BEST FOR: serious audiophiles
WORST FOR: hardcore detail fanatics
Audio-Technica ATH-AD900
($299, audio-technica.com)
Beyerdynamic DT-990
($345, beyerdynamic.com)
Grado RS2i
($495, gradolabs.com)
HiFiMan HE-300
($249, hifiman.com)
Sennheiser HD598
($249, sennheiserusa.com)
Sony MDR-Z1000
($499, sony.com)
|
|
|
|
THE ONLY MAJOR MANUFACTURER I know of that makes the same headphone in different impedances, Beyerdynamic offers the DT-990 in a 32-ohm version for use with portable devices, a 250-ohm version for average home gear, and a 600-ohm version for high-end headphone amps. We requested the 32-ohm version because the other headphones tested here run in that range and because we figured most S+V readers would at least occasionally want to plug straight into a smartphone or a computer.
All the panelists complimented the DT- 990’s build quality, and none complained about the ergonomics. “It’s like putting on a nice, comfy sweater,” Geoff said. “It feels secure, but you don’t notice it.” The earcups clamp your head fairly firmly, but the ample padding and the soft fabric over the pads allow for hours-long listening sessions. Beyerdynamic also throws in a really nice carrying case with the DT-990.
It’s hard to imagine who wouldn’t like the sound of the DT-990. The three youngest panelists all picked it as their favorite, and I enjoyed it, too. “It’s pretty far ahead of the rest,” Joe said. “I can hear the kinds of details on these that I hear from our speakers.” Geoff was similarly effusive: “Without question the best,” he said. “It’s very open-sounding, and it tends to ‘disappear’ more than the others.” Howard, though, felt the DT-990 was good but lacked detail. I concurred; even though I loved the sound, it seemed a bit less precise than with the Audio-Technica ATH-AD900 and the Sennheiser HD598.
The DT-990’s frequency response is well balanced from bass to treble. Right and left channels match well. The 75-ohm output impedance measurement showed a minor change in frequency response, a bump of about 1.2 dB centered at 120 Hz. Impedance averages 32 ohms but increases to 43 ohms at 100 Hz. Isolation is a little better than average for an open-back headphone, reducing ambient noise by 10 to 20 dB above 2 kHz. Distortion is very low at 80 dB; at 100 dB, it rises below 50 Hz to 13.1% at 20 Hz. Average sensitivity from 300 Hz to 10 kHz with a 0.179-volt RMS signal is 102.8 dB.
Of the six headphones we tested, the DT-990 is one of the two safest recommendations we can make. It’s comfortable and well built, and your impression of the sound will likely range from very good to great.
Please bear in mind that this graph is technically inaccurate in the uppermost frequencies. First, I have looked long and hard at graphs and listened to the headphones on this site. Although this graph seeks to represent the DT990 well, it makes it seem as if it has a rolled-off, muddy upper treble response. I can tell you that the Beyerdynamics do not exhibit such a response, but, in fact, are brighter in the uppermost highs than even the ATH-AD900 and, in some ways, the Grado RS-2! And I am not the only one sharing in that consensus, either, as you can see on Head-Fi and other review sites with graphs showing the polar opposite of here. It is clear that there is something wrong in the testing methodology of these headphones.
Just another point of clarification for those who may worry about a lack of detail in these headphones as suggested. These headphones do have a V-shaped frequency curve, which does make midrange details somewhat less apparent than the extremes of the sonic range. Even so, it happens to have a rather punchy, sparkly sound that makes listening in movies and music more engaging than a flat or N-shaped frequency curve, as the Audio Technicas, Sennheisers and, to some degree, the Grados possess.
Sorry our opinions don't jibe with yours. That's why, unlike most sites that review headphones, we use multiple panelists to get a broader perspective. We can't guarantee that every listener will agree with our opinions, but we believe our methods provide a more accurate assessment of a headphone's sound quality than either: A) one guy listening and opining, based on his hearing, his taste, the music he chose, etc., etc., or B) a bunch of anonymous posters on an Internet forum who may or may not have actually heard the headphone in question, who may or may not have much experience with headphones, and who often appear to want to conform to group opinion.
My measurement methods and equipment are well-documented in every review. I use the calibration curves provided by G.R.A.S. If you can point to other measurements that disagree with mine, where the methods and equipment are fully documented and industry-standard calibration and compensation methods are employed, I'd appreciate it. In my research into headphone measurement, and my consultations with various manufacturers, I encountered numerous methodologies--some employing compensation curves, some not, some using industry-standard measurement gear, some not. All I can do is do my best to conform to industry standards.
The Pro is supposedly the better performing of the others, the better built, and the cheaper of the four 990 versions. And 250ohms is actually easier to drive properly than 32ohms... assuming you can get it loud enough. The low impedance cans would need jacks of under 3-5 ohms to have the proper deep bass.
I won't argue with anyone saying the 990s tend towards at least slightly recessed midrange. The bass also seems a little wooly to me and overall it's certainly a step down from the Koss ESP 950 and Etymotic ER4S in terms of precision, distortion, and not to mention balance. But a very interesting design Beyer has here. I just wish there was some way to get the DT1350's sound in a more comfortable headphone. That's one of the few dynamic conventional cans I've ever heard that does not sound dynamic or conventional, but I find those earpad phones like it and the HD25 pretty intolerable for very long... and I'd rather not have to pull a van Gogh.