...in contrast to the CHARYBDIS —and beyond the first (and second) impressions...
First of all: the CHARYBDIS are headphones that require a very fine tuning. I know we could say this about almost all headphones. But I think that the CHARYBDIS are particularly demanding —as are, for example, the EMPYREAN. It's not a matter of them fitting well enough, but they must fit perfectly. Otherwise, they can throw a somewhat strange treble, losing the enormous balance of which they are capable along the way. The CALDERA, on the other hand, are kinder when it comes to this matter. And not because they don't need a good adjustment, but because they integrate the different frequency fields in a single trace. The CHARYBDIS put us in the front row of the auditorium, though without facing a wall of sound. There is air, they let you breathe. The CALDERA, on the other hand, a little further back. I listen to both with stock cables and pads and connected to the FERRUM combo (OOR + HYPSOS).
I will briefly comment what my impressions are with a few recordings whose sound pickup is exceptional. The comments do not follow the same pattern. They are rather field notes.
1—
George Onslow: Sonates violoncelle & piano, Op.16, with Maude Gratton and Emmanuel Jacques —
here. Recording with good dynamic contrasts and excellent timbre.
"Air" between instruments: CH > CAL. Timbre-textures: CH > CAL (yes, surprising). Dynamic contrast: CH > CAL. Scene: CH > CAL (wider in the CH). Scene focus: CAL > CH. Layers: CH > CAL. Decay of the notes: CAL > CH, although it goes to taste: the CHs are drier or more precise; but the CAL translate better the resonance of the room.
2—
Franz Liszt by Claire-Marie Le Guay —
here. Excellent recording -and performance- at the piano... always so difficult to "reproduce". CH: unobjectionable dynamics and cleanliness. CAL: "less" cleanliness and contrast. On the other hand, they reproduce better the resonances of the piano box. The piano is more piano with the CHs.
3—
Beethoven, Bruckner, Hartmann and Holliger quartets by the Zehetmair Quartett —
here. Pure string, very well recorded. The CALs sweeten it (and therefore the violins, cello, viola are not as realistic). But they still translate the reverberations of the room better.
4—Let's go with the voice:
Julian Prégardien with Christoph Schnackertz on piano —
here The CHs effortlessly express the subtleties of Prégardien's playing, the inflections of his voice. The CALs are not so informative here. They prefer to follow the phrasing line. On the other hand, the CHs better separate the voice from the piano, placing it in the foreground. The CALs "delay" it a step (or two).
5—Now an unusual recording, some
Shostakovich cantatas conducted by Paavo Järvi —
here. The CHs launch the orchestral winds —and percussion, soloist's voice, choir...— with undisputed authority. Phew! An impressive sound scene. The CALs, on the other hand, opt for the sumptuous, splendid, majestic, superb... side of the presentation. The stroke is more far-reaching. The attack is not as precise as in the CHs. I understand that, with the orchestra, some prefer the CALs. However, the CHs invite you —rather, push you— to pick up the baton.
6—
Music For Solo Baroque Guitar & Theorbo by Rolf Lislevand —
here. The baroque guitar is darker —deviantly warm?— in the CALs. With the CHs, the jaggedness is more precise. Perhaps as it should be.
7—
New Moon Daughter by Cassandra Wilson —
here. The CHs, as expected, separate better, offering top-notch textures. Also with the attack they have more malice. The bass is crisp and punchy. However, the CALs are perhaps more "seductive" for this type of music -and I say perhaps because it depends on what seduces us.
8— ... and to finish some blues —the good kind:
Get on board Taj by Mahal and Ry Cooder —
here. I would say more or less the same as what I said about Cassandra Wilson's album. Although here CH take a step forward. At least, because the blues doesn't pretend to seduce....
To sum up:
CHARYBDIS: enormously resolute, without falling into tonal imbalance; details at the tip of the iceberg that, nevertheless, are not thrown in your face; they translate dynamic contrasts without problem; they attack until they bite, although without making us bleed; crisp and forceful bass; textures of the first level; very good separation and air, but at the price, which we can gladly pay, of placing us in the first row.
CALDERA: "neutral" profile, tending to warm, but with more than enough resolution; smooth treble; dynamic contrasts... pulling on the reins: kisses, not bites; prefer long strokes to short ones; offer a slower decay without being slow, but perhaps for that very reason they deliver a more friendly or "musical" sound; they are not a layering monster, although, in this aspect, they sound better with the OOR than with the ACRO: no doubt, they ask for a bit of current to loosen up. VERY enjoyable.
The CHARYBDIS are cool —not ice-cold— water in the face. The CALDERA, a blanket on your lap in the evening. Pilsen vs "toast". Macallan vs Lagavulin. The CALDERA are a Mediterranean woman. The CHARYBDIS, on the other hand, a Slavic woman, not much given to caresses, but honest: she always comes from the face. I can understand that the CALDERA are more attractive. You could have them as the only headset —it plays a lot of sticks— and be happy. However...