Agree with you about x9000. Now I do not like too much bass but I prefere texture and realism on percussion for example. About details, I think isn't aggressive. I found 009 more aggressive. Of course, depends on combination of amp and dac. Probably with delta-sigma dac x9000 is fatiguingToday my friend and I had a listening session at my house. He was there to return a few amps he had been borrowing for some time, but he also brought along the L700mk2 (which he has been borrowing from me for several months now) to hear it on my chains and compare it vs the X9000.
The amps: Linear Tube Audio Z10e (big black box in the back), Stax SRM-727 with feedback mod (far left), Stax SRM-006tS with CCS mod (right, with repainted blue cover).
The DACs: Ferrum Erco Gen 2 (black box between the Z10e and the laptop), TEAC UD-507 (silver box in the middle that says "Line XLR" on the screen).
My friend prefers the L700mk2 to the X9000. He thought that the X9000 was too detailed, it was too much information vying for his attention whenever he listened to it. It was like being constantly attacked with detail ("aggressive") and he thought it got fatiguing. It also sounded "digital" or artificial to him, like every instrument was too perfect, more perfect than it would realistically be. He noted that it sounded very good on acoustic music, but on studio-produced tracks it often hindered enjoyment. Certain combos of DAC and amp would exacerbate that aggressiveness.
I understand where he's coming from; the X9000 is the first headphone where I, a complete detail-head, thought there was too much detail being presented to me at a time. It's like it was constantly yanking my attention towards small background details and away from the main elements in the music. However, I like its spaciousness and sense of clarity, and I'm not bothered too much by the somewhat artificial level of separation provided.
My friend preferred the L700 for a few reasons. First, the L700 has more bass than the X9000, particularly in mid-bass. Second, the L700 has a taller soundstage. Each note is also taller within the soundstage, more like a physical instrument or singer rather than some disembodied point source. Finally, the L700 has the soundstaging and overall presentation that lets him think that he's not listening to headphones. The X9000 sounds like a headphone, a really detailed one, while the L700 is more reminiscent of him listening to speakers (he has a pair of KEF LS50 Wireless speakers for reference).
On the topic of bass, my friend prefers more bass than I do. More specifically, I don't like "wall of sound" bass, and too much bass in a headphone always produces that "wall of sound" effect in bass. The CRBN and CRBN2, though they have good bass quantity and texture, they turn into a wall of sound with bass. I want well-localized, spacious, and punchy bass. I index more on percussive impact (think snare drum instead of kick drum) and impact is more a function of mids/treble tuning rather than bass. But for bass, the L700 has more.
On the chains, he had some thoughts on the various chains. Some were clearly not to his taste, while there were two that he couldn't decide which he liked better.
The bad chains:
Erco + 727: Too aggressive and fatiguing.
Erco + Z10e: Exacerbates the X9000's "detail bombardment" tuning. So detailed that he thought it was a solid-state amp. Also wasn't his favorite with the L700.
The good chains:
UD-507 || Erco + 006t: He couldn't decide which he liked better. For more aggressive music, he preferred the UD-507 as it sounded mellower. For more laid-back music, the Erco presented a bit more treble kick and energy.
UD-507 + 727: A bit more spacious in depth than the 006t, but didn't sound as natural.
In general, he preferred the TEAC over the Ferrum as it sounded like the bass was more prominent while the Ferrum made treble more prominent. He also preferred the 1-bit (DSD) modulator vs the multibit modulator on the TEAC. I did a test where I changed the modulator setting without telling him which one was which and he consistently preferred the 1-bit mode. He sometimes liked the extra separation that the Erco offered or the extra treble kick, but only on the 006t.
In the end, he liked the L700 and 006t the most. I was happy to let him continue to borrow those two.
I also enjoyed being able to hear the L700mk2 again. I enjoyed listening to it on the 727 quite a bit. I never got around to listening to it on the Z10e though. Somehow, vocals didn't seem as forward (close to me) as they did when I had them last (which is a good thing). I've found the Stax tube amps to emphasize the midrange, and that might have played a role as I didn't have the 727 or Z10e before I lent the L700 to my friend.
Thanks for the insights, have a new pair of L700MKII on the way, hopefully I can share the same opinions as your friend.
Have to say I love my L700mk2’s didn’t expect them to have more bass than X9000… I run mine with a subwoofer these says though and that is a truely next level experienceToday my friend and I had a listening session at my house. He was there to return a few amps he had been borrowing for some time, but he also brought along the L700mk2 (which he has been borrowing from me for several months now) to hear it on my chains and compare it vs the X9000.
The amps: Linear Tube Audio Z10e (big black box in the back), Stax SRM-727 with feedback mod (far left), Stax SRM-006tS with CCS mod (right, with repainted blue cover).
The DACs: Ferrum Erco Gen 2 (black box between the Z10e and the laptop), TEAC UD-507 (silver box in the middle that says "Line XLR" on the screen).
My friend prefers the L700mk2 to the X9000. He thought that the X9000 was too detailed, it was too much information vying for his attention whenever he listened to it. It was like being constantly attacked with detail ("aggressive") and he thought it got fatiguing. It also sounded "digital" or artificial to him, like every instrument was too perfect, more perfect than it would realistically be. He noted that it sounded very good on acoustic music, but on studio-produced tracks it often hindered enjoyment. Certain combos of DAC and amp would exacerbate that aggressiveness.
I understand where he's coming from; the X9000 is the first headphone where I, a complete detail-head, thought there was too much detail being presented to me at a time. It's like it was constantly yanking my attention towards small background details and away from the main elements in the music. However, I like its spaciousness and sense of clarity, and I'm not bothered too much by the somewhat artificial level of separation provided.
My friend preferred the L700 for a few reasons. First, the L700 has more bass than the X9000, particularly in mid-bass. Second, the L700 has a taller soundstage. Each note is also taller within the soundstage, more like a physical instrument or singer rather than some disembodied point source. Finally, the L700 has the soundstaging and overall presentation that lets him think that he's not listening to headphones. The X9000 sounds like a headphone, a really detailed one, while the L700 is more reminiscent of him listening to speakers (he has a pair of KEF LS50 Wireless speakers for reference).
On the topic of bass, my friend prefers more bass than I do. More specifically, I don't like "wall of sound" bass, and too much bass in a headphone always produces that "wall of sound" effect in bass. The CRBN and CRBN2, though they have good bass quantity and texture, they turn into a wall of sound with bass. I want well-localized, spacious, and punchy bass. I index more on percussive impact (think snare drum instead of kick drum) and impact is more a function of mids/treble tuning rather than bass. But for bass, the L700 has more.
On the chains, he had some thoughts on the various chains. Some were clearly not to his taste, while there were two that he couldn't decide which he liked better.
The bad chains:
Erco + 727: Too aggressive and fatiguing.
Erco + Z10e: Exacerbates the X9000's "detail bombardment" tuning. So detailed that he thought it was a solid-state amp. Also wasn't his favorite with the L700.
The good chains:
UD-507 || Erco + 006t: He couldn't decide which he liked better. For more aggressive music, he preferred the UD-507 as it sounded mellower. For more laid-back music, the Erco presented a bit more treble kick and energy.
UD-507 + 727: A bit more spacious in depth than the 006t, but didn't sound as natural.
In general, he preferred the TEAC over the Ferrum as it sounded like the bass was more prominent while the Ferrum made treble more prominent. He also preferred the 1-bit (DSD) modulator vs the multibit modulator on the TEAC. I did a test where I changed the modulator setting without telling him which one was which and he consistently preferred the 1-bit mode. He sometimes liked the extra separation that the Erco offered or the extra treble kick, but only on the 006t.
In the end, he liked the L700 and 006t the most. I was happy to let him continue to borrow those two.
I also enjoyed being able to hear the L700mk2 again. I enjoyed listening to it on the 727 quite a bit. I never got around to listening to it on the Z10e though. Somehow, vocals didn't seem as forward (close to me) as they did when I had them last (which is a good thing). I've found the Stax tube amps to emphasize the midrange, and that might have played a role as I didn't have the 727 or Z10e before I lent the L700 to my friend.
