not bathe in the soul and warmth of music. There was no 'confidence' in the delivery of the music. I think I can attribute most of this to what I mentioned above in the previous paragraph. Drivers are only part of the key to the musicality of a headphone. The construction and materials in the housing play a great role as well. You need the right combination.

If Philips can keep the sonic balance and make a more solid housing, they might get all the way there.

 

[KPzypher]

Well, these arrived a day early.


And here are some thoughts.

Build quality – Mediocre for a HP w/ $349 MSRP. Biggest gripe is the poorly glued leather piece on the headband. The underside seam is very visible with tons of folds and wrinkles, and the ends are abruptly cut with glue marks (enlarge to get a better picture). I also found the included cable very microphonic. The rest of the HP build is fine and I appreciate the easily swappable pads.


Comfort - I rate highly the big, round (the opening inside is oval shaped), and thick earpads, but found the headband suspension a bit stiff and definitely felt some pressure in several spots, where I had to periodically readjust. The earpads are soft but the material used is a bit abrasive (reminds me of the wool blanket I was issued in basic training decades ago) and my ears got toasty pretty quick. Not the most comfortable out there and hope they'll loosen up a bit overtime. These HPs feel lighter than the advertised 380g weight.

I'll keep the sound impressions at wavetop. We all perceive sound differently, so take my words with a giant grain of salt. I'll just highlight a few things.

I found them very sibilant out of the box. After running it for several hours, and once my ears readjusted to the new sound (not a huge burn-in believer), they felt a bit more manageable. But it's definitely there and they're quite fatiguing for me (For reference, I don't find Beyer T1.2 sibilant). I don't see myself wearing these for an extended period. To be fair, I found them more sibilant on my Topping A90/D90 stack but less so on my other setup (SMSL M400 + Focal Arche). Older recordings sounded mostly fine, but some modern recordings can be sibilant or overly sharpened. However, they are not grainy, or metallic like on some bright HPs, so I can see how the sound signature can be appealing to people more tolerant to sibilance. Overall, I find the treble a bit too forward for my taste (they don't sound thin like the Beyer T1s). If they dial it back just a tiny bit, IMO they'd make for a great all-rounder. Other than the forward treble, I think the lows and the mids are well-balanced. It's quite fast and imaging is really good. The soundstage is proper for a HP. Not too boxed-in or artificially widened. They just feel right. I don't like HPs that sound distant with exaggerated soundstage.

So, do I think it's worth the asking price? If you can pick one up at a discount (currently $249 on Amazon), I think it would be a worthwhile purchase. Otherwise, I personally wouldn't pay the full $349 MSRP.

Overall, I'll probably keep them as they don't sound like anything else in my stable. With that being said, I would be hesitant to use them as a daily driver. It's definitely a good flavor to add to the collection, but if I can only afford to have one or two HPs, these aren't it.

 

[Mink]

In terms of resolution they're about on par with the original X2, the bright signature will give a sense of fake detail, don't fall for that bullshite, listen to subtle changes in dynamics, small pitch changes, the X3 can't do it

I agree that they aren't that dynamic sounding, I don't agree about fake detail, I perceive their brighter tone as a different hue, not with the intent of artificially creating more detail.

I also felt a musical disconnect, in that I enjoyed the 'sound' of the X3 but could not bathe in the soul and warmth of music. There was no 'confidence' in the delivery of the music

Well said, they indeed seem to lack confidence in their delivery, this is line with their lack of dynamics. The BeoPlay H6s have a similar reticence, they don't like to get their feet wet.
But it also depends on the kind of music. I like the X3s very very much with classical music. And I find their timbre to be spot on, not plasticky at all.
With some of my favorite classical recordings, like Boulez's Mahler 6 I prefer them over the NightHawks. The NightHawks are with this recording darker but brighter on top.

For pop and rock there are certainly more engaging headphones out there. But still I mostly prefer the X3s in these genres over the Fidelio X2s, which are thin sounding in parts where the music has little bass. X3s mids are significantly more present than X2s mids.
The X3s sit in my top 3 of favorite headphones. But mainly because I like classical music a lot.

 

[xRaptorxPunisher]

If you listen to the sound of silence the distortion on Davids voice as he shifts from a warm effortless flow into the more aggressive verse you can hear the X3 completely lose out on displaying the dynamic contrast properly. Something like an Audeze, Verum, or even something entry level like a AKG K712 is able to display subtle shifts in tone. When I listen to a track most detail in a track is obvious even with a pair of Apple earbuds, phones like the X3, some Grados will bring those highlights out, they don't bring out subtle detail, those layers that require a more resolving driver to uncover that depth(assuming chain is up to par) that is what I always mean when I say a phone is resolving, not showing me what I already know and then screaming it at my face(fake detail)

What the X3 fail to do is bring out subtitles that I can pick out on my Koss Porta Pro. For the record I don't care about resolve as much if the tonality is okay, the X3 doesn't even get that right. As a Guitar player the way strings sound on my own recordings is just wrong. Vocals that are meant to have body, tracks with have natural decay sucked out by the X3; I just don't see what this headphones does to justify it being released imo.

If you're going to make a headphone technically not great, get the tonality right, heck many didnt even realise how capable the HD650 was until they tried it on higher end sources, they fell in love with the tone(a bit too much energy around 5k for my liking these days) but as I said one man's opinion, my ear, my requirements aren't everyone's. I was more surprised Philips took this direction, coming from a warm, fun headphone to a lean bright one is a weird move especially when your fan base is used to the X line being this way.

I do wonder of they were just testing the waters or it was just a cash grab. I think we've reached a point now where there's plenty of headphones, I would've hoped Philips could come out with a fun, resolving headphone at say £500-600 especially since the market is planar land right now. The HD600 line is still a go to for high end dynamic for timbre, mids and is that stop before say going for an end game like the Focal Clear I'd love for Philips to shake things up, this was what I was hoping.

 

[Mink]

Wow. Maybe take your ears for a rest, I mean put them aside for now and come back to them after a while?
I just don't agree with you. I own the HD650s myself and to me there isn't that much difference in resolution, tonality and timbre, apart from the brighter treble and slightly more recessed mids.
Nah, you have made up your mind, you know what you like and dislike. Who am I kidding?
I am always in complete disbelief when someone hears things completely different.

 

[cel4145]

Wow. Maybe take your ears for a rest, I mean put them aside for now and come back to them after a while?
I just don't agree with you. I own the HD650s myself and to me there isn't that much difference in resolution, tonality and timbre, apart from the brighter treble and slightly more recessed mids.
Nah, you have made up your mind, you know what you like and dislike. Who am I kidding?
I am always in complete disbelief when someone hears things completely different.

No pressure, but I look forward to trying them out based on all of your observations. I caved to the Prime Day special and should have them on Tuesday

 

[Mink]

No pressure, but I look forward to trying them out based on all of your observations. I caved to the Prime Day special and should have them on Tuesday

I demand you to like them

 

[xRaptorxPunisher]

They're not going to become less bright, and all of a sudden transform into good headphones. What sealed the deal was making my own mastard recordings sound like a bright, lean mess, just sounded like arse. The benefits of mixing your own stuff means you can instantly tell which phones have a good timbre and sound natural, reference tracks also. As a vocal fan and obviously strings having a metallic, thin timbre..ergh. The resolution difference is quite big between the two, 650's I find too harsh around 5k but everything else is leagues ahead. 650's can sound boring at times but the X3 just sounds wrong, broken; Philips I believe were looking for a cash grab here. It is what it is, like I said I have a certain criteria, vocal depth, body, timbre if voices and instruments, I expect resolution at least decent, not a priority because like I said timbre means more, it's the most important aspect of a headphone because of the timbre is wrong, the songs sound wrong, X3 flops big time. Whether you disagree is irrelevant, these are my impressions and I do warn people, if you care about a natural sound, forgot it with these, go for the original X1 over this garbage in my opinion or even better save up more and just get a better headphone period. The Verum is the same price as this, it's comical how much better the Verum is.

I get a lot of people are going to defend their purchase, no need to, if you like it be confident in your own ears and experience and don't worry about it.

I'll leave it at that.

 

[Beagle]

They're not going to become less bright, and all of a sudden transform into good headphones. What sealed the deal was making my own mastard recordings sound like a bright, lean mess, just sounded like arse. The benefits of mixing your own stuff means you can instantly tell which phones have a good timbre and sound natural, reference tracks also.

Good that you are using your own recordings. I like when people have a proper frame of reference as opposed to just comparing one headphone to another and guessing which one is 'right' (they are all 'wrong' when you don't know what 'right' is).

 

[rev6]

Hayley Williams - Why We Ever can you try this track. Her Ssss's are quite bright with my setup. How is it with the X3's?

 

[Mink]

Hayley Williams - Why We Ever can you try this track. Her Ssss's are quite bright with my setup. How is it with the X3's?

At this moment, I have been listening all day with the X3s I don't find any problems with that track, no sibilance or peakiness. Very smooth highs.
But as a reference, a track I do ocassionally find to be peaky (note: not sibilant) and fatiquing with the X3s:

 

[KPzypher]

Good that you are using your own recordings. I like when people have a proper frame of reference as opposed to just comparing one headphone to another and guessing which one is 'right' (they are all 'wrong' when you don't know what 'right' is).

What is right?

There's no such thing as right or wrong in this hobby. You can only judge by the level of your own perceived enjoyment.

Every sound you'll ever hear will be processed thru your ears, which are not only different from others, but will change overtime as you age.

Why do you think the Harman curve is an average and a targeted frequency, and not an absolute value?

There's no absolute truth or a 'right way' to do things in this hobby.

It's whatever floats your boat.

 

[Beagle]

What is right?

There's no such thing as right or wrong in this hobby. You can only judge by the level of your own perceived enjoyment.

Every sound you'll ever hear will be processed thru your ears, which are not only different from others, but will change overtime as you age.

Why do you think the Harman curve is an average and a targeted frequency, and not an absolute value?

There's no absolute truth or a 'right way' to do things in this hobby.

It's whatever floats your boat.

So buy a PortaPro and be happy forever.