The Basshead Club
Dec 5, 2012 at 10:14 AM Post #3,451 of 11,286
Quote:
The HDJ 2000 are well worth their $200 asking price, and now in black they are tempting again (I sold off the originals this summer). Their build and materials have yet to be matched, and I believe they were the first to use memory foam ear cushions (correct me if I am wrong). But I definitely needed the ZO when using them.

 
Quote:
I read somewhere that they lacked subbass extension. Can you comment on that? Also could you get that eartickling bass with the ZO?

 
I agree with the build quality of the HDJ-2000. Probably one of the best-made headphones out there. It definitely looks the part, alright.
 
As basshead cans. they aren't as bassy as their younger siblings (HDJ-500 & HDJ-1000), but they are very clear in its bass presentation. Mid-bass isn't huge, and sub-bass is pretty good. The sound signature is decidedly V-shaped, with good treble extension as well.
 
I can't really get ear-tickling bass with the HDJ-2000; it does rumble a little bit, but nothing as fantastic as with some of the more renowned basshead cans. I've paired them with ZO2.3, D-Zero and E11, and I found them sounding a little better with the E11.
 
All in all, the HDJ-2000 is a really expensive can that is a slight improvement over the HDJ-1000 in terms of quality, but tones down the bass quantity. For some, it's worth the premium, especially since its a really well made can, but for others, they might look elsewhere, especially if they are seeking a very bassy can. For me, I prefer my HDJ-1000 Limited to the HDJ-2000. A bit more bass quantity with a very similar sound signature. Plus, I think the HDJ-1000 Limited (black) looks so much prettier. 
smile.gif

 
Dec 5, 2012 at 10:32 AM Post #3,453 of 11,286
It seems like many including myself are trying to find a basshead can that checks all the boxes for $300.  I'm starting to feel like I am looking for something that doesn't exist in this price range and thinking I need to max out the credit card on Signature DJs.
 
 
Dec 5, 2012 at 10:40 AM Post #3,454 of 11,286
I personally dont think i will be be able to tell the difference, or be willing to pay for it. 300ish is the maximum I want to spend.
 
Right now my best hope is the AKG267. If that disappoints I'm just going to get the M100s I think.
 
Dec 5, 2012 at 10:56 AM Post #3,455 of 11,286
Quote:
I personally dont think i will be be able to tell the difference, or be willing to pay for it. 300ish is the maximum I want to spend.
 
Right now my best hope is the AKG267. If that disappoints I'm just going to get the M100s I think.

 
Personally I have my eyes set on AKG K267 & K167... however I don't expect K267 to sound much better (if at all as K167 already performs like such priced cans), I'm very tempted in K167 already and think it will probably satisfy me more than even M100 (because M100 seems to have too much recessed lower-mids). :)
 
Dec 5, 2012 at 11:14 AM Post #3,456 of 11,286
Quote:
 
Personally I have my eyes set on AKG K267 & K167... however I don't expect K267 to sound much better (if at all as K167 already performs like such priced cans), I'm very tempted in K167 already and think it will probably satisfy me more than even M100 (because M100 seems to have too much recessed lower-mids). :)

 
Exactly, after listening to the K167's I'm no longer interested in the M-100's, precisely because of the recessed mids.
 
Dec 5, 2012 at 11:23 AM Post #3,457 of 11,286
The mids are detailed and clear. The K267s are not out yet (January).


Yes, there is. The K167. Have a look at the thread but READ it all (comparisons with D2000, Momentum, UE6000, etc).



Exactly, after listening to the K167's I'm no longer interested in the M-100's, precisely because of the recessed mids.


If they just weren't so god damn gaudy looking id be more interested in them.
 
Dec 5, 2012 at 11:32 AM Post #3,458 of 11,286
Quote:
If they just weren't so god damn gaudy looking id be more interested in them.

 
You're really putting looks THAT important that you are skipping a pair of headphones because of their looks? :O
 
Personally I'd wear the Pink Hello Kitty headphones if they were actually great sounding and smile at their face to any1 that's laughing at me and tell how their prioritizings stinks! IT'S ALL ABOUT THE SOUND MY FRIEND. THAT's the spirit. :wink:
 
Dec 5, 2012 at 12:13 PM Post #3,461 of 11,286
Quote:
 
You're really putting looks THAT important that you are skipping a pair of headphones because of their looks? :O
 
Personally I'd wear the Pink Hello Kitty headphones if they were actually great sounding and smile at their face to any1 that's laughing at me and tell how their prioritizings stinks! IT'S ALL ABOUT THE SOUND MY FRIEND. THAT's the spirit. :wink:

 
I'm NOT by any means a flashy person, I'm someone who prefers subtlety and laidback looks over silver dot matrix headbands and Darth Vader black gloss. I might end up having to suck it up though for the sake of sonic bliss. I'm especially not particularly fond of the thickness of the headband, and detracts me more than the rest of this books cover.
 
I'm definitely going to get my ears on them, test them out for sure, and if they end up ticking all my boxes, I'll get them. I still think style is important with headphones, where most headphones in this price range look great, K167 missed the mark for me, way off. Beats are also in the Lego Brick category of toyish looking headphones. Just personal opinion, one I'll have to let my ears decide one way or the other.  
 
I'm also interested in the K267 for it's triple mode switch, and what effect each of those modes have on the signature. So I'm going to keep my eye open for that in January. 
 
Dec 5, 2012 at 1:03 PM Post #3,462 of 11,286
Does anyone have freq response graphs of the k167? How do they compare to Vmoda M100s or AKG K550 graphs?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top