jlbrach
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2005
- Posts
- 7,597
- Likes
- 8,095
I owned the stealth and sold it...it also does not have far more detail than the susvara..both have incredible detail
Dan Clark Audio EXPANSE Review: Interview, Measurements, Impressions
My take is all three have excellent detail retrieval and the differences are equivalent to listening to speakers in rooms with various levels of treatment.
jlbrach
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2005
- Posts
- 7,597
- Likes
- 8,095
for me the difference between the susvara and the expanse is the soundstage...I just find the susvara soundstage wider and more immersive...otherwise both fantastic HP's
damascato
Member of the Trade: Marco Custom Cables
- Joined
- Dec 3, 2011
- Posts
- 571
- Likes
- 671
Spot-on comment
jlbrach
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Jun 4, 2005
- Posts
- 7,597
- Likes
- 8,095
certainly there is no complaint about detail for any of the 3 and that shouldnt be a determining factor
What do you all find to be the biggest difference(s) between the Stealth and the Expanse?
iamoneagain
Headphoneus Supremus
If you own one or the other, Dan Clark has posted the EQ adjustments for both headphones to get them to sound like each other. I only own the Expanse and have listened for the Stealth for less than 30 min but the EQ setting for making like a Stealth sounds like what I heard.
With Stealth EQ, the soundstage has pinpoint precision, the mids are richer and more detailed. But on the flip side, vocals have less weight, missing bass impact and warmth, and overall less weight across whole frequencies. I greatly prefer the Expanse default sound. The extra detail and precision of Stealth doesn’t outweigh the thinner sound and less live-like presentation. The Expanse sounds more natural to me and have more emotion since you can feel the music. More like on stage instead of just listening.
Last edited:
So I had the chance to pit the Expanse vs the Stealth, and I'm going to say it up front: I'm Team Stealth
Yes, I said it, and yes, it's my opinion. I know I'm probably in the minority, but I don't feel the Expanse is different enough from the Stealth. Yes, it's open back, but it's not a night and day difference vs. the Stealth when it comes to soundstage. I think that's more a huge credit to DCA for creating such an "open" closed back headphone rather than a deficiency of the Expanse. I've seen some people comment that the Expanse is a good complement to the Stealth, but I don't feel that's true. A good complement to Stealth would be a true open back headphone that provides more of a contrast like a 1266, Final D8000 or Susvara where they're incredibly open, wide, and less reference tuned.
Before I go into the sound impressions, my chain is as follows:
PC --> Holo Spring 3 KTE --> Loki Max (both in EQ and Passive modes to test) --> Ferrum OOR + Hypsos --> Ampsandsound Nautilus
Much like the Stealth, the Expanse pairs well with a good tube amp to give it that extra "flavor." However, both sounded great just with the Ferrum stack. A powerful solid state can drive these well, but again, you need a powerful amp otherwise the dynamics will be lacking on both headphones. Much like any other headphone I threw at it, the Nautilus of course drove these headphones to perfection.
The Expanse definitely is punchier with the bass bump in its tuning, however, at times this comes at the cost of vocals and overall clarity. Some songs sound a little canned or veiled, especially in rock tracks, while others sounded fine. I felt vocals sounded better on the Stealth vs the Expanse. Ironically, the theme song to the critically acclaimed show "The Expanse" sounded better on the Stealth than the Expanse!
The Stealth benefits from a better sub-bass response, and honestly, with the right chain, the bass is not lacking vs. the Expanse. When I spoke to Dan at Canjam SoCal, he said that some people prefer the Stealth over the Expanse because of the sub-bass. I feel the Stealth has less punchiness (but not by much), but the bass is tighter and clearer. It might have to do with all the damping in the Expanse which doesn't fully allow the bass to "breathe" so to speak. I know that's not a scientific explanation of air moving, but I like the description.
In terms of isolation, I was pleasantly surprised how much the Expanse actually isolated vs other open backs. However, if isolation is something that is important, you might as well just stick with the Stealth. In my opinion, if you're going open-back, you want the full open experience in a quiet environment. The extra isolation of the Expanse vs other open backs might be marginally useful if you have low-level background noise like an AC hum in the distance or something and are trying to listen at lower volume levels.
Now - when you EQ - things change a bit. By adjusting the Expanse to the Stealth's FR, clarity and vocals improve. However, if you need to EQ the Expanse to sound like the Stealth, then you might as well stick with the Stealth, no? As I mentioned before, the Expanse DOES sound more open than the Stealth, but not by much. Again, not a night and day difference. Imaging, detail and separation are both incredible on Expanse and Stealth, and are on par with each other. I'd honestly rather just EQ the Stealth's bass up for the extra punchiness if I need it. Both headphones respond to EQ very well.
Overall the Expanse is an excellent and beautifully designed headphone all around, and I liked it. However, I feel DCA chose a half-measure, when they should have gone all the way. I think if DCA (@mrspeakers ) wants to do an open back headphone with the incredibly promising AMT technology, it needs to go all the way. If it wants to create a "fun" dynamic headphone (both closed and open), then it also needs to go all the way beyond just a small bass bump.
I would absolutely love to see a balls to the wall fun headphone (that obviously wouldn't be called Stealth), and then a true open back headphone with less damping and less isolation to really open up the soundstage. The AMT has so much potential, and I'm very excited to see what new headphones DCA comes out with in the future.
Yes, I said it, and yes, it's my opinion. I know I'm probably in the minority, but I don't feel the Expanse is different enough from the Stealth. Yes, it's open back, but it's not a night and day difference vs. the Stealth when it comes to soundstage. I think that's more a huge credit to DCA for creating such an "open" closed back headphone rather than a deficiency of the Expanse. I've seen some people comment that the Expanse is a good complement to the Stealth, but I don't feel that's true. A good complement to Stealth would be a true open back headphone that provides more of a contrast like a 1266, Final D8000 or Susvara where they're incredibly open, wide, and less reference tuned.
Before I go into the sound impressions, my chain is as follows:
PC --> Holo Spring 3 KTE --> Loki Max (both in EQ and Passive modes to test) --> Ferrum OOR + Hypsos --> Ampsandsound Nautilus
Much like the Stealth, the Expanse pairs well with a good tube amp to give it that extra "flavor." However, both sounded great just with the Ferrum stack. A powerful solid state can drive these well, but again, you need a powerful amp otherwise the dynamics will be lacking on both headphones. Much like any other headphone I threw at it, the Nautilus of course drove these headphones to perfection.
The Expanse definitely is punchier with the bass bump in its tuning, however, at times this comes at the cost of vocals and overall clarity. Some songs sound a little canned or veiled, especially in rock tracks, while others sounded fine. I felt vocals sounded better on the Stealth vs the Expanse. Ironically, the theme song to the critically acclaimed show "The Expanse" sounded better on the Stealth than the Expanse!
The Stealth benefits from a better sub-bass response, and honestly, with the right chain, the bass is not lacking vs. the Expanse. When I spoke to Dan at Canjam SoCal, he said that some people prefer the Stealth over the Expanse because of the sub-bass. I feel the Stealth has less punchiness (but not by much), but the bass is tighter and clearer. It might have to do with all the damping in the Expanse which doesn't fully allow the bass to "breathe" so to speak. I know that's not a scientific explanation of air moving, but I like the description.
In terms of isolation, I was pleasantly surprised how much the Expanse actually isolated vs other open backs. However, if isolation is something that is important, you might as well just stick with the Stealth. In my opinion, if you're going open-back, you want the full open experience in a quiet environment. The extra isolation of the Expanse vs other open backs might be marginally useful if you have low-level background noise like an AC hum in the distance or something and are trying to listen at lower volume levels.
Now - when you EQ - things change a bit. By adjusting the Expanse to the Stealth's FR, clarity and vocals improve. However, if you need to EQ the Expanse to sound like the Stealth, then you might as well stick with the Stealth, no? As I mentioned before, the Expanse DOES sound more open than the Stealth, but not by much. Again, not a night and day difference. Imaging, detail and separation are both incredible on Expanse and Stealth, and are on par with each other. I'd honestly rather just EQ the Stealth's bass up for the extra punchiness if I need it. Both headphones respond to EQ very well.
Overall the Expanse is an excellent and beautifully designed headphone all around, and I liked it. However, I feel DCA chose a half-measure, when they should have gone all the way. I think if DCA (@mrspeakers ) wants to do an open back headphone with the incredibly promising AMT technology, it needs to go all the way. If it wants to create a "fun" dynamic headphone (both closed and open), then it also needs to go all the way beyond just a small bass bump.
I would absolutely love to see a balls to the wall fun headphone (that obviously wouldn't be called Stealth), and then a true open back headphone with less damping and less isolation to really open up the soundstage. The AMT has so much potential, and I'm very excited to see what new headphones DCA comes out with in the future.
Last edited:
johnwillmclean
Head-Fier
Maybe the Expanse was so close to the Stealth the bump was added so at least there was some differentiation.
SolidSlug
Head-Fier
- Joined
- Nov 28, 2007
- Posts
- 52
- Likes
- 19
Maybe so much “stuff” between the drivers and the ears is a great piece of engineering that makes conforming to a specific curve easier or possible…while creating a new kind of curtain for the wizard to hide behind. And maybe so much funneling of sound waves affects the naturalness of the reproduction.
Maybe the meta material contraption is like a physical form of DSP.
Maybe the meta material contraption is like a physical form of DSP.
iamoneagain
Headphoneus Supremus
For me the Expanse’s somewhat closed nature is exactly what I was looking for. I use them at home in my living room with my family in and out of the room. It blocks just enough for them not to complain and for me not to hear them. They breathe a little better than closed headphones but certainly are more closed sounding when no music is playing than any open headphone I’ve heard.
And sound is right on the balance of technical while still being fun. If I went for something like the Meze Elite, I think I’d miss out on the extra detail the Expanse provides. The Stealth is just too technical for my tastes. But I can easily see if someone was coming from the Stealth, the Expanse could seem like it’s lacking in its refinement.
The original Utopia leaned a little more fun than the Expanse but then I had to shell out over $1000 on a Danacable Reference to try to pull out more detail and the Expanse still easily wins in the area.
And sound is right on the balance of technical while still being fun. If I went for something like the Meze Elite, I think I’d miss out on the extra detail the Expanse provides. The Stealth is just too technical for my tastes. But I can easily see if someone was coming from the Stealth, the Expanse could seem like it’s lacking in its refinement.
The original Utopia leaned a little more fun than the Expanse but then I had to shell out over $1000 on a Danacable Reference to try to pull out more detail and the Expanse still easily wins in the area.
Last edited:
This is a subset of what AMTS does... I've explained the technology and while it's complex I'm happy to answer questions about operation, at least to the extent I feel it's TMI.
Whether you like the result is of course up to you!
Absolutely yes, I've tried to be very clear we wanted two voicings that are both similar and unique. There were specific reasons each headphone was designed the way it was...
johnwillmclean
Head-Fier
The Abyss sales guys were banging on about how damping wasn’t optimum, eluding of course to the DCA Stealth and Expanse. But I cannot fathom how other vendors without AMTS technology or similar one can arrive at reference target accurately without distortion and tune from there. The Stealth and Expanse are breakthrough products and the most accurate version of high fidelity in headphones available now, personal preferences aside of course.
Noire doesn't utilize AMT
Users who are viewing this thread
