Takstar Pro 82/GM200 Review, impressions and discussion thread

Which headphones do you want Pro 82 to be compared with?


  • Total voters
    39
  • Poll closed .
Sep 5, 2017 at 1:30 PM Post #331 of 4,538
I really want to pull the trigger on this. No idea where to buy atm, though :frowning2:. Anyone found a decent retailer with stock?
Headphoniaks (HPK): http://headphoniaks.com. They are based in Spain. I spoke directly to them a few days ago and they still have stock (they got most of the units from Takstar's first production).

They told me that outside Spain they usually ship only to the US, but are open to offer a quote on the shipping costs to different countries. Drop them a line.

Recommending only because I bought from them and the experience was excellent, they are serious and very professional. I don't get any benefits from this statement.
 
Sep 9, 2017 at 5:44 PM Post #332 of 4,538
Yesterday my Pro 82 got a little brother and a little sister:
upload_2017-9-10_0-40-34.png


Hope they get along.
 
Sep 13, 2017 at 5:09 AM Post #334 of 4,538
How do they compare? :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:
I'm guessing you are asking about Fostex 900 MK2.
On some characteristics they are very close, maybe even tied.

Overall though - no competition, Fostex is the best closed headphone I heard so far, and maybe 2nd or 3rd best over-the-ear headphone I heard.
Before purchasing it, I have auditioned:
Focal Utopia,
Focal Elear,
Oppo PM-1,
Oppo PM-3,
ATH-W5000,
ATH-A1000Z,
Bower Wilkins P9,
FAD Sonorous VI,
Sennheiser HD700,
Sennheiser HD800S,
HiFiMan Edition X,
HiFiMan 560,
Denon AH-D7200,
JVC Wood 01,
Sony MDR1Z,
Beyerdynamic T5p II,
B&O H9,
Shure SRH1540,
PSB M4U,
Fostex 610,
Meze 99 Classics,
Abyss AB-1266

The best overall was Abyss AB-1266, but it is very amp picky - Oppo HA-1 made is sound boring and too analytical, Cayin HA-1AMk2 made it sound amazing, perfect in every way.

I used Oppo HA-2 as an Amp/DAC for most, as DAC only for some really power hungry ones.
 
Last edited:
Sep 13, 2017 at 6:48 AM Post #338 of 4,538
Can't figure out how to double quote on phone. Apologies for double post. I'm curious how you rank the w1000 and w5000. Have my eyes on the at-ad 2000 and iirc people say the 5000 are very similar
ATH-W5000 - plain bad, small soundstage, for bassheads only
ATH-A1000Z - good timbre and clarity, great bass - far better headphone than W5000
Haven't heard W1000
 
Sep 15, 2017 at 11:32 AM Post #341 of 4,538
Following up with this previous comment:
After having my Pro 82 for over three months now, I still agree to myself to most of what I wrote in there some months ago. Except perhaps for my impressions on their soundstage, which may need some slight amendment (for the good). This change of mind came after buying the Fidelio X2, which are supposed to deliver a huge soundstage, and comparing them directly, side by side, to the Pro 82. Since the X2 are a quite popular headphone, I will probably post something more elaborated on this comparison later on, in case it's helpful for others.
I thought it would be good to elaborate a bit more on it, since although it may be seen as an unfair closed- vs. open-back headphone comparison, those Philips might be a good reference point to some people.

So at first, right after my X2 arrived and I put them on to try, I was quite surprised by how the Pro 82 seemed to be much more detailed and resolving! Especially in the highs and lows (their bass response is quite unbeatable for any open hp, I believe). X2 seemed to be superior in the vocals (both in tonality and presence); they are probably not the best Hi-Fi experience out there, but they do deliver a very pleasant overall sound.

I was told that the X2's characteristics were mids-forward with a grainy treble. I think the X2 are not so much mid-forward, I would say that they are more balanced with vocals than the Pro 82, which is clearly a bit recessed. To me, the X2 are clearly worse in the low frequencies, and not in quantity but in quality. They do have enough amount of bass, not overly bassy, but perhaps lying in between the Pro 82 with the bass port closed and opened by one notch. They are softer in the highs, not muddy at all but with a lower impact than the Pro 82, which can be good or not depending on your preference (of course). I think this feature makes the X2 quite tolerating to bad audio sources, while the Pro 82 will very likely more easily pinpoint aspects of a bad recording.

After some burn-in period and a more detailed one-to-one comparison, the X2 were finally put for sale... And it was after this experience that I thought I would need to reevaluate some points of my previous review on the Pro 82.

The main point is about soundstage. The Fidelio X2 are considered to have a wide, if not huge, soundstage, which honestly I couldn't really feel that much in my tests. Obviously, being an open headphone adds a lot to the feeling that you are in a more open space, but to me never to the great extend of feeling like in a full room. I'm quite new to Hi-Fi and perhaps didn't understand what people refer to good soundstage: I thought it was about resembling the experience of listening to speakers, which TBH I never felt with any headphones yet. Taking the X2 as this good reference for soundstage and having said that the Pro 82 have a compressed spatial representation of sound (left-right game), I now believe that maybe I should rephrase it to a “good soundstage”. It is the clearness of the Pro 82 and the always-present highs what makes them feel that way, I believe.

On the other hand, the X2 made me realize more about some of the Pro 82's flaws. Specifically the vocals. Swapping headphones in a sort of a quick-and-dirty A/B test, made me hear the voices in the Pro 82 sounding a bit phony and clearly shifted to the highs, every single time, besides them being recessed (as commented in the past). After a little while, my brain somehow gets used to it, but at first it is always appreciated as not that natural. Doing the opposite test, from Pro 82 to X2, I could always hear a big improvement in vocals.

Highs in the X2 are much milder, I'm not sure if the correct term would be rolled-off, because I could hear all frequencies were present, but in a very gentle way. Which in comparison makes the Pro 82 to me much more revealing and enjoyable. I've noticed, again, perhaps they are a bit accentuated (on purpose) over what should be a more natural sounding.

It is the bass and the highs the main reason why I'm not keeping the X2. The bass is quite good though, but I prefer the slightly over-present highs in the Pro 82 than the softer ones in the X2. The X2 would not be used that much since the Pro 82 are much more revealing and fun, while giving a more coherent/complete experience of music and vocals.
 
Sep 15, 2017 at 9:30 PM Post #342 of 4,538
Thanks for the effort, nice comparison.

From what I've read, X2 is a nice fun pair of cans without pretention of neutrality. So I assume good bass and highs, big soundstage, great details, very musical and engaging but with recessed mids in the end (I'm speculating here from reviews please correct me if I'm wrong).

From your notes it is interesting that the 82 felt short on the mids visavis to the X2 which should have not be its strong point anyways and won you on the lows and highs presentation over X2 superior soundstage.
 
Sep 16, 2017 at 5:28 PM Post #343 of 4,538
Thanks for the effort, nice comparison.

From what I've read, X2 is a nice fun pair of cans without pretention of neutrality. So I assume good bass and highs, big soundstage, great details, very musical and engaging but with recessed mids in the end (I'm speculating here from reviews please correct me if I'm wrong).
If the X2 are neutral or not would depend on your personal definition of ‘neutral’, of course. To me, their bass is thick and above what I would call neutral, the mids are ok, and the highs are not as crisp or their body not as full as I would prefer (I feel something missing there).

One thing I forgot to mention is that in songs with many instruments going on at once, the X2 seemed to sound a bit congested to me. I could certainly pinpoint almost each sound source in the audio —the X2 aren't bad headphones—, but I needed to concentrate a lot more during the listening. In comparison, the Pro 82 are much more revealing, analytical so to say in that respect, although it comes in exchange of those slightly high-pitched vocals and the more brilliant high frequencies.

From your notes it is interesting that the 82 felt short on the mids visavis to the X2 which should have not be its strong point anyways and won you on the lows and highs presentation over X2 superior soundstage.
Yes, I still prefer the Pro 82 over the X2 because of the overall perception and feeling of the music that I get from them. Regardless of such recessed vocals and other deficiencies. On the other hand, these X2 helped me to confirm and better quantify such flaws in the Pro 82.
 
Sep 22, 2017 at 11:48 AM Post #344 of 4,538
info-less post, but I can't contain my enthusiasm:

I ordered the headphones from headphoniaks, and got them within 2 days. I was patiently waiting for my mic-cable to arrive when I realised I could screw off the 6.35mm jack and plug the remainder into my laptop to listen anyway >.<. They feel very comfortable on my head, though adjusting the size of the headband seems a bit flimsy? didn't slip yet but may wear. . . Hopefully it'll last.

I feel like using this with my laptop (even with FLAC quality) doesn't do the music nor the headphones a lot of justice...
 
Sep 23, 2017 at 11:12 PM Post #345 of 4,538
What do you think about differences between this pro 82 and Denon AHD600 and Somic MH463???
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top