Quote:
Hear you. It´s been way to long since I last heard the 400/450 Pro or even the 435S. The 435S sounded the most neutral of the bunch on my old system whatever that was. I still have them you could buy mine if you want. No real need for them having the LCD-2 and AD700 as new toy for open headphones. Has some spare earpads you could try with it as well if so.
The 435S with it´s stock ear pads did have a better bass extension and overall more bass than the 450 Pro though they are no benchmark in term of bass extension. I also want to remember 435S to be a bit dryer sounding than the 450 Pro. . For classical I would take the 450 Pro anyday. It just has a really juicy mid range that was very appealing and the ev lack of sub bass just seemed to make the music flow better.
As for fatigue I didn´t notice that much. The 450 Pro is from what I remember the least forgiving of the bunch regarding sibilance and it´s also the brightest but not to the point causing ill comfort for me. The only slightly fatiguing thing for the 435S primarily since it has the widest soundstage of the bunch is that it´s just that. To wide horizontally and lacking in vertical depth.
I suppose I have mentioned this but I have experimented quite a bit with different ear pads on the 435S and it alter the tonal balance a lot. You can get it really bright with the right earpads. Perhaps even brighter then the 450 Pro. I haven´t been able to A-B them so can´t say honestly. But new pads or not I still want to remember the 450 Pro was more musical with classical so if that is your primary genre that would be my recommendation from audio memory. Otherwise get my 435S and experiment
.
As for isolation I don´t remember the 450 Pro isolate anything at all so I did rule out that factor when comparing the German Maestros alltogether. 450 Pro sounded like an open headphone to me
Indeed, time has walked quite a bit since you posted your impressions on the German Maestros. I appreciate your effort oqvist!
I see that you are selling your GMP 435s for 180 euros...
Thanks for the offer but I can get it cheaper on my local store
It's interesting... my dilemma between the 435s and 450 Pro came, in part, from your early impressions of the two headphones:
Sound signature wise I want transparency, neutrality, balance, accuracy all along the frequency spectrum (above all midrange), high resolution, capability of reproducing realistic spacial cues,...
I want to be able to hear the sources sound signature... I don't want interference of the headphone on the incoming sound signature of the source...
Indeed a transparent can, with no souns signature of it's own, is what I need.
But, if possible, I want the sense of musicality to pass through the headphone, I dont want a boring, dry, sterille sound...
Being aware that there is no such perfect (my ideal) headphone in existence, within my budget of 230 Euros, I spent months and months searching and reading, not only Head-fi, but inoumerous other headphone or audio related websites and forums from all over, for the closest thing that didn't require a heavy duty mod... to much hassle
The German Maestros were the closest things that I found. In fact they seem to be relatively popular among the chinese and russian audiophiles and headphone enthusiasts who regard these headphones as some of the most accurate and true to life money can buy... serious!
The 435s should be the choice from the descriptions I have read...
more balanced and neutral than the GMP 450 Pro and GMP 400(with stock pads), relatively transparent, but it doesn't seem to be technically as capable as the other two when proprerly amplifieds.
Your description of it's sound being boring and dryer than the GMP 450 Pro matches with other descriptions I've read and seems to be the a simple result of technical inferiority.
About the GMP 450 Pro, I've read that they have an extremely competent midrange and high tonal resolution(tonal accuracy), which I think correlates with what you and joelpearce so flatteringly about the midrange. I've read also that it sounds like an open headphone (I have a hard time to believe this), that it sounds bright, midcentric, balanced, transparent, highly analitycal, highly musical, sometimes cold, smooth, harsh in the highs, narrow,... some incompatible descriptions coexist with this headphone...
The 450 Pro has been compared to all kinds of high end cans and I have yet to see someone identifying a clear flaw in it's sound....
So bottom line:
Should I make a safe bet and go for the 435s getting the most balanced, neutral, all around, unpretensious sound possible, at the sacrifice of refinement and greater musicality enjoyment?
Or should I take my chances with the possibly cantankerous, but technically superior, GMP 450 Pro, for a possibly greater musicality enjoyment without the sacrifice of transparency, accuracy, realism?
And to complicate the equation I still don't know how the GMP 400 sounds with the opened back earpads in comparison...
Quote:
Does the GMP 450 Pro show any signs of compression, boxiness, or ressonance in it's sound duo to it's closed back design? This is something that I was able to identify in my audition of the MB Quart QP 450, although only very slightly. These shortcoming were the only thing I realy disliked about it's sound, but I was only able to tell that by comparing it with the QP 400.
Well, it's pretty high task to be less boxiness than a Grado.
Within the category of closed back phones, GMP450pro counts as a very open one.
Even some very hi-end closed back I audited like ED9 ED8 are not that "open" as a pair of closed back phones.
The reason is pretty simple, the fit is very loose and comfortable so that it only provides weak isolation..
Compare to GS-1000, yes, you can feel it as a closed back phone. (I think this is a very high standard....)
However, GMP450pro manages the sound very wisely so you can compare it to some other open phones other than Grado..
Because of its clean presentation of details, you will have an very airy feeling within its class of phones.
You can feel a boundary of the headstage, which is reasonable and very well controlled.
This is really not a problem for classical music since majority of them are indoor recording.
Comparatively speaking, GS-1000 simply shows where the boundary is without claiming there is boundary, GMP450pro has a pretty high upper limit yet very reasonable, DT990 sometimes blurs the boundary of the room, and closed back phones like AKG271s will have smaller soundstage.
For example, the following reissue of Turina's orchestral works:
http://www.amazon.com/Turina-Orchestral-Music-Joaquin/dp/B001F0TSIE/ref=sr_1_4?ie=UTF8&s=music&qid=1293515616&sr=8-4
The recording is somewhat upfront, it makes gives boomy trouble for closed back phones.
GMP450pro manages it very beautifully.
I audited K702 long before, I like it.
It does try to make some reverabration to make sound sweeter, which is still in acceptable range.
However, I cannot answer if I'll pick it over GMP450pro without further audition..
All I can say is that I'm somewhat confident with the sound from both of them for critical listening.
To me, the phones for critical listening has to be able to show the cross-section difference across recording without stressing too much on its sound signature.
Lower models of Grado are good for details but the sound is crowded, it's not until GS-1000 that Grado provides a reasonable solution for most kind of works.
DT990 dilutes the soundstage for every recordings, yet T1 finally addresses that issue.
K702 does a little bit the similar thing but still good for small scale works.
GMP450pro has its own room (or soundstage) definition for sure, but that's dominating over different recordings.
stokitw, do you agree with joelpearce when he says that the GMP 450 Pro is midcentric?
Thanks!
