[MuppetFace]

I do think measurements can be helpful, and that they can convey a rudimentary but vital "general idea" of how a headphone sounds in tonal balance. Obviously, there are many non-measurable factors to headphone enjoyment, but I think frequency response lies at the heart of many listener's preferences. If you don't get that "right" (right for the individual, that is), then the best soundstage and imaging is going to take a backseat in a lot of cases. Example? The Edition 10. It just so happens to excel in those things that can't be easily measured: soundstage, imaging, that "being there" feeling. But the measurements DO show its biggest flaws, including the ear-piercing and sibilant treble.
 
So in a sense, I think frequency response CAN be used to assess performance on a general level. When you have two headphones that measure reasonably well, then I think it becomes harder to try to use such measurements to justify "better" and "worse." For some, a more neutral presentation is better. For others it's a more fun-colored presentation. I think Tyll said something to the effect of measurements being more useful to weed out problem areas, and I'm starting to agree with this.

 

[noxa]

I'm looking for a bit of advice from you guys, i'm coming from some bass heavy iem's, IE8 and Atrio m5 and am now looking to buy a closed headphone and would really like an Ultrasone, i'm specifically looking at the DJ1 as it's within my budget at the moment. I would like to know how the bass on these compares with the current iem's i'm used to.

 

[pataburd]

Quote:

interesting remarks... I always like hearing these types of comments because it leaves me less disappointed when I hear headphones that are so so raved about haha.. Have you tried out the HifiMan HE500s by any chance? Also did you find the LCDs to be more or less sibilant than the ultrasones (if that even applies)?

Ahzari:
 
The LCD were definitely more open and tended to be less over driven with treble tracks that had a harsher edge with the PRO 2500.  In that respect the LCD had, you might say, more ease and facility with high frequencies in general.  In my own experience, and to my ears, however, the Ultrasones are not, and have never been, categorically over-sibilant--that is, "colored" in the sense that they always add a sibilant quality that isn't already resident in the mix--just true to the recording.
 
As I had alluded before, it wasn't any single sonic trait--from the long list of superlatives--where the LCD performed poorly but to me, overall, they just seemed to lack "pulse".  The sound, for example, of vocals lacked ungulation and a front-to-back dimensionality.  The Ultrasones simply seemed to convey more compellingly the physical/psychical presence of of the performer.  Vocal wavers and tremolo with the PRO 2500 came across with a better sense of 3 dimensions and a more natural rear-to-front advance/progression.  
 
That was the clincher for me.  It was as though the LCD's Achilles' heel became visible in that fleeting moment and henceforth, like Paris with bow and arrow, I fixated upon it.  That "unum necessarium" (and perhaps the ONLY area where the LCD, to my ears, revealed any sort of deficit) ultimately became the point of departure--literally--between the Audeze and myself.  (Think of a sin of omission rather than commission, if that helps.)
 
As we speak, the LCD-2 are en route to their new owner.  May he be happy with those popular, planar-magnetic headphones. 
 
MuppetFace has already made an excellent case for reasons of preference that, for some, may seem to contraindicate strictly empirical acceptance criteria (and commensurately elude the posse who enforce today's popularly recognized, "top-tier" products).  Enjoying music integrally involves the technological and the psychological aspects of sonic reproduction.  That is why these threads thrive, and why I and others of like mind/ear are not summarily tarred and feathered for our alleged irreverence while visiting the "pantheon" of headphones that occupy the latest "short list".  
 
: )
 
PAB
 
p.s.  Haven't yet tried the HE500s, but the D7000 are due to arrive today!  : )

 

[DVDRey]

 
Quote:

but the D7000 are due to arrive today!  : )

 
It'll be interesting to have your opinion, Pro2900 VS D7000
 
 

 

[pataburd]

Quote:

 
 
It'll be interesting to have your opinion, Pro2900 VS D7000
 
 

For me and for you!  : )
 

 

[MuppetFace]

I've been enjoying the D7000 quite a bit having re-discovered them earlier this year. I just wish the cable wasn't so prone to twisting up like crazy. Managing it can be very frustrating.
 
I wonder how the Fostex TH900 will compare to the D7000, seeing as the latter is really made by Fostex as well. I'm especially curious as to whether they're going for a more neutral or a colored sound like the D7000's.
 
The Ultrasone Signature PRO already surprised me by its relative lack of coloration compared to the Edition 9 and 8.

 

[DVDRey]

 
Quote:

I've been enjoying the D7000 quite a bit having re-discovered them earlier this year.

 
I think you prefer D7000 to Pro2900?

 

[MuppetFace]

Quote:

I think you prefer D7000 to Pro2900?

Yes, that's my personal preference. I'm less sure about the D7000 vs.Edition 9, Edition 8, and Signature PRO though. Those are tougher for me to discern.

 

[DVDRey]

 
Quote:

Yes, that's my personal preference. I'm less sure about the D7000 vs.Edition 9, Edition 8, and Signature PRO though. Those are tougher for me to discern.

 
Thanks .
 
I'm tempted since their release by the signature pro. If mids are good and not so recessed that the PRO900, i ll buy it with pleasure. (well, when i ll have some economies,lol).

 

[priest]

Quote:

 
Sarcasm doesn't always come through on the Internet.

I have been characterized by some as naive.

 
In any event the PRO 2900 gets it right by me, and has been easier to appreciate than the PRO 900, or any other Ultrasone I've tried actually, other than the Edition 8. I love the precise imaging and tactility, and the soundstage is plenty wide, but not so wide as to be diffuse or lacking in intimacy.

 

[Ahzari]

Quote:

 
 
It'll be interesting to have your opinion, Pro2900 VS D7000
 
 

I have the 2900s and the D7000s.. I prefer the Denon7000 in terms of sound but I like the comfort of the 2900s.. I really can't stand leather ear pads. The reason I prefer the Denons is because they are more musical, the treble and midrange are smoother and less analytical than the 2900s. Also something I noticed is that the Denons have better separation of instruments, surprisingly even with the openness of the 2900s and their S-Logic Plus, they can't come close to the Denons. With that said, I'm likely going to keep my 2900s and sell my Denons soon. Looking into getting the HifiMan HE500 for my next big phone ..

 

[DVDRey]

 
Quote:

surprisingly even with the openness of the 2900s and their S-Logic Plus

 
Yes, Pro2900 hasn't a big soundstage for an open headphone and HFi2400, with the same design, has much more soundstage imo, but seem much less natural.

 

[MuppetFace]

Found a pair of the now out-of-production HFI 2200s. I'm giving them a whirl.
 
 
 

 
 
 
Very smooth and fun headphones, these. Back when they were in production and people were still discussing them on the forum, they were oft referred to as "romantic dinner by candlelight" headphones. I think this description is pretty apt. Soundstage isn't as expansive as some of Ultrasone's other open headphones, and their resolution is perhaps a tad lower than some of their more recently released siblings, but, for me, their overall tonal quality puts them ahead of most of the other HFI, Proline, and PRO models I've tried in the past. Liquid? Yes. Warm? Indeed. Fun? Certainly!
 
Highs are not at all harsh, and there is little if any sibilance. They make the PRO 2900 sound downright harsh to me. Mids seem a bit recessed but still very musical and fluid. Lows are solid without being bloated, and I'm not detecting any bleeding into the other frequencies.
 
Then of course there are the aesthetics of the thing. Love it or hate it, it's certainly unique. I can't help but think "70s sofa." They've got charm for sure. All in all, I think Ultrasone had a real winner with the HFI 2200. If you're looking for a pleasant and highly colored headphone these are worth spending the time looking for.

 

[joelpearce]

Quote:

Found a pair of the now out-of-production HFI 2200s. I'm giving them a whirl.
 
Very smooth and fun headphones, these. Back when they were in production and people were still discussing them on the forum, they were oft referred to as "romantic dinner by candlelight" headphones. I think this description is pretty apt. Soundstage isn't as expansive as some of Ultrasone's other open headphones, and their resolution is perhaps a tad lower than some of their more recently released siblings, but, for me, their overall tonal quality puts them ahead of most of the other HFI, Proline, and PRO models I've tried in the past. Liquid? Yes. Warm? Indeed. Fun? Certainly!
 
Highs are not at all harsh, and there is little if any sibilance. They make the PRO 2900 sound downright harsh to me. Mids seem a bit recessed but still very musical and fluid. Lows are solid without being bloated, and I'm not detecting any bleeding into the other frequencies.
 
Then of course there are the aesthetics of the thing. Love it or hate it, it's certainly unique. I can't help but think "70s sofa." They've got charm for sure. All in all, I think Ultrasone had a real winner with the HFI 2200. If you're looking for a pleasant and highly colored headphone these are worth spending the time looking for.

I just snagged a pair recently on ebay as well, for surprisingly cheap.  I'm actually surprised at how much head time they are getting.
 
 

 

[MuppetFace]

Quote:

I just snagged a pair recently on ebay as well, for surprisingly cheap.  I'm actually surprised at how much head time they are getting.
 
 

I recently got a Sansa Clip Zip, and I find the synergy with the HFI 2200 to be really satisfying. Too unwieldy and open to be truly portable, but for moving around the house it's lovely.