[jpelg]

Gee, still no reviews/impressions of the woodie CD3000's. Are people just being polite, and adhering to the old adage "if you don't have something nice to say..."?

Gosh, I'd love to hear the K1000's from a 300b-powered amp!

 

[raaj]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpelg Gee, still no reviews/impressions of the woodie CD3000's. Are people just being polite, and adhering to the old adage "if you don't have something nice to say..."?

Jpelg.. I am pretty sure that adage doesn't apply to the woody CD3Ks.. I spent some time listening to the woodies through the Stealth as well as the Maestro, and compared its sound to the stock CD3K and the mighty R10.. The preliminary comment I can pass on the woody would be that it improves the stock CD3K a lot and makes it sound a lot better and a lot more tolerable for listening to bright sources.

The woody I listened to was wmcmanus's 'Baby-R10' with the full woody package that includes a cable replacement. The sources used were Sony NV500 SACD player and the Meridian 588 CDP, playing through Ray Samuels' Emmeline Stealth amp with the power supply, and the SinglePower Maestro ZR. The test tracks were the OST SACD of "Titanic". The way I would characterize the sound of the woody "Baby-R10" compared to the R-10 is that the Woody sounds more "aggressive" and "forward" compared to the uber-refined silky smooth presentation of the R-10. The performance of the R-10 is so effortless even in very complex music passages where as the inherent limitations of the CD3K drivers make the "Woody" compromise on minute detail in favor of quantity.. I guess I said it right.. On the woody, the bass is markedly tighter, punchier and defined than on the stock CD3K, where as the same bass sounds a bit over done and doesn't have as many distinguishable levels of bass compared to that of the R-10. The highs are more clear and resolved compared to the stock CD3K but nowhere as refined as that of the R-10. The highs on the woody suffer from slight coloration due to the resonant nature of the wooden cups, and this makes some string instruments sound as if you were hearing them through a resonant drum.. if you know what I mean.. But still, this is an improvement compared to the stock CD3K, but a compromise when compared to the R-10. I did not have the time to test vocals on the Woody, but I would think they would rank better than the stock phone, maybe similar to the Senn HD600.

Overall, is the $300 odd woody upgrade to the stock CD3Ks worth it?? Based on the initial impressions and the limited audition time available during the meet, I would say, "YES !!". In my opinion (mine alone), I think the woody upgrade improved the sound of the stock phones more than the cable upgrades would improve the sound of a HD650, for example.. (I did not hear such a discernable difference while hearing to stock Vs recabled Senns). But do the upgrades really turn the stock CD3Ks into a "Baby-R10"..?? I guess NOT. The R-10 is in a completely different realm [EDIT: along with the Stax Omega-II and AT-L3000, of course] compared to any other phones at the meet, but the "Baby-R10" is definitely a "baby-step" towards the mighty R-10. In essence, the Woody might be one of the best phones this side of the $1000 barrier, the only other contender being a re-cabled Senn HD-650 costing nearly as much as a full-woody CD3K.

USUAL DISCLAIMER: I am just a newb, and all the above impressions are strictly as my ears told my brain, and as such, I would suggest that people defer thier judgement on the woody CD3Ks to the opinions of other knowledgeable people here like wmcmanus and agile_one

 

[jpelg]

Thanks, raaj! All well-said.

I look forward to impressions from others also.

 

[Sewer Guy]

Guru: just wanted to clear up a couple of points in your review of my modded class A chiara amp. The hole in the middle that you noticed is not a product of the amps wide sound staging. It was the particular recording you were listening to. Wayne had noticed the same effect & mentioned it to me; I suggested that he try another recording. He put on the Pavorotti & there was no hole in the middle. The problem was with a particular recording, not the amplifier. I have a good idea how the offending recording was made & why it produced the effect but I won't go into it here.

An amplifiers attack can be controlled & changed by several different means; however the decay is a function of the program material, unless the circuit is verrry slow. What you heard was the original performance as far as the decay of the sound.

The amps frequency response is flat & there are no coupling capacitors in the signal path. I might include a switchable bass boost as some amps do to accommodate those who prefer more bass than the program source provides.

All in all we all had a great time. I took a voice vote at the end of the day;
we will be hosting another meet next May or June.

 

[Wmcmanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DevilDog My next biggest shock was what a difference there was between a <$1000 and a >$2000 amp. I really didn't expect that big of a difference. Both the Maestro and Blockhead were incredible.

Note carefully the < (less than) and > (greater than) symbols. Those bad boy amps ain't cheap! I'm still not sold on the Blockhead, although I've heard on 3 occasions now, and it is starting to grow on me. With my particular sonic preferences, it mates much better with the Sennheisers than with the RS-1's.

The Maestro ZR, on the other hand, seems to do magic with any and all headphones I've ever listened to with it. That beauty is really calling my name, but I'd have to compare it carefully to my SDS side by side to see what the sonic differences are. The Maestro seems a little warmer and does all sorts of nice, pillowy things to my ears. Clark did a one word reviw on the Maestro which I agree with: "chill"!!!

 

[Wmcmanus]

Quote:

Originally Posted by raaj Jpelg.. I am pretty sure that adage doesn't apply to the woody CD3Ks.. I spent some time listening to the woodies through the Stealth as well as the Maestro, and compared its sound to the stock CD3K and the mighty R10.. The preliminary comment I can pass on the woody would be that it improves the stock CD3K a lot and makes it sound a lot better and a lot more tolerable for listening to bright sources. The woody I listened to was Wmcmanus's 'Baby-R10' with the full woody package that includes a cable replacement. The sources used were Sony NV500 SACD player and the Meridian 588 CDP, playing through Ray Samuels' Emmeline Stealth amp with the power supply, and the SinglePower Maestro ZR. The test tracks were the OST SACD of "Titanic". The way I would characterize the sound of the woody "Baby-R10" compared to the R-10 is that the Woody sounds more "aggressive" and "forward" compared to the uber-refined silky smooth presentation of the R-10. The performance of the R-10 is so effortless even in very complex music passages where as the inherent limitations of the CD3K drivers make the "Woody" compromise on minute detail in favor of quantity.. I guess I said it right.. On the woody, the bass is markedly tighter, punchier and defined than on the stock CD3K, where as the same bass sounds a bit over done and doesn't have as many distinguishable levels of bass compared to that of the R-10. The highs are more clear and resolved compared to the stock CD3K but nowhere as refined as that of the R-10. The highs on the woody suffer from slight coloration due to the resonant nature of the wooden cups, and this makes some string instruments sound as if you were hearing them through a resonant drum.. if you know what I mean.. But still, this is an improvement compared to the stock CD3K, but a compromise when compared to the R-10. I did not have the time to test vocals on the Woody, but I would think they would rank better than the stock phone, maybe similar to the Senn HD600. Overall, is the $300 odd woody upgrade to the stock CD3Ks worth it?? Based on the initial impressions and the limited audition time available during the meet, I would say, "YES !!". In my opinion (mine alone), I think the woody upgrade improved the sound of the stock phones more than the cable upgrades would improve the sound of a HD650, for example.. (I did not hear such a discernable difference while hearing to stock Vs recabled Senns). But do the upgrades really turn the stock CD3Ks into a "Baby-R10"..?? I guess NOT. The R-10 is in a completely different realm [EDIT: along with the Omega-II and AT-L3000, of course] compared to any other phones at the meet, but the "Baby-R10" is definitely a "baby-step" towards the mighty R-10. In essence, the Woody might be one of the best phones this side of the $1000 barrier, the only other contender being a re-cabled Senn HD-650 costing nearly as much as a full-woody CD3K. USUAL DISCLAIMER: I am just a newb, and all the above impressions are strictly as my ears told my brain, and as such, I would suggest that people defer thier judgement on the woody CD3Ks to the opinions of other knowledgeable people here like Wmcmanus and agile_one

Raaj, in the quote above I've corrected a minor error for clarity: by "Orpheus II" you meant to say "Omega II".

First let me say that this is as close to a mirror image of my impressions of the Woody CD3000 (relative to the stock CD3000 and R10) as anyone could possibly write! I'd have to do a lot more listening to come up with anything that would add to, or improve upon, your impressions. So when it comes to this "listen and report back" game that we all play, you are definitely not a newb. And besides, Gene and I have a lot more mileage on our ears than you do, so your hearing is probably much better. Seriously. When I was in San Diego last week getting my ear impressions done, I also did a hearing test to establish a base line so that I can go back in another year to see if there are any signs of a hearing loss. Fortunately, I'm Ok for now but I'm getting to be borderline for the upper frequencies. It takes a 20dB signal for me to hear anything at 3000 HZ or above (slight hearing loss begins to kick in when the signal required for you to hear is 25 dB). Thus, I suspect that you can do a better job at picking up the fine distinctions between the Woody CD3000 and R10 in the treble region.

I agree wholeheartedly that the woody and cable mod done by Larry has provided more improvement to the CD3000's than any cable replacement has done for my HD600's and/or HD650's (and just for clarity, I'm definitely in the camp that believes that the Senn replacement cables make a big difference). What I don't know at this point is whether I prefer the Woody CD3000's to the HD650/Moon Audio Silver Dragon (which still is my cable of choice after hearing 7 different Senn replacement cables at recent meets). This would seem to be a prime candidate for a detailed review. Unfortunately I no longer have a stock pair of CD3000's on hand to use as a control which I think would be needed. To me, however, the real review would be against the HD650/Moon (or you name your favorite replacement cable) because this is IMO an best value at the <$1000 level today. There are many people who actually prefer a cable rolled HD650 to any other headphone available at any price. I'm not one of them, but they are very good indeed. The real issue is thus not whether the Woody CD3000's are better than the stock CD3000's. Nearly everyone who has heard them would agree with this assessment. What matters now is whether they are worth the asking price relative to what else is out there... but I agree that they are definitely not at the R10 level... not that anyone really expected them to be... but they are more than a "baby step" closer to these sorts of higher end phones IMO.

Oh, by the way (speaking of HD650's), Larry is now developing prototype Sennheiser replacement cups and it looks like he will be able to do this in a way that will allow you to pop them on and off without opening up the assembly. Per Larry, there is a very noticeable difference relative to the stock HD600's which he thinks is to the better. So there you go! You will be able to cable roll and cup roll your Senns as well. If I were to do this, I'd probably use the Senn HD580's to keep the cost down because I'm pretty sure that they use the same drivers in the HD580/600/650 series and all of the sonic differences are related to the other stuff happening in the enclosure which would be nullifed by the Woody cups. (Same goes for the Grado lineup for anything from the 225's on up... same drivers in all of them as far as I can tell).

 

[blumenco]

well, wayne, while I do agree that certain "improvements" can be had with cable replacements, after hearing several myself, I have landed on a few realizations.

No replacement cable manufacturer specifically tunes their cables to any of the different headphones specifically. this is a highly important point, as i hear far more difference between 580 and 650 than between even high end cable replacements. so these manufacturers say that their cables fit 580 through 650. sure they do. the connector fits in the holes ok. but which ones are they meant for (sonically). I mean, a cable that is supposed to bring out high frequencies would probably have far more use on 600s than 650s. after living with a few different replacements, i finally landed back on the stock, beleive it or not, though i really like the cardas. I found that most of the replacement cables, while "bringing out" certain detail, i was not sure if i was supposed to be hearing it, and i found myself fatiguing very quickly with replacement cables compared to the "flat" sound of the sennheisers cable.

now a main reason i think this happened was that i bought a cable before the 650s were released and then put it on the 650s when i finally got them and hence the too much high frequency glare (the cable was most likely made for 600).

also, since i think that a replacement cable must be different for each headphone type sonically, I think it might (and this may sound a little crazy) make sense to trust the engineers at sennheiser to make them sound right. they are the only replacement cable manufacterer that has bothered to make their cables tuned specifically to each model. (i have listened to 580, 600 cables on 650s, all sound different) a 650 cable i would not even consider an improvement when placed on 580s. So i guess i challenge the replacement cable industry to make a different model for each model headphone and do things proper.

I guess another thing i ask myself, and this is a personal preference thing, is which cable the studio engineer uses when he mixes with sennheisers (the few who do, but i do have a recording to that effect). do they replace their cables in order to hear finer detail? I doubt it. they most likely will roll tubes in their mics before doing that. the other thing is that i have noticed that alot of studios prefer 600s to 650s for mixing jazz and classical because of the frequency response inversion effect between mixing and playback. (i am not sure if that is said right, but basically, if the highs are recessed in a studio monitor then they will be boosted in the mixing process in order to sound right through the monitors to the studio dude). so in otherwords, to each his own. I just must express my general skepticism in the replacement cables and the difficulty of getting them to sound right for each different application (either audio playback or studio sound) it is a little different than just putting better copper in the cable. The load that sennheiser engeneers calculate the drivers and ohmage on includes the stock cable, not a replacement, naturally, some replacement cable manufacturers "get it right" for alot of customer's ears, but i think it is hard to declare one as better when most of what is changed is the character of the cable. if one has consistently superior detail presentation, well then, that is another story.

Clark

 

[Wmcmanus]

Clark, no offense to your post (the one right before this post, so I won't quote it) but it seems to me that you may be overthinking it a bit when you start wondering what they were using in the studios. You're right in that different cables affect different headphones (at least the 600's and 650's) differently.

For me, at least, it is just a matter of trying them out and giving them a listen. To the extent that you've done this and found that the improvements were not all that great, you're definitely not alone. In my experience, some of them did very little, but they all were improvements over the Sennheiser stock cables. Some of them (the Moon Audio Silver Dragon especially) made a big difference to my ears. I'm not sure why, but I like them.

 

[DevilDog]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blumenco No replacement cable manufacturer specifically tunes their cables to any of the different headphones specifically. this is a highly important point, as i hear far more difference between 580 and 650 than between even high end cable replacements. so these manufacturers say that their cables fit 580 through 650. sure they do. the connector fits in the holes ok. but which ones are they meant for (sonically).

I would say that the 580/600/650 line all have a very similar sound. A cable may affect one slightly differently than another but I'd still think the differences would be more similar than dissimilar. Cables are, after all, a matter of personal taste. That particular cable with that particular model may or many not appeal to you but another may.
Quote:

Originally Posted by blumenco now a main reason i think this happened was that i bought a cable before the 650s were released and then put it on the 650s when i finally got them and hence the too much high frequency glare (the cable was most likely made for 600).

Then this particular combo didn't appeal to you.

Quote:

Originally Posted by blumenco also, since i think that a replacement cable must be different for each headphone type sonically, I think it might (and this may sound a little crazy) make sense to trust the engineers at sennheiser to make them sound right. they are the only replacement cable manufacterer that has bothered to make their cables tuned specifically to each model. (i have listened to 580, 600 cables on 650s, all sound different) a 650 cable i would not even consider an improvement when placed on 580s.

If we take this to other components, you'd have to trust tube amp manufacturers to get their sound right and not switch tubes or upgrade power supplies. Like it or not, some things are done to keep costs down. And I believe Sennheiser is aware that there is an after market replacing their cables, but they also know that their headphones sound great with their stock cable, it's just not as good as they could possibly make it. If they didn't want it to happen they wouldn't make it so easy by putting the interchangeable (sp?) on them.
Quote:

Originally Posted by blumenco So i guess i challenge the replacement cable industry to make a different model for each model headphone and do things proper.

This might be cost prohibitive and again, after all is said and done, there is no BEST, there is only a best for you. We all can't agree.
Quote:

Originally Posted by blumenco so in otherwords, to each his own. I just must express my general skepticism in the replacement cables and the difficulty of getting them to sound right for each different application (either audio playback or studio sound) it is a little different than just putting better copper in the cable. The load that sennheiser engeneers calculate the drivers and ohmage on includes the stock cable, not a replacement, naturally, some replacement cable manufacturers "get it right" for alot of customer's ears, but i think it is hard to declare one as better when most of what is changed is the character of the cable.

I think getting it right for one's ears is what it's about. I'm not sure what you mean by the character of the cable. If that changes the character of the sound well, then, sometimes that is a good thing.
Quote:

Originally Posted by blumenco if one has consistently superior detail presentation, well then, that is another story.

But that is part of it as well. I know you prefer the stock cable. There are others who do as well. You may prefer a certain interconnect or tube set, that's fine, that's why they make so many different models.
I wasn't able to stay to see if there was a cable shoot-out. Apparently not, but I know some did some members did their own and found their personal preferences.
You know a lot more about cables than I do, but I have to agree and disagree with you. Of course I wish cable manufacturers would make a specific cable for a specific headphone. But we both know, as long as those little connector thingies are the same we're going to shove whatever cable we can get in there and SOMEBODY is going to like the sound.

 

[agile_one]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wmcmanus My favorite combo by a wide measure at this meet was the R10's driven by the Single Power Maestro ZR on Mikhail's Meridian 508.

Just a small point, and probably not significant, Wayne, but the Maestro and Stealth were sourced from my Meridian 588. Mikhail's 508 was busy driving the PPX3's, MPX3, and, on demand, the HeadRoom Blockhead from its balanced outputs.

Speaking of balanced outs, I think one reason the Omega II's out of the Stax 007t tube amp sounded so sweet to most people is that it was fed from my 588's balanced outs.

 

[Wmcmanus]

My bad, Gene. It was your Meridian 588.

 

[agile_one]

ok, I confess, I realize now that after I got home from the meet I was just too giddy from having my brand new Maestro that my focus was there, rather than on meet recollections.

Two very obvious omissions were the Eddie Current HD300, and the Woo Audio 1 tube amps.

Both should be seriously considered by entry level tube afficianados. I do not know the exact prices, but believe the EC is more than the Woo. That reflects their sound quality, and is a good value proposition, as I heard them.

I believe there are pictures of each elsewhere in this thread to view, so I won't try to find them - if you have interest, seek and find ...

Also, I did not spend a lot of time (maybe 5-10 minutes) with these (nor much else at the meet), so these are truly "meet impressions", with all that that implies.

Eddie Current HD300 - A nice contender in the SinglePower PPX3 and ASL MG-Head crowd. Ideally one could audition all three and choose, because the choice would be one of personal preference, not an absolute "this is better than that". The first thing I noticed (Dave Brubeck - Take Five) was better than expected speed and attack - the little guy kept the pace very well. Bass was full, Brubeck's piano was accurate, and Paul Desmond's Sax was as sweet as ever I've heard it.

If there is a criticism, it would be that the bass gives away a little speed in return for reaching down so low - not a bad thing for some people. Sorry I did not spend more time with it, and I must also note that it was quite new, so perhaps not even broken in yet. Maybe tyrion will invite me over to Lauderdale for a mini-meet sometime?

Build quality is excelllent, in an artsy-industrial sort of way that most geeks love but WAF may suffer.

Woo Audio 1- This is a cute little bugger, what with its white end plates - did Steve Jobs have a hand in this design

?

I understand that Mr Woo built the transformer himself, so that is quite the bit of hand craftsmanship in that stainless circular enclosure. To my ears the Woo was not the equal of the Eddie Current. That doesn't mean it's not good, it just verifies that there is rarely (never) a free lunch - you get what you pay for. To anyone wanting to dip their feet into the tube waters at an entry level price, the Woo could be your ticket to the joys (horrors) of tube rolling. You'll be rewarded with a true tubey (slightly warm) sound, without giving up a whole lot in detail or agressiveness. The same Brubeck CD lost a step on Dave's piano, but was very close wth Desmond's sax.

Many have mentioned that cheap tube amps should be perfect for rock, blues, and other aggressive styles because most amplified guitar music is made on tube amps to begin with. Sort of makes sense. Just to check this theory out, I loaded up a live Skynard cd and played it on the Woo - Yeah, that's what I'm talkin' about

- I think there is something to that.

 

[tyrion]

Gene, I am working on the possibility of a mini meet down here. When and if I figure out how to pull it off, I will let everyone know. A longshot, but worth a try.

 

[Mikey01]

Thanks for the HD300 and Woo1 impressions Agile_one. I like the idea of the HD300 being in the mix for low to moderately priced tube units. I think it will do well. It's always nice to have a large selection with something for everybody.

 

[gsferrari]

The tubes in use were the "Test" tubes supplied by Mr. Woo to make sure the heater circuit was working alright before putting in the premium NOS tubes he had supplied. Unfortunately matthew did not put the premium tubes in and we were using the $1.00 tubes all through the day. I dont know how I missed this but I think it is acceptable considering the level of confusion in the room that day.

The Woo with NOS tubes sounds MUCH better although it still has a solid tubey sound. It is source forgiving and very generous with its power. It is also DEAD SILENT and I use it with Etymotics/Shure/Grados etc. and with the Senns (powers a variety of headphone impedances with ease). The Woo amplifiers silence is stunning and it seems like the more expensive Rudistor is almost unbearably noisy in comparison!!!