Ultrasone PRO 750 vs. Denon AH D2000
Dec 1, 2008 at 3:02 AM Thread Starter Post #1 of 61

toxic888

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Posts
274
Likes
0
I'm looking for some basic differences in qualities between these two headphones; low's, mid's, high's, amped, not amped, durability, etc.; don't consider my personal music tastes, rather just tell me as much as you can about what either of those 'phones are good for.

I listen to Rock, Techno, Hard Rock, Alternative -> all types that require a sufficient amount of bass response.

Portability is not an issue, just SQ, sound stage, sound signature, etc.

It would be helpful if you (owners) compare/rate them to other 'phones you have/ have had, or if you own both that would be even better
k701smile.gif


Hopefully this will clear up confusion from my other threads
ksc75smile.gif



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

You would help me out if you copied this and filled it out: honestly I'm looking for a simple answer,
it's nice if you clarify something but then tell me the basics as well...:


In these categories, which headphones (PS750 or D2000) surpass the other in terms of clarity, SQ, etc. (IYO). A tie is always a possibility.
______________________________
PS750 or D2000:
lows: ""
mids: ""
highs: ""
vocals: ""
no amp: ""
amp: ""
durability: ""
______________________________

______________________________
 
Dec 1, 2008 at 8:03 AM Post #2 of 61

love2listen

Head-Fier
Joined
Sep 13, 2008
Posts
62
Likes
0
Bump, as I would like to know too.
icon10.gif


I have the Proline 650 (should be very similar to the 750), and would like to know if the Denons are an upgrade to them or more just a different sound...

Anyway the Ultrasones requires *heavy* burn-in; my pair is approaching 200 hrs, and they sound a lot more full bodied and round compared to when they only had logged 100 hrs
wink.gif
 
Dec 1, 2008 at 11:39 AM Post #3 of 61

alexpea

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Posts
377
Likes
10
The D2000's have a more bloathy bass-representation. The 750's bass is more controlled and nuanced, but still has plenty of quentity compared to most phones. As for the highs, the D2000's is beautiful. Its mids may be a little affected by the overpowering bass, but the highs are just beautiful with lots of detail and spaciousness. The 750's on the other hand has terrible plastic-sounding highs. It beats the D2000's in the midrange clearly, but eveything sounds plastic when it climbs up the frequency-ladder. IMO. Comfortwise, the D2000's is way too loose, and the 750's are ok. But the 750's has these unscrewable pads which are going to bug you because they fall off at the slightests touch.
 
Dec 1, 2008 at 12:31 PM Post #4 of 61

pataburd

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Jul 1, 2003
Posts
6,326
Likes
787
Location
Rural New York State
IMHE, the D2000 were the more detailed and better/more evenly balanced of the two (the Proline 750 have a slight deficit in their lower/middle midrange).

With proper source and amping, the D2000's bass is not bloaty at all, simply true-to-the-source, IMHO. : ) In addition, I found the D2000 to sound better unamped or amped by modest sources (like a mini-component system) than the PL750. The D2000 did not sound good with the Darkvoice 337, though.

I do however, give the Proline 750 the nod for listening to female vocals. They have a raw, visceral quality about them that is really quite special.
 
Dec 1, 2008 at 7:47 PM Post #5 of 61

Peter Pinna

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Posts
1,002
Likes
75
Quote:

Originally Posted by alexpea /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The D2000's have a more bloathy bass-representation. The 750's bass is more controlled and nuanced, but still has plenty of quentity compared to most phones. As for the highs, the D2000's is beautiful. Its mids may be a little affected by the overpowering bass, but the highs are just beautiful with lots of detail and spaciousness. The 750's on the other hand has terrible plastic-sounding highs. It beats the D2000's in the midrange clearly, but eveything sounds plastic when it climbs up the frequency-ladder. IMO. Comfortwise, the D2000's is way too loose, and the 750's are ok. But the 750's has these unscrewable pads which are going to bug you because they fall off at the slightests touch.


I use the Pro 750 professionally as well as for personal listening. I completely disagree that the highs of the 750 are, in any way deficient. To my ears, the highs are among the best and most natural sounding of any headphone I've ever heard. The 750 is a very revealing headphone. If you are hearing "plastic-sounding highs", I would suggest that there is something else (other than the 750) wrong in your audio chain. Perhaps a recording or recordings to which you listen was (were) recording incorrectly.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pataburd /img/forum/go_quote.gif
IMHE, the D2000 were the more detailed and better/more evenly balanced of the two (the Proline 750 have a slight deficit in their lower/middle midrange).

With proper source and amping, the D2000's bass is not bloaty at all, simply true-to-the-source, IMHO. : ) In addition, I found the D2000 to sound better unamped or amped by modest sources (like a mini-component system) than the PL750. The D2000 did not sound good with the Darkvoice 337, though.

I do however, give the Proline 750 the nod for listening to female vocals. They have a raw, visceral quality about them that is really quite special.



IMO, there is no "slight deficit" in the lower/middle midrange of the Pro 750. Across the full frequency spectrum, the Pro 750 is the best sounding headphone I've heard so far.
 
Dec 1, 2008 at 10:31 PM Post #6 of 61

alexpea

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jul 13, 2006
Posts
377
Likes
10
Peter Pinna: It's a common experience amongst many head-fiers, that the highs of the 750's unnatural sounding. It's a phone you either love or hate. Crash-cymbals doesn't get the acoustic sound, but is instead portrayed as metallic-sounding and somewhat messy. If you listen to drum-loops with lots of overheads being hit rapidly, it sounds like they blend into eachother. My audio-chain is perfectly fine, and I had the AD2000 along-side to compare with. They sounded extraordinary in contridiction.

As I said, my opinion though.
 
Dec 1, 2008 at 10:44 PM Post #7 of 61

toxic888

100+ Head-Fier
Joined
Nov 19, 2008
Posts
274
Likes
0
alexpea, can you clear up what you were trying to say at the end there in your last post?
drum-loops with lots of overheads will sound better on the D2000's then on PL750's in your opinion?

When compared alongside (with proper burn-in, but used without advanced or high-end amps), (peter penna I want your input on this as well if you have heard the D2000's ;P), is there a CLEAR difference between the sound signature, and the level of defined and crisp sound along the audible, common frequency range?

It would help me out if you copied this and filled it out, honestly I'm looking for a simple answer, it's nice if you clarify something but just tell me the basics
biggrin.gif
...:

______________________________
In these categories, which headphones surpass the other in terms of clarity, SQ, etc. A tie is always a possibility.
lows: ""
mids: ""
highs: ""
no amp: ""
amp: ""
durability: ""
______________________________

Also, do/have you use(d) an amp with your D2000, and if so, which one? I'm looking for a low end one, I've heard the FiiO E5 will be able to power full-size phones, for ex.

It's also important that I know:
Would one of these be considered an upgrade from the other?
 
Dec 2, 2008 at 3:23 AM Post #8 of 61

Peter Pinna

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Posts
1,002
Likes
75
Quote:

Originally Posted by alexpea /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Peter Pinna: It's a common experience amongst many head-fiers, that the highs of the 750's unnatural sounding. It's a phone you either love or hate. Crash-cymbals doesn't get the acoustic sound, but is instead portrayed as metallic-sounding and somewhat messy. If you listen to drum-loops with lots of overheads being hit rapidly, it sounds like they blend into eachother. My audio-chain is perfectly fine, and I had the AD2000 along-side to compare with. They sounded extraordinary in contridiction.

As I said, my opinion though.



I find it amusing when someone says that such and such a thing is "a known fact" or that something is "commonly agreed upon" without anything to verify a statement of this nature. I am sure there are some on head-fi who agree with your opinion about the 750. I am also sure that some don't. I belong in the later category. Actually, I listen to Jazz recordings all of the time where the tempos are very fast and the cymbals are going right along with the fast tempo. The sound of those cymbals is distinct and clear. One is able to hear quite distinctly each and every time the plastic or wooden tip of the drum stick hits the cymbals. It sounds very very real.
My thinking is possibly you have heard only a Pro 750 that was not fully burned in. This might account for the sound you are describing as "metallic highs", which do exist to some extent in the very early "life" of a new Pro 750. But, after about 50 hours (approximately) of playing, that "metallic" sound completely disappears. And, the sound becomes better and better up to around 300 hours. After that, the Pro 750 is one beautiful sounding headphone.
 
Dec 2, 2008 at 3:31 AM Post #9 of 61

Peter Pinna

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Posts
1,002
Likes
75
Quote:

Originally Posted by toxic888 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
alexpea, can you clear up what you were trying to say at the end there in your last post?
drum-loops with lots of overheads will sound better on the D2000's then on PL750's in your opinion?

When compared alongside (with proper burn-in, but used without advanced or high-end amps), (peter penna I want your input on this as well if you have heard the D2000's ;P), is there a CLEAR difference between the sound signature, and the level of defined and crisp sound along the audible, common frequency range?

It would help me out if you copied this and filled it out, honestly I'm looking for a simple answer, it's nice if you clarify something but just tell me the basics
biggrin.gif
...:

______________________________
In these categories, which headphones surpass the other in terms of clarity, SQ, etc. A tie is always a possibility.
lows: ""
mids: ""
highs: ""
no amp: ""
amp: ""
durability: ""
______________________________

Also, do/have you use(d) an amp with your D2000, and if so, which one? I'm looking for a low end one, I've heard the FiiO E5 will be able to power full-size phones, for ex.

It's also important that I know:
Would one of these be considered an upgrade from the other?



In all fairness, I have not heard the D2000 enough to make this comparison. I would want to hear both of these headphones side-by-side simultaneously to make an analytical comparative judgment of this type.
 
Dec 2, 2008 at 4:15 AM Post #12 of 61

Peter Pinna

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Posts
1,002
Likes
75
Dec 2, 2008 at 4:26 AM Post #13 of 61

ZephyrSapphire

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Posts
2,192
Likes
13
I loved the PRO750's. But I have to disagree that they are natural sounding.
I enjoy "studio monitor-ish, listen to every detail without any emphasized frequencies" type of headphones. And that's what the PRO750 is to me. Natural sounding headphones IMHO are those which are able to tame certain frequencies so that all the frequencies blend and sound like what I like to call, musical. The Denon D2000's are indeed musical to my ears and the only thing stopping me from buying them is my love for decently wide and deep soundstages. The D2000's have width but do not have depth. Cheers.
 
Dec 2, 2008 at 4:38 AM Post #14 of 61

Peter Pinna

1000+ Head-Fier
Joined
Jun 4, 2008
Posts
1,002
Likes
75
Quote:

Originally Posted by ZephyrSapphire /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I loved the PRO750's. But I have to disagree that they are natural sounding.
I enjoy "studio monitor-ish, listen to every detail without any emphasized frequencies" type of headphones. And that's what the PRO750 is to me. Natural sounding headphones IMHO are those which are able to tame certain frequencies so that all the frequencies blend and sound like what I like to call, musical. The Denon D2000's are indeed musical to my ears and the only thing stopping me from buying them is my love for decently wide and deep soundstages. The D2000's have width but do not have depth. Cheers.



I think we are "swimming in semantics" here. Your description of the sound of the Pro 750, "studio monitor-ish, listen to every detail without any emphasized frequencies" type of headphones. And that's what the PRO750 is to me" is very similar to the way I have described their sound in the past. By my "definition" that could be described as a "natural" sound. Your "definition" of "natural" (in this sense) is analytically interesting, to say the least. Perhaps my "definition" of a "natural" sound is just as interesting to you. As I wrote previously, we are "swimming in semantics" here.
 
Dec 2, 2008 at 4:48 AM Post #15 of 61

ZephyrSapphire

Headphoneus Supremus
Joined
Oct 26, 2007
Posts
2,192
Likes
13
But of course. Everyone's definition of natural sounding headphones is different. In my own personal view, natural headphones need not to be able to show every detail but at least is enough to reveal sufficient detail so that we can hear every instrument/line sang clearly.

That said, to the OP. If you want to listen to everything and live with ignorance about the faults in a recording, go for the D2000. If you wish to hear everything down to the smallest mistake, go for the PRO750's for dynamic, Stax for electrostatic. It's just a matter of what flavour you prefer.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top