[higgsbison]

Which will be more suited to acoustic, piano, vox, softrock/indie and a bit of jazz and blues.

From my research the AKG will prob be more to my liking as far as sound sig goes. It does seem to be more accurate and natural of the two, with a more realistic stage. The Ad900 on the other hand big and airy with a 'creamy' mid but less accurate and refined in the staging. AKG should also have a bit more bass punch and presence though the Fiio E10 should do a good job of boosting the AD when needed.

Anything else to consider and which would you buy?

 

[MalVeauX]

Quote:

Which will be more suited to acoustic, piano, vox, softrock/indie and a bit of jazz and blues.
From my research the AKG will prob be more to my liking as far as sound sig goes. It does seem to be more accurate and natural of the two, with a more realistic stage. The Ad900 on the other hand big and airy with a 'creamy' mid but less accurate and refined in the staging. AKG should also have a bit more bass punch and presence though the Fiio E10 should do a good job of boosting the AD when needed.
Anything else to consider and which would you buy?

Both would be good for you either way. Go with the one you like the look of more or will be more comfortable. I'd get the AKG here simply due to comfort.
 
Considered the Hifiman HE-300, Beyer DT880 PRO, Goldring DR150 or Fischer FA-002?
 
Very best,
 

 

[DVDRey]

K242HD is an excellent headphone for the price, but i prefer the AT sound. AD900 is a beautiful all rounder and not need amp with AD900.

 

[higgsbison]

The Hifiman He300 does sound very interesting as well but it seemed like it needed a better amp. Is this the case?
 
If i did consider it is it better than the 242 and AD?

 

[MalVeauX]

Quote:

The Hifiman He300 does sound very interesting as well but it seemed like it needed a better amp. Is this the case?
 
If i did consider it is it better than the 242 and AD?

Heya,
 
Better is a relative term. I'd put it in the same arena as the AD900, and likely choose it over the AD900 myself (style, weight, build quality, sound). The AKG is ... well, an AKG. You have to really like AKG as far as I'm concerned. I like having bass. AKG doesn't seem to pack much of that for my tastes (but others of course are fine with it).
 
As for your amp question:
 
Quote:

HE-300
 
Impedance:       50 Ohm
Sensitivity:       93 dB @ 1KHZ, 1mW

 
 
Quote:

AKG K242 HD
 

Input Impedance	55 Ohms
Sensitivity	91 dB SPL/V

 
You'd need more amplification for the AKG. So what made you think you'd need a better one for the HE-300?
 
Very best,

 

[higgsbison]

Most people say the AKG does better with an amp and they are very similar by the looks of it.
 
Price in Australia is
AKG - $259
AD900 - $279
HE300 - $349
 
So the HE300 does my budget for both the HP and Dac/amp (sick of bad laptop SQ) in one go. If it would run well and sound 90% as good unamped as amped off a Sansa Clip i might consider it worhwhile and maybe get a Cmoy down the track.

 

[higgsbison]

More i read the less interested i am in the HE300. Guess all thats lefg is to find a vendor with a generous return policy and take the plunge. Think I'll start with the AKG

 

[Austin Morrow]

Quote:

More i read the less interested i am in the HE300. Guess all thats lefg is to find a vendor with a generous return policy and take the plunge. Think I'll start with the AKG

If your ever going to go with the HiFiMan HE-300, make sure it's a Rev 2.

 

[higgsbison]

Whats different on the rev2?

 

[Austin Morrow]

Quote:

Whats different on the rev2?

A lot better sounding. The first batch wasn't very good sounding, IMO. Enjoyable, but not too my tastes.

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

Whats different on the rev2?

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/HiFiMANHE300.pdf
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/HiFiMANHE300Rev2.pdf
 
Judging by those alone, they both look pretty colored, favoring (middish-)bass and upper mid-range, but the rev. 2 is more balance and has a much smoother frequency response. No objectionable pits and valleys, at the loss of sub-bass (which might just be an artifact of the measuring process, to some degree).

 

[Austin Morrow]

Quote:

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/HiFiMANHE300.pdf
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/HiFiMANHE300Rev2.pdf
 
Judging by those alone, they both look pretty colored, favoring (middish-)bass and upper mid-range, but the rev. 2 is more balance and has a much smoother frequency response. No objectionable pits and valleys, at the loss of sub-bass (which might just be an artifact of the measuring process, to some degree).

From what I have heard as well, the Rev 2. sounds a lot like the HD650. I know the HE-300 Rev 1. sounded more smooth and warm the HD650
 

 

[Head Injury]

Quote:

From what I have heard as well, the Rev 2. sounds a lot like the HD650. I know the HE-300 Rev 1. sounded more smooth and warm the HD650

Definitely some similarities in shape in the upper mid-range and treble. I'd take the HD650 any day though, just because of that beautiful raw curve 

 

[higgsbison]

Certainly looks better. The treble really rolls off on both models doesn't it? Quite a difference to the AKG and AT.

 

[Austin Morrow]

Quote:

Definitely some similarities in shape in the upper mid-range and treble. I'd take the HD650 any day though, just because of that beautiful raw curve 

i'll always love my HD650. Even if I got the HD800, the LCD-2, or the SR-009, I would never give up the HD650.