[afinch1992]

Quote:

See to me when amped they don't improve that much. The bass becomes tighter and the sound is more coherent, but they aren't that hard to amp to begin with. I foudn the abss does not increase with amping really.
 
I find they are bass heavy and have more bass than the ATH-M50 that I tried. I prefer these to the ATH-M50 actually.

I must have gotten a bad pair, cause there is no way that the m50s could have less bass than the ones i had. If i had to put it in numbers, it would be like 1/4 the bass i have in my current q40s

 

[mcoleg]

Thanks for the suggestions .
 
Well, minibox-d amp either not too powerful or it would seem that Amp3 and Hifiman 602 can drive DJ100 just as well as a portable amp can.
I almost forgot that Amp3 could be used as a portable amp as well. so, I tried all the combinations of the sources bellow:
 
- Amp3 - bright and fast as a player and pretty much carries those characteristics over when used as an amp;
- Hifiman 602 - laid back and darkish sounding; sort of like sony A8** series only with 10x of driving power;
- minibox-d amp - right in between the above two; not as fast as Amp3, brighter than HFM 602; you get the idea.
 
So, I tried:
 
Amp3 alone
Hifiman 602 alone
Amp3 -> minibox-d
Hifiman 602 -> minibox-d
Hifiman 602 -> Amp3
 
What it comes down to it, DJ100 seems to be taking on a sound signature of whatever the last source in line is. At least to my ears. With Amp3 it's bright; with HFM 602 it's almost too slow-sounding and darkish; with minibox-d it's just as vanilla as minibox-d is.
 
Does it even have it's own sound signature ? Or is it the most transparent pair of cans that I ever listened to? Most peculiar.
 
Anywho, I think I will burn them in for a while.
 
Won't mind replacing the pads as well - I have a suspicion these will benefit from deeper pads.

 

[roma101]

Quote:

I agree 100% with you on your comments about the sound when unamped and with an E5. I also have an E5 and just don't like them with that amp at all. Enough to suggest to people not to buy them when unamped or with just an E5. I remember listening to an old track that Anaxilus tested them with and for both of us, the same track was nearly un-listenable and harsh sounding with the E5 if I recall. I think basically my feeling it's sound is just all out of control when un-amped. They can be quite harsh sounding unamped, the mids are just not there and the bass is just not very well controlled. I always thought they were horrible unamped, but this may be a bit overkill. I can certainly say it's bad enough to NOT suggest them without an amp. Strangely, some music sounds fine on them unamped, but not so with everything.
 
I think for those with a cheap stereo or receiver, that may work too. I have a cheap $99 Sony stereo system and that drives them quite well, but obviously an amp is far better.
 
I would suggest unamped to try the Creative Aurvana Live (D1001 drivers) over the D2000. The reason is that I just can't suggest the D2000 without an amp. I think it's safe to say it will be better unamped than the DJ100, but I still don't suggest it.
 
Back in early 2010 I tried them when I only had a small portable amp and absolutely hated them. I actually complained that the mids were too recessed, the bass was bloated and uncontrolled. Well guess what? I gave them another chance when I had a full desktop amp and loved them! The next day I tried them unamped and couldn't understand why all of a sudden they sounded so bad! I took them back upstairs and connected them to my desktop amp and the problem was fixed!
 
D2000 is also huge and not very portable. If you used them as a portable it's also like you're having to carry around a snake with it. The cable is really annoying for portable use. Un-amped I'd suggest the M50 over them. With an amp I prefer the D2000 though.
 
M50 is also not very portable to me. I prefer my KRK KNS-8400 and it's very small and portable. I figure most would complain about it's light bass, but the sound is so good, but it's a little bright.
 
 

 
Quote:

So here's an update on my impressions of the DJ100. I'm actually pretty disappointed and will sadly be returning them. I know - I have read so many times how you need a good amp with these 'phones but I thought I could possibly withstand them with an E5 - at least have them sound decent. And I guess they are decent - but there are just so many things wrong with them without a a great amp.
 
The only thing I can say I really love about these headphones is the soundstage. But the sound itself can be fatiguing without the proper amp. There's some clarity and separation but sometimes it can be jumbled together here and there and the bass also distorts here and there (depends on the genre of music, what EQ I'm setting on my ipod - on Rock or Acoustic it's totally distorted and on Treble booster the highs are too much for my ears, considering they're already bright 'phones). Anyway, I wanted to love these headphones so bad since I have been really after a pair of comfortable, isolating circumaurals for portable use ( with good soundstage and bass impact) and I'm sure they would sound amazing with the right amp, but I'm not ready to pay $100 for an amp right now. 
 
So I will take them back and save up for something good and less fatiguing. I've been thinking about the Denon AH D2000 but it looks pretty big and I'm not sure how light-weight they'd be. Anyone have any experience with them?

Thanks for the reply Tdock. I considered the Creative Aurvana Live! but do you know how the isolation is on them?  I'm usually on the go every day on nyc subways so I'm not sure how the isolation would be. Although I've heard the sound is supposed to be pretty groovy.

 

[dudeitsart]

I'm new here and just got a pair of PortaPros which i love!
 
I've been keeping an eye on these for a while now, i cant seem to find them anywhere for $50, they seem to be $80.
 
witch makes me consider getting the UR-55.
Are the DJ100 worth the extra cash?
What makes them better than the UR-55?
 
Im looking for a great all around headphone as well.
I mostly listen to Hard Rock like At The Drive-In as well very melodic stuff like Radiohead.
Do these have good separation?
i've tried some other DJ headphones and they really lacked that.
 
i also plan to use these when i recording stuff with my band,
 
i'm new to all this stuff so i don't know much:/
really would like the help, thanks
 

 

[mcoleg]

Well, I've burned them in for over 50 hours. Without listening in between so that I don't get the "psycho-burn" effect .
 
Now they have so much bass it hurts my head... Holly smoke, these are the bassiest cans I've ever heard. SHR 840 are not even close and DT 770 sound like AKG's 271 compared to these.
Quote:

id give them some more time. They definitely will change more with burn in. I put 50 hours or so on mine and there was a huge difference. it wasnt enough for me, but i had different expectations 

 

[tdockweiler]

Quote:

I'm new here and just got a pair of PortaPros which i love!
 
I've been keeping an eye on these for a while now, i cant seem to find them anywhere for $50, they seem to be $80.
 
witch makes me consider getting the UR-55.
Are the DJ100 worth the extra cash?
What makes them better than the UR-55?
 
Im looking for a great all around headphone as well.
I mostly listen to Hard Rock like At The Drive-In as well very melodic stuff like Radiohead.
Do these have good separation?
i've tried some other DJ headphones and they really lacked that.
 
i also plan to use these when i recording stuff with my band,
 
i'm new to all this stuff so i don't know much:/
really would like the help, thanks
 

UR-55 can't even compare really. The UR-55 are very good, but the sound on those is a lot less clear in comparison. It's hard to tell the difference until you compare them side by side. The UR-55 are also not as comfortable and are going to be supra-aural for most people I think. The main difference I think is that the UR-55 sounds more like the Porta Pro. The DJ100 to me has a ton of detail, it's much more clear, has better comfort, better bass and very good imaging. It's much harder to drive though. I keep saying it over and over again, but for me everything on them sounds "just right". They do have slightly rolled off highs, but so does the UR-55. The DJ100 does have more forward sounding mids and far better vocal quality. Female vocals are amazing on the DJ100. That's why I'd never give them up. Reminds me of the vocal quality of the K601 and ATH-AD2000.
 
Last night I was really bored and compared the level of detail on all of my headphones that could be driven from an Airhead.  This isn't really in reply, but someone may find this useful.
 
Here is most detailed headphones I had from the most detail to the least:
 
KRK KNS-8400 - the level of detail on these is insane. Even comparable to a Beyer. Because of this I think this is why they may be fatiguing for some. In one recording I could hear a faint recording hiss. On this headphone it was so incredibly easy to hear and it was there the longest in the recording. For plain music listening this isn't always a good thing! If you find a Beyer Dynamic headphone too bright, avoid this! Out of the box they are ear piercing bright. After burn in, it gets tamed a LOT. These are quite bass light. As a studio monitor I'd use these over the SRH-840 any day. SRH-840 was my old #1 favorite.
 
Audio Technica ATH-AD2000 - Some may not agree with me, but I find these more detailed than the K702 I own. I haven't done long side by side comparisons though. I've been listening to these non-stop the past 3 days. Their sound is soooo addicting.
 
Koss Pro DJ 100 - That recording hiss and all the tiny details were so clear and not covered up by anything, which is surprising. Nowhere near the level of detail as the 8400, but these are not a studio monitor! The VERY slightly rolled off treble hurts them, but I find it's not a problem AT ALL since these are my fun headphones. The level of detail and it's imaging/soundstage make them a good budget gaming headphone. No, really. The sound on these to me is just as clear as my modded SR-80, but adds more detail, but with less treble and more bass. BTW the sound isn't quite as clear as the KRK, but those are $150 headphones and not exactly "fun". Some say otherwise, but these are NOT very forgiving of low bitrate mp3 files.
 
AKG K240 Studio - Due to the open design, some of the detail was a tad harder to hear and more distant. All the details were still there and I was surprised that this cheapie could pick up even recording hiss and all those tiny details. On one track I kept trying to locate a really faint sound and on some of my headphones it was nearly missing. It almost went missing on the DT-235 and HD-497!
 
modded Koss UR-55 - It surprised me that these had a lot of detail and could even pick up recording hiss. Barely. Not many $50 headphones can. Fairly detailed, but the sound isn't quite as clear/clean as the SR-80. It does have a far better soundstage and more bass. The mod removes the grill, but makes them less bass heavy.
 
Grado SR-80 - I was shocked to find that for the comparisons that recording hiss was non-existent on these!! Other small details were still there though. I do find that the SR-80 has some crystal clear sound, but I always hated it's bass. This is the modded version.
 
DT-235/HD-497 - Basically these kind of made me laugh with disgust at how bad they were compared to any of the above. Despite this they sound fairly good! All the detail I picked up on the other headphones were basically lost or very, very faint. Recording hiss? Forget it!
 
I also tested and compared the soundstage of all of them (I'm weird). Here's the best to worst:
 
ATH-AD2000 > Koss Pro DJ 100 > AKG K240 Studio > Modded Koss UR-55 > Modded Grado SR-80 (flat pads, probably why!) > DT-235/HD-497
 
It's quite impressive how the DJ100 has a better soundstage than the semi-open AKG K240! BTW I did hook up my K702 during this test and it would easily beat them all. Duh! That alone makes me love them.
 
I did this all since I was curious. Of course more detail doesn't mean anything, but I still find it interesting. I love how detailed the DT-880 is, but it bores me fast for music listening. I want to try the 32 ohm version for gaming and see how they compete with my ATH-AD2000. Love those for gaming.
 
 


Quote:

Well, I've burned them in for over 50 hours. Without listening in between so that I don't get the "psycho-burn" effect .
 
Now they have so much bass it hurts my head... Holly smoke, these are the bassiest cans I've ever heard. SHR 840 are not even close and DT 770 sound like AKG's 271 compared to these.
Quote:

id give them some more time. They definitely will change more with burn in. I put 50 hours or so on mine and there was a huge difference. it wasnt enough for me, but i had different expectations 

 

 
Yeah I always said they were not bass heavy and I still don't think they are, but pretty close! I don't listen to a ton of bass heavy music, so maybe thats why! I was actually shocked with them when I heard some bass heavy electronic music. I think it'd give bassheads the wrong impression if I said they were bass heavy! I think they have much more than the SRH-840, K240 Studio, but definitely not more than the D1101, XB500 or M50. They MIGHT have more than the latest white boxed M50, but I HIGHLY doubt it. Some on here have said the white box version is bass light! Huh?! I had the old version and mine had excessive, bloated bass. The bass on the DJ100 can fool me sometimes because it's VERY well controlled (when amped). It only shows up when required and doesn't overdo it. I think perhaps without an amp the bass is a little less controlled. I'd need to do more testing.
 
I'm no bass head, but I love the bass on these. When listening to my ATH-AD2000 I do miss the bass of my DJ100, but the AD2000's bass is still good. I still think the Denon D2000 is a bass monster compared to the DJ100. Like the DJ100 though, the bass is very well controlled when amped with my Asgard. I think sometimes when people say the DJ100 is bass light is because they're using a tiny mp3 player!
 

 

[mcoleg]

 
Quote:

Quote:

Well, I've burned them in for over 50 hours. Without listening in between so that I don't get the "psycho-burn" effect .
 
Now they have so much bass it hurts my head... Holly smoke, these are the bassiest cans I've ever heard. SHR 840 are not even close and DT 770 sound like AKG's 271 compared to these.
Quote:

id give them some more time. They definitely will change more with burn in. I put 50 hours or so on mine and there was a huge difference. it wasnt enough for me, but i had different expectations 

 

 
Yeah I always said they were not bass heavy and I still don't think they are, but pretty close! I don't listen to a ton of bass heavy music, so maybe thats why! I was actually shocked with them when I heard some bass heavy electronic music. I think it'd give bassheads the wrong impression if I said they were bass heavy! I think they have much more than the SRH-840, K240 Studio, but definitely not more than the D1101, XB500 or M50. They MIGHT have more than the latest white boxed M50, but I HIGHLY doubt it. Some on here have said the white box version is bass light! Huh?! I had the old version and mine had excessive, bloated bass. The bass on the DJ100 can fool me sometimes because it's VERY well controlled (when amped). It only shows up when required and doesn't overdo it. I think perhaps without an amp the bass is a little less controlled. I'd need to do more testing.
 
I'm no bass head, but I love the bass on these. When listening to my ATH-AD2000 I do miss the bass of my DJ100, but the AD2000's bass is still good. I still think the Denon D2000 is a bass monster compared to the DJ100. Like the DJ100 though, the bass is very well controlled when amped with my Asgard. I think sometimes when people say the DJ100 is bass light is because they're using a tiny mp3 player!
 

Huh, maybe I should correct myself here. I listened to DJ100 yesterday using HM-602. After I read your post, I tried some of the same tracks on AMP3.
 
I have some Demo tracks that came with AMP3 and tracks from Ultrasone Demo CD. Some of the recording will go into sub-bass, to my ears.
 
I said in another thread how DJ100 were probably the most transparent cans I've ever heard. By that I mean - they seem to take on the sound signature of whatever source they are plugged into.
 
with HM-602, a darker-sounding player, there's so much bass it's scary. My perception, obviously. I had XB500 until a couple of days ago (well, still have them; I was curious how they were made and took them apart ) and I'd say, the bass on DJ100 is better out of HM-602 than anything XB500 could deliver. Better control, no muddy-sounding BOOMs, pretty good sub-bass extension.
 
With AMP3 though, it's a different story. AMP3 is a bright-sounding player. It also output a bit less power but it can still drive DJ100 to the same level of detail as HM-602 so I don't think power is a problem.
 
On AMP3 there's much less bass impact. Still, good, tight bass that extends pretty deep but not to the level of HM-602 + DJ100 combo. The last one most bassheads should be satisfied with, seriously - I had to put it down last night 'cause it was causing me a headache.
 
So, I'd agree with you, tdockweiler, the amount of bass will greatly depend on the source.
 
Not enough driving power - no bassheads need to apply;
 
Enough driving power yet a bright source - not yet to the basshead's standards;
 
Darker-sounding source and plenty of power - basshead's happily ever after. Of course, I mean the head-fi sort of a basshead, not the common variety. I'm sure the later would be happy with all BOOM and no detail so they don't need to go into all this trouble to scratch their itch.