[bhavanidte]

  I'm assuming you do want the DAC and headphone amplifier for travel or fixed / desktop?
The Macbook 2012 I believe has USB 3 out as well as a headphone out (or 3 pole to RCA) to feed the DAC.
 
Micca Origen+ - has the USB and many options which far more expensive DAC / Amp combos do not have.
SMSL M3 - USB, has a good 1/4" out (these always last longer than the 3.5mm)
FiiO E10k - USB, has a silly bass boost that doesn't do well which you can ignore, sound is not as great for music as others in the same price range e.g. SMSL M3
 
 
At the 170 USD (slightly higher than your range)
SMSL M6 - USB, very close to expensive DAC/AMP combos almost 2 to 3 times the price, has a joystick controller with a screen, pretty small but not as small a form factor as the above 3, can lineout RCA speakers.
Kind of weird that it is close enough to the price of the SMSL M3 but you're paying for a better DAC and having an external power supply.

Thank you the real great help. I went ahead and bought the Micca Origen+. 

 

[Hifihedgehog]

Here is the post I found that I had read where the user says the higher impedance DT drivers are lighter. As to efficiency and finesse of the driver, its magnetic strength would be stronger will more, tighter windings:

 

 
I've compared the DT770 Premium 250Ω and 600Ω, and they were a clear night and day...much clearer trebles and much faster response. Hell, they even were much lighter when having a 250Ω driver in one hand and a 600Ω in the other(I bought the 600Ω drivers as spare parts).
 
http://europe.beyerdynamic.com/headphones-headsets/faqs.html
 
"The impedance is determined by the voice coil (dynamic headphones), which is a winded copper wire (coated to avoid a short-circuit). This copper wire is available in nearly every length, but not in every gauge (thickness) and a thicker wire has less resistance than a thin wire ("less fits through"). The magnetic field of the voice coil depends on the number of windings of the coil, causing a low impedance system to use a thicker (also heavier) wire and since the membrane foil can't be infinitely light-weight, the moving mass (voice coil and membrane) is relatively high. It's pretty clear that a higher mass can't move as easily (following an audio signal) as a lower mass. This low mass can easily be accomplished with thinner (lower weight) wire, but the thinner wire has a higher impedance. This means that the DT 770 PRO with 250 ohms sound more natural, but plays (depending on the used headphone amplifier) not as loud as the 80 ohms version."
 
being skeptic is good, but these are FACTS. And yes, my 32Ω cd3k kills all their 600Ω Manufaktur phones but that's just how BD engineer their drivers...higher impedance = faster reponse and clearer trebles, just like nikchen said: http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/424842/beyerdynamic-dt880-closed-back
 
"The 600ohm driver have much more precise bass and the overall sound is clearer. These are really a big step and should be preferred. Of course the result is good with the 250ohm systems but you give away potential."

 
Judging by the charts, the DT 880 Premium 600-ohm is more neutral. The sonic differences you should expect with the DT 880 Premium 600-ohm would be tighter bass (about 3 to 5 dB more from 30 to 100 Hz), more upper midrange (about 3 dB more at 2 KHz), and slightly less ultra high treble (about 3 dB less at 16 KHz). Combined with its much lower distortion and faster decay, you will hear a more realistic, detailed, dynamic sound since everything lines up so nicely. However, you are correct about the DT 880 Pro/Premium 250-ohm coming close and having a rawer sound. The DT 880 Pro/Premium 250-ohm will be rawer since it has ever so slightly less bass impact, less midrange, and more treble. Combined with a slightly high distortion floor, it is a lighter, more diffuse sound. However, the Pro/Premium 250's higher distortion will make it much harder to discern the upper treble in more busy, complex passages compared to the Premium 600-ohm. In a graph using the latest Harman Target Response Curve for headphones, the DT 880 Premium 600-ohm would implement the following changes (shown in magenta).


Source: InnerFidelity's First Test of Estimated Harman Target Response Curve on Various Headphones. Used under fair use for educational purposes only.

 

[Me x3]

Red trace is 250 Ohm version

 

[SHAMuuu]

  Here is the post I found that I had read where the user says the higher impedance DT drivers are lighter. As to efficiency and finesse of the driver, its magnetic strength would be stronger will more, tighter windings:

 
 
Judging by the charts, the DT 880 Premium 600-ohm is more neutral. The sonic differences you should expect with the DT 880 600 Premium would be tighter bass (about 3 to 5 dB more from 30 to 100 Hz), more upper midrange (about 3 dB more at 2 KHz), and slightly less ultra high treble (about 3 dB less at 16 KHz). Combined with its much lower distortion and faster decay, you will hear a more realistic, detailed, dynamic sound since everything lines up so nicely. However, you are correct about the DT 880 Pro/Premium 250-ohm coming close and having a rawer sound. The DT 880 Pro/Premium 250-ohm will be since it has ever so slightly less bass impact, less midrange, and more treble. Combined with a slightly high distortion floor, it is a lighter, more diffuse sound. The "rawness" will come on account of the upper treble. However, the Pro/Premium 250's higher distortion will make it much harder to discern in more complex passages compared to the Premium 600-ohm. In a graph using the latest Harman Target Response Curve for headphones, the DT 880 Premium 600-ohm would implement the following changes (shown in magenta).


Source: InnerFidelity's First Test of Estimated Harman Target Response Curve on Various Headphones. Used under fair use for educational purposes only.

Looks like you've put a lot of effort into your research, and i appreciate the information. Clears up a lot of the confusion Thanks.

 

[Hifihedgehog]

 
Red trace is 250 Ohm version

In my experience, HeadRoom's graphs are not as consist or as accurate as Tyll's at InnerFidelity. The graphs I used from InnerFidelity were the following:
 

 

 
/
 

 

[Me x3]

Here you have them overlapped from Innerfidelity

 



In both cases:
Red and Blue is 250 Ohm
Light Blue and Yellow is 600 Ohm
 
600 Ohm has worse matching so it has just a bit more bass in one channel and just a bit less treble in the other.
Yellow has the same treble as the 250 Ohm version, and light blue has the same amount of bass as the 250 Ohm version.
 
Unit to unit variation plays a role, also placement variations when measuring.
Last but not least, the pads can play a small role as well. Sometimes even rotating the pad can cause slight differences in the measured FR.

 

[Hifihedgehog]

  Here you have them overlapped from Innerfidelity

 

 

In both cases:
Red and Blue is 250 Ohm
Light Blue and Yellow is 600 Ohm
 
600 Ohm has worse matching so it has just a bit more bass in one channel and just a bit less treble in the other.
Yellow has the same treble as the 250 Ohm version, and light blue has the same amount of bass as the 250 Ohm version.
 
Unit to unit variation plays a role, also placement variations when measuring.
Last but not least, the pads can play a small role as well. Sometimes even rotating the pad can cause slight differences in the measured FR.

We will have to agree to disagree. I stand by my assertion that the 600-ohm model has tighter bass, filled-out midrange, and a smoother, more neutral treble response. Why? My own graphical translation, which is a lifted graph of the 250-ohm model's frequency response curve (in green) onto the 600-ohm model's plot, clearly shows this. However, I admit that placement variation is a highly likely reason for the other channel's atypical unmatched bass behavior. When I initially saw it, I took it as a measurement error since the individual uncompensated samples show an outlier with much more bass. This suggests that channel was not in proper alignment for most of the measurement samples unlike the other, properly aligned channel.
 

 
I have a deep background in discrete signal processing and computer engineering and I found unit to unit variation to be rather small in most cases. The only manufacturer I found with loose matching standards has been Grado Labs. This is in my experience I have with virtually thousands of headphones. I have demoed hundreds of headphones, all the way up to the AKG K 812, Grado Labs PS 1000, HiFiMAN HE-1000, JPS Labs Abyss and Sennheiser HD 800 each in multi-day, multi-hour occasions. Besides those, I have demoed every model or nearly every model of audiophile headphone from the following manufacturers: Audio Technica, AKG, Beyerdynamic, Denon, HiFiMAN, Grado Labs, Shure, and Sennheiser.
 
Indeed, Tyll does average out his measurements of samples and I clearly addressed that quibble and that is my well-researched, educated conclusion. It is apparent that one side was off-axis given that one measurement sample showed bass levels far more in line with the bassier, more neutral channel. I have observed his headphone measurements extensively and in a case like that where there is one measurement nearly in line and other samples of the averaged result are far off, it means more often than not that he moved the ear cup a bit too much for one side in his measurement session. You will have to either trust me on this or you will have to agree to disagree and move on. You are free to share your more extensive findings in the Sound Science sub-forum since you are derailing this thread if you choose to go any further.

 

[Me x3]

  We will have to agree to disagree. I stand by my assertion that the 600-ohm model has tighter bass, filled-out midrange, and a smoother, more neutral treble response. Why? My own graphical translation, which is a lifted graph of the 250-ohm model's frequency response curve (in green) onto the 600-ohm model's plot, clearly shows this. However, I admit that placement variation is a highly likely reason for the other channel's atypical unmatched bass behavior. When I initially saw it, I took it as a measurement error since the individual uncompensated samples show an outlier with much more bass. This suggests that channel was not in proper alignment for most of the measurement samples unlike the other, properly aligned channel.
 

I've seen DT880 with even worse channel matching than the 600 Ohm version measured by Tyll.
Although channel matching is normally quite good on most DT880's.
Friend of mine for instance has a terribly matched pair. More bass on one channel, less bass on the other.
 
Tyll measures the headphone in various positions then average the results, so position is less likely to cause important differences.
 
Making claims out of 2dB - 3dB differneces on a single graph is not reliable. If you search the web for DT880 measurements (250 vs 600) you'll find they differ in different manners.
In some cases they are closer, in some others they are more different. If you do the same but comparing only 250 Ohm version with 250 Ohm version, you'll find the same, and that's because of unit to unit variation.
 
My DT880 (250 Ohm) has different treble than the 250 Ohm measured by Tyll and it's much more similar to the Headroom graph AND one of the channels of the 600 Ohm Tyll's graph (the blue one)
 
You can make relatively educated guesses and then find a channel on one measurement that fits your description, you are free to do so, but you need more solid bases to use that as proof.
When measured differences are into the unit to unit variation range making claims is very risky.
 
Three or four headphones for each model coming of different batches would be needed in order to measure and compare considering the effects of unit to unit variation.
I've had many headphone and measured them all. My Tesla T1 for instance has an AKG-like bump in the upper midrange, and you won't find many (or any) measurements of T1's with such a FR on the web. Unit to unit variation play a big role sometimes. I've had two AKG K702, the former had less bass than DT880, the newer have more bass than DT880. Unit to unit variation can not be setted aside.
 
I'm not saying you're plain wrong, but as a person with a scientific background and based on my experience measuring headphones, I would say there's no need to rush for conclusions when all is based on just one graph of a headphone with less than ideal matching.

 

[Hifihedgehog]

I just received my Beyerdynamic DT 880 Premium 600-ohm's and my hutch was right. These are far more resolving than the DT 880 Pro ever was. There are endless gobs of low-level clarity, bass reaches deeper and the midrange is clearer and far more neutral. Like another user aptly said, the DT 880 Premium 600 is better sound. Even unamped out of my iPhone, it sounds better than the Pro model ever did.

 

[SHAMuuu]

  I just received my Beyerdynamic DT 880 Premium 600-ohm's and my hutch was right. These are far more resolving than the DT 880 Pro ever was. There are endless gobs of low-level clarity, bass reaches deeper and the midrange is clearer and far more neutral. Like another user aptly said, the DT 880 Premium 600 is better sound. Even unamped out of my iPhone, it sounds better than the Pro model ever did.

After spending some time , please do expand. Maybe try some different genres and tell us your impressions. That would be helpful for many.
 
Also you are saying better bass timbres/texture, but what about impact?
 
Do the 600 extend better in highs? which one is more laid back, which one is more sparkly?

 

[Hifihedgehog]

 
After spending some time , please do expand. Maybe try some different genres and tell us your impressions. That would be helpful for many.
 
Also you are saying better bass timbres/texture, but what about impact?
 
Do the 600 extend better in highs? which one is more laid back, which one is more sparkly?

Impact? Impact is eye-blinklingly fast! I have been listening to my Blu-ray of The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring and its DTS-HD MA audio track is addictingly vivid. The very first opening scene where the LFE boom rumbles after the One Ring is cut from Sauron's hang is deep and strong. In another early scene of The Fellowship of the Ring, the enchanted fireworks in the visage of a dragon is fizzling and soaring through the air with a whoosh! while the orchestra in the soundtrack is playing boldly that leaves me in dumbstruck awe. I once had a Denon AH-D5000 and the 600's bass is actually faster, stronger and yet never overpowering all at the same time. In other words, there is this instant sense of boundless dynamics and detail to kingdom come without any congestion whatsoever.
 
Case of point: the 600 is so involving that I have been pulling out all my pop and rock albums (10cc, Abba, Bananarama, Bee Gees, The Cars, Earth, Wind & Fire, Lindsey Stirling, Spandau Ballet, Toto, Wild Cherry, etc.) since the 600 has a WOW factor that makes anything that relies on energy and dynamics catchy and exciting. And yet I am also hearing details I never heard with the 250: the bass drum at the beginning of Diamond Girl by Seal and Crofts is strong and distinct, the hard-panned cymbal crash is bold but never brash, and the instruments and voices are stout and proud. This is not to say this is a one-trick pony meant just for fast-paced genres. The 600 has a huge soundstage and excellent detail retrieval which makes splendid with jazz (Chuck Mangione), easy listening (Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass), orchestral (The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe), theater (The Phantom of the Opera), musical (Fiddler on the Roof), big band (Glenn Miller), folk (Burl Ives) and choral (The Mormon Tabernacle Choir). I was not honestly expecting sound quality of this level but let me be clear: the 600 is easily an end game for me. To heck with the HD 800, which when I demoed it was incredibly detailed but never had this wicked fun factor.
 
The 600 extends very naturally while not being at all as peaky. As I suspected, it has to do with the lower distortion floor and the better square wave handling. The recording of the 600 from Soundcloud that I shared a few posts back that led me to believe it was far superior is right. For example, the 250 would carry an unnatural treble timbre in a binaural trickling water demo. However, with the 600, the water in this track has its naturally bright trickle without any of the 250's weird glare. The heightened detail in the treble allows me to peal apart the sound and analyze at near HD 800 levels but there is still plenty of bass oomph and presence in the midrange so I never get bored like I would from an AKG K7xx/Q7xx. The 600 actually comes across as more sparkly while less grainy and I attribute this to its extremely fast precision drivers. If you ever get a chance to pounce on a good deal for the 600's or have the opportunity to demo these sonic champions, do it. You will not regret it!

 

[bhavanidte]

I recently got the 600ohm 880 with a Micca Origen+ amp. I really like the Headphones, But i feel the Amp is really not able to drive the 600 ohm version. The volume is not that good. i compared two other headphones with the Amp the ATH-M50 and also the Sennheiser HD555 and the overall volume is much better on these headphones compared to 880.
 
But 880 sounds much clearer in terms of Treble, Bass compared to the other two headphones. The volume through the amp is lower when i compare the headphones directly with my imac also.
 
Do i need a better amp with my 880?

 

[trellus]

Hifihedgehog, what's the amp you're using with your DT880/600? You might have mentioned it in another post but I can't find it.

I have the DT880 Pro/250 and your comparison of the two has me intrigued and wondering if I should get a pair of the 600 Ohm.

 

[SHAMuuu]

  Impact? Impact is eye-blinklingly fast! I have been listening to my Blu-ray of The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring and its DTS-HD MA audio track is addictingly vivid. The very first opening scene where the LFE boom rumbles after the One Ring is cut from Sauron's hang is deep and strong. In another early scene of The Fellowship of the Ring, the enchanted fireworks in the visage of a dragon is fizzling and soaring through the air with a whoosh! while the orchestra in the soundtrack is playing boldly that leaves me in dumbstruck awe. I once had a Denon AH-D5000 and the 600's bass is actually faster, stronger and yet never overpowering all at the same time. In other words, there is this instant sense of boundless dynamics and detail to kingdom come without any congestion whatsoever.
 
Case of point: the 600 is so involving that I have been pulling out all my pop and rock albums (10cc, Abba, Bananarama, Bee Gees, The Cars, Earth, Wind & Fire, Lindsey Stirling, Spandau Ballet, Toto, Wild Cherry, etc.) since the 600 has a WOW factor that makes anything that relies on energy and dynamics catchy and exciting. And yet I am also hearing details I never heard with the 250: the bass drum at the beginning of Diamond Girl by Seal and Crofts is strong and distinct, the hard-panned cymbal crash is bold but never brash, and the instruments and voices are stout and proud. This is not to say this is a one-trick pony meant just for fast-paced genres. The 600 has a huge soundstage and excellent detail retrieval which makes splendid with jazz (Chuck Mangione), easy listening (Herb Alpert and the Tijuana Brass), orchestral (The Chronicles of Narnia: The Lion, The Witch and The Wardrobe), theater (The Phantom of the Opera), musical (Fiddler on the Roof), big band (Glenn Miller), folk (Burl Ives) and choral (The Mormon Tabernacle Choir). I was not honestly expecting sound quality of this level but let me be clear: the 600 is easily an end game for me. To heck with the HD 800, which when I demoed it was incredibly detailed but never had this wicked fun factor.
 
The 600 extends very naturally while not being at all as peaky. As I suspected, it has to do with the lower distortion floor and the better square wave handling. The recording of the 600 from Soundcloud that I shared a few posts back that led me to believe it was far superior is right. For example, the 250 would carry an unnatural treble timbre in a binaural trickling water demo. However, with the 600, the water in this track has its naturally bright trickle without any of the 250's weird glare. The heightened detail in the treble allows me to peal apart the sound and analyze at near HD 800 levels but there is still plenty of bass oomph and presence in the midrange so I never get bored like I would from an AKG K7xx/Q7xx. The 600 actually comes across as more sparkly while less grainy and I attribute this to its extremely fast precision drivers. If you ever get a chance to pounce on a good deal for the 600's or have the opportunity to demo these sonic champions, do it. You will not regret it!

 
What you're saying lines up with the statements of some knowledgeable headphone guys on here. I won't mention them as sometimes it can create problems for them because their statements are too bold for the sensitive, E.g I have heard on a few occasions that this dt880 600ohm out dueling the hd800, which can't be an easy pill for those who forked out the dough for them. And like your statements, they also explained their reasoning in a more technical fashion which outweighed some of the subjective factors as to why it was superior overall (as the hd800 has some areas where it is indeed stronger (e.g soundstage, overall detail retrieveal almost to point of exhaustion as it takes away from the musicality)) . These factors of course make it difficult to say one is "better," but i don't think anyone would really argue that end of the day with two cans performing at high levels; that is, they are supremely good at detail retrieval, neutral sounding, with excellent separation and sound-stage;  that, musicality can be a differentiating factor to give one the edge, which I think as you described, in its bass region magic. This can has been compared to some heavy hitters, but the one i remember most was one reviewer saying it was close to stax 007 mkII
"
While the DT 880 has a little thinner tonal balance than the Stax SR-007 MK2 Omega II (a $3,000 electrostatic headphone), the DT 880 sounds pretty darn close. Worn for extended periods, I tend to forget which one I'm wearing. The DT880s have no response peaks or valleys to call attention to themselves, so the slight and broad balance differences are quickly forgotten. The sound of the DT 880 doesn't change much as I put my hands up to their outsides.
The DT 880s offer beautiful electrostatic sound, and they don't go Pop! when pressed to your head or demand a plug-in-the-wall bias source to drive them.
It's funny that the original 1988 Beyer DT990 copied the appearance of the then state-of-the-art Stax Lambda, and these DT 880 today vaguely copy the appearance of today's state-of-the-art Stax Omega.
The DT880 is clean, clear and open like the Omegas, and doesn't feel that much different on the head. The DT 880 sounds light and airy, spacious, smooth, beautiful, clean and open. WIth the DT 880, you'll hear everything right — and wrong — with your recordings.
With the DT880 you're almost at the performance, while with the Omegas, you are there. For one-tenth the price of the Omegas, these DT880s are 95% as good."
 
I hope what i'm saying makes sense its 8am . Your statements are helpful but its making me look at the 250 ohm and going "DAMN!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" even though i really like it. One more thing. Your end game statement is a bold statement. I would like to hear your opinion on whether the 250 crowd here should eventually acquire the 600 or just move to a t1. t1 seems like the more logical upgrade upgrade if you know what i mean. Having 2 880s seems a little insane even though the reasoning would be acceptable in the courts for the judge since it seems the proof is in the pudding.

@Hifihedgehog, what's the amp you're using with your DT880/600? You might have mentioned it in another post but I can't find it.

I have the DT880 Pro/250 and your comparison of the two has me intrigued and wondering if I should get a pair of the 600 Ohm.

Yeah man, i been arguing with my 250. She's telling me to upgrade from my cheapie little ocean

 

[FritzS]

   
What you're saying lines up with the statements of some knowledgeable headphone guys on here. I won't mention them as sometimes it can create problems for them because their statements are too bold for the sensitive, E.g I have heard on a few occasions that this dt880 600ohm out dueling the hd800, which can't be an easy pill for those who forked out the dough for them. And like your statements, they also explained their reasoning in a more technical fashion which outweighed some of the subjective factors as to why it was superior overall (as the hd800 has some areas where it is indeed stronger (e.g soundstage, overall detail retrieveal almost to point of exhaustion as it takes away from the musicality)) . These factors of course make it difficult to say one is "better," but i don't think anyone would really argue that end of the day with two cans performing at high levels; that is, they are supremely good at detail retrieval, neutral sounding, with excellent separation and sound-stage;  that, musicality can be a differentiating factor to give one the edge, which I think as you described, in its bass region magic. This can has been compared to some heavy hitters, but the one i remember most was one reviewer saying it was close to stax 007 mkII
"
While the DT 880 has a little thinner tonal balance than the Stax SR-007 MK2 Omega II (a $3,000 electrostatic headphone), the DT 880 sounds pretty darn close. Worn for extended periods, I tend to forget which one I'm wearing. The DT880s have no response peaks or valleys to call attention to themselves, so the slight and broad balance differences are quickly forgotten. The sound of the DT 880 doesn't change much as I put my hands up to their outsides.
The DT 880s offer beautiful electrostatic sound, and they don't go Pop! when pressed to your head or demand a plug-in-the-wall bias source to drive them.
It's funny that the original 1988 Beyer DT990 copied the appearance of the then state-of-the-art Stax Lambda, and these DT 880 today vaguely copy the appearance of today's state-of-the-art Stax Omega.
The DT880 is clean, clear and open like the Omegas, and doesn't feel that much different on the head. The DT 880 sounds light and airy, spacious, smooth, beautiful, clean and open. WIth the DT 880, you'll hear everything right — and wrong — with your recordings.
With the DT880 you're almost at the performance, while with the Omegas, you are there. For one-tenth the price of the Omegas, these DT880s are 95% as good."
 
I hope what i'm saying makes sense its 8am . Your statements are helpful but its making me look at the 250 ohm and going "DAMN!!!!!!!!!!!!! YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!" even though i really like it. One more thing. Your end game statement is a bold statement. I would like to hear your opinion on whether the 250 crowd here should eventually acquire the 600 or just move to a t1. t1 seems like the more logical upgrade upgrade if you know what i mean. Having 2 880s seems a little insane even though the reasoning would be acceptable in the courts for the judge since it seems the proof is in the pudding.

Yeah man, i been arguing with my 250. She's telling me to upgrade from my cheapie little ocean

Which dt880 you are mean?
 
dt880 250
dt880 pro 250
dt880 600
dt880 pro 600