[Poor Man Reviews] Dunu's DN-2000
Oct 19, 2014 at 1:15 AM Post #16 of 33

thatonenoob

Reviewer: PMR Audio
Joined
Sep 15, 2014
Posts
2,402
Likes
2,010
  Thanks for the review! Great job 
beerchug.gif

 
Can you possibly do a short comparison between DN2000 and IM02, so that I can relate since I have the IM02? I wonder if vocals are better on DN-2000 or IM02...

Thank you! Okay, here goes my comparison.
 
Hardware wise, the IM02 uses a dual BA, whereas the DN-2000 adds a 10mm driver on top of that.  This most significantly affects the bass production of the earphones.  The bass on the IM02 is not overly lean, but it definitely does not have the quantity nor extension of the DN-2000's bass.  Due to the dynamic nature of the DN-2000's bass, it is naturally neither as accurate nor as precise as the IM02's. However, it adds a fullness of sound that the IM02 sometimes lacks, and ultimately adds musicality (very very subjective, I know) that can make the DN-2000 more enjoyable than the IM02 with certain genres.
 
The DN-2000's vocals are more laid back than the IM02's, but not in a negative manner.  Sometimes, the IM02 seems to be just a little too forward, and I found the DN-2000 to be slightly more comfortable to listen to.  There's a slight hint of warmth in the DN-2000's mids, which gives it more sweetness than the IM02's.   
 
Treble performance on both is pretty good.  Soundstage is larger on the DN-2000 than the IM02.  However, if you like detail retrieval, the IM02 still trumps the DN-2000.  In addition, the DN-2000 seems to struggle a little with classical pieces featuring quartets or soloists.  It doesn't have enough grain to let you hear details like upbow and downbow that are immediately obvious on the IM02.  
 
Hope this helps and good listening!
 
Best Regards,
Thatonenoob
 
Oct 19, 2014 at 1:20 AM Post #17 of 33

lalala6

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Feb 8, 2012
Posts
877
Likes
175
Location
Singapore
  Thank you! Okay, here goes my comparison.
 
Hardware wise, the IM02 uses a dual BA, whereas the DN-2000 adds a 10mm driver on top of that.  This most significantly affects the bass production of the earphones.  The bass on the IM02 is not overly lean, but it definitely does not have the quantity nor extension of the DN-2000's bass.  Due to the dynamic nature of the DN-2000's bass, it is naturally neither as accurate nor as precise as the IM02's. However, it adds a fullness of sound that the IM02 sometimes lacks, and ultimately adds musicality (very very subjective, I know) that can make the DN-2000 more enjoyable than the IM02 with certain genres.
 
The DN-2000's vocals are more laid back than the IM02's, but not in a negative manner.  Sometimes, the IM02 seems to be just a little too forward, and I found the DN-2000 to be slightly more comfortable to listen to.  There's a slight hint of warmth in the DN-2000's mids, which gives it more sweetness than the IM02's.   
 
Treble performance on both is pretty good.  Soundstage is larger on the DN-2000 than the IM02.  However, if you like detail retrieval, the IM02 still trumps the DN-2000.  In addition, the DN-2000 seems to struggle a little with classical pieces featuring quartets or soloists.  It doesn't have enough grain to let you hear details like upbow and downbow that are immediately obvious on the IM02.  
 
Hope this helps and good listening!
 
Best Regards,
Thatonenoob

Thank you very much! I think I got a good idea of how DN-2000 sounds like now. Will go to the local shop to give it an audition soon.
 
Cheers!
 
Oct 19, 2014 at 9:32 AM Post #23 of 33

thatonenoob

Reviewer: PMR Audio
Joined
Sep 15, 2014
Posts
2,402
Likes
2,010
Any comparison to the dn1000s?

Unfortunately, I haven't really used the DN-1000s.  However, from what various reviewers have been saying, the DN-2000 is an upgrade for the most part (except for the design). Hope this helps and good listening!
 
Best Regards,
Thatonenoob
 
Oct 19, 2014 at 10:05 AM Post #24 of 33

nekromantik

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 30, 2009
Posts
1,541
Likes
153
Any comparison to the dn1000s?

Unfortunately, I haven't really used the DN-1000s.  However, from what various reviewers have been saying, the DN-2000 is an upgrade for the most part (except for the design). Hope this helps and good listening!
 
Best Regards,
Thatonenoob


Thanks
I only just got the 1000s loving them.
 
Oct 20, 2014 at 4:24 AM Post #27 of 33

omastic

500+ Head-Fier
Joined
Aug 9, 2010
Posts
728
Likes
133
Excellent review!!
 
For the very short amount of time that I owned them, I found the sibilance to be too much that just didn't go away with any of the supplied tip/ring combination. The treble extension also seemed to be short (could not hear past 16.5 KHz test tones). I was rather surprised to find this as they are one of the more brighter sounding earphones I have ever listened to. The brightness apparently comes from the emphasis in the lower treble presence and the very slightly recessed mids.
 
Everything else was great. I wish I could somehow find a tip//ring configuration with a tolerable level of sibilance. My bad luck.
 
Oct 20, 2014 at 8:01 AM Post #28 of 33

thatonenoob

Reviewer: PMR Audio
Joined
Sep 15, 2014
Posts
2,402
Likes
2,010
  Excellent review!!
 
For the very short amount of time that I owned them, I found the sibilance to be too much that just didn't go away with any of the supplied tip/ring combination. The treble extension also seemed to be short (could not hear past 16.5 KHz test tones). I was rather surprised to find this as they are one of the more brighter sounding earphones I have ever listened to. The brightness apparently comes from the emphasis in the lower treble presence and the very slightly recessed mids.
 
Everything else was great. I wish I could somehow find a tip//ring configuration with a tolerable level of sibilance. My bad luck.

Thanks!  The first thing I noticed too was that these were quite similar to the IM02 (which are bright), but with better bass and slightly recessed mids.  There does seem to be sibilance on some tracks.  However, with a shallower fit, I found that SQ in general got better and the sibilance became less of a problem.  The ring system just didn't work for me in general. 
tongue.gif

 
Oct 20, 2014 at 10:52 AM Post #29 of 33

defguy

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 6, 2008
Posts
149
Likes
21
  Excellent review!!
 
For the very short amount of time that I owned them, I found the sibilance to be too much that just didn't go away with any of the supplied tip/ring combination. The treble extension also seemed to be short (could not hear past 16.5 KHz test tones). I was rather surprised to find this as they are one of the more brighter sounding earphones I have ever listened to. The brightness apparently comes from the emphasis in the lower treble presence and the very slightly recessed mids.
 
Everything else was great. I wish I could somehow find a tip//ring configuration with a tolerable level of sibilance. My bad luck.

I don't really notice too much sibilance but I have it paired with a Fiio X3 which is a little on the warm side, so that may balance it out a little. I think if they are paired with a drier,more clinical source they may not sound ideal. As for extension above 16.5k, I don't think there is actually much musical info in that range with most genres anyway. 
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top