Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on May 19, 2013 15:45:28 GMT
I have and quite like the A900. It's quite good as a closed headphone. No big deep bass stuff going on but it's an even handed headphone and serves its purpose well.
It has good isolation and a clear mid with a robust top end. (Although it don't believe it's flat up there. Mids are better.
One thing missing from the a900 is really low bass. (Bit like Grados) It doesn't sound at all bad and I do quite like it but wouldn't mind a bit more punch lower down.
Has anyone heard the a900x? Rumour has it that the bass is a little better than the a900, although that could be wishful thinking.
Not much around about the a900x.
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,881
|
Post by solderdude on May 19, 2013 15:52:50 GMT
Audiotechnica ATH-A900X FR isn't that bad Have a look at the CSD (Waterfall) link to the GE webpage: en.goldenears.net/13934
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on May 19, 2013 16:15:58 GMT
Oh, it's on there? There's that dip in FR again where in fact it's ringing quite nicely too!! 6Khz ringing but followed by a dip at 7. Trouble at that area is the ears are kind of sensitive to that. The natural 'ringing' part for the eardrum is about 7KHz isn't it? ie the canal resonates around there so a dip might be beneficial, but not ringing. Or is it 4KHz? No sign of the old a900 to compare on there. I don't mind the a900. It's not offensive, but for me, the treble timbre comes across a little 'swishy' and not 'ssssy'. It's not as clean as some but it's a pleasant listen for a closed headphone and doesn't pump oodles of bass because it's closed. In fact, the mids are its strong point I think.
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,881
|
Post by solderdude on May 19, 2013 18:58:43 GMT
The resonance area of the ear canal (+15dB !) is indeed around 3kHz to 4kHz (depends on the individual), and is the reason why the ears are more sensitive in that area (see phon curves) as the ear canal 'amplifies' those frequencies. These graphs also show that a little peak in the 7-12kHz area isn't really problematic as long as there is no ringing involved and those peaks are 'gradual' and not higher than +4dB or so. here is a Russian plot (mind the dB scale) and it's highly regarded open sibling AD900 the 6dB raise from 3kHz to 10kHz gives it it's heightened sense of 'airiness' but of course is artificial.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on May 19, 2013 20:53:47 GMT
Actually, I found the AD900 too toppy for long term listening. The A900 is tamer. I've seen talk that the a900x has an improved bass compared to the A900 of old.
It doesn't sound too shabby, but trying it with different sources today revealed a little more bass on one source and not the other.
Coming straight from a Kindle Fire tablet, it seemed very full. From an O2 much less so. So perhaps they are sensitive to amping or my head is making things up!! Funny that the a900 has that hump peaking just below 100 hz - I'm not that aware of it when listening.
I guess the dip at 6KHz sucks out a lot of 'sibilance' and may account for why I hear a strange 'timbre' to the treble with it. (although there is a nice bit of ringing there too!!)
It's one of the most comfortable headphones that I have to wear as well.
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,881
|
Post by solderdude on May 20, 2013 18:23:39 GMT
acc to the GE plots (they are of the ATH-A900X) it seems as that one has more bass than the ATH-A900 measured by those Russians.
The older one (without the X) seems more balanced, the newer version (with the X) seems more 'fun' but also more 'detailed' but not nearly as much as the AD900.
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on May 20, 2013 19:31:42 GMT
I think that I must be detecting the 6KHz dip tbh. In comparison to say, K550 or HD250, the treble of the a900 isn't as sharp. It almost seems curtailed and you hear a 'shhh' sound rather than 'sssss'.
So it's kind of softer in the treble than the K550.
Perhaps AT have responded to comments like the a900 and ad900 don't have much bass? I think the a900 is a little more beefy than the ad900. I had an ad900 once and did find it a bit thin so I sold it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 12, 2013 21:01:21 GMT
could you post a graph of the denon d7000 on here to compare? curious as i used to own the a900
|
|
solderdude
Administrator
measureutternutter
Posts: 4,881
|
Post by solderdude on Jun 13, 2013 11:40:39 GMT
or all in one go (including the D1100 )
|
|
Rabbit
Administrator
Posts: 7,087
|
Post by Rabbit on Jul 12, 2013 18:26:43 GMT
The AH-D7000 doesn't look too shabby either. Raised treble, but pretty flat looking.
I spent some time comparing closed headphones today and tbh, the A900 doesn't do that bad a job considering it's closed. The HD250II is more 'steely' sounding and if I'm honest, not the best for orchestral music. OK for rock because it goes deep but quite unpleasant actually with a string quartet.
The A900 gives a more 'even' picture in orchestral stuff - I just want it to go deeper.
Getting ready for first night of the Proms live tonight you see and the TV will be on for the wife!!
|
|