[DrunkSaru]

Alright, people, can you tell me one thing: how much body do the mids have? Capable of having?

compared to what? These are reference headphones. they sound like your typical references headphones. Still great today considering how old it is but there are plenty of headphones that will outperform this. The best analogy I can give the CD900ST is like the Honda S2000. Old but can still hang with the new budget sports vehicles but of course there are plenty of better cars out there. Some just like it old school. But yeah, hard to answer your question unless you have something to compare with.

 

[mmmmkay]

I had a pair and didn't think anything spectacular of them. Sold them on ebay not too long ago. or Maybe it was 6 years ago. I do was surprised they sold over $100 auction style. That's all I remember.. You can still get them off yahoo japan auction for a decent price.
Edit: Actually, nvm. I checked the auction where I sold it. it was an MDR-CD999. Sold it for $189 to an ebayer who goes by the ebay handle william_wooten. Is it similar sounding to the CD900ST?

 

[GREQ]

I had a pair and didn't think anything spectacular of them. Sold them on ebay not too long ago. or Maybe it was 6 years ago. I do was surprised they sold over $100 auction style. That's all I remember.. You can still get them off yahoo japan auction for a decent price.
Edit: Actually, nvm. I checked the auction where I sold it. it was an MDR-CD999. Sold it for $189 to an ebayer who goes by the ebay handle william_wooten. Is it similar sounding to the CD900ST?

I've spoken to someone who owns both, and he says they sound quite different.
He also prefers the CD999 by a significant margin.

But his music tastes are quite different to mine.
From our discussions, I believe I would not enjoy the CD999 due to some possible treble peaks.

They're also both from different product lines.
For example, the CD999 has 50mm amorphous diamond drivers, while the CD900ST has 40mm drivers.
So they should sound different and can't really be directly compared as siblings.

 

[Elegiac]

compared to what? These are reference headphones. they sound like your typical references headphones. Still great today considering how old it is but there are plenty of headphones that will outperform this. The best analogy I can give the CD900ST is like the Honda S2000. Old but can still hang with the new budget sports vehicles but of course there are plenty of better cars out there. Some just like it old school. But yeah, hard to answer your question unless you have something to compare with.

I can reference a k240 mkII, Koss Pro4s, Beyer DT 770 80 ohm, Beyer DT 880 600 ohm, k240 DF, and a k371. Any of those.
And of those I would say that the Koss Pro4s sound thinnest in the mids.

 

[mmmmkay]

I've spoken to someone who owns both, and he says they sound quite different.
He also prefers the CD999 by a significant margin.

But his music tastes are quite different to mine.
From our discussions, I believe I would not enjoy the CD999 due to some possible treble peaks.

They're also both from different product lines.
For example, the CD999 has 50mm amorphous diamond drivers, while the CD900ST has 40mm drivers.
So they should sound different and can't really be directly compared as siblings.

That's sucks. I should;ve wore them more often. I think the fact the CD999 look similar to the MDR-V6 might've clouded my judgement, and that's probably why I got rid of them. My college's music faculty used the MDR-V6 extensively (in all labs and studios) and I was sick of them. I got them for $20 at a yard sale and they spent most of their time with a pile of random hardware and cables in box.

 

[mobbaddict]

I can reference a k240 mkII, Koss Pro4s, Beyer DT 770 80 ohm, Beyer DT 880 600 ohm, k240 DF, and a k371. Any of those.
And of those I would say that the Koss Pro4s sound thinnest in the mids.

Not on your list but going by memory I think the CD900ST is pretty much a closed-back HD600 in terms of overall balance.

 

[Elegiac]

Not on your list but going by memory I think the CD900ST is pretty much a closed-back HD600 in terms of overall balance.

Well, I've seen so many things compared to the HD600 that's it's like an imaginary standard in my head that I've never heard, hahaha
Alright, the HD600 has some body in the mids, yeah? Enough body to not sound thin.

 

[mobbaddict]

Well, I've seen so many things compared to the HD600 that's it's like an imaginary standard in my head that I've never heard, hahaha
Alright, the HD600 has some body in the mids, yeah? Enough body to not sound thin.

Yes I realize that haha! Well yeah the midrange is very balanced on both, if you take a look at the frequency response of the CD900ST you will see the same bump around 3khz, which is how a neutral headphone should look. It makes the midrange more prominent than other headphones like the DT770. But the midrange is not thin either, it has a good body and lower range too. Personally it's one of the most balanced closed-back headphones I've heard. This is all going by memory as my CD900ST need a recabling, it doesn't work now.

 

[GREQ]

Yes I realize that haha! Well yeah the midrange is very balanced on both, if you take a look at the frequency response of the CD900ST you will see the same bump around 3khz, which is how a neutral headphone should look. It makes the midrange more prominent than other headphones like the DT770. But the midrange is not thin either, it has a good body and lower range too. Personally it's one of the most balanced closed-back headphones I've heard. This is all going by memory as my CD900ST need a recabling, it doesn't work now.

Here are my measurements of HD600 (early production) vs MDR-CD900ST

 

[Elegiac]

Aha, thank you.
I realise that FR isn't everything in how something sounds, so it's nice to have subjective confirmation as well.

 

[GREQ]

Indeed.
The difference in overall presentation is significant.
I always think comparing open backs to closed backs is fundamentally apples to oranges, but objective tonal balance can't be ignored.

 

[Elegiac]

Indeed.
The difference in overall presentation is significant.
I always think comparing open backs to closed backs is fundamentally apples to oranges, but objective tonal balance can't be ignored.

Well, you force my curiosity... the difference in overall presentation?

 

[GREQ]

Well, you force my curiosity... the difference in overall presentation?

Oh, I just mean the usual stuff.
All big open-backs have bigger soundstage and significantly more 'air' than ANY closed-back, no matter how big they are.
And in the case of these rather small Sony's, their soundstage is rather tiny ... or 'intimate' if you prefer to give it a positive spin.
That will always be the most obvious difference.

 

[plmon]

I can reference a k240 mkII, Koss Pro4s, Beyer DT 770 80 ohm, Beyer DT 880 600 ohm, k240 DF, and a k371. Any of those.
And of those I would say that the Koss Pro4s sound thinnest in the mids.

I'd say it's most like the K240 or the DT880 in terms of the mids, they sound a bit thick actually since there's a bit of a midbass hump and the treble is fairly relaxed. But overall, I like the mids better than most of the headphones you listed (haven't heard the Koss or the K240 DF).

But I agree with the others, I find the CD900st's midrange resolution and naturalness to be closest to the HD600 series. It's just the relaxed treble that keeps them from being a full-on closed back equivalent, they're slightly less clear-sounding. But definitely one of the best closed-backs I've heard in terms of tonality.

 

[Elegiac]

I'd say it's most like the K240 or the DT880 in terms of the mids, they sound a bit thick actually since there's a bit of a midbass hump and the treble is fairly relaxed. But overall, I like the mids better than most of the headphones you listed (haven't heard the Koss or the K240 DF).

But I agree with the others, I find the CD900st's midrange resolution and naturalness to be closest to the HD600 series. It's just the relaxed treble that keeps them from being a full-on closed back equivalent, they're slightly less clear-sounding. But definitely one of the best closed-backs I've heard in terms of tonality.

With a touch more bass than the 880 or 240?