[Ahzari]

Quote:

Hi there!
 
I've just purchased Signature PRO from a local vendor. I've listened to it for like 20 hours. And I find that the highs are pretty loud (on par with Edition 8 or more). And it definitely lacks the bass - my Sennheiser HD 280 Pro has more bass then this headphone.
 
I don't know whether I'm used to Edition 8 (which I find a bit sibilant too, and the bass with ED8 is too loud for my ears) but the Signature Pro sound really cuts my ear. Have anyone experienced the same? Or just maybe my pair is defective?
 
Will appreciate any advice right now.

This was not my experience, I have about 100 hours on mine and they definitely do not lack bass, I actually thought their bass was even stronger than my D7000s on some tracks (and those are considered bass monsters). Even straight out of the box they had great bass, the burn in has just opened up the soundstage and improved separation, I want to wait to do my full review on the Sig Pros until I have about 200-250 hours (though I don't think it will change much from where it is now)..
 
The treble was a bit harsh straight out of the box, but that mellowed down really fast (just after 10 hours) and they are smooth at about 100 hours.
 

 

[drmind]

 
Quote:

Either something is wrong with yours or they need more burn-in time. I've never heard an Ultrasone has less bass than a Sennheiser, especially the HD 280 pro, which is significantly lacking in the bass.


 

I do not believe that HD280 is lacking the bass but it is definitely not the strongest I heard. From what I heard Signature PRO should have destroyed the HD280 in bass region. However it does not happening.
 
 
Quote:

1500 hours of burn-in? That's a new record.

Not quite - in ED8 thread one person burned it to 2000 hours and suggested everyone else to do so 

 
 
Quote:

FWIW, I find the Signature Pro to be LESS bright / sibilant / cutting than the Edition 8. I believe Gwarmi felt the same way as well. Perhaps your source is very bright? Not sure what else could account for differences there, aside from subjectivity in perception and different ears. I wouldn't be too concerned about having a defective pair.

 
The source is DX100 which is not bright - it's quite neutral. I tried it with iPhone and my laptop - it's all the same.

 
Quote:

You might want to get a better quality files. I tried them with 192kbps music, it hurts your ears. Later I tried with the lossless, It's totally different

I'm listening to ALAC and there're like 1700 absolutely different tracks in my playlist. There're electronic, pop, rock, classical, jazz and some other genres. I do not remember every single track to sound bright.

 
Quote:

I'm order Ibasso Dx100 .I want to use with Signature pro.Who can tell me it's good or not? Thanks ^^

Congratulations! I believe that the DX100 is the best portable DAP so far (in terms of sound quality). However I don't like the sound of my Signature PRO so I cannot tell any valuable information. But I believe that DX100 will deliver a good sound with every headphone you own or headphone you're going to purchase.
 
Thanks everyone! I forgot to mention that I listened to a demo unit 2 weeks ago and I didn't find it bright or lacking bass. Actually I thought there was plenty of bass and the highs were a little bit dim. That is why I preferred it to ED8 and choose to buy it. I'm concerned about my pair to be defective or something. I would've never bought a headphone that sounds like mine.
 
For now I have about 40-50 hours on them and they still sound bright.

 

[stuckonsound]

Are you eqing the HD280? Flat, I always found it weak on bass.

 

[stuckonsound]

I forgot to ask the classic question, do you have the cable twisted all the way into the headphone? Believe it or not, quite a few people who have reported weird response from an Ultrasone Pro series failed to get the cable all the way snug.

 

[Han Bao Quan]

Finally somebody who agrees with me
 
Quote:

Are you eqing the HD280? Flat, I always found it weak on bass.

 

 

[drmind]

Quote:

Are you eqing the HD280? Flat, I always found it weak on bass.

No' I'm not eqing it. I've used it for 4 years and thought it has flat bass, then I've got ED8 and thought that HD280 has even flatter bass than I thought. Now I have Signature Pro and I think that HD280 has a good bass comparing to it.
 
Quote:

I forgot to ask the classic question, do you have the cable twisted all the way into the headphone? Believe it or not, quite a few people who have reported weird response from an Ultrasone Pro series failed to get the cable all the way snug.

That was my first thought too, but unfortunately it's not the issue. I've twisted it as hard is it gets into.
 
Now it really frustrates me. The headphone for $130 has a better bass reproduction than a $1300 headphone. I'm going to go to service to repair it or if they tell me that this is the right sound, I'm going to return it to the vendor.

 

[HoShiZoRaa]

drmind  Thanks you ^^ I want to write more but My english not good hahaha^^
 
 

 

[raelamb]

Got a pair coming to me for delivery on Tuesday. Got them from Drew at Moon Audio and got them balanced with Black dragon. Was gonna wait a while but I've been so digging my PRO 900's that Drew balanced for me. I have never seen a headphone that has so remarkedly benefited from burn in. The bass gets cleaner and deeper and the hi's get more tamed every day.Can't wait to try the Sig PRO's

 

[Mortalcoil]

Congrats ..keep us posted with impressions.

 

[the fool]

All ultrasone higher end headphones require at least 1000 hours of burn in, whether it is pro900, pro2900, and edition series,so i would suggest you burn your signature pro more.

 

[Ashurei]

I really think that the headphone has a design flaw if it needs more than 50hrs burn in. (either physical or mental)
 
If you think a headphone needs a 1000hrs to burn in...I don't know what to say.

 

[murrays]

Quote:

I really think that the headphone has a design flaw if it needs more than 50hrs burn in. (either physical or mental)
 
If you think a headphone needs a 1000hrs to burn in...I don't know what to say.

One wonders when extended "burn-in" becomes "burn-out". 

On another note: what if the headphone starts out sounding subjectively good and "burn-in" makes it sound subjectively worse? 

Must "burn-in" always make it better?  (sorry - going a bit off topic there, but my Pro 750's did sound better after a few days from new).
 

 

[Ahzari]

Quote:

I really think that the headphone has a design flaw if it needs more than 50hrs burn in. (either physical or mental)
 
If you think a headphone needs a 1000hrs to burn in...I don't know what to say.

+1
 
exactly my thoughts...

 

[Ahzari]

Quote:

All ultrasone higher end headphones require at least 1000 hours of burn in, whether it is pro900, pro2900, and edition series,so i would suggest you burn your signature pro more.

Here is the problem I have with your comment. You state that all higher end ultrasones "require" at least 1000 hours. It would be nice to know where you are getting this information from... just in case, after reading your comment I read through the whole Ultrasone website and didn't find anything that matches what you said (actually nothing about burn in whatsoever). The way I see it, if it was such a necessity for these headphones to endure so many hours of burn in before they properly reach their potential, Ultrasone would either do it in house or provide some information for customers to do it themselves (the same way Grado and Woo Audio provide that for their headphones and amps). 
 
The only reason I felt I should reply to your comment is because I'm concerned someone that hasn't done their research will read your post and become discouraged from purchasing headphones that "require 1000 hours" because quite honestly if that was the case, I would have never purchased my Pro900, 2900, or Signature Pro. I wouldn't be caught dead waiting around for the headphones I just bought to burn in for 1000 hours (equivalent to about 42 days of non-stop burning in and I don't think any headphone company would ever deem that necessary).
 
From the hundreds of posts I have read about this topic and my own personal experience over the years I don't feel like anything over 100 hours produces an audible discernible difference.
 
The only thing I can think of is you meant to write 100 hours and accidentally added an extra "0" haha..

 

[MuppetFace]

Keep in mind you're reading the posts of someone with "the fool" as a username. Could be a troll post.
 
That being said, there's simply no consensus on whether burn-in is even real or not, let alone anything approximating an exact "requirement" of hours for certain headphones. It's as simple as that. Anything else is speculation. Sure, people's speculation should be respected if it's based on experience, but these are still opinions and NOT fact.
 
Here's my speculation, based on my experience: I've never observed burn-in myself. Now, I've certainly observed headphones changing in sound from one listen to another. However I've never been comfortable assigning an exact cause to this. It could just as easily be due to my changing moods, tastes, ear wax buildup, source material, position of the headphones, etc. In fact I still notice changes in the sound of headphones I've owned for years. Does that mean they're still burning in? I don't think so. It strikes me as a bit convenient that whatever someone's greivances with a particular headphone are, burn-in seems to solve. As if it were some sentience that knew what needed improvement. Find the bass too bloated? Burn-in tightens it. Find it too tight? Burn-in loosens it. Treble too bright? Burn-in tames it. Too dark? It brings it out. To me that seems like wish fulfillment. I've rarely seen a post where someone finds the bass to be acceptable, only to have the burn-in process make it worse. Why are the changes always for the better?
 
Here's a fact: we know that the components of a headphone or earphone degrade over time. Whether or not this physical degradation is responsible for a significant change in sound known as "burn-in" however is still unknown. I'd direct anyone curious to InnerFidelity and Tyll's article on the subject. In it, he measures headphones and he arrives at an interesting conclusion. He finds that there IS some change that occurs over time. However he also finds that the difference in sound is not as dramatic as some claim. It's a very subtle change, one that people will likely fail to detect in double-blind tests.