DT48 appreciation thread!!
Apr 8, 2009 at 6:13 PM Post #61 of 94
Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Sounds like a plan. Definately would be good to compare these whether I'm going to canjam or not. What does autometric mean?
redface.gif


The HP-1000 and K-1000 do not have a bass hump and they have plenty of slam. I wouldn't take that quote from the headroom site too seriously. My GS-1000 has a bass hump and does simulate the rumble of loudspeakers, so I do understand what that means, but the hump isn't necessary to "feel" the bass in headphones.


I'm not sure myself. The manual states they are audio metric headphones.. I know that the 48a was never meant for the consumer market.. Strictly used as a professional tool for DRs, med labs, & acoustic investigations. Ear cups are color coded. 1 blue. 1 red. They are also used for hearing testing.. Personally, I like them better then the 48e..
 
Apr 8, 2009 at 6:54 PM Post #63 of 94
Quote:

Originally Posted by adanac061 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I can probably answer that fully on Monday, I have a pair shipping to me from California.


what amp will you be using with the k501's? what amp did you use with the k701 and hd600's as well?

thanks.
 
Apr 8, 2009 at 8:54 PM Post #65 of 94
Well wadayaknow. I've just got round to recabling my 200 ohm DT-48E with some simple Canare Star Quad. I must say in the last few weeks I was never completely happy with the way they sounded, I could hear all the neutrality and the detail but the highs somehow seemed to be almost completely missing. Recabling has certainly fixed that, now it's just perfect! I wonder if there was something wrong with the original cable after all? (I described it in the DT-48 design comparisons thread.)

This makes me even more curious to hear the 25 ohm version, which some people consider to be much better than the 200 ohm one.
 
Apr 8, 2009 at 10:11 PM Post #66 of 94
^ I wouldn't doubt for a minute that a cable built in the 1950s would create a bottleneck.

I'd imagine these things re cabled would really shine considering the positive reviews with the standard cable.
 
Apr 9, 2009 at 1:01 AM Post #67 of 94
Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
^ I wouldn't doubt for a minute that a cable built in the 1950s would create a bottleneck.

I'd imagine these things re cabled would really shine considering the positive reviews with the standard cable.


Greatly.
 
Apr 9, 2009 at 4:36 AM Post #68 of 94
Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
^ I wouldn't doubt for a minute that a cable built in the 1950s would create a bottleneck.

I'd imagine these things re cabled would really shine considering the positive reviews with the standard cable.


Quote:

Originally Posted by kool bubba ice /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Greatly.


This particular one certainly wasn't built in the 1950's. I would say early '90s at the oldest, it has the modern Beyerdynamic logo (I don't know how far that one goes back). The cable looked reasonably dependable (actually the heaviest stock cable I've seen on a headphone up till now), I didn't really expect it to be a major bottleneck. But I guess it was.

I really would love to hear one balanced now. I see you have one recabled for that KBI (or are planning too). Have you had a chance to try it out?
 
Apr 9, 2009 at 4:45 AM Post #69 of 94
Yes 4 pin. No B amp yet though. Previous owner said it does benefit from balanced drive, but not as much as other cans he tried. I wonder if the 480s are part of the 48s in some way. They really sound like a 48/240 hybrid Imo. And have a very nice coloration to them, but still analytical.
 
Apr 9, 2009 at 8:25 AM Post #70 of 94
There's something else that's starting to make sense with the new cable too, and that's the 120 ohm output, for which these headphones were made. I have a Meier-Audio Corda Opera that has both 0 and 120 ohm outputs, but when I used to try out the 120 ohm output before recabling it just sounded murky and badly controlled to me. Now however, I really like it better than the 0 ohm output. From the 120 ohm it doesn't really sound less detailed, but the detail sounds more organic and integrated in the music. The sound also becomes more fluid and musical. Instrument separation however is reduced a little.

Of course, YMMV depending on your taste and transparency of source and amp.
 
Apr 14, 2009 at 12:43 PM Post #71 of 94
Quote:

Originally Posted by Uncle Erik /img/forum/go_quote.gif
You know, I still haven't tried them out side-by-side.
redface.gif
It's a little late to get started on that tonight, but I'd be happy to get out the reference discs and give both a listen.


I'm still waiting for the K240DF comparision.
smily_headphones1.gif
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 6:41 PM Post #73 of 94
Quote:

Originally Posted by Shoewreck /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I'm still waiting for the K240DF comparision.
smily_headphones1.gif



x2 - btw did wcmcmanus ever get around to reviewing the DT-48 (any model)? i remember reading that he snapped it in half but dont recall a follow up...
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 6:57 PM Post #74 of 94
Quote:

Originally Posted by kukrisna /img/forum/go_quote.gif
x2 - btw did wcmcmanus ever get around to reviewing the DT-48 (any model)? i remember reading that he snapped it in half but dont recall a follow up...


Had he thrown out the broken pair? Why bother repairing if it breaks so easy anyway?
biggrin.gif
 
Apr 15, 2009 at 8:25 PM Post #75 of 94
It's true that these DT48s are weaker than owners have suggested (please, no more of that i-could-beat-burglars-up-with-them-and-run-them-over stuff), but build quality is a common and pervasive problem throughout current headphones, examples being the Sennheiser flagships (HD580/600/650) with headbands that are also prone to snapping when people try to bend them a bit and I've heard of some Ultrasone models with issues as well. Oh, and the high-end Denons with the cups just falling off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 5 (members: 0, guests: 5)
Back
Top