Vancouver / Burnaby Meet Impressions!!
May 12, 2004 at 9:49 PM Post #31 of 44
It was the CS43122 version with USB (which wasn't working as the chip died due to overvoltage long time ago). PACE had normal PCM1793.

There was so much gear that I doubt anyone had a chance to hear it all. I haven't heard Rega Jupiter for example or MG Head or...
 
May 12, 2004 at 10:55 PM Post #32 of 44
SteeleBlayde:

*lol* I'm just a -member- of the Stax Mafia. There are many more of us! muhahahahahahahahahahahahahahha! <looks to the sacrificial altar> <looks to steeleblayde> <looks back at the sacrificial altar>...

/
very_evil_smiley.gif
 
May 13, 2004 at 5:52 AM Post #35 of 44
Quote:

Originally Posted by mbriant
Are those winter pads on the AKG phones in the pic with the TV?


Socks. Yep, that's right. These sounded darker than other phones there, and they were swell with the X-Cans Magnavox pcdp (so were the Senn 580s, and 600s, and any other phone I tried). It was a blast on the Gladiator (The happy Roman) soundtrack. The Charlestons caught my eye right from the start, but by the time I got to them, I was done listening, and busy talking. Sorry KR.

On the power theory, I'm glad it wasn't just me who thought some of the gear was too noisy to be true. The upsampling was most affected I think since it adds noise anyway (with the dithering thing). The mpx3 is usually pretty transparent, I'd say but not on this occasion. Sorry 'bout that folks.
 
May 13, 2004 at 6:53 AM Post #37 of 44
I did but it was out of a CD player's jack and I can't remember what it sounded like. I do recall that it felt like they were floating at my ears, kind of what I always thought K1000 would be like.
 
May 13, 2004 at 12:59 PM Post #39 of 44
Quote:

Originally Posted by KR...
Well, someone must of gave them a listen...

who owns them anyway?



I own them and I've listened to them a fair bit. Because of their nature (built as a special commemorative headphone to celebrate Sennheiser's Golden Jubilee), they're "more show than go". As if the leather headband and gold-plating wasn't a giveaway. But, in their day, they were considered to be excellent headphones. That was before the 600s and 650s appeared, of course. Nowadays, they're just above-average. My nutshell review: Good treble, good midrange, not lush or warm, somewhat sterile, only average bass.

They're probably the most comfortable headphones I've ever owned, though. aos' comment about the Charlestons feeling as if they are floating over one's ears seems to be a common impression, too.

D.
 
May 13, 2004 at 10:52 PM Post #40 of 44
they sound very much like the senn 495's and 497's in sound signature ... drivers about the same size
 
May 14, 2004 at 8:37 AM Post #41 of 44
Quote:

Originally Posted by xtreme4099
they sound very much like the senn 495's and 497's in sound signature ... drivers about the same size


Not surprisingly, the Charleston has 4xx-based drivers. The major differences are that the Charleston has a slightly broader frequency response (18 - 25,000 Hz), lower THD (0.1%), and a higher nominal impedance (140 Ohms) than the Sennheiser 4xx-series headphones.

Otherwise, the drivers are most similar to those found in the 433/435/437 range.

D.
 
May 17, 2004 at 4:47 AM Post #42 of 44
I just wanted to revise my thoughts on the Grado mpx3 combo. Steeleblayde reminded me at the meet at how evil the Grado bowl pads are. I replied that the bowls worked better for me with the 125s than did the flats. The upper midrange, and low treble was emphasized in a way that gave the music life, and made up for inadequacies in my systems (home/portable). In the last several months, I had grown a bit of a distaste for the 125s since my 2 tube amps were certainly Sennheiser favorites. The highs were thin and muted, and there was no detail, or slam (especially bass) - unlike how I remembered them from 5 years ago. I wondered how some folks could be such die hard Grado fans. Then today, I slipped on my flat pads, and expected what I had heard the previous times: the bass, and treble would roll off too much, the sound would be flat, and it would just sound boring. Not so this time! The sound of the old Grado I remember buying was back. The mids were sweet, and the bass was big, while the emphasized highs were thick, but not all that extended. It was fun to listen to these again, and through the mpx3 to boot!

I was baffled at how the change in pads could make such a difference. But after thinking about it, I believe that the firmness and generally good shape of my flat pads made more of a difference in the sound than the shape did. The bowls look pretty good, but they don't spring to the thickness they once did.

btw, the bass in the Grado-mpx3 combo is much improved. I can actually feel the foam vibrate on those made-for-boom-car tunes. However, I still don't think that the mpx3 is an amp for bassheads. I think that the consensus is that tube amps have difficulty with big-ass bass compared to solid state types w.r.t. frequency extension. Also, I think that the dynamic slam of solid state - (eg Creek, and cmoy variants) suits the Grado 125s better than tube amps such as the mpx3, or (especially) the MG-Head OTL.

You'll notice that I haven't listed many high budget amps, but my opinion agrees with my impressions at the meet during a comparison of the PPA to the mpx3.

Though I'm sad I've realized the solid state vs tube dilemma, I'm also glad about how gorgeous my classical cds finally sound through tubes and Sennheisers.
 
May 17, 2004 at 5:41 AM Post #43 of 44
Quote:

Originally Posted by zoboomofo
I think that the consensus is that tube amps have difficulty with big-ass bass compared to solid state types w.r.t. frequency extension. Also, I think that the dynamic slam of solid state - (eg Creek, and cmoy variants) suits the Grado 125s better than tube amps such as the mpx3, or (especially) the MG-Head OTL.


Heh heh heh heh. You're on the road. Someday you'll put in a set of tubes that have some serious bass, and finally understand
wink.gif
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top