Quote:
Originally Posted by JaZZ
More Swiss meets to follow!
|
We'll have another one when your SA5000 arrives...
Impressions
The following impressions are just that and to be honest, they were all good. Really.
Sony CD 3000 vs. Sennheiser HD 650
I used to own these headphones (paired with a Gilmore Lite and a cheap portable player) and sold them due to brightness issues, lack of bass and a weird soundstaging. At a later time I was able to hear the Sony from a Corda Ha-2 MKI fed by a Rega Planet 2000 and still did not like these headphones although looking back it was more of a mindset issue and perhaps not wanting to admit that I sold good headphones before hearing their true potential.
Yesterday I went into the meet with an open mindset and first heard the Sony CD3000 out of the PPX3 fed by a Philips 963 and immediately digged the spacious soundstage, deep bass, high comfort and exciting sound. The music really came to life although there was still something in the highs that bothered me; the midrange also seemed to lack some qualities in comparison to the HD 650.
At a later time I did a thorough comparison between the CD 3000 and the HD 650 (Headphile cable) from a Corda HA-2 MKII fed by a Bel Canto DAC2 (Philips 963 transport). I also used my own gold/silver/copper alloy cable which has already solved many of my brightness problems in my system.
The result was pretty much a tie and there were songs where the CD3000 beat the HD 650 and vice versa. Nevertheless, it was always close. I used a 70 tracks test Cd (includes some tracks from the Chesky Ultimate Test disk, 1812 Ouverture, pop, jazz, rock…) which I use for reviews and co. I compared both headphones for about half an hour.
The CD3000 has a wonderful soundstage and is very holographic in nature. Instrument imaging is good although slighty bettered by the HD 650. The HD 650’s soundstage is much narrower although depth and height is about the same on both headphones The bass is where the CD3000 has the upper hand imo. Despite the HD 650 higher visceral feel to it cause by the midbass bump, the bass also sounded a bit sloppy and muddy compared to the Sony due to the midbass issue. Bass extension was about the same but as mentioned, the Sony’s bass was just more convincing overall. The midrange was more a matter of tonal difference rather than one of quality. The Sony seem to have a less pronounced lower midrange which lends a feeling of higher clarity but at the same time lacking body compared to the Sennheiser.
The treble on the Sony really is a tightrope walk. It’s just on the edge of being right although I can imagine that a harsher source or Ics can easily disturb the balance. There seemed to be more texture in the highs (which on other hand sounded a bit chalky at times) but I think that impression was more due to the frequency related reasons rather than differences in resolution. Nevertheless, a lot of details were more apparent on the CD3000 due to this. More time might have revealed whether the subjective perception of increased detailing would have turned out to be unnatural or not. In the end, detailing has to fit into the musical flow instead of being out of sync leading to a real improvement in the resolution rather than just being tipped up treble and throwing out musical artefacts at random that pretend to be musical details. Certainly, brightness is different from detailing but you can't deny the connection between them. From experience I know that the HD 650 performs this task admirably and I really wanted to spend more time with the Sony. In the end, I never quite lost the impression that the HD 650 has a more naturally pleasing sound whereas the Sony creates this wonderfully sounding sphere that holds you at the neck and doesn’t let go until the song finishes. I would love to have both headphones at my disposal but will have to wait to the hear the SA5000 compared against the CD3000 and HD 650.
Bottom line, both are great headphones and it was hard to declare a tube or SS preference for each headphones because I preferred PPX3 to the HA-2 MKII with both headphones. I should also add that the Sony sounded very nice in conjunction with the Corda's crossfeed.
Grado SR-80 vs. Alessandro MS-1 vs. Grado SR-225 (Sennheiser pads on all of them; source: Bel Canto DAC2; amp: Corda HA-2 MKII)
First up was the easy comparison: Grado SR-225 against the MS-1. Frankly, there was no competition at all because the MS-1 simply sounded like a Grado without the Grado magic - call it coloration if you will. The MS-1 sounded blunt, muddy in the bass and soundstage-weak in comparison. So next up was the SR-80. This comparison was much more difficult because both headphones had flaws and it was more a matter of deciding which flaws to live with. The MS-1 sounds more neutral while the SR-80 had some strange dips and peaks: the midrange sounded thin and some parts of the treble was jacked up. Soundstage- and bass-wise they were about equal. In the end, I liked the MS-1 more due to its slightly better allroundedness.
Beyerdynamic DT 770-250 vs. DT 770-80 (Source: Bel Canto; Amp: Corda HA-2 MKII)
This was the easiest comparison at the meet. The DT 770-250 had thin mids, an uneven frequency response and just no good against the 80 Ohm version.
AKG K271 vs. A900 (Source: Bel Canto; Amp: Corda HA-2 MKII)
From the 70 tracks, test CD, the A900 won in about 2/3 to 3/4 of the disciplines. I always thought that given a better source and amp, the AKG 271 might outrun the A900 but this was not the case. The AKG 271 major problem still is the anemic bass which leads to missing fundament on which the music can base on. It lacks body and the midrange coloration was quite pronounced on certain tracks. Still, the AKG has beter PRaT and slightly better resolution. Nevertheless, since both about in the same performance class, it’s really a matter of personal preference for the tonal characteristics. Still, considering that the A900 sounds good out of everything including an ipod and wins against the AKG 271 in my book even on highend equipment, the practical winner has to the A900. On the other hand, the a900 is also more expensive.
A900 vs. Sony CD3000 (Source: Bel Canto; Amp: Corda HA-2 MKII)
Interestingly, the A900 sounds quite similar to the Sony but worse in about every technical discipline you can think of. Not much else to say about it except that the sound difference was sometimes smaller than the price difference would have indicated.
AKG K1000 (Source: Bel Canto; Amp: Sonic Impact T amp)
Good as always. Magnificent soundstage, clarity, … I didn’t do a direct comparison to the Sony but albeit very different they were about equally good.
Beyerdynamic DT 860 vs. DT 660 (Source: Bel Canto; Amp: Corda HA-2 MKII)
The DT 860 has technical advantages over the DT 660 such as soundstage (very good actually) or resolution but I simply couldn’t stand the tonal balance of the DT 860. The treble emphasis on the DT 860 takes place a little bit higher up than the DT 660 and as result, it sounded thin and bright. The DT 660 has a more solid (yet still cold) sounding upper midrange and holds it own against the AKG 271 or A900 for closed headphones.
When trying both headphones I avoided going from the relatively dark sounding HD 650 directly to the Beyerdynamics (which I did last time; bad idea) and hence tried fitting some other headphones in between. Psychoacoustic effects, even if I know that they take place, can’t be avoided.
Impressions on the amps later but as JaZZ already said, the Dynamight was a real stunner and I'm eagerly awaiting a direct comparison once my Headcode arrives. I still can't decide whether or not to upgrade from the Dual Mono to the Triad configuration. In any case, it should be fun
