[kman1211]

I think its not the same driver there are different part numbers for the 1770 and 1990 driver

Well the DT 1770 sounded the most different, in fact they didn’t seem fit for an open-back enclosure. The Amiron Home and DT 1990 sounded more similar but still different. I found the different pairs of Amiron Homes and DT 1990 consistent in terms of how they sounded, the variance is small. People just assume they sound the same because the drivers look the same. It’s like the HD 600 vs Hd 650 the drivers look the same but they don’t sound quite the same.

 

[kman1211]

No, it's variance. Buy several DT1770 units and you'll hear minor differences between them all. Other head-fiers have noticed their somewhat loose quality control.

Not in regards of the DT 1770 vs Dt 1990 drivers. They sounded quite different. The Amiron Home and DT 1990 were quite close though, close enough I’m not sure if it’s variance or not but I’m leaning towards slightly differently tuned. There were also defective DT 1770’s when they were first released. I found QC of the DT 1990 and Amiron Home’s quite good.

 

[Chastity]

Not in regards of the DT 1770 vs Dt 1990 drivers. They sounded quite different. The Amiron Home and DT 1990 were quite close though, close enough I’m not sure if it’s variance or not but I’m leaning towards slightly differently tuned. There were also defective DT 1770’s when they were first released. I found QC of the DT 1990 and Amiron Home’s quite good.

The Amiron Home have the newer dust liner foamies, same as the Tygr 300 R. These will alter the tunings.

 

[kman1211]

The Amiron Home have the newer dust liner foamies, same as the Tygr 300 R. These will alter the tunings.

No they don’t, the DT 1770, DT 1990, Amiron Home, DT 770/880/990, etc. all use the same fabric covers. It’s the Amiron Wireless that has the new dust liners (first Beyer with them actually) not the Home.

 

[6Channel]

OK. Here goes:

I look for some tips from The Board: I've auditioned about every phone that's hit the market (from Jecklin & Orpheus to Abyss) and settled on a new 1990 this week. I've only got a few hours on them, but before I send 'em back I thought I'd solicit your input. They sound better to me (as I remember) than anything short of 1266's, both of which I'd only heard at CanJams.

Sound balance is really terrific with the Analytical pads, but they still fall noticeably short of my old 880 Studios: transients are sluggish, dynamics are constrained, and hall/venue ambience is usually MIA. Toms & snares lack "snap", no shimmer on hi-hats, maracas & strings; vague bass pitch. Listening to many familiar cuts in my library, imaging through the 1990's made me check to see if audio had accidentally toggled to monaural. My old 880's stick me smack in Van Gelder's studio, and place me in an imaginary highchair 6 feet behind an orchestra conductor. The 1990's set me far enough back that I miss the full stereo effect. I bought these based on CanJam auditioning, and was hoping these would be a good backup when my 40-year-old 880's (yes, Headphoneous: the "pink" ones) inevitably fail due to breakage or crystallized driver.

In the first 15 minutes' listening, I fell back on the old "give 'em a break-in period". But after evaluating another coupla hours' listening, I've serious doubts that's gonna happen. I even twisted on a few different "hot" ear pads, but they only screwed up the already great balance. I'd be grateful if another reader can tell me (1) returning them is the right move and (2) what else I might look for in the market today. (I really want to avoid the $$$$ 1266's, which feel like a diving bell on my head)

 

[Chastity]

No they don’t, the DT 1770, DT 1990, Amiron Home, DT 770/880/990, etc. all use the same fabric covers. It’s the Amiron Wireless that has the new dust liners (first Beyer with them actually) not the Home.

You are correct. My bad

 

[Chastity]

OK. Here goes:

I look for some tips from The Board: I've auditioned about every phone that's hit the market (from Jecklin & Orpheus to Abyss) and settled on a new 1990 this week. I've only got a few hours on them, but before I send 'em back I thought I'd solicit your input. They sound better to me (as I remember) than anything short of 1266's, both of which I'd only heard at CanJams.

Sound balance is really terrific with the Analytical pads, but they still fall noticeably short of my old 880 Studios: transients are sluggish, dynamics are constrained, and hall/venue ambience is usually MIA. Toms & snares lack "snap", no shimmer on hi-hats, maracas & strings; vague bass pitch. Listening to many familiar cuts in my library, imaging through the 1990's made me check to see if audio had accidentally toggled to monaural. My old 880's stick me smack in Van Gelder's studio, and place me in an imaginary highchair 6 feet behind an orchestra conductor. The 1990's set me far enough back that I miss the full stereo effect. I bought these based on CanJam auditioning, and was hoping these would be a good backup when my 40-year-old 880's (yes, Headphoneous: the "pink" ones) inevitably fail due to breakage or crystallized driver.

In the first 15 minutes' listening, I fell back on the old "give 'em a break-in period". But after evaluating another coupla hours' listening, I've serious doubts that's gonna happen. I even twisted on a few different "hot" ear pads, but they only screwed up the already great balance. I'd be grateful if another reader can tell me (1) returning them is the right move and (2) what else I might look for in the market today. (I really want to avoid the $$$$ 1266's, which feel like a diving bell on my head)

1) What are you driving the 1990 on?
2) With new headphones, you do need a few days to brain adjust, no matter what you try out. This is why CanJam listening and trying is mostly pointless.

 

[KCXT]

OK. Here goes:

I look for some tips from The Board: I've auditioned about every phone that's hit the market (from Jecklin & Orpheus to Abyss) and settled on a new 1990 this week. I've only got a few hours on them, but before I send 'em back I thought I'd solicit your input. They sound better to me (as I remember) than anything short of 1266's, both of which I'd only heard at CanJams.

Sound balance is really terrific with the Analytical pads, but they still fall noticeably short of my old 880 Studios: transients are sluggish, dynamics are constrained, and hall/venue ambience is usually MIA. Toms & snares lack "snap", no shimmer on hi-hats, maracas & strings; vague bass pitch. Listening to many familiar cuts in my library, imaging through the 1990's made me check to see if audio had accidentally toggled to monaural. My old 880's stick me smack in Van Gelder's studio, and place me in an imaginary highchair 6 feet behind an orchestra conductor. The 1990's set me far enough back that I miss the full stereo effect. I bought these based on CanJam auditioning, and was hoping these would be a good backup when my 40-year-old 880's (yes, Headphoneous: the "pink" ones) inevitably fail due to breakage or crystallized driver.

In the first 15 minutes' listening, I fell back on the old "give 'em a break-in period". But after evaluating another coupla hours' listening, I've serious doubts that's gonna happen. I even twisted on a few different "hot" ear pads, but they only screwed up the already great balance. I'd be grateful if another reader can tell me (1) returning them is the right move and (2) what else I might look for in the market today. (I really want to avoid the $$$$ 1266's, which feel like a diving bell on my head)

FWIW since you asked, everything you wrote in your second paragraph is the polar opposite of my experience with my DT-1990s.

 

[Cevisi]

OK. Here goes:

I look for some tips from The Board: I've auditioned about every phone that's hit the market (from Jecklin & Orpheus to Abyss) and settled on a new 1990 this week. I've only got a few hours on them, but before I send 'em back I thought I'd solicit your input. They sound better to me (as I remember) than anything short of 1266's, both of which I'd only heard at CanJams.

Sound balance is really terrific with the Analytical pads, but they still fall noticeably short of my old 880 Studios: transients are sluggish, dynamics are constrained, and hall/venue ambience is usually MIA. Toms & snares lack "snap", no shimmer on hi-hats, maracas & strings; vague bass pitch. Listening to many familiar cuts in my library, imaging through the 1990's made me check to see if audio had accidentally toggled to monaural. My old 880's stick me smack in Van Gelder's studio, and place me in an imaginary highchair 6 feet behind an orchestra conductor. The 1990's set me far enough back that I miss the full stereo effect. I bought these based on CanJam auditioning, and was hoping these would be a good backup when my 40-year-old 880's (yes, Headphoneous: the "pink" ones) inevitably fail due to breakage or crystallized driver.

In the first 15 minutes' listening, I fell back on the old "give 'em a break-in period". But after evaluating another coupla hours' listening, I've serious doubts that's gonna happen. I even twisted on a few different "hot" ear pads, but they only screwed up the already great balance. I'd be grateful if another reader can tell me (1) returning them is the right move and (2) what else I might look for in the market today. (I really want to avoid the $$$$ 1266's, which feel like a diving bell on my head)

Maybe you tend to listen quiter with the 1990 because you get a full spectrum at lower levels then your 880 try to match the volume or try to turn it up my 1990 has smack dynamics and transient like hell

 

[Terriero]

OK. Here goes:

I look for some tips from The Board: I've auditioned about every phone that's hit the market (from Jecklin & Orpheus to Abyss) and settled on a new 1990 this week. I've only got a few hours on them, but before I send 'em back I thought I'd solicit your input. They sound better to me (as I remember) than anything short of 1266's, both of which I'd only heard at CanJams.

Sound balance is really terrific with the Analytical pads, but they still fall noticeably short of my old 880 Studios: transients are sluggish, dynamics are constrained, and hall/venue ambience is usually MIA. Toms & snares lack "snap", no shimmer on hi-hats, maracas & strings; vague bass pitch. Listening to many familiar cuts in my library, imaging through the 1990's made me check to see if audio had accidentally toggled to monaural. My old 880's stick me smack in Van Gelder's studio, and place me in an imaginary highchair 6 feet behind an orchestra conductor. The 1990's set me far enough back that I miss the full stereo effect. I bought these based on CanJam auditioning, and was hoping these would be a good backup when my 40-year-old 880's (yes, Headphoneous: the "pink" ones) inevitably fail due to breakage or crystallized driver.

In the first 15 minutes' listening, I fell back on the old "give 'em a break-in period". But after evaluating another coupla hours' listening, I've serious doubts that's gonna happen. I even twisted on a few different "hot" ear pads, but they only screwed up the already great balance. I'd be grateful if another reader can tell me (1) returning them is the right move and (2) what else I might look for in the market today. (I really want to avoid the $$$$ 1266's, which feel like a diving bell on my head)

I didn't like at all the Beyer 1990s at lower volumes, I had to increase the volume to mid levels to make them really shine. At low volumes they sound veiled.

 

[Chastity]

I didn't like at all the Beyer 1990s at lower volumes, I had to increase the volume to mid levels to make them really shine. At low volumes they sound veiled.

That says something about your amp, or another aspect of your chain.

 

[audiobomber]

Just because an amp can push the DT 1990 to loud levels doesn't mean it is a good match. Loudness is a factor of voltage, but current capability determines dynamics. Virtually any headphone amp, and even mobile phones, will go quite loud with the DT 1990, but the results with a current-limited amp are as Terriero and 6Chan are experiencing; the music is boring, lacking jump factor and PRaT (pace, rhythm and timing).

 

[6Channel]

1) What are you driving the 1990 on?
2) With new headphones, you do need a few days to brain adjust, no matter what you try out. This is why CanJam listening and trying is mostly pointless.

1) FiiO E12 (After listening to about 150 amps)
2) You're correct. CanJam is a good place to start sorting & eliminating candidates and determining which to pursue further. I live in an audio wasteland.

 

[6Channel]

FWIW since you asked, everything you wrote in your second paragraph is the polar opposite of my experience with my DT-1990s.

That's what I'm wishing for: balance & clarity are super with the analyticals on. Dynamic range will improve after a few hundred hours, but I don't think I'll ever be able to turn the volume high enough to let the "air" creep into it. I'm also suspicious the 1990's depend on their midrange by bouncing too much off the back of the cup - they aren't as open-backed as I'd hoped they'd be.

 

[6Channel]

Maybe you tend to listen quiter with the 1990 because you get a full spectrum at lower levels then your 880 try to match the volume or try to turn it up my 1990 has smack dynamics and transient like hell

Ya, I probably don't crank volume up as high as many. My old 880's came smokin' right out of the box when I bought them, so I'm a little leery of counting on time to pop up the dynamics. I'll say the transients are about as good as I've auditioned through a brand new dynamic can.