[wahsmoh]

I think anyone who owns a DT880 should listen to the Alpha Dogs once in their life. They "correct" all of the problems I had with the DT880 with the only sacrifice they make being the overall soundstage (it is not as large as the DT880) but images much better. Vocals are more lifelike too. 

 

[TrollDragon]

Seriously...

When I had the LCD-3's here they did everything the DT880's did and them some in Spades, the bass was luscious!

So yes indeed eveyone who owns the DT880's owes it to themselves to listen to a higher tier headphone to find out what your missing... :rolleyes:

 

[riverlethe]

Grado's are just a little more bright than my DT880 (Premium 600Ω), which I also think are bright.

Really? The Headroom graphs show treble spikes on the SR325 8-10dB above the DT880 throughout the treble region. Even the dreaded 8kHz peak is a few decibels higher on the Grado model.

 

[wahsmoh]

Seriously...

When I had the LCD-3's here they did everything the DT880's did and them some in Spades, the bass was luscious!

So yes indeed eveyone who owns the DT880's owes it to themselves to listen to a higher tier headphone to find out what your missing...

Keeping that in mind I will still be holding onto my DT880s until the day I purchase a more expensive pair of open backed headphones. The DT880s are still king of their price range IMO but when it comes to natural tonality they are no match for the Alpha Dogs. 
 
Orthodynamic bass has me addicted. There is something about it that dynamic drivers can't do. It is grain free and has more extended low end that isn't always as punchy as dynamic headphones but is felt in a different way.

 

[Chris J]

Seriously...

When I had the LCD-3's here they did everything the DT880's did and them some in Spades, the bass was luscious!

So yes indeed eveyone who owns the DT880's owes it to themselves to listen to a higher tier headphone to find out what your missing... :rolleyes:

I agree......basically.........in my own crazy, mixed up way!

Personally, anyone who likes the DT880s should try a pair of Stax SRS-2170, I found the Stax "fixed" some of the problems I found in the DT880.

FWTW, I didn't find my DT880 s very bright at all, I would use the word neutral.
Grado SR-325i: now that's a bright headphone!
AKG Q701: That's a bright headphone!

In closing....YMMV, folks!

 

[rodweb]

Really? The Headroom graphs show treble spikes on the SR325 8-10dB above the DT880 throughout the treble region. Even the dreaded 8kHz peak is a few decibels higher on the Grado model.

That's my perception at least... The 325's are ineed brigther, but with the 80's I never felt too much difference really... 

 

[i luvmusic 2]

I just love my DT880 600 Ohms the way it is.

 

[HeretixAevum]

Yeah, I really don't agree that the DT880 is a "very bright headphone" as some say. I'd say it qualified as being bright, but not in the negative way that a lot of people think of with it being shrill, piercing or harsh. It's very articulate and clear in the treble, but really quite smooth. Only a really bright, badly recorded / mixed / mastered recording (that is already harsh in and of itself) will sound harsh. 
 
There's extra treble energy but it's not peaky sounding for me at all. I also wouldn't say it was particularly fatiguing to listen to, either, and it's not a laid back sounding headphone. YMMV, I don't know how the Denon D2000 cable I have on it effects the sound, same with my DAC/Amp.

 

[pp312]

Seriously...

When I had the LCD-3's here they did everything the DT880's did and them some in Spades, the bass was luscious!

So yes indeed eveyone who owns the DT880's owes it to themselves to listen to a higher tier headphone to find out what your missing...

Well, I'd certainly expect the LCD-3 to ace the DT880 given the respective prices. No surprises there.
 
As to whether we owe it to ourselves to listen to higher tier headphones, I've already owned the LCD-2 (Rev1) and HE-500 (twice) and am still quite happy to stick with the 880. The LCD-2 was just too damn heavy and unwieldy, and the HE-500 I just didn't like the sound of, period (plus it was also too damn heavy). A truly satisfying headphone is really a combination of several factors, comfort and build quality (reliability) being not the least of them, so while it's true there may be better sounding phones in existence, for me the 880 hits the spot in so many areas I feel I'm not likely to soon find a satisfactory replacement.
 
Let's list them:
 
1. It's amazingly cheap. I think even its detractors would agree that the price it often goes for (under $250) is ridiculous for what is in fact a genuine alternative to the HD650 (albeit a different flavour).
 
2. It's hugely comfortable. Without comfort, sound quality means nothing.
 
3. Good build quality. Certainly nothing cheap about the build quality.  
 
4. Comes in different impedances to suit purpose. No other manufacturer offers that.
 
5. Can be custom sprayed for a zippo look. No other manufacturer offers that.
 
The last advantage isn't really something you can list, but arises out of its one major fault: the peak at 6.5khz. All headphones, at least all affordable ones, have a fault; the important thing is how easy it is to fix. Some, like the lower treble peak in the AKG K7--s, are quite difficult without proper EQ. The DT880's, at least subjectively, can be virtually eliminated with a simple tone control. It may not be scientific, but it works.

 

[HeretixAevum]

Yep, I totally agree a headphone needs to be strong in more than just sound quality. My 'big 4' personal priorities with a headphone are:
 
1. Sound Quality. If I'm left unsatisfied here, you can forget everything else.
2. Comfort. This is only just below sound quality, but I very much believe an uncomfortable headphone is as useless to me as a bad sounding one.
3. Build Quality. A headphone needs to be built right so that it feels solid and has the subsequent durability that it won't fall apart from regular use.
4. Looks. I'm unwilling to spend hundreds of dollars on something that looks ugly. I'm paying good money for it, it should look like it. Beauty is in the eyes of the beholder of course, but if I personally am unhappy with it's looks I'm not going to want it. An ugly headphone would have to be absolutely immaculate in my first 3 priorities for me to buy it. 
 
Things like accessories, packaging are bonus things that are nice but I don't particularly care about. 
 
pp312, I'm quite keen to give the new Hifiman HE400i a try, since it's a planar that's actually not too much of a leap in price from my DT880s, and it's a reasonable weight! I'm glad the hifiman are paying attention to weight, because whilst never trying a planar before, I know I would find the previous Hifiman and Audeze models too heavy. I couldn't believe that Audeze's new models are the good part of 100g heavier than their older offerings! That's really going in the wrong direction and I hope they take note because I think I'd really like an Audeze outside of the boulder-tier weight.  I'm obviously also eyeing the HE560 but it's a lot more money and I couldn't really afford it at the moment.
 
But like you say, I do like the comfort and build of the DT880, it's also handsome in it's own professional looking way. Also quite like the sound, would just prefer better bass authority down low, maybe a tad less treble and an overall step up in refinement wouldn't go astray, such as it being fast (not that it's a sluggish headphone). Maybe a wee bit less on the analytical side of things tonally, too? These new generations of planars should give me a lot of those things, I would hope. I'm going to watch the HE400i like a hawk. 

 

[genclaymore]

Seriously...

When I had the LCD-3's here they did everything the DT880's did and them some in Spades, the bass was luscious!

So yes indeed eveyone who owns the DT880's owes it to themselves to listen to a higher tier headphone to find out what your missing...

That exacty what I did, change headphones because tube amp wasnt gonna make me happy with the DT880's, Which how I ended up with the T90's in the first place and I still end up grabbing a Tube amp any way. And the T90's was the best thing I did. The only thing left is to get a hold of aschiit bifrost and I all set.

 

[pp312]

Heretix, see my last paragraph. These days tone controls are derided as non-audiophile, but you'd be surprised what their subtle use can achieve. A touch down on the treble, a touch up on the bass and voila!, a lot of the things people complain about with the 880 disappear.
 
Ah, you say, but I use a dedicated HP amp with no tone controls. To that I would ask, why, and you would answer, because it's the received wisdom here at Head-Fi that you can't get good sound with an integrated amp or stereo receiver. Well, that's wrong. I've compared mid-price dedicated amps (Matrix M-stage, LD Mk V etc) to good integrateds and can hear no difference whatsoever, at least with high impedance phones like the 880 (low impedance may be a different matter). Before you switch to a planar that may be less comfortable, see if you can borrow a good integrated amp and experiment. It might just keep you off the merry-go-round of upgrading.

 

[HeretixAevum]

  Heretix, see my last paragraph. These days tone controls are derided as non-audiophile, but you'd be surprised what their subtle use can achieve. A touch down on the treble, a touch up on the bass and voila!, a lot of the things people complain about with the 880 disappear.
 
Ah, you say, but I use a dedicated HP amp with no tone controls. To that I would ask, why, and you would answer, because it's the received wisdom here at Head-Fi that you can't get good sound with an integrated amp or stereo receiver. Well, that's wrong. I've compared mid-price dedicated amps (Matrix M-stage, LD Mk V etc) to good integrateds and can hear no difference whatsoever, at least with high impedance phones like the 880 (low impedance may be a different matter). Before you switch to a planar that may be less comfortable, see if you can borrow a good integrated amp and experiment. It might just keep you off the merry-go-round of upgrading.

Actually my answer to why I don't use a Stereo Amp would be "Because they're massive and would take up a lot of room on my desktop, and I'd still have no DAC". I'm very happy with my DAC/Amp combo. Sounds great, has a bunch of inputs and doesn't take up a lot of room. Why use something 5 times bigger that sounds no better and requires extra cash to spent on the DAC?
 
Haha, but I honestly have nothing against EQing, but since I have no access to any hardware EQ I'd have to use software. When I was living with my parents I would play around with my Dad's NAD Stereo Amp with the tone controls, it's pretty cool to have such easy, intuitive ways to adjust bass and treble. I really do think desktop amp makers need to include this feature. Do you think it would pay to learn how to use a good parametric EQ, maybe? I've just always been a bit intimidated by the learning curve of how to effectively EQ, not because I buy into the Head-Fi attitude of EQing not being 'pure' (which I agree with you, it's BS). 
 
But also, A slightly different tonal balance is only going to do so much. It's not going to magically make the DT880 reach down low flat and tight with fantastic authority and definition the way a good planar is supposed to. But hey, I'm willing to try it. 

 

[pp312]

Sorry to be writing your dialogue for you. Just thought I'd save some time.

 
Don't know about the size thing. Either you've only auditioned really large amps or you have a very small desk. I do take the point though, if space is an issue. As for a dac, I never use them so forget that others do. What are they for again? It keeps slipping my mind.
 
I'm not a believer in parametric equalisers. They eventally become like worry beads: you just can't stop touching them. If tone controls don't work, it's time to switch components. As for planar bass, I owned two planars and yes, the bass is very flat, but bass isn't as area of the FR I spend a lot of time thinking about; it's either adequate, abundant or deficient, and I find the 880s bass highly adequate. If it's very important to you, then yes, you probably need a planar, so long as you're aware that planars have their own set of problems.
 
If you end up getting the HE400i, don't forget to give us a comparison with the DT880.

 

[HeretixAevum]

Haha, that's OK 

 
I actually don't have a small desk, mine is 1800mm(W) x 900mm(D) so it's quite spacious. But considering that is accomodating a 24" monitor and my large PC tower (which I will have to move underneath the desk to accomodate 8" speakers when I can afford some) a stereo receiver is going to not have much room about. Whenever I think of a stereo receiver I think of large ones as that's what I've always seen growing up, I dunno, maybe my perceptions are skewed. In any case, my little Audio GD Amp DAC is on 165mm wide, 45mm tall and about 260mm deep. I like that I can get sound so nice out of something of a relatively low footprint. 
 
All the parametric EQs I've ever tried to use have made me give up almost immediately for being not approachable for beginners or user friendly. But even then, tone controls and EQ can only do so much. They're not going to give the DT880 the bass I want. Bass is something I consider quite a bit having varied music tastes. If I was only listening to classical the bass would be totally fine. I long for a bass response that goes right down, is flat with the midrange, can punch hard when required and is as tight as a nun

. I'm sure that planars have their own set of problems, no doubt. The LCD2 is the planar I've read most about over the years I've been aware of them, and their most documented flaws are that they're not the best for soundstage, were too dark, maybe a bit too thick and syrupy for many people and of course really ******* heavy. Not all of those things are about being a planar as much as being tuned a certain way, but just like with dynamics you just have to find the right one. The reports so far of the new Hifiman is that they're fast, clear and clean without being strident (according to Tyl over at Innerfidelity as well as reviews I've seen on the HE560). I'll be sure to audition them if I get the chance.