[Arnaldo]

The back and forth on this thread has been rather interesting to me, because I took the time to go through all of its pages before taking the plunge on the Ed 10. And based on what came through, I kind of developed a somehow negative predisposition towards them. Thus my absolute surprise that the objectionable opinions felt so off the mark by a wide margin. Instead, my Ed 10 continues to steadily improve over the burn in process, offering a startlingly crystalline and electrostatic-like presentation, but with the added punch of dynamics phones.
 
What also called my attention is how some people with little or no experience with the Ed 10, nevertheless still seem prone to criticize it, I guess maybe out of resentment to the price. Then there are those who have tried the Ed 10 - some extensively - but possibly dislike it because it may be exposing flaws on their favorite recordings.
 
Personally, I would not audition the Ed 10 with either low-resolution (44.1 kHz / 16 Bit PCM) recordings or with "multi-generation" transfers of analog tapes. The Ed 10 was simply not made for this kind of material. Instead, it was more likely conceived to shine with state-of-the-art (DSD, DXD and High-Resolution 24 Bit PCM) acoustic recordings, whatever the media employed (SACD, BD or High-Rez downloads).
 
Likewise, I would not spend a small fortune on upgraded digital sources and amplifiers, and then evaluate equally expensive headphones with lesser audio recordings (in terms of reproduction, not artistic merit). And since posters here have been talking about cars, a perfect analogy would be like driving a Ferrari Coupe in New York City's rush-hour traffic and then complain that it's a bad car because it doesn't go fast enough...

 

[jpelg]

My feeling is that any opinion that is well-stated & at least somewhat objective has  worth. Even negative ones. Most top-level gear is pretty polarizing. Either people love it or they hate it. That's the way it should be, imo. It represents the designers' viewpoint of how something should reproduce sound, which itself is an opinion. The best in any game are rarely the same as their fellow competitors. They each have their own respective strengths & weaknesses, and have employed ways of playing them up or down as needed.
 
The most valuable of prolific posters here on Head-Fi will give clear indication of their own preferences (euphonia/detail, tubes/SS, etc.), and therefore allow us readers to more easily gauge where we might fall in relation to that opinion, even if our own preferences are quite different. We don't have to agree to have civil & valuable discourse.

 

[Arnaldo]

Your point is perfectly stated. And accordingly, my own view is that the particular preferences of some posters were less than apparent to those following the thread. [It could be my fault though, having to catch up with literally hundreds of pages.] Regardless, I was totally surprised with the astonishing quality of the Ed 10's sound, at least with the right kind of acoustic material.
 
Truth be told, while I adamantly respect each and every person's right to an opinion, I'm just extremely relieved that I did not listen to some of the opinions expressed on this thread. OTOH, I'm actually quite grateful for the open and lively discussion, which has helped me to learn a lot about my own preferences.
 
Quote:

 
My feeling is that any opinion that is well-stated & at least somewhat objective, has worth. Even negative ones. Most top-level gear is pretty polarizing. Either people love it or they hate it. That's the way it should be, imo. It represents the designers' viewpoint of how something should reproduce sound, which itself is an opinion. The best in any game are rarely the same as their fellow competitors. They each have their own respective strengths & weaknesses, and have employed ways of playing them up or down as needed.
 
The most valuable of prolific posters here on Head-Fi will give clear indication of their own preferences (euphonia/detail, tubes/SS, etc.), and therefore allow us readers to more easily gauge where we might fall in relation to that opinion, even if our own preferences are quite different. We don't have to agree to have civil & valuable discourse. 

 

[Skylab]

Definitely a good cross section of opions is what provides the most value to the most readers here.

Just for the record, I did listen to hi-res digital, very high quality SACD and DVD-Audio recordings, via the very excellent Oppo BDP-95, as well as other 96/24 digital via my AVA DAC, with the Edition 10. And while some of this material was certainly enjoyable, the basic flaws I hear in the Ed 10 remained very much in evidence.

 

[Arnaldo]

I couldn't agree more. The open-forum format as provided by Head-Fi is indeed the best way to achieve a "cross-section of opinions" of the community as a whole. That's why I place more value on the healthy discussion here than I would ever place on the unilateral view of a single magazine reviewer. In the meantime, as I write this post, I'm listening to an amazing Pentatone SACD of Arabella Steinbacher playing Bartok's Violin Concertos. Simply flawless through the Ed 10! To each its own...
 
Quote:

Definitely a good cross section of opions is what provides the most value to the most readers here.

Just for the record, I did listen to hi-res digital, very high quality SACD and DVD-Audio recordings, via the very excellent Oppo BDP-95, as well as other 96/24 digital via my AVA DAC, with the Edition 10. And while some of this material was certainly enjoyable, the basic flaws I hear in the Ed 10 remained very much in evidence.

 

 

[googleli]

Definitely a good cross section of opions is what provides the most value to the most readers here.

Just for the record, I did listen to hi-res digital, very high quality SACD and DVD-Audio recordings, via the very excellent Oppo BDP-95, as well as other 96/24 digital via my AVA DAC, with the Edition 10. And while some of this material was certainly enjoyable, the basic flaws I hear in the Ed 10 remained very much in evidence.

Good buy Skylab! I am also using Oppo 95. It's picture and sound quality in blu ray viewing is second to none, and when it comes to 2 channel music it is no mean feat either. It still has a bit of job to catch up to what my Esoteric DAC is capable of, but I find it to be a very good CD transport using its Coaxial out to connect to my Esoteric. And since it can play 192/24, I have since replaced my laptop with it as the output for hi res computer files via USB or esata as well (d/a conversion is still done by the Esoteric). I invited a couple of friends over to see Avatar on blu ray last month and their jaws dropped wider than they tried on the LCD2 (both are audiophiles)!

 

[jpelg]

While I am a fan of the potential that hi-rez has, as well as good sources in general, it is most certainly the recording (and mastering) itself that makes it. I have heard some great recordings from both Redbook & Hi-Rez, and it doesn't have to come out of an Esoteric or dCS Scarlatti to enjoy.

 

[warp08]

Quote:

While I am a fan of the potential that hi-rez has, as well as good sources in general, it is most certainly the recording (and mastering) itself that makes it. I have heard some great recordings from both Redbook & Hi-Rez, and it doesn't have to come out of an Esoteric or dCS Scarlatti to enjoy.

I agree.  But it sure does matter a great deal.
 
The Oppo 95 BD-player has received excellent reviews in its price range and can play BD and DVD-A discs, which my P-03 can't (without the Universal upgrade for DVD-x).
 
If you're into 2 ch. SACDs for the most-part like I am, one of the key differentiators seem to be between both onboard and external DACs, whether they convert the DSD stream into PCM as most of them do in the low to mid-price range.  They can still sound very good, of course, but there is a difference.
 

 

[Dynamic74]

Over the past few months, I kept on trying the Edition 10 with various kinds of music. I find that the Edition 10 is weak in music that contains cymbals and female voices. It cannot reproduce cymbals with the definition of other headphone such as the Edition 9, ATH-W1000, Ety ER-4S and others. Female voices that are too high also tend to be very prone to sibilance. The type of music that does not do well on the Edition 10 includes pop, jazz and worst of all, rock and metal music.
 
On the other hand, the Edition 10 excels in classical music. Orchestral and chamber music sounds excellent on the Edition 10. Violins, cello, flute, harp, bells, double basses and timpani sounds crisp and realistic. One thing I noticed is that classical music usually has lower sound pressure levels than pop and rock recordings and do not tend to distort on the Edition 10. Since, classical music is my main genre, I can say I am quite satisfied with Edition 10. However, I will never use the Edition 10 when listening to jazz and rock music. 
 
I think that the Edition 10 does not hide the defects in the recordings. Bad recordings sounds terrible and excellent recordings shine. All recording, whether good or bad, can be improved with a good source. When I upgraded my source's power supply, I also noticed that the harshness in the highs also diminishes.
 
Have a nice day ahead!

 

[warp08]

I don't believe any audiophile-quality reproduction gear should hide, alter or attempt in any way to compensate for deficiencies in poorly mastered recording.  So I don't hold that against the Edition 10 or any other headphone.  However, the consensus seems to be here that classical music seems to be THE area where it performs on the level commensurate to its premier class.  An SR-007 or HE60 with decent energizers can perform better on a wide variety of genres, IMHO, at a similar cost (yes, I know the HE60 is out of production).  Past Ultrasone models had the advantage of not requiring as expensive an upfront investment in gear just to make them, well, emit any sound.  That is not the case with the Edition 10s.
 
This is just an observation, but ever since the classics, the R10s, Qualias and perhaps a few others, I can think of almost no dynamic cans that lived up to their billing for one reason or another.  Even Sennheiser could not come up with anything better than the HD-800s--which are really nice cans, of course--but nowhere near as good as the HE60 and especially the HE90s were/are.
 
If not for the promise of the SR-009s, and some of the new planars, like the HE-6, I would be seriously disappointed for our near-time future prospects.

 

[jpelg]

Wow, even just reading these last two posts, I have no idea what the Edition 10's sound like. It's amazing how we can each hear things so differently!

 

[nigeljames]

At the price of the Edition10's I would demand that they were at least very good at all genres otherwise I would not waste my money! 

 

[Skylab]

Quote:

I think that the Edition 10 does not hide the defects in the recordings. Bad recordings sounds terrible and excellent recordings shine. All recording, whether good or bad, can be improved with a good source. When I upgraded my source's power supply, I also noticed that the harshness in the highs also diminishes.
 

 
Dynamic74 I am quoting you here but I am not "picking" on you.  But I do think this statement is not accurate, and I will explain why.  The Edition 10 have a very peaky treble.  This is easily seen on the measurements, and for me, it is easy to hear.  What that means is that some recordings that don;t have treble content in the offending range will sound good - potentially even very good.  But that is VERY different from saying "The Edition 10 are neutral and so they sound good with good recordings and bad with bad ones".  The Edition 10 are not neutral - they are colored.  They have some very nice qualities, and on certain recordings can sound spectacular.  But it's not a question of good or bad recordings.  I have played some excellent recordings that sounded awful on the Ed 10, which were absolutely stuffing on the R10 (and others).  The Edition 10 can sound good with recordings for which their colorations are symbiotic.  That is very different from universally sounding good with all good recordings, which, IMO, they most definitely do not.

 

[Dynamic74]

I agree with you, Skylab, that there is a certain range in the treble region that will sound bad with the Edition 10, thus making the phones colored in a way. The more neutral phone I heard such as the ER-4S sounded quite different from the Edition 10 in terms of bass and treble emphasis.  In terms of detail and micro-dynamics, I think the Edition 10 is a rather detailed and revealing headphone, although not in a neutral way, as compared to other headphones. It seemed to me that classical recordings are less affected by this anomaly that is present in the Edition 10 as compared to pop or rock recordings.
 
In the past months, when I acquire new amplifiers such as the Yamamoto HA-02 and upgraded my source's power supply, I noticed quite a profound improvement to the performance of the Edition 10 in terms bass and midrange of refinement but the peaky treble still remains although not as harsh as before. I suppose I will do more burning in and do another upgrade on my source to see where any further improvements are possible. But at the current moment, I am quite pleased with the Edition 10 for the types of music that I listened most often to.

 

[Skylab]

That all makes good sense.  The Ed 10 are plenty good enough that they will respond well to improvements in gear and recordings, definitely.  I'm sure there is gear that will bring out the best in them, and recordings where they will shine.  But the colorations mean they are not good "all-arounders".