The Closed-Back Headphone Thread (Plus Comparisons & Reviews)

[Malevolent]

If I had known you were looking to pick the nightowls back up; I would have gladly sold you the ones I just recently sold; with a hefty discount aha

Shucks, I would have loved to get that. Thanks for the thought, though!

 

[Sound Eq]

So, 3 Japanese and 1 Russian walked into a bar...

Here's a comparison of 4 of woodies in my collection - the Audio-Technica ATH-WP900, the Denon AH-D9200, the evergreen Fostex TH900 Mk2, and the newest entry to the collective, the Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50!

Some pre-review notes:

• All of them were tested with their stock cables.
• My source is the usual, a Schiit Gungnir Multibit and a Schiit Mjolnir 2.
• I used an eclectic selection of tracks (75% EDM, 25% Pop and Rock).

So, let's get to it, shall we?

Bass
Audio-Technica ATH-WP900: Naturally, the Audio-Technica has the heaviest lows of the 4. Its mid-bass hump is huge, and coupled with a (very) tangible sub-bass rumble, the entire bass presentation can be perceived as "big and bold". If you enjoy a massive bass boost, the ATH-WP900 is certainly the most compelling of the 4. It retains decent texture in its lows, and a lingering decay.

However, the ATH-WP900 is also the poorest contender in terms of definition and layering. As the mid-bass is boosted by quite a fair bit, there is some bleed into the lower-mids; expect some congestion in your music.

Denon AH-D9200: The mid and sub-bass regions on the Denon are slightly boosted, but not too much. It has the leanest and lightest bass profile of the 4 headphones here. Nevertheless, you will be wrong to dismiss the AH-D9200 on the prominence of its bass alone; it actually has the best quality in the lineup. It has very good texture and layering - the bassline is present but never overwhelming; the bass rumbles clearly but never egregiously.

The AH-D9200 is also fairly punchy, with good transients. Decay is perceptible, but it isn't prolonged. All in all, the Denon has a top-notch bass presentation.

Fostex TH900 Mk2: We now come to 1 of the grand champions of the bass arena. Is the Gjallarhorn good enough to beat the Fostex? Firstly, the mid-bass on the TH900 Mk2 is actually less prominent than on the Gjallarhorn. Nevertheless, sub-bass rumble and extension remain true hallmarks of this legendary headphone. The usual accolades are true - the TH900 Mk2 has good texture, articulation, and has enough of a boost in its bass to render a solid and compelling presentation that carries bass-driven music to its finest levels.

However, the TH900 Mk2, by virtue of its boosted bass, has a tendency to sound a little boomy. Thankfully, this is controlled well, so there is little intrusion into the lower midrange. The Fostex retains a punchy and impactful low-end, with transients that are lagging slightly behind the Gjallarhorn.

Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50: We now come to the star of the show. It is true, the Gjallarhorn's forte is its bass, and yes, it does it really, really well. Its lows are solid but not overbearing, with a strong push in its mid-bass complementing one of the best sub-bass presentations around. There is apparent rumble that rivals the TH900 Mk2, with extension that is equally as formidable. Moreover, bass is punchy, with very good impact and texture. Like the Fostex, it can get a little boomy as well, but again, this is handled rather well, so we don't hear the sort of midrange congestion that is obvious on the ATH-WP900.

Layering and articulation on the Kennerton lags slightly behind the AH-D9200, however, but solidly trades blows with the Fostex in this category. There is adequate slam that is fast and tight. Suffice to say, if you enjoy a grand bass presentation, the Gjallarhorn fits that bill.

Winner: In terms of overall quality, it's probably the Denon AH-D9200. It has the best detail and layering in its lows. However, as a blend of quantity and quality, I actually prefer the Gjallarhorn GH50 over the Fostex TH900 Mk2.

Midrange
Audio-Technica ATH-WP900: Sadly, thanks to its "v-shaped" signature, the Audio-Technica has the most recessed midrange of the bunch. This results in a presentation that sees vocals sounding recessed and distant. With vocal-driven music, the performers appear the furthest away; a very jarring effect, especially when one is doing quick transitions between different headphones with the same tracks.

With that being said, the ATH-WP900 has lush and warm mids; vocals are full and rounded. They simply don't sound forward enough to retain engagement in this arena. There is decent separation in the midrange, though.

Denon AH-D9200: Without a doubt, the Denon has the best midrange on display here. There is adequate lushness and a tinge of warmth to lend vocals a strong push; this results in voices that are clear yet authoritative, distinct yet compelling. There is good definition in this area, resulting in instruments and voices being reproduced with a level of prominence. There is also good separation and articulation. Vocals are rounded but aren't too weighty; the Gjallarhorn and the ATH-WP900 are better in this particular department.

Fostex TH900 Mk2: The Fostex retains its infamous midrange dip, which has the unfortunate result of producing vocals and instruments that lack forwardness. Thankfully, it isn't as distant or as recessed as the ATH-WP900. Nevertheless, balance was never a key factor in the Fostex's composition.

Still, vocals retain a sense of energy and definition; they are clear and well-defined. It doesn't have as lush a presentation as the Denon or Kennerton, though. At times, the midrange can sound a little nasal, too.

Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50: The Kennerton comes into this shootout bearing a midrange that is thick, lush, and weighty. It's certainly more rounded and full than its Denon and Fostex contemporaries. Vocals, especially, retain a good sense of authority. You'll certainly enjoy the vigor on display here. However, it lacks the articulation and clarity of the aforementioned 2. Thankfully, it also retains an organic timbre, so you'll certainly enjoy the vocal reproduction capabilities of the Gjallarhorn GH50.

Winner: It's obvious, it's the Denon AH-D9200. It has the greatest balance of the 4, with a midrange that is teeming with quality. The Kennerton has a less-sculpted midrange, but compensates with a lusher, warmer presentation.

Treble
Audio-Technica ATH-WP900: The ATH-WP900 has an accentuated treble section; there is good detail and decent articulation. There is also a (very) slight semblance of air. The slightly-boosted highs certain exude a sense of energy and engagement. However, the highs have a tendency to sound a little hot at times. It doesn't get sibilant, but it can be fatiguing.

Denon AH-D9200: In terms of prominence, the Denon doesn't come close to the Fostex's highs, but that is a good thing. Of the 4 headphones, the AH-D9200 has the clearest and cleanest highs. The treble retains good detail, with crystalline sparkle and loads of energy.

If you enjoy crisp and brilliant highs, the Denon does this in spades. Extension is also excellent on the AH-D9200, with a lasting reach into the upper registers. Of the headphones in this comparison, the Denon has the airiest highs; make no mistake, though, it's airy by closed-back standards only.

Fostex TH900 Mk2: Clearly (no pun intended), the Fostex has the harshest highs in this bunch. It is prominent and overbearing, resulting in a treble presentation that is often hot and harsh, and sibilant at the worst of times. If you are sensitive to treble brilliance, stay away from the TH900 Mk2.

Nevertheless, it isn't all bad with the Fostex. The highs are crystal clear, with good extension and expression. It is also decently airy, trailing the Denon by a hair in this category.

Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50: Sadly, the treble on the Kennerton is subdued, muted even. It is recessed, with a distinct lack of peaks, so its highs lack a measure of air and presence. With that being said, there is some semblance of definition, clarity, and sparkle; it's just harder to distinguish, in general.

Nevertheless, if you enjoy a smooth, controlled treble presence, the Kennerton is certainly a great fit. The entire treble section is velvety smooth and somewhat gentle, so fans of a darker signature might gravitate to the Gjallarhorn GH50.

Winner: The AH-D9200 has the best treble of the bunch. It is clear and detailed, but never sibilant or harsh. It also offers a distinct level of airiness that is lacking in both the Gjallarhorn and the ATH-WP900.

Technicalities
Audio-Technica ATH-WP900: Let's get this out of the way. The ATH-WP900 is the least resolving headphone in this lineup. However, the margin between this and the Gjallarhorn isn't too great. Clarity and micro-detail retrieval is decent, but these aspects are severely hampered by a congestion in its lower-midrange. Thankfully, it retains decent instrument separation and layering throughout.

Denon AH-D9200: With the cleanest profile and the best resolving capabilities, the AH-D9200 shows its chops in this department. It easily renders micro-detail without a sweat; you'll have no issues discerning the nuances and finer elements of each song and track. It performs decently well with layering and instrument separation, too, but the Fostex trumps it in these aspects.

Fostex TH900 Mk2: The TH900 Mk2 reproduces detail on a level that is similar to the Denon; it probably loses out by a sliver, though. Overall resolution is fantastic, and it beats the Denon in instrument separation and layering. Unfortunately, it also has a slightly crowded signature, thanks to its boosted bass and treble sections; thus, its technical capabilities are ostensibly hampered - you'll need to strip off all the extra layers to hear the fine detail underneath.

Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50: The Kennerton has decent resolving abilities; however, it is a rung below both the Denon and the Fostex. Its biggest issue is its ability to reproduce finer elements within crowded passages. In this sense, it ever-so-slightly bests the ATH-WP900; this was quite surprising, since I'd assume that the Kennerton would handily trump the Audio-Technica in detail. This was not the case, however.

Winner: In the overall balance of things, it's a tie between the AH-D9200 and the TH900 Mk2. The Denon fares better in overall resolution; it is effortless in this particular regard. On the other hand, the Fostex resolves detail and nuance on a level close to the AH-D9200. However, it is superior in separating instruments, voices and layers; this is most apparent in complex tracks.

Staging and Imaging
Audio-Technica ATH-WP900: The ATH-WP900 has a slightly wider stage than the Gjallarhorn. Elements within a track sound a little mashed together, with poor-to-average separation. Imaging is on par with the Gjallarhorn; it's easily beaten by the Denon and the Fostex, however.

Denon AH-D9200: The Denon doesn't have a big soundscape to begin with, but it is evidently bigger in all 3 dimensions than the ATH-WP900 and the Gjallarhorn. It has very good imaging, however, offering precise aural cues to instruments and voices.

Fostex TH900 Mk2: Here, the Fostex shines, offering the largest and deepest stage; music sounds sufficiently expansive on the TH900 Mk2. There is a vivid sense of scale that is missing in the other 3 headphones. Thankfully, it doesn't falter in the imaging department either, offering precise cues similar to that on the AH-D9200.

Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50: Strangely, the Gjallarhorn has the smallest stage of the 4, in terms of horizontal width. It is a touch deeper than the ATH-WP900, though. Like the Audio-Technica, instruments and vocals appear congested and close to each other. Imaging suffers as a result, lagging behind both the Fostex and the Denon in this regard.

Winner: The TH900 Mk2 easily takes the trophy for this category. It has the widest and deepest stage, and offers a sense of scale that provides a touch of grandeur to your music.

Comfort
Audio-Technica ATH-WP900: The Audio-Technica is the lightest with a moderate clamp force. The pads are also sufficiently roomy and plush. As a result, it has a good level of comfort.

Denon AH-D9200: The AH-D9200 has the strongest clamp force of the bunch. It isn't vice-like, though, but it's sufficiently tight that some users may experience a level of discomfort. Its pads aren't very plush, relative to its cup size, offering depth that is shallower than the Gjallarhorn. In general, I didn't experience any major issues using the Denon.

Fostex TH900 Mk2: The Fostex has the weakest clamp (read: terrible) of the bunch. In order to get them to fit, you'll need to push the headband closer together. The pads are sufficiently thick, but I would have preferred something thicker and deeper to counteract the lack of grip afforded by its headband assembly. It's a comfortable headphone, as long as you don't move your head too much.

Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50: The Gjallarhorn has the softest headband and the roomiest, plushest pads. The grip is rather tight, though. They don't feel very heavy (even though it should), with its mass evenly distributed across its structure.

Winner: The ATH-WP900 steals the win in this category. It is light, with soft, comfortable pads. The TH900 Mk2 would be supremely comfortable too, if it came with a slightly tighter grip.

Final Thoughts
From my initial impressions of the Gjallarhorn, I knew that it was capable of producing great bass, and this was confirmed during the shootout. It has a grand bass presentation that actually bests the Fostex by a hair. This is no easy feat, mind you, as only a few headphones on the contemporary market are able to match the TH900 Mk2 in the delicate balance of quality VS quantity. The Kennerton does this, and does this very well, too. I didn't expect it to beat the Denon and the Fostex in the detail and clarity department, however.

It's interesting to note that the Gjallarhorn has a tonality that is quite different from the rest - the AH-D9200 is the most balanced of the 4, the TH900 Mk2 and the ATH-WP900 are both "v-shaped", with the Audio-Technica being more slanted toward the low-end, and the Fostex being more prominent in its treble. In contrast, the Gjallarhorn has a tonality that is decidedly "dark", with a smooth, velvety signature throughout, complemented by a robust and excellent low-end presence.

The TH900 MK2 retains its engagement crown, but I have found a new headphone that does bass equally well, if not better. I would still pick the Fostex for dance music, as its energetic treble helps to balance its "big bass"; however, the mellower signature of the Kennerton is a great complement, offering bold lows with midrange and treble sections that are smooth and sugary. If you can stomach the treble, however, the Fostex remains one of the kings of EDM.

The AH-D9200 is still the best of the bunch here, and easily competes with some of the best closed-back headphones on the market, such as the MDR-Z1R, the Vérité Closed, the ATH-AWKT, and the Stellia. Its relatively balanced tone is matched well by a competent bass presence and a treble section that is equal parts sparkling and detailed. Resolution on the Denon is one of the finest around, and you'll be hard pressed to find a major issue with it.

Sadly, the ATH-WP900 is outmatched and outgunned here, but this is no surprise, really, considering the price gulf between the different contenders (the Gjallarhorn costs twice as much). Still, it offers a fun and musical signature, blending a robust low-end with engaging, lively highs.

really thanks so so much for this amazing comparison and this big effort

I forgot to ask was the GH50 mudded or not ?

 

[plakat]

@Malevolent very comprehensive comparison, thank you!
Yesterday I ordered the Denon AH-D9200, and since I do value clarity and details besides a well structured bass, I think, that might actually fit my taste. I used to own the TH900 (1. gen), but treble was a bit too hot for my taste. Lets see.. should arrive early next week.

 

[John Massaria]

So, 3 Japanese and 1 Russian walked into a bar...

Here's a comparison of 4 of woodies in my collection - the Audio-Technica ATH-WP900, the Denon AH-D9200, the evergreen Fostex TH900 Mk2, and the newest entry to the collective, the Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50!

Some pre-review notes:

• All of them were tested with their stock cables.
• My source is the usual, a Schiit Gungnir Multibit and a Schiit Mjolnir 2.
• I used an eclectic selection of tracks (75% EDM, 25% Pop and Rock).

So, let's get to it, shall we?

Bass
Audio-Technica ATH-WP900: Naturally, the Audio-Technica has the heaviest lows of the 4. Its mid-bass hump is huge, and coupled with a (very) tangible sub-bass rumble, the entire bass presentation can be perceived as "big and bold". If you enjoy a massive bass boost, the ATH-WP900 is certainly the most compelling of the 4. It retains decent texture in its lows, and a lingering decay.

However, the ATH-WP900 is also the poorest contender in terms of definition and layering. As the mid-bass is boosted by quite a fair bit, there is some bleed into the lower-mids; expect some congestion in your music.

Denon AH-D9200: The mid and sub-bass regions on the Denon are slightly boosted, but not too much. It has the leanest and lightest bass profile of the 4 headphones here. Nevertheless, you will be wrong to dismiss the AH-D9200 on the prominence of its bass alone; it actually has the best quality in the lineup. It has very good texture and layering - the bassline is present but never overwhelming; the bass rumbles clearly but never egregiously.

The AH-D9200 is also fairly punchy, with good transients. Decay is perceptible, but it isn't prolonged. All in all, the Denon has a top-notch bass presentation.

Fostex TH900 Mk2: We now come to 1 of the grand champions of the bass arena. Is the Gjallarhorn good enough to beat the Fostex? Firstly, the mid-bass on the TH900 Mk2 is actually less prominent than on the Gjallarhorn. Nevertheless, sub-bass rumble and extension remain true hallmarks of this legendary headphone. The usual accolades are true - the TH900 Mk2 has good texture, articulation, and has enough of a boost in its bass to render a solid and compelling presentation that carries bass-driven music to its finest levels.

However, the TH900 Mk2, by virtue of its boosted bass, has a tendency to sound a little boomy. Thankfully, this is controlled well, so there is little intrusion into the lower midrange. The Fostex retains a punchy and impactful low-end, with transients that are lagging slightly behind the Gjallarhorn.

Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50: We now come to the star of the show. It is true, the Gjallarhorn's forte is its bass, and yes, it does it really, really well. Its lows are solid but not overbearing, with a strong push in its mid-bass complementing one of the best sub-bass presentations around. There is apparent rumble that rivals the TH900 Mk2, with extension that is equally as formidable. Moreover, bass is punchy, with very good impact and texture. Like the Fostex, it can get a little boomy as well, but again, this is handled rather well, so we don't hear the sort of midrange congestion that is obvious on the ATH-WP900.

Layering and articulation on the Kennerton lags slightly behind the AH-D9200, however, but solidly trades blows with the Fostex in this category. There is adequate slam that is fast and tight. Suffice to say, if you enjoy a grand bass presentation, the Gjallarhorn fits that bill.

Winner: In terms of overall quality, it's probably the Denon AH-D9200. It has the best detail and layering in its lows. However, as a blend of quantity and quality, I actually prefer the Gjallarhorn GH50 over the Fostex TH900 Mk2.

Midrange
Audio-Technica ATH-WP900: Sadly, thanks to its "v-shaped" signature, the Audio-Technica has the most recessed midrange of the bunch. This results in a presentation that sees vocals sounding recessed and distant. With vocal-driven music, the performers appear the furthest away; a very jarring effect, especially when one is doing quick transitions between different headphones with the same tracks.

With that being said, the ATH-WP900 has lush and warm mids; vocals are full and rounded. They simply don't sound forward enough to retain engagement in this arena. There is decent separation in the midrange, though.

Denon AH-D9200: Without a doubt, the Denon has the best midrange on display here. There is adequate lushness and a tinge of warmth to lend vocals a strong push; this results in voices that are clear yet authoritative, distinct yet compelling. There is good definition in this area, resulting in instruments and voices being reproduced with a level of prominence. There is also good separation and articulation. Vocals are rounded but aren't too weighty; the Gjallarhorn and the ATH-WP900 are better in this particular department.

Fostex TH900 Mk2: The Fostex retains its infamous midrange dip, which has the unfortunate result of producing vocals and instruments that lack forwardness. Thankfully, it isn't as distant or as recessed as the ATH-WP900. Nevertheless, balance was never a key factor in the Fostex's composition.

Still, vocals retain a sense of energy and definition; they are clear and well-defined. It doesn't have as lush a presentation as the Denon or Kennerton, though. At times, the midrange can sound a little nasal, too.

Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50: The Kennerton comes into this shootout bearing a midrange that is thick, lush, and weighty. It's certainly more rounded and full than its Denon and Fostex contemporaries. Vocals, especially, retain a good sense of authority. You'll certainly enjoy the vigor on display here. However, it lacks the articulation and clarity of the aforementioned 2. Thankfully, it also retains an organic timbre, so you'll certainly enjoy the vocal reproduction capabilities of the Gjallarhorn GH50.

Winner: It's obvious, it's the Denon AH-D9200. It has the greatest balance of the 4, with a midrange that is teeming with quality. The Kennerton has a less-sculpted midrange, but compensates with a lusher, warmer presentation.

Treble
Audio-Technica ATH-WP900: The ATH-WP900 has an accentuated treble section; there is good detail and decent articulation. There is also a (very) slight semblance of air. The slightly-boosted highs certain exude a sense of energy and engagement. However, the highs have a tendency to sound a little hot at times. It doesn't get sibilant, but it can be fatiguing.

Denon AH-D9200: In terms of prominence, the Denon doesn't come close to the Fostex's highs, but that is a good thing. Of the 4 headphones, the AH-D9200 has the clearest and cleanest highs. The treble retains good detail, with crystalline sparkle and loads of energy.

If you enjoy crisp and brilliant highs, the Denon does this in spades. Extension is also excellent on the AH-D9200, with a lasting reach into the upper registers. Of the headphones in this comparison, the Denon has the airiest highs; make no mistake, though, it's airy by closed-back standards only.

Fostex TH900 Mk2: Clearly (no pun intended), the Fostex has the harshest highs in this bunch. It is prominent and overbearing, resulting in a treble presentation that is often hot and harsh, and sibilant at the worst of times. If you are sensitive to treble brilliance, stay away from the TH900 Mk2.

Nevertheless, it isn't all bad with the Fostex. The highs are crystal clear, with good extension and expression. It is also decently airy, trailing the Denon by a hair in this category.

Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50: Sadly, the treble on the Kennerton is subdued, muted even. It is recessed, with a distinct lack of peaks, so its highs lack a measure of air and presence. With that being said, there is some semblance of definition, clarity, and sparkle; it's just harder to distinguish, in general.

Nevertheless, if you enjoy a smooth, controlled treble presence, the Kennerton is certainly a great fit. The entire treble section is velvety smooth and somewhat gentle, so fans of a darker signature might gravitate to the Gjallarhorn GH50.

Winner: The AH-D9200 has the best treble of the bunch. It is clear and detailed, but never sibilant or harsh. It also offers a distinct level of airiness that is lacking in both the Gjallarhorn and the ATH-WP900.

Technicalities
Audio-Technica ATH-WP900: Let's get this out of the way. The ATH-WP900 is the least resolving headphone in this lineup. However, the margin between this and the Gjallarhorn isn't too great. Clarity and micro-detail retrieval is decent, but these aspects are severely hampered by a congestion in its lower-midrange. Thankfully, it retains decent instrument separation and layering throughout.

Denon AH-D9200: With the cleanest profile and the best resolving capabilities, the AH-D9200 shows its chops in this department. It easily renders micro-detail without a sweat; you'll have no issues discerning the nuances and finer elements of each song and track. It performs decently well with layering and instrument separation, too, but the Fostex trumps it in these aspects.

Fostex TH900 Mk2: The TH900 Mk2 reproduces detail on a level that is similar to the Denon; it probably loses out by a sliver, though. Overall resolution is fantastic, and it beats the Denon in instrument separation and layering. Unfortunately, it also has a slightly crowded signature, thanks to its boosted bass and treble sections; thus, its technical capabilities are ostensibly hampered - you'll need to strip off all the extra layers to hear the fine detail underneath.

Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50: The Kennerton has decent resolving abilities; however, it is a rung below both the Denon and the Fostex. Its biggest issue is its ability to reproduce finer elements within crowded passages. In this sense, it ever-so-slightly bests the ATH-WP900; this was quite surprising, since I'd assume that the Kennerton would handily trump the Audio-Technica in detail. This was not the case, however.

Winner: In the overall balance of things, it's a tie between the AH-D9200 and the TH900 Mk2. The Denon fares better in overall resolution; it is effortless in this particular regard. On the other hand, the Fostex resolves detail and nuance on a level close to the AH-D9200. However, it is superior in separating instruments, voices and layers; this is most apparent in complex tracks.

Staging and Imaging
Audio-Technica ATH-WP900: The ATH-WP900 has a slightly wider stage than the Gjallarhorn. Elements within a track sound a little mashed together, with poor-to-average separation. Imaging is on par with the Gjallarhorn; it's easily beaten by the Denon and the Fostex, however.

Denon AH-D9200: The Denon doesn't have a big soundscape to begin with, but it is evidently bigger in all 3 dimensions than the ATH-WP900 and the Gjallarhorn. It has very good imaging, however, offering precise aural cues to instruments and voices.

Fostex TH900 Mk2: Here, the Fostex shines, offering the largest and deepest stage; music sounds sufficiently expansive on the TH900 Mk2. There is a vivid sense of scale that is missing in the other 3 headphones. Thankfully, it doesn't falter in the imaging department either, offering precise cues similar to that on the AH-D9200.

Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50: Strangely, the Gjallarhorn has the smallest stage of the 4, in terms of horizontal width. It is a touch deeper than the ATH-WP900, though. Like the Audio-Technica, instruments and vocals appear congested and close to each other. Imaging suffers as a result, lagging behind both the Fostex and the Denon in this regard.

Winner: The TH900 Mk2 easily takes the trophy for this category. It has the widest and deepest stage, and offers a sense of scale that provides a touch of grandeur to your music.

Comfort
Audio-Technica ATH-WP900: The Audio-Technica is the lightest with a moderate clamp force. The pads are also sufficiently roomy and plush. As a result, it has a good level of comfort.

Denon AH-D9200: The AH-D9200 has the strongest clamp force of the bunch. It isn't vice-like, though, but it's sufficiently tight that some users may experience a level of discomfort. Its pads aren't very plush, relative to its cup size, offering depth that is shallower than the Gjallarhorn. In general, I didn't experience any major issues using the Denon.

Fostex TH900 Mk2: The Fostex has the weakest clamp (read: terrible) of the bunch. In order to get them to fit, you'll need to push the headband closer together. The pads are sufficiently thick, but I would have preferred something thicker and deeper to counteract the lack of grip afforded by its headband assembly. It's a comfortable headphone, as long as you don't move your head too much.

Kennerton Gjallarhorn GH50: The Gjallarhorn has the softest headband and the roomiest, plushest pads. The grip is rather tight, though. They don't feel very heavy (even though it should), with its mass evenly distributed across its structure.

Winner: The ATH-WP900 steals the win in this category. It is light, with soft, comfortable pads. The TH900 Mk2 would be supremely comfortable too, if it came with a slightly tighter grip.

Final Thoughts
From my initial impressions of the Gjallarhorn, I knew that it was capable of producing great bass, and this was confirmed during the shootout. It has a grand bass presentation that actually bests the Fostex by a hair. This is no easy feat, mind you, as only a few headphones on the contemporary market are able to match the TH900 Mk2 in the delicate balance of quality VS quantity. The Kennerton does this, and does this very well, too. I didn't expect it to beat the Denon and the Fostex in the detail and clarity department, however.

It's interesting to note that the Gjallarhorn has a tonality that is quite different from the rest - the AH-D9200 is the most balanced of the 4, the TH900 Mk2 and the ATH-WP900 are both "v-shaped", with the Audio-Technica being more slanted toward the low-end, and the Fostex being more prominent in its treble. In contrast, the Gjallarhorn has a tonality that is decidedly "dark", with a smooth, velvety signature throughout, complemented by a robust and excellent low-end presence.

The TH900 MK2 retains its engagement crown, but I have found a new headphone that does bass equally well, if not better. I would still pick the Fostex for dance music, as its energetic treble helps to balance its "big bass"; however, the mellower signature of the Kennerton is a great complement, offering bold lows with midrange and treble sections that are smooth and sugary. If you can stomach the treble, however, the Fostex remains one of the kings of EDM.

The AH-D9200 is still the best of the bunch here, and easily competes with some of the best closed-back headphones on the market, such as the MDR-Z1R, the Vérité Closed, the ATH-AWKT, and the Stellia. Its relatively balanced tone is matched well by a competent bass presence and a treble section that is equal parts sparkling and detailed. Resolution on the Denon is one of the finest around, and you'll be hard pressed to find a major issue with it.

Sadly, the ATH-WP900 is outmatched and outgunned here, but this is no surprise, really, considering the price gulf between the different contenders (the Gjallarhorn costs twice as much). Still, it offers a fun and musical signature, blending a robust low-end with engaging, lively highs.

Send me the GH50 and I will mod it so it beats the bunch or nearly so IMHO price for performance after mod will surely be up there with the best - really. You pay for shipping back and forth and I will blow your socks off. Or you could mod them yourself and re-test.

 

[limaaa]

Ok, it seems nobody is selling E-MU Teak in Europe. Which headphone in price range of 400-500€ can be found in Europe which are similar?

Thanks!

 

[Terriero]

Thanks again, for your detailed reviews, @Malevolent

@plakat, congratulations on your purchase, I will wait for any D9200 Black friday discount, if I can't find one, I will buy anyway.

 

[Malevolent]

really thanks so so much for this amazing comparison and this big effort

I forgot to ask was the GH50 mudded or not ?

You're welcome.

No, it's the stock GH50. I was mulling over the GH50 or the JM edition, but I thought I'd try the original version first; that way, I can better understand the original concept of the Gjallarhorn, as envisioned by Kennerton.

Suffice it to say, I'm very impressed, at least with its bass capabilities.

 

[Malevolent]

@Malevolent very comprehensive comparison, thank you!
Yesterday I ordered the Denon AH-D9200, and since I do value clarity and details besides a well structured bass, I think, that might actually fit my taste. I used to own the TH900 (1. gen), but treble was a bit too hot for my taste. Lets see.. should arrive early next week.

Sure, glad to help!

Yes, the AH-D9200 is, in many ways, an improvement over the TH900 (and its Mk2) variant. The treble section is tamed to afford a palatable presentation; you still get distinct and clear highs, but it's restrained enough to avoid runaway peaks. In tandem, the prominence of the bass is reduced a little so the signature of the headphone is levelled out, resulting in a balanced tonality. It's still a musical headphone, though; it's just not as immediately engaging as the Fostex.

 

[Malevolent]

Ok, it seems nobody is selling E-MU Teak in Europe. Which headphone in price range of 400-500€ can be found in Europe which are similar?

Thanks!

A headphone that's similar would be the Denon AH-D5200. I'm not sure what's its retail cost in Europe, though; probably around €500-600?

 

[limaaa]

A headphone that's similar would be the Denon AH-D5200. I'm not sure what's its retail cost in Europe, though; probably around €500-600?

They are something like €400. Is Ah-7200 much better than 5200?

 

[plakat]

@plakat, congratulations on your purchase, I will wait for any D9200 Black friday discount, if I can't find one, I will buy anyway.

Thank you -- though I see it a bit as a failure as well... actually I set a price limit for my purchases 2 years ago, and the D9200 is over that limit. But while I still have to hear them for myself, reports sound like I might actually like it, balanced and with a good bass implementation. I I decide to keep it, it will necessitate another cleaning of my collection, with maybe even the Master-1 on the chopping block...

Waiting that one week would have been a good idea of course... patience was never one of my assets though

Sure, glad to help!

Yes, the AH-D9200 is, in many ways, an improvement over the TH900 (and its Mk2) variant. The treble section is tamed to afford a palatable presentation; you still get distinct and clear highs, but it's restrained enough to avoid runaway peaks. In tandem, the prominence of the bass is reduced a little so the signature of the headphone is levelled out, resulting in a balanced tonality. It's still a musical headphone, though; it's just not as immediately engaging as the Fostex.

Contrasting it with the TH900 was very helpful, I've had that one quote some time and I think I now know better what to expect.

I have to admit that I really have a soft spot for Japanese headphones, i.e. ones that are actually manufactured in Japan, like the Master-1 and the TH900. I always liked Japanese culture with its concentration on refinement and the essentials of a thing.

The Russian philosophy of simply doing it, using science, available tools, duct tape and pencil is intriguing as well. I know some Russian headphones that came out of personal efforts, and they worked really well. Yet what I read about the Gjallarhorn makes me think it might be a bit uncomfortable, and thats a killer argument for me...

 

[Malevolent]

They are something like €400. Is Ah-7200 much better than 5200?

I think that's a pretty decent price for one of the better bass-centric headphones within that price segment.

I haven't compared the AH-D7200 with the AH-D5200 together for some time now; however, I found the latter a more energetic headphone. It contrasts well to the AH-D7200 in overall technical refinement, but raises the stakes in the engagement department.

 

[Malevolent]

Contrasting it with the TH900 was very helpful, I've had that one quote some time and I think I now know better what to expect.

I have to admit that I really have a soft spot for Japanese headphones, i.e. ones that are actually manufactured in Japan, like the Master-1 and the TH900. I always liked Japanese culture with its concentration on refinement and the essentials of a thing.

The Russian philosophy of simply doing it, using science, available tools, duct tape and pencil is intriguing as well. I know some Russian headphones that came out of personal efforts, and they worked really well. Yet what I read about the Gjallarhorn makes me think it might be a bit uncomfortable, and thats a killer argument for me...

I've always been a fan of the Foster-produced headphones, such as the old Denon D7000 and its ilk. Thus, the Denon AH-D9200, upon release, went straight to the top of the "Must Try" charts. Thankfully, it ticked many of the right boxes, namely, the ones related to tonality, bass performance, and technical ability. I am confident that you'll like the AH-D9200, too. Let us know what you think of them!

I agree, I've always been a fan of how meticulous the Japanese are during the manufacturing process. These 2 videos detailing the painstaking processes involved in making the Fostex and Denon wood cups were fascinating to watch.

 

[waveSounds]

@Malevolent I've been keeping an eye open for Owls up for sale to see if any arise for a decent price that I could forward your way. Not had any luck thus far. There is a listing on eBay UK, but even since writing this the bids have gone to the £300 mark. Although I'd be loathe to be without my personal set, I may consider shipping them out to you for comparison testing against your crop of closed-backs if you'd be interested. Sure we could work something out. Obviously fellow Owl owners can read your thorough reviews of what's already been tested, but actually being able to see a first-hand comparison from you with the Owls themselves would afford us (OK, me

) a much more informed insight of the current market's offerings. As another EDM/electonic fan, I can say there's probably no one better out there than yourself to conduct such a comparison!

 

[Malevolent]

@Malevolent I've been keeping an eye open for Owls up for sale to see if any arise for a decent price that I could forward your way. Not had any luck thus far. There is a listing on eBay UK, but even since writing this the bids have gone to the £300 mark. Although I'd be loathe to be without my personal set, I may consider shipping them out to you for comparison testing against your crop of closed-backs if you'd be interested. Sure we could work something out. Obviously fellow Owl owners can read your thorough reviews of what's already been tested, but actually being able to see a first-hand comparison from you with the Owls themselves would afford us (OK, me ) a much more informed insight of the current market's offerings. As another EDM/electonic fan, I can say there's probably no one better out there than yourself to conduct such a comparison!

There were a few sets on the Head-Fi classifieds; they were all priced between $350-400, though. If I can spot a unit closer to $300 (or hopefully, below), I might consider a purchase.

In any case, I appreciate the gesture. But I'm afraid that your headphones may get damaged or lost in-transit; frankly, I've had my fair share of delivery horror stories. Hopefully, I'll be able to secure a NightOwl sooner rather than later. I'll see if there are any demo units stashed away in the various audio stores in Singapore. There must be one.. somewhere.