[HankTheTank]

Hi everyone, after a 2 year hiatus of any serious posting on this board I'm ready to upgrade. My first decent headphones were the Audio Technica A900's which I chose on the basis that I was starting college and of hte phones that sounded compatible with my tastes and budget were the best since they were closed (noisy dorm). Now I am looking to buy a headphone/amp combination that will curb my desire for more so I am looking at a soft budget of around $1000 for the phones and amp.

Anyhow, after doing quite a bit of reading the Ultrasone Proline 750/2500 have been sounding pretty good but I'm a little worried I'm doing what I sometimes tend to in picking out a favorite and ignoring drawbacks or not giving other phones as much of a chance. Onto my music and sound preferences which are somewhat scattered. I listen to a lot of classic rock and southern rock such as Rush, Lynyrd Skynyrd, Pink Floyd, Allman Brothers, the Police, etc. I have some newer music like Dave Matthews, Ben Harper, Jack Johnson and am starting to listen to some other new stuff. To mix it up even more I enjoy some swing, celtic music, and would like to get into classical. I guess to sum it up I want the phones to work well for all types of music.

As far as the sound, I love hearing details and a signature that is on the forrward and bright side. I am not a basshead by any means but I do enjoy a decent amount of impact on kick drums and such. Also I do pay a lot of attention to percussion. If it helps, last summer I went around with my dad to the home theatre shops to choose speakers for a HT we just put in our house. We ended up choosing the Monitor Audio RS line due to its slightly brigther then neutral character and decent ability to resolve details. I actually liked the JM Lab/Focal Cobalt line more, it had a very detailed yet bright and musical sound that I felt really involved me in the music. As far as my A900's, I enjoy them but I feel they lack in detail, don't give the most natural presentation but do like how the high hats are brought slightly forward but lack the transient response to sound realisitic. The one area I prefer them to the Monitor speakers in is that the electric guitars have a a little more grit and distortion. One last thing, in comparing receivers I preferred cool detailed sound of the Denon to a Yammy that I felt was warm and muddy.

My apologies for being a bit long winded but I want to try and get it right. Alternative headphone and amp pairing suggestions are greatly appreciated. Thanks!

 

[pataburd]

For about $450-$500 you can get both the 750 and the 2500 used, and make up your mind from there. Given your listening preferences, I would tend to endorse the 750: more overall solidity and bass whack than the 2500 IMHO. : )

 

[HankTheTank]

Oops, sorry if I wasn't clear about it but I was looking more for confirmation that either of those sound compatible with my preferences or if others might be more fitting. Although, I would appreciate that suggestion if you think the Ultrasones are right so thanks for your reply

 

[pataburd]

DT880/2003 sounds like it might work for you, too.

 

[HankTheTank]

Thanks again, any other thoughts/opinions?

 

[tbritton]

The Proline 750s never cease to amaze me.

Terry

 

[ruZZ.il]

Infact, for a bit over 500$, you can get BOTH the 750 and 2500's NEW. There are a few interesting places to look at for some good prices. I got my 750's for ≈260$ and I love them. I think its best to see if you can hear a pair before you decide.. they had me from go but everyone and their own. I also don't think it's necessary to get both, from what I hear, they're very similar sounding. Supposedly the 2500s sound ever so slightly, hardly noticeably, better, except for bass, which the 750's are ever so slightly, hardly noticeably, better (so I read). I chose the 750's for isolation so I can listen in public places and stuff.. I also like the warmth, the bass, the soundstage, the detail, errr... everything. specially now that they're maturing and I built myself a nice amp that really compliments them.
I'll pm you some places to look at..
meanwhile, good luck and enjoy the music!

-Ruzz

 

[xinoxide]

in my experience and from the words of my friends, the rock and rock-ish genres sound good and detailed on ultrasones, BUT it still sounds bland and flat. especially new music that has been recorded with newer recording technique and equipment, if it were more like the beatles and simon and garfunkel, would definately recommend them as i have discography of both those groups.

 

[HankTheTank]

Ruzz, thanks for the PM.

Most of my music is older rock, not Beatles but mostly 70s era stuff but would you have any other alternative headphones that would be more lively but still have a similar detail level as the Ultrasones. Would the Beyer 880's be better? I am thinking I should get one of the prolines and a pair of the Beyer's and then sell one.

 

[pataburd]

I've owned and a/b-ed both the 2500 and 750, and I ended up keeping the 750. In my listening experiences, the two Ultrasones differ, chiefly with respect to soundstage (the 750's is bigger), bass impact (the 750 offer more) and meatiness in the mids (again, I cast my vote for the 750). See posts on the dedicated 2500 thread for more details.

With the 750, you get a very good, closed can. With the Beyers, you get a very good open can. Both are versatile and offer good bass. The Beyers will give you, in addition, the high frequency extension and forwardness you crave. The 750 give you raw, unexpurgated musical dellivery, IMHO. Remember to give either headphone adequate break-in, though, 300+ hours is a prudent margin before making serious comparisons.

I've owned the DT880/2003 in the past, before my meandering path brought me to the Ultrasone camp. Of all the cans I owned prior to the 2500/750, I miss the DT880 perhaps the most.

 

[blessingx]

Gotta say I agree with pataburd, but in reverse. The 750s have a larger soundstage, because it's narrower and longer lengthwise. It's got more bass, because it's less balanced. The 750s are an excellent closed phone (and even sound more open in a traditional soundstage sense) and the 2500s are more coherent and balanced (if sounding more closed and holographic from traditional soundstage perspective). I'd recommend the 2500s unless you need a closed cans, then the 750 is a good substitute.

As for what you're looking for, I'm not sure. The Ultrasones are certainly superior to the A900 in most respects, but they're more detailed phones if that's what you're after. They are more organic than the ATs so they would be likely better for your type of music.

 

[HankTheTank]

Pataburd, thanks for the additional thoughts, they are definately helping me get more confident that i might be throwing my money at the right phones. There are a couple posts in another thread that do worry me a bit and one of those was blessingx saying clarity isn't one of the ultrasone's strengths followed by another member saying that the ultrasones are muddy. Now, blessingx or anyone else, what exactly would contribute to their lack of clarity and would anyone else consider them muddy?

 

[pataburd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by blessingx /img/forum/go_quote.gif Gotta say I agree with pataburd, but in reverse.

Now what, exactly, do you suppose blesingx is trying to say?

Nevertheless, I vigorously second my endorsement of the Proline 750, although the 2500 will do if you're in a pinch. : )

BTW, the elipsoidal headspace of the 750 is still much larger than the more spherical headspace of the 2500. (I'd say that the diameter of the 2500's sphere is just about equal to the minor axis of the 750's elipsoid.)

I must concede that the 2500 locate and anchor instruments and performers in space more precisely than the 750 but, IMHO, at the slight--or not-so-slight--expense of naturalness/realism in expression. The 2500 strike me as tilted more toward the analytic (in terms of composition of headspace), while the 750 are more synergistic.

It could be, in my case, that the 750 were the first closed can I really took a shine to, easily bettering--again, IMHO--the A900LTD. So that's why I so doggedly endorse them.

The best thing for anyone attracted to Ultrasone Proline, and whose budget allows: get the 2500 and the 750, make sure they're broken all the way in, do some critical a/b-ing, then decide for yourself.

Then sell the 2500 for $250/shipped on the FS forum. : )

(That was a joke, blessingx--well, sort of.)

 

[benjamind]

Pataburd, I used to own the 750s and was considering the 2500s as I like the Ultrasone sound.

Pataburd, I read that you used to own the Beyer DT880s. I was wondering what the soundstage on these was like compared to the 750/2500 prolines? I was also wondering what the overall bass was like compared to the prolines? I heard the bass on the DT880s lacked impact but then I've read that the DT880 had plenty of bass. So many conflicting subjective opinions on the DT880. I've heard the DT880 weren't as bright as the Ultrasones and they had a more neutral sound, especially in the mids and bass. Not sure about top end though.

Are the DT880s technically the better phone? Or are the Ultrasones?

I know the S-Logic on the Ultrasones gives me a good sense of spatial depth of instrument placement, it did on the 750 and I assume it would on the 2500s. Does the DT880 have a soundstage comparable to the Prolines? I'm not sure if it the soundstage on the DT880 would be radically different than the Prolines due to not having the driver placement of the Ultrasones.

I always prefer a more speaker-like soundstage with great bass impact but with a neutral (reference) midrange. That's what I'm really looking for in a headphone. I've been recommended the 2500s by Dexdexter, but I'm still wondering how they compare to the DT880s.

Just wondering.

Ben

 

[pataburd]

Quote:

Originally Posted by benjamind /img/forum/go_quote.gif Pataburd, I used to own the 750s and was considering the 2500s as I like the Ultrasone sound. Pataburd, I read that you used to own the Beyer DT880s. I was wondering what the soundstage on these was like compared to the 750/2500 prolines? I was also wondering what the overall bass was like compared to the prolines? I heard the bass on the DT880s lacked impact but then I've read that the DT880 had plenty of bass. So many conflicting subjective opinions on the DT880. I've heard the DT880 weren't as bright as the Ultrasones and they had a more neutral sound, especially in the mids and bass. Not sure about top end though. Are the DT880s technically the better phone? Or are the Ultrasones? I know the S-Logic on the Ultrasones gives me a good sense of spatial depth of instrument placement, it did on the 750 and I assume it would on the 2500s. Does the DT880 have a soundstage comparable to the Prolines? I'm not sure if it the soundstage on the DT880 would be radically different than the Prolines due to not having the driver placement of the Ultrasones. I always prefer a more speaker-like soundstage with great bass impact but with a neutral (reference) midrange. That's what I'm really looking for in a headphone. I've been recommended the 2500s by Dexdexter, but I'm still wondering how they compare to the DT880s. Just wondering. Ben

Ben,

I previously owned the DT880/2003. In short, I think (a) the DT880's never-fatiguing treble is more detailed and extended than the 2500. (b) I never found the DT880's bass lacking, either; depending on the recording, there could be a lot of rich, deep bass with very respectable impact. (c) The DT880 soundstage was bigger than the 2500's, less analytical, but also less three-dimensional. (d) DT880 have, generally, a warmer/easier signature than 2500. (e) Lower midrange/upper bass is where I found the DT880/2003 wanting (the 2005 design has presumably addressed this problem; but, as some have observed, at the expense of losing the trademark DT880/2003 treble). Vocals could sound hollow, dimmed/buried beneath the DT880's steller treble on the one side, and its deep, enveloping bass on the other.

(f) The 2500 gave me the midrange purity that the DT880, I felt, lacked. The 2500, IMHO, are the more balanced headphone. You get the sense that everything is in correct proportion, without one segment of the frequency spectrum calling undue attention to itself. (g) In addition, the soundstage on the 2500 strikes a very nice balance between analytic and holistic: each instrument/voice is anchored solidly in a spherical space about the listener's head, yet without being perceived as mutually isolated from one another; you still get very much the sense of instruments/voices working together, but at any point along the way, you can cleanly "fixate" on one instrument/voice and easily track it for the duration of the song. (h) 2500 deliver more consistent, foundational bass than the DT880. Some would argue--justifiably in many instances--that the 2500 sound bass-heavy, but that assessment is dependent on what other headphones you happen to be listening to alongside the 2500 at the time. The 2500 do sound bass-emphasized after long sessions with the K701, for example.

The open 2500 were the best headphones I'd ever heard for Bach's organ works! As part of an Ultrasone-induced quest, they led me to the closed 750, where my tent is currently staked.

At this point, I would like to get a pair of the DT880/2005 and properly a/b them and the 2500. My comments/comparisons in this thread are based on mutually exclusive recall of my experiences with either can, since I did not own/audition both simultaneously. (Admittedly, I miss the DT880. For an open design, I very much preferred them to the HD650, and ever-so-slightly preferred them to the K701.)

In terms of a Head-Fier's quest for "speaker-likeness" in a can, there are definite limitations. While the 2500 generate a better sense (than the DT880) of the music being "out there" and around the head, neither the 2500, nor any other headphone for that matter, will ever sound like a pair Audio Physic Virgos or Aliante monitors in an acoustically treated room. For their more "traditional" headphone space, the DT880 are an extremely engaging and musical listen in their own right.


PatABurd