<deleted, wrong thread!>
Last edited:
ZMF Bokeh - Open Back Headphones
- Thread starter JerseyD
- Start date
I just finished the week with the Caldera Closed that's on the loaner tour and wanted to share some impressions while it's still fresh in my memory (and before I somehow manage to lose what I'd written like I did for the Arashi!). I kept everything in the stock configuration for the Caldera (both mesh and pads).
Comfort: These felt surprisingly light despite being officially rated at slightly heavier (or at least on par) with the Atrium. The BBB strap certainly helps, but even after extended listening I did not notice any fatigue from the weight or hotspots.
Synergy: These are more sensitive to output impedance than any other headphone I've ever tried, including many dynamics. Listening on my Bigger Ben v2 (so with the noval front-end), the 32-ohm tap was the sweet spot; just the right amount of musical bloom and driver damping. The low-z and 8-ohm taps provided crystal clarity, but sounded a bit sterile in comparison (always the thief of joy), while the 100 and 300-ohm taps dialed up the warmth to an excessive degree, completely smearing the treble in the process. I normally favor solid state amps with planar drivers (the Ragnarok 2 is absolutely outstanding with the Arashi and my Diana v2), but the Caldera was outstanding on both solid state and tubes. I also enjoyed them from the diminutive Nitsch Piety, which lends a bit of mid-range flair.
Sound: Bass seemed more "polite" than the Arashi, comparable to the Bokeh closed (but the Bokeh seems to have a bit more occasional cup rumble than the Caldera, perhaps woods are playing a role here). The mid-range timbre and clarity handily beats the Bokeh, which isn't particularly deficient in either of these areas, but in a side-by-side comparison the Caldera is just more refined. My first thought was something like "how can I ever go back to the Bokeh after hearing this," but after more extended comparisons my thought gravitated to "how can the Bokeh be this good in comparison for the price?"
vs. Atrium: The Atrium is quite a bit more mid-focused, mid-bass over sub-bass. Even with the solid mesh and Auteur pads, I frequently find the Atrium a bit too aggressive in the upper mids, but the Caldera puts vocals directly in the sweet spot for me and rounds it out with a bit more sparkle in the treble to the Atrium's ever-so-slightly darker tuning. A bit more V-shaped for the Caldera vs. the Atrium's W-shape, perhaps. Very easy to sink into the music and not fiddle with the volume knob (if anything because of the lack of any peakiness whatsoever, I often find myself turning the volume up).
vs. Arashi: Arashi lacked the ZMF characteristic organic warmth, with a faster decay. The Caldera edges it out in terms of mid-range timbre as well, which I absolutely found no fault with on the Arashi while I had it on loan, but only noticed that during my recent visit to Audio46 and was able to compare the Arashi against the JOAL. In terms of comfort, I'm very used to the Caldera hybrid pads from my Bokeh and Dahlia, which probably biased me slightly towards the Caldera here. I remember the Arashi bass being a bit more authoritative, perhaps a bit faster and textured as typical of many planars, but there's really nothing to complain about here with the Caldera.
TLDR: Every ZMF always feels like a statement piece with a real pride of ownership factor; the Arashi wins here on value for what they can deliver, but I would (and will!) probably go with the Caldera as a replacement for the Atrium that I recently sold (especially since Katharine mentioned that they're able to do custom sets now in some styles, and I've been dreaming about a set that I missed both during ZMF November and CanJam NYC, which they brought with them).
As a random aside, I did notice a bit of driver "crinkle" if I quickly removed them from my ears, which I remember hearing with my Modhouse Argon Mk3's but not the Arashi (presumably because it's open-back); I know it's not atypical for planar drivers, but hopefully that does not present problems for the driver long-term.
Moving on to the Arashi, which I actually received prior to the Caldera Closed. I'm not sure what more I can add to what's already been said so eloquently by others about these headphones (notably by @bigbeans, @goldwerger and @vsrrr), but I will do my best!
Comfort & quality: ZMF puts everyone to shame here, but the Arashi was a relatively upscale unboxing experience. The headphone itself feels "overbuilt" but in the best possible way, with a lot of details put into the smallest things. Everything is fully articulating so fit should never be an issue.
Sound: Having recently spent a bit of time with the JAR600, the Arashi brought a lot of that reference neutrality and added a nice amount of sub-bass; everything that's there is supposed to be there. At the time I felt it to be an incredibly coherent sound profile, and while listening during my time with it there was really nothing that I would have changed about the profile. The bass extends deep, sub-bass is emphasized over mid-bass, and the treble is articulate without being strident. It very much reminded me of a headphone equivalent of the Klipsh RP-600M II's that I enjoy so much. I particularly loved them for orchestral, strings, vocal and electronic. Piano timbre was perhaps slightly off, in part due to the slight mid-range dip that I noted previously. But to reiterate, it's not something I would notice if picking them up "cold," only in comparison to other more mid-focused headphones.
Synergy: As mentioned I absolutely loved these with the Ragnarok 2. The Bigger Ben came in second, again on the 32-ohm tap (although 16 was also enjoyable); not seemingly as sensitive to amp impedance as the Caldera. Finally the Nitsch Piety also delivers here. The DNA Starlett perhaps came in last, but I spent so much time on the other amps here it could just be sample bias.
vs. Dahlia: As somewhat of a reference-tuned planar, it would be easy to live with the Arashi as your only headphone, especially if you're working off solid state amplification; music is presented with everything in its intended place when called for (there's no coloration that bleeds across genres where it shouldn't be). But the synergy you get with dynamics and tubes is hard to replicate with anything else. On a high-impedance tube amp like the DNA Starlett or Bottlehead Crack, the Dahlia is absolute magic to my ears; perhaps the most enjoyable headphone I've ever heard. Beautiful mid-range, ethereal treble, and rich and deep sub-bass. I actually sold both my Atrium and JAR600 after spending a few months with the Dahlia.
vs. Diana v2: Coming from the 6XX at the time, this is the first headphone that made me appreciate good treble, but it notoriously comes at the expense of a slightly "honky" mid-range. The Arashi has none of that really, truly the best of both worlds for a planar (but I think the JOAL has the Arashi slightly beat here). The Diana will most likely be getting replaced with an Arashi at some point.
TLDR: We seem to be living in a bit of a golden era with this latest generation of headphones; I was very impressed with the quality, technical prowess and musical enjoyment from the Arashi, especially considering it's their first over-ear effort. But the overall richness of the Dahlia (with the right amp pairing) and tuning options (pad swapping, tuning rings) makes this one a slightly more versatile choice in my view, on top of being a clear value winner compared to the Arashi (even with the recent price increases).
Yep! I was gonna say is this Bokeh Open or ZMF Caldera Closed hehe
PS
Having a goosebump session now with Bokeh Open with this album below:
It sounds so frigging PERFECT with Bokeh Open on stock pads, no ring, stock mesh
Last edited:
Hayduke5270
New Head-Fier
You weren't kidding about this album. It DOES sound amazing on the BO. A little nuanced, light EQ brings these things to life even more than stock, which is a statement.Yep! I was gonna say is this Bokeh Open or ZMF Caldera Closed hehe
PS
Having a goosebump session now with Bokeh Open with this album below:
It sounds so frigging PERFECT with Bokeh Open on stock pads, no ring, stock mesh
baseball8793
Head-Fier
haven't heard the abyss diana v2 in over a year--anyone here like the Bokeh Open more than the Abyss Diana V2?
Bokeh Open may not win in technicalities particularly detail retrieval of the V2, but I would take its far more realistic tonality over V2's technical advantage any day.
andrewchoppa
1000+ Head-Fier
Bokeh Open - fantastic allrounder, natural, dynamic, punchy, fun. Diana - comfortable, good bass, excellent detail and resolution but just not natural sounding to me. I sold them within a few weeks of owning them. I was so excited to get them from what people told me and i was sooooooo disappointed with them.
However, I heard the MR and DZ recently (as well as the Phi 1266), and was actually very impressed with all 3.
For anyone who has heard both, if I found the upper mids of the Atrium to be a bit too forward, am I liable to have a similar experience with the Bokeh Open? Or are they different enough that it is worth trying?
They're definitely different than alike. The Bokeh is tilted to be more fun and lively so its midrange frequencies especially in female vocals are highlighted slightly more than the rest of the frequencies, but I don't find the upper mids too forward. BO would have a feeling of faster/snappier transients than Atrium Open though
erics75
Headphoneus Supremus
I have both. First I don't find the Atrium too forward, so take my impressions with a grain of salt. The BO IMO is more aggressive sounding, with more forward treble. Its a bright headphone by ZMF standards, and can come across more shouty and exuberant up top. I don't find it fatiguing at all, but I find the Atrium even less energetic and less fatiguing than the BO. So if you're struggling with the Atrium, I'm thinking the BO will be too much. They do have different traits though, and sometimes that might be enough to make it less fatiguing. The BO is drier sounding, with faster transients and more bass overall. Highs are very present, but come across relatively smooth to my old ears. Emphasis on OLD, mind you...
I'm wondering if the Aeolus would move you in a safer direction. It's not as extended and forward as either the AO or BO, and had a wonderful midsection. Best bet though is try to find a meet locally, or attend a canjam to try for yourself. My tastes likely won't translate well to you or anyone else, it's so personal and subjective.
I know you have the both Starlett and Stratus right? I seriously recommend the BO for DNA amps. No aggressiveness or sharp transients or fatiguing presentation with DNA amps based on how I heard the BO with Supernaut
baseball8793
Head-Fier
can someone compare the Bokeh Open with the Fostex TH909?
erics75
Headphoneus Supremus
I can only speak to the Stratus and BO, that is an incredible pairing. Smooth response, huge dynamics, and incredible spaciousness. Easily the best amp I’ve used with the BO.
Yes big DNA enthusiast here! This actually sounds great, I will have to find a way to give them a try.
Interestingly, my preference seems to have gravitated towards headphones that have more treble extension as I’ve acquired better tube amps. I find that I’m able to lower the volume from normal listening levels and not suffer any engagement factor, since the treble is somehow made more coherent and the bass is even richer from the higher output impedance. It seems especially true for some headphones that I find too harsh on solid state, so I am an even more firm believer in synergy now! I've never been able to get the same effect from EQ alone (or at least I've given up trying).
I somehow didn’t get that from the Atrium, regretfully, but that's alright because the Caldera Closed hit the sweet spot for me (and perhaps the Bokeh Open!). The CC requires a tube amp with an impedance toggle since I found it got very flabby at 100-ohm output impedance or higher, but fortunately DNA has that covered.
Thanks very much for the insights!
erics75
Headphoneus Supremus
I was curious about the BO vs AO on the Stratus, and fatigue level, so last night did an hour or so of testing. All my opinion of course. Dac is a Border Patrol R2R NOS unit, super smooth. Paired with a Stratus and you have an extremely smooth and inoffensive setup. Tidal hifi for source at highest available quality.
These are pretty different sounding up top. The BO is brighter as I said before, but the AO is indeed more energetic in the upper mids area, where some higher pitched male and female vocals reside. Also some strings/winds resonate here as well. I mainly listen to guitar based music so I'll focus on that only.
First, the AO is darker overall IMO. There is less overall high frequency volume vs the BO. Both are very strong in the mid bass, with the AO reaching down lower. My music doesn't go ultra low so it's pretty much a wash for bass performance. The BO is faster and tighter sounding. The AO more resonant and euphonic. Decay hangs longer, giving more of an echo or reverb effect. Hard for me to put into words, other than it just resonates more and hangs in the air more. And that was the key to my saying the AO's high frequency response did sound a bit more energetic. I found neither fatiguing, but I could see someone finding the AO more fatiguing because of this. It's almost like ringing a bell, the AO's decay lasts longer and has more intensity vs the BO, despite the BO's increased volume. Totally unintuitive to my mind, but it stood out.
Beyond the decay/resonance thing, the BO highs are drier, with less body/weight. They also sound slightly plasticky vs the AO. That surprised me, as the BO sounds very natural as a whole, but in comparison the AO is the more organic and natural sounding set to these ears. I pushed the volume to my max tolerances and despite the BO's added volume up top, it was the easier listening set. I had the BO on low gain, low output impedance. Opposite for the AO. That definitely plays a part. Unfortunately being such different impedance/sensitivity drivers I could not use the same settings. The BO on high gain/OI was too boomy. The AO on low gain/OI was too overdampened. They sounded their best with the different settings.
So I have to change my stance from the BO might be too much and not worth looking at, to give it a shot, you might tolerate it better. It's upper frequencies are so different that it's worth checking out. Sorry for speaking earlier before testing, my mistake. I always think i know all these sets so well, but when you sit down and really compare, they can surprise you. Also it seems my memory has some of the pre-burn in sound profile from the BO burned in to it, whereas the AO has been with me so long it's tough to remember what it sounded like out of the box. The BO was very intense up top for me out of the box, but after burn in it became much much smoother and more enjoyable.
Last edited:
Users who are viewing this thread
