[oldshoe99]

There's an interesting discussion at the headphiles site about testing the DT48 headphones and what most likely went wrong in the Innerfidelity tests.

 

[maniacal71]

Quote:

There's an interesting discussion at the headphiles site about testing the DT48 headphones and what most likely went wrong in the Innerfidelity tests.

Hey Gramps, how did you know about that so quickly, sometimes you really amaze me.....

 

[oldshoe99]

Quote:

Hey Gramps, how did you know about that so quickly, sometimes you really amaze me.....

There's these three hot models who work for Beyerdynamic who adore me, and they keep me informed.  Then again, I can run the 1/4 mile in 65 seconds, so I'm usually a step ahead.

 

[maniacal71]

Quote:

There's these three hot models who work for Beyerdynamic who adore me, and they keep me informed.  Then again, I can run the 1/4 mile in 65 seconds, so I'm usually a step ahead.

Two Thumbs Up for you old man, could you tell those hot ladies to keep me informed as well? Thanks a million.

 
 

 

[oldshoe99]

Quote:

Two Thumbs Up for you old man, could you tell those hot ladies to keep me informed as well? Thanks a million.

 
 

They know who you are.  If you're respectful enough to me, they may do something for you too.

 

[shamu144]

Mmm, I don't really buy the theory of the impedance mismatch... In my experience, the DT48A version is pretty insensitive to different output impedance (0, 33 and 200 Ohms tested). It is however very sensitive to the signal quality (and possible EQ build in).
 
Quote:

There's an interesting discussion at the headphiles site about testing the DT48 headphones and what most likely went wrong in the Innerfidelity tests.

 

 

[oldshoe99]

Quote:

Mmm, I don't really buy the theory of the impedance mismatch... In my experience, the DT48A version is pretty insensitive to different output impedance (0, 33 and 200 Ohms tested). It is however very sensitive to the signal quality (and possible EQ build in).
 
Quote:


 

The theory isn't something I necessarily believe or want anyone else to believe.  It's just my attempt to look for an explanation for bad test results and bad listening results for the same tester at the same time.  Since my sweep tone tests didn't indicate anything near a 35 db difference between 5 and 8 khz or thereabouts, and my music listening tests indicate good quality sound, both of which are very different that the tester's findings, the only thing I see that could explain both is the source.  The dummy head or measurement technique could affect the tech tests, but not the listening test.  Capisce?

 

[WhiteCrow]

so has anyone tested these headphone against the DT1350's? I remember really liking the DT48's when I used them from memory the DT1350's have a similar sound and detail if not more.

 

[shamu144]

Don't trust your memory

 
I have not even bothered describing my impressions of the DT48A vs the DT1350... Those are not even close or playing in the same league.

 
Quote:

so has anyone tested these headphone against the DT1350's? I remember really liking the DT48's when I used them from memory the DT1350's have a similar sound and detail if not more.

 

 

[oldshoe99]

Quote:

so has anyone tested these headphone against the DT1350's? I remember really liking the DT48's when I used them from memory the DT1350's have a similar sound and detail if not more.

Yes, extensively.  Both side by side.
 
The bass is strong and detailed with the 1350, and although the bass is as detailed on the DT-48E, it's lower in volume from 60 hz on down by about 6 db.  To me the 1350's bass sounds fairly flat, so there you go.
 
The highs on the 1350 from ~9 khz up are good and very smooth, while the DT-48E's highs are slightly more uneven, but still good, and music with strong sibilants will be more of a problem with the DT-48E.
 
The high midrange of the DT-48E is very nice and musical, like the mid-midrange itself.  In a word, exceptionally good.  The high midrange of the 1350 is recessed enough that I had a problem hearing detail there.  The mid-midrange of the 1350 is very dry, not good IMO.
 
The lower midrange down to ~150-200 hz is somewhat lean with both headphones.  Neither are what I would describe as warm.
 
Physically, the 1350 gave me a slight headache the first few sessions, but I got used to it eventually.  They work well for portable use as well as desktop.  The DT-48E is something else entirely.  They not only take some getting used to, but they have a rather unique requirement for sealing to get adequate bass.  If you want the final word on the DT-48E sound and fit, see the review by Audiophath at the B&H website in Beyerdynamic DT-48E 25 ohms.  He's the Canadian guy.  Very short review, very to the point.

 

[WhiteCrow]

Quote:

Yes, extensively.  Both side by side.
 
The bass is strong and detailed with the 1350, and although the bass is as detailed on the DT-48E, it's lower in volume from 60 hz on down by about 6 db.  To me the 1350's bass sounds fairly flat, so there you go.
 
The highs on the 1350 from ~9 khz up are good and very smooth, while the DT-48E's highs are slightly more uneven, but still good, and music with strong sibilants will be more of a problem with the DT-48E.
 
The high midrange of the DT-48E is very nice and musical, like the mid-midrange itself.  In a word, exceptionally good.  The high midrange of the 1350 is recessed enough that I had a problem hearing detail there.  The mid-midrange of the 1350 is very dry, not good IMO.
 
The lower midrange down to ~150-200 hz is somewhat lean with both headphones.  Neither are what I would describe as warm.
 
Physically, the 1350 gave me a slight headache the first few sessions, but I got used to it eventually.  They work well for portable use as well as desktop.  The DT-48E is something else entirely.  They not only take some getting used to, but they have a rather unique requirement for sealing to get adequate bass.  If you want the final word on the DT-48E sound and fit, see the review by Audiophath at the B&H website in Beyerdynamic DT-48E 25 ohms.  He's the Canadian guy.  Very short review, very to the point.

interesting, I have the polar opposite experience with this. The upper midrange seems recessed but it has so much detail in the midrage and upper registers that I don't mind at all. I find them to be very musical and...not lush like my RS-2s but certainly not dry. I really want to hear the DT48's now to test the difference in midrage. anyone feel like loaning out a pair?!?!

 
OH also a simple EQ fixes the small dip in the midrange around the 800-1200 range I bumped up 2 db and it's just magical.

 

[oldshoe99]

Quote:

interesting, I have the polar opposite experience with this. The upper midrange seems recessed but it has so much detail in the midrage and upper registers that I don't mind at all. I find them to be very musical and...not lush like my RS-2s but certainly not dry. I really want to hear the DT48's now to test the difference in midrage. anyone feel like loaning out a pair?!?!

 
OH also a simple EQ fixes the small dip in the midrange around the 800-1200 range I bumped up 2 db and it's just magical.

Based on your descriptions, you are certain to have the same experience as the Innerfidelity guy.  He loved the 1350 and hated the "wretched" DT-48E.  Besides, the DT-48 series are an ancient design, are very uncomfortable, are very, very bass light, and have choppy upper highs, unlike the smooth highs of the 1350.  Like the other guy said, they sound nothing alike.  I can't imagine anyone going for a DT-48 unless they just have a major thing for antique stereo gear.

 

[WhiteCrow]

Quote:

Based on your descriptions, you are certain to have the same experience as the Innerfidelity guy.  He loved the 1350 and hated the "wretched" DT-48E.  Besides, the DT-48 series are an ancient design, are very uncomfortable, are very, very bass light, and have choppy upper highs, unlike the smooth highs of the 1350.  Like the other guy said, they sound nothing alike.  I can't imagine anyone going for a DT-48 unless they just have a major thing for antique stereo gear.

I didnt say I hated the DT48, I liked them. and they were built like mad. I'm saying they sounded at least to my ears alike the DT1350's.

 

[maniacal71]

Quote:

Based on your descriptions, you are certain to have the same experience as the Innerfidelity guy.  He loved the 1350 and hated the "wretched" DT-48E.  Besides, the DT-48 series are an ancient design, are very uncomfortable, are very, very bass light, and have choppy upper highs, unlike the smooth highs of the 1350.  Like the other guy said, they sound nothing alike.  I can't imagine anyone going for a DT-48 unless they just have a major thing for antique stereo gear.

Quote:

interesting, I have the polar opposite experience with this. The upper midrange seems recessed but it has so much detail in the midrage and upper registers that I don't mind at all. I find them to be very musical and...not lush like my RS-2s but certainly not dry. I really want to hear the DT48's now to test the difference in midrage. anyone feel like loaning out a pair?!?!

 
OH also a simple EQ fixes the small dip in the midrange around the 800-1200 range I bumped up 2 db and it's just magical.

If you appreciate the details of the DT1350, the DT48 will give even more, They do not need EQ and are perfectly fine without it, so many have complained about it being bass light, but I don't find anything missing strangely, On why many have detracted from these even after owning them could be that, they had no Synergy with the equipment and that at no fault of the DT48, doesn't make expensive gears a placebo but gives the most honest audition. From the source to whatever in between, will be inspected closely with a microscope, that is how revealing the DT48 is.
 
http://headfonics.com/2011/11/beyerdynamic-dt-48a-the-audiometric-headphone/

 

[maniacal71]

Quote:

I didnt say I hated the DT48, I liked them. and they were built like mad. I'm saying they sounded at least to my ears alike the DT1350's.

 
I think grumpy oldshoes misinterpreted or he was just serving a warning, that they may not be for everyone, To appreciate the DT48, you need to forget everything you may like in modern headphones which have gone on the wrong direction in designing headphones., but in owning and liking your K500 I think you wouldn't have a problem with them. The best DT48 you can buy right now is the A version and a new pair of E version ear pads, its more comfortable. Hope you read the review on Headphiles/Headfonics by one very respected member of the Headphones community.(link in the previous post)