[radrd]

Quote:

Would it be fair to say that the W1000s are full size Etys with some added warmth, wide soundstage and visceral bass?

Quite possibly, but I will have to do some more listening and comparison, which I don't have time for right now.

All I know is that to my ears the W1000 seem to sound significantly better without losing anything that the Etys have.

 

[Bongo]

Nadim said...Hmmm...reading through the different posts, it sounds like comfort (not surprisingly) is very personal, based on how the cans fit one's own ears. Can anyone with the W1000 measure the inside of the cups, say X and Y at widest point, so I can compare it to my current <name stricken due to extreme embarrasment> headphones and see if they'll be comfortable enough for me?

Hadron measured 54 mm width of the inside of the w1000's circular ear cup. I measure 56 mm on mine (no big diff). the nominal depth of the cup is 10 mm. The cushion is 24 mm wide so there's pretty good distribution of pressure (read: extremely light pressure). My ears are 69 mm at their widest (top to bottom of lobe)...I never considered them big but that's what they are. I find that I can easily positon the cushions so that all of my ear feels like its entirely within the interior of the cushion. They are very comfortable from that standpoint. I can imagine (as the weather warms up) that the pleather covers will be a bit hot... but I don't notice it yet.

 

[Nadim]

Quote:

Originally posted by Bongo Hadron measured 54 mm width of the inside of the w1000's circular ear cup. I measure 56 mm on mine (no big diff). the nominal depth of the cup is 10 mm. The cushion is 24 mm wide so there's pretty good distribution of pressure (read: extremely light pressure). My ears are 69 mm at their widest (top to bottom of lobe)...I never considered them big but that's what they are. I find that I can easily positon the cushions so that all of my ear feels like its entirely within the interior of the cushion. They are very comfortable from that standpoint. I can imagine (as the weather warms up) that the pleather covers will be a bit hot... but I don't notice it yet.

Thanks for the exacting (and personal?) measurements. Overcome by intense curiosity, I decided that 2am on a workday notwithstanding, I clearly had to measure my ears. I even found a metric tape measure... Anyway, my measurements are 65mm, pointy tip to droopy earlobe, not too far off from yours. I even measured both ears in case of a bizzare abberation causing unequal ear sizing.

I'm not sure why people haven't thought of this before. Just as profiles are there so that one can evaluate a review's applicability by seeing which cans/amps/sources the reviewer has, I think clearly the time has come to carve out a place for ear measurements, to establish frames of reference for can-comfort!

Again, thanks for the info. Oh, and it's a good thing the g/f didn't see me straining to read the tape measure in the bathroom mirror...I wouldn't have been exactly sure how to explain that one.

-Nadim

 

[gdahl]

Interesting conversation here. I'm one of the folks who got all excited about the W1000 after buying them. After jumping up and down about them several times in print, I guess I took a break from Head-Fi because I was busy enjoying the music.

I had an interesting session last weekend, where I had a chance to borrow a pair of HD600's with an upgraded cable for comparison. I had heard this same pair of Senns with its original cable in my system. The upgraded HD600 made a much more worthy opponent for comparison to the W1000. My impressions:

The W1000 was best in naturalness at the frequency extremes. The generally excellent tonal balance was marred only by a bit of midrange forwardness. The W1000 can't hold its composure through as wide a dynamic range as the HD600.

The modified HD600 was recessed in the same part of the upper midrange where the W1000 was forward. This phone has less trouble with dynamic extremes, but is itself less dynamic. The top and bottom end are compromised, in terms of resolution and naturalness.

For the comparison, I used Telarc's recording of Berlioz' Symphonie Fantastique and Patricia Barber's Night Club, both on SACD, using a Philips SACD-1000 and the Espressivo headphone amp.

On the Patricia Barber recording, I felt it would be just as easy to prefer the HD-600 as the W1000; I could easily lean toward the HD-600. With the Berlioz, I was torn...the upper strings were so much more realistic on the W1000, but this recording presents extremes of dynamic range. The HD600's compressive characteristics were actually helpful in this case.

 

[radrd]

Thanks for your impressions Gary,

Just to clarify:
Quote:

The top and bottom end are compromised, in terms of resolution and naturalness.

Was that referring to the HD600 or the W1000?

I assume that you mean that the HD600 is compromised at the top and bottom rather than the W1000 since you previously said:
Quote:

The W1000 was best in naturalness at the frequency extremes.

Right?

But now that I read your impressions again, maybe there is a difference between "natural" and "dynamic," so perhaps you were referring to the W1000 as compromised at the top and bottom. I guess I don't have the proper vocabulary here.

 

[gdahl]

radrd,

Yes, I meant the W1000 had the best performance at the frequency extremes.

To my ears, the HD600 was a bit indistinct at the bottom and sort of "electronic"-sounding at the top. This was a problem with orchestral music. The bottom-end problem causes a loss of detail in the bass-clef instruments, while the top-end's sound affects upper strings. With the HD600, upper strings sound very "airy", in the audiophile sense, but unnaturally so. The W1000 presents the upper strings very realistically, rather than with a (to me) artificial "air".

On the Patricia Barber recording, this "air" (HD600) didn't seem unnatural; it sort of highlighted the detail in a pleasing way. The W1000's midrange forwardness, added to the great deal of midrange information already in the recording, was perhaps too much of a good thing; the HD600 sounded a bit more "even-handed" through the middle.

The W1000 is more responsive to the dynamics in the music, but to my ears has a narrower dynamic range, which means pieces like Symphonie Fantastique may result in the seams showing during the loudest passages. The HD600 sounds a bit compressed in comparison, but it has less trouble negotiating the loudest passages.

I can see why some folks really like the modified HD600's. But considering my tastes and listening preferences, I still would rather live with the W1000.

Does this help? It was rather late last night when I wrote the previous message...sorry it wasn't more clear.

 

[tonyjang]

wow, this is good... i should have expected nothing less from the people at head-fi.

 

[Pepsione1]

Quote:

Originally posted by gdahl Does this help? It was rather late last night when I wrote the previous message...sorry it wasn't more clear.

That is a good review. Thanks. Right now I am waiting for my W1000 to arrive as it has been stuck at customs for 3 days already. Grr...

 

[bangraman]

Quote:

Originally posted by Nadim Thanks for the exacting (and personal?) measurements. Overcome by intense curiosity, I decided that 2am on a workday notwithstanding, I clearly had to measure my ears. I even found a metric tape measure... Anyway, my measurements are 65mm, pointy tip to droopy earlobe, not too far off from yours. I even measured both ears in case of a bizzare abberation causing unequal ear sizing. I'm not sure why people haven't thought of this before. Just as profiles are there so that one can evaluate a review's applicability by seeing which cans/amps/sources the reviewer has, I think clearly the time has come to carve out a place for ear measurements, to establish frames of reference for can-comfort! Again, thanks for the info. Oh, and it's a good thing the g/f didn't see me straining to read the tape measure in the bathroom mirror...I wouldn't have been exactly sure how to explain that one. -Nadim

Hahahahaha! The length we headphone geeks go to...

The A1000 pads measure 59mm(v) x 45mm(h).
The A900 pads are about 3-5mm wider in (h), the same or just a tiny bit longer in (v).

 

[radrd]

Quote:

Does this help? It was rather late last night when I wrote the previous message...sorry it wasn't more clear.

Thanks Gary! That helps a lot. When I thought you were saying that the W1000 wasn't good at the frequency extremes I was going to disagree with you, but I didn't want to sound like an idiot (made that mistake before), so I just asked for a bit of clarification.

Quote:

The W1000's midrange forwardness, added to the great deal of midrange information already in the recording, was perhaps too much of a good thing

Which I would add, makes it good for rock music as well, while still maintaining a very good composure for classical as you have described. I wouldn't say that it's perfect for either, but definitely easy to recommend for both (unless one happens to prefer exaggerated bass).

So, I would say that we agree on the W1000 (though I haven't heard an HD600, so I can't comment on the comparison part).

BTW, did you get your reimbursement for the CE775 that was ruined? I'm still mad at the USPS over that one...

 

[gdahl]

Hi radrd,

Yesterday afternoon I called the USPS automated claim-status line to check on things. The recorded voice said that you and I had both been sent a letter asking for further information, but I haven't received such a letter as of yet. The voice went on to say that processing of my claim would proceed after they receive the additional information.

Sounds like I'll be lucky if I see the money before Spring. I don't plan to trust the postal service with anything important in the future.

 

[andrzejpw]

I'm a bit confused here. Some have said that the w1000s lack treble and extension. Others say the opposite. Anyone want to chime in here?

 

[elnero]

Who said they lack treble extension???

 

[radrd]

Quote:

Some have said that the w1000s lack treble and extension.

I bet you are referring to this, correct?:
http://www4.head-fi.org/forums/showt...threadid=24744

If you read down where JensL provides an update (RickG chimes in as well), you will see that the bass gets better with break-in. I'm not sure exactly where the treble thing came from, but I think that the treble improves with break-in as well. I also found that replacing my Outlaw interconnects with PSS Silver interconnects resulted in more treble emphasis, so I would guess that these headphones are a bit more system dependant than previously believed.

 

[JahJahBinks]

Quote:

Originally posted by tonyjang Just a few months back I remember all the excitement over these cans.

Well, it seems the excitement is back...sort of.