The following is a brief comparison between two headphones, which are now officially amongst my "favorite cans" list. As a preface, the equipment used is as follows:
- Marantz SA7001 SACD player
- Apogee Mini-Dac
- Kimber DV-75 coax digital cable
The two 'phones in question are: the Audio Technica ATH-AD2000 (stock, with phatpad mod) and the Sony MDR-SA5000 (APS V3 recabled and balanced, with an APS V3 XLR-->SE adaptor cable for single ended use). I will talk about the bass, midrange and high frequencies, and in the midst of these I'll include details of such factors as soundstaging etc.
Bass: the AD2000 has a superb ability in this region, one which I am particularly fond of for its ability to go deep enough for my liking, whilst retaining speed and control. The SA5000 is no slouch either - what was striking to me was how extended the Sony was, and the tautness and tunefulness of top to bottom LF reponse.
The primary difference between the two was that I could follow the lines of the song more with the Sony, its accuracy of tone one may call it. This was particularly apparent in the instrumental passage of Diana Krall's Girl in the Other Room when the bass line is accompanied with a range of other instruments. The AD2000 though has more "thwack"; that is - greater impact. Together with this, it has more body (and perhaps warmth)....I could almost feel the reverb of the wood in the passage above.
Midrange: this is where I feel the biggest difference was. It was more a difference in presentation, as opposed to one being "better".
The AD2000 - instruments seem closer, the vocals very upfront, very smooth but not overly bright. Soundstaging is good, if a tad compressed (compressed is a harsh word really - more like reduced instrument separation). It is relatively wide, height is sufficient. I attribute much of this to the very close proximity of the drivers to the ears - even with the phatpads. What it excels in though is attack and bite, without ever approaching harshness (ala RS1).
The SA5000 - a tough one to describe. It was as if the vocals were the same, if not even a bit more upfront, yet the instruments were more distant than with the AT. The Sony has a bit more sparkle....it has an uncanny ability to be quite bright but without a hint of sibilance or sizzle (ala W5000). The instrument seperation is greater, and there is more air between them. Instrument placing is therefore enhanced, and the soundstage is expansive in comparison - wide, deep and high.
High Frequency: detail wise I think the are on-par, but the Sony has a slight edge because the added soundstage size allows that detail to be more easily discernable. I think its transient speed is also a little quicker which adds to this. I would say that it just edges the AT in the ability to dissect the music, but that has negative connotations, and I really mean it in a positive light - perhaps extract is a more appropriate description.
Both are relatively bright compared to many other headphones. Whilst the SA5000 has a bit more sparkle, I foresee that with the wrong equipment it may be a little overcooked for some. The AD2000 on the other hand is warmer in comparison (but by no means syrupy or slow). I think you could call the AD2000 neutral; the Sony cool.
Both, however, are very smooth. They can be sultry too and luxuriously so at that - Rebecca Pidgeon's Raven being a perfect example. I think the AT may lend itself more to that music though with its slightly warmer, call it "romantic" presentation (only in comparison to the Sony - it remains far more neutral than most cans). The intimacy of its vocal presentation backs that up too. The Sony's transparency and crispness may better suit classical and very dynamic music.
Overall: choosing between the two would be very difficult indeed. A lot depends on the type of music listened to, as well as associated equipment, and the factor I think many people tend to miss out - your mood at that particular point in time.
I own the SA5000 and think it is a keeper - especially since I already own a balanced HD650 and think the two provide plenty contrast to each other, whilst being able to - together - cover all of my sonic needs. Had I not had the HD650, things would be different, as I think the AD2000 could be a better all-rounder and may play more nicely with other gear. It would probably also be more forgiving (the SA5000 with a really bad recording is not a pleasant experience!)
In closing: I wanted to extend my warm thanks to musicmind for the great listening session and for bringing along the AT's. It was a very pleasant, intriguing, and highly enjoyable afternoon - in another episode of our series of South African micro-meets (don't get any more micro than two participants
).
I am sure I left some things out, as not notes were taken so the above is from memory
. I'll try and answer as many questions as possible.
- Marantz SA7001 SACD player
- Apogee Mini-Dac
- Kimber DV-75 coax digital cable
The two 'phones in question are: the Audio Technica ATH-AD2000 (stock, with phatpad mod) and the Sony MDR-SA5000 (APS V3 recabled and balanced, with an APS V3 XLR-->SE adaptor cable for single ended use). I will talk about the bass, midrange and high frequencies, and in the midst of these I'll include details of such factors as soundstaging etc.
Bass: the AD2000 has a superb ability in this region, one which I am particularly fond of for its ability to go deep enough for my liking, whilst retaining speed and control. The SA5000 is no slouch either - what was striking to me was how extended the Sony was, and the tautness and tunefulness of top to bottom LF reponse.
The primary difference between the two was that I could follow the lines of the song more with the Sony, its accuracy of tone one may call it. This was particularly apparent in the instrumental passage of Diana Krall's Girl in the Other Room when the bass line is accompanied with a range of other instruments. The AD2000 though has more "thwack"; that is - greater impact. Together with this, it has more body (and perhaps warmth)....I could almost feel the reverb of the wood in the passage above.
Midrange: this is where I feel the biggest difference was. It was more a difference in presentation, as opposed to one being "better".
The AD2000 - instruments seem closer, the vocals very upfront, very smooth but not overly bright. Soundstaging is good, if a tad compressed (compressed is a harsh word really - more like reduced instrument separation). It is relatively wide, height is sufficient. I attribute much of this to the very close proximity of the drivers to the ears - even with the phatpads. What it excels in though is attack and bite, without ever approaching harshness (ala RS1).
The SA5000 - a tough one to describe. It was as if the vocals were the same, if not even a bit more upfront, yet the instruments were more distant than with the AT. The Sony has a bit more sparkle....it has an uncanny ability to be quite bright but without a hint of sibilance or sizzle (ala W5000). The instrument seperation is greater, and there is more air between them. Instrument placing is therefore enhanced, and the soundstage is expansive in comparison - wide, deep and high.
High Frequency: detail wise I think the are on-par, but the Sony has a slight edge because the added soundstage size allows that detail to be more easily discernable. I think its transient speed is also a little quicker which adds to this. I would say that it just edges the AT in the ability to dissect the music, but that has negative connotations, and I really mean it in a positive light - perhaps extract is a more appropriate description.
Both are relatively bright compared to many other headphones. Whilst the SA5000 has a bit more sparkle, I foresee that with the wrong equipment it may be a little overcooked for some. The AD2000 on the other hand is warmer in comparison (but by no means syrupy or slow). I think you could call the AD2000 neutral; the Sony cool.
Both, however, are very smooth. They can be sultry too and luxuriously so at that - Rebecca Pidgeon's Raven being a perfect example. I think the AT may lend itself more to that music though with its slightly warmer, call it "romantic" presentation (only in comparison to the Sony - it remains far more neutral than most cans). The intimacy of its vocal presentation backs that up too. The Sony's transparency and crispness may better suit classical and very dynamic music.
Overall: choosing between the two would be very difficult indeed. A lot depends on the type of music listened to, as well as associated equipment, and the factor I think many people tend to miss out - your mood at that particular point in time.
I own the SA5000 and think it is a keeper - especially since I already own a balanced HD650 and think the two provide plenty contrast to each other, whilst being able to - together - cover all of my sonic needs. Had I not had the HD650, things would be different, as I think the AD2000 could be a better all-rounder and may play more nicely with other gear. It would probably also be more forgiving (the SA5000 with a really bad recording is not a pleasant experience!)
In closing: I wanted to extend my warm thanks to musicmind for the great listening session and for bringing along the AT's. It was a very pleasant, intriguing, and highly enjoyable afternoon - in another episode of our series of South African micro-meets (don't get any more micro than two participants
I am sure I left some things out, as not notes were taken so the above is from memory
