Audioquest DragonFly

If you’re like me and primarily use a laptop computer, you’ll know the trials of extracting great sound from your computer. In my case, the onboard sound is actually quite good, but it’s not exceptional and I like exceptional.

At home, the sound processing is handled by my Audio-gd NFB-5.2. On the road I used to use the Creative X-Fi HD USB, but as good as the X-Fi is, I had a couple of needs that it couldn’t quite meet. Firstly, it required a separate lead to connect so I ended up with boxes and cables everywhere. Secondly, it struggled to effectively drive my low-impedance IEMs like the Shure SE535 LEs and now my Unique Melody Miracles (review coming soon).

After much hunting, I finally found a DAC that I thought would meet all my needs. Does it? Read on to find out…

Overview

The DragonFly is a DAC and headphone amp created in the form factor of a full-size USB thumb drive. That means it is about 3-4cm long, around 1cm thick, and about 1.5cm wide. At that size I wouldn’t have expected particularly strong performance, but other reviews I read suggested otherwise.

The DF’s general specs are very competitive:

  • Sample rates:  44.1kHz – 96kHz
  • Minimum HP impedance:  12 ohms
  • Maximum power:  150mW

I was excited to see the 12 ohm minimum rating for the headphone impedance as it suggested that my 15.9 ohm UM Miracles would pair well with the Dragonfly. We’ll get to that shortly…

Design

DF with lightThe design of the DragonFly is simply brilliant. It’s tiny, requires no USB cables, feels solid and high quality, and works flawlessly in general terms. I was particularly pleased to note that it’s small enough to not obscure adjacent USB ports.The chassis of the dragonfly is coated in a nice soft-touch black paint and overall it feels very high quality.

A fun (and useful) feature of the DragonFly is its LED indicator light. The indicator lights up in different colours depending on the status of the sound feed and the sample rate being used. It’s red when there is no activity and then turns to green (44.1kHz), blue (48kHz), Yellow (88.2kHz), or magenta (96kHz). It’s kind of fun to see the light change between different tracks at different sample rates and it’s useful to see if your settings are correct (i.e. if you play a high sample rate track and the light stays green, you know you’re settings are causing the system to down-sample your music).

If I had to find one fault with the design of the DragonFly it’d be the separate cap. So far I’ve kept hold of it, but I can see it being lost far too easily and wonder if it would have been possible to have it somehow stay attached to the body of the DragonFly (e.g. with a short string so it hangs free when not in use, but doesn’t get lost). It’s a tiny gripe, but it would prevent having to be quite so careful to place the cap in the bag every time I uncork the DAC.

Functionality

The DragonFly works without any special drivers which is a nice plus in my eyes. I’ve tried it with ASIO4ALL and with WASAPI and it works perfectly with both. I’ve settled on WASAPI because it’s easier in my setup, but there is no significant difference I could find between the 2. Regardless of the output drivers, the DF also handles all supported sample rates equally well with no hiccups.

DF PackagingAnother nice piece of functionality with the DF is that it’s happy driving moderate impedance IEMs like the Re272s and V-Sonic GR07s as well as high impedance cans like the HD650s, but it can also be paired with a separate amp using the DF’s 3.5mm jack as a line-out. To do this, Audioquest recommend turning the computer / DF volume to full, but I’ve found it can be used perfectly well as a variable line-out.

When pairing with amplifiers like the Tralucent T1, which has very high gain, the variable output of the DF is a godsend. You can reign in the volume on the DF so you can use a better range of attenuation on the amplifier’s volume pot.

In terms of functionality, there’s really nothing lacking in the DragonFly – it does what it does flawlessly in terms of straight-forward functionality.

Sound Quality

Where the rubber meets the road… a DAC and amp is only ever as good as it sounds and the DragonFly sounds very good, but perhaps not as exceptional as I’d hoped. I think my expectations were a touch unfair though so read on and I’ll explain in full.

In terms of basic sound quality, the DragonFly is excellent. It creates plenty of space in the soundstage, good placement of the sound image and nice response across all frequencies without any hint of colouration.

I’ve tested it with a number of devices including:

  • IEMs ranging from 15.9 ohms to 50 ohms
  • Headphones ranging from 32 ohms to 300 ohms
  • Active speakers
  • Portable amplifier

In all but one case, the DragonFly sounded great. Perhaps not quite as good as the Audio-gd NFB-5.2, but that’s to be expected when comparing a USB powered device to a mains powered device.

Line-Out Performance

The DragonFly works extremely well as a simple DAC with line-out. The sound provided to active speakers or a separate amplifier is clean, spacious and sweet. Being able to use the computer’s volume control as a variable line-out is a definite bonus too.

Headphone Performance

The output power of the DragonFly is simply amazing! The Creative X-Fi HD USB was just able to drive the 75 ohm Utrasone HFI-680s to a good listening level, but was underwhelming with the Sennheiser HD650s. The DragonFly manages to drive the HD650s to full listening volumes while still having plenty of room to spare in the volume adjustment range.

Of course, it doesn’t have quite the dynamics of a mains powered desktop amp, but you can’t expect that from USB power. As it stands, it’s the best USB powered device I’ve heard when driving power-hungry headphones.

IEM Performance

If you thought there was a “but” coming, you’re unfortunately right. The DragonFly maintains sweet sound on the 20 ohm Re272s and 50 ohm GR07s, but sounds a bit harsh with the 15.9 ohm Unique Melody Miracles.

DF BoxI expected better performance at low impedance due to the 12 ohm minimum rating published on the DragonFly’s box, but while it probably can handle 12 ohms, it won’t be with optimum sound quality.

I found a massive jump in sound quality by feeding the DragonFly’s line-out into the Tralucent T1 amp* before passing it onto the Miracles. You’d expect some improvement with a dedicated amplifier, but this jump was too great to be the amp’s prowess alone. To my ears, the DragonFly just doesn’t pair well with loads below about 20 ohms. That’s a shame to be sure, but given the distinct lack of a USB DAC/amp with 16 ohm prowess (from what I’ve seen and heard so far), I have resigned myself to using the DragonFly with the T1 if I want to listen to the Miracles from my laptop. For everything else, a direct connection to the DragonFly provides outstanding quality sound for a USB device.

* Obviously, the power of an amplifier isn’t required for low impedance IEMs like the Miracles, but a good amplifier will offer better control over the transducers in a low impedance IEM setup and will therefore provide better, smoother sound.

Interestingly, measurements conducted by Stereophile.com show the DragonFly has very low output impedance (around 0.65 ohms) which would normally indicate a good match with devices in the 16 ohm range so I am not entirely sure why the DragonFly doesn’t excel with the Miracles.

Summary

All-in-all the DragonFly is a brilliant piece of kit. For it’s size it is unbelievably powerful and sounds fantastic. It offers all of the processing features of more expensive desktop DACs (except support for 192kHz sample rates which few if any USB devices offer) at a relatively low price and with incredible portability.

At around $200-250 depending on your location, the DragonFly is fantastic value and its portability and compact design make it a winner in my book. It won’t outperform top-end DACs or separate, dedicated amps, but it’s the combination of size, functionality and very good performance that makes this a worthwhile purchase.

Perhaps don’t buy it to directly drive low impedance IEMs, but do buy it to connect to higher impedance ear / headphones, active speakers, and amplifiers.

$300 Headphones at a Glance

I had a great afternoon today, courtesy of the team at Addicted to Audio (www.addictedtoaudio.com.au) I spent about an hour and a half in their audition room checking out a bunch of closed style headphones for around $300. I’m not going to try to give you a full-blown review for all of them, but thought a little description of each pair might be helpful. Here goes…

Shure SRH840 (approx. $200)

Shure SRH840

Having read lots of good things about the 840s, I came in with them high on my shortlist and they didn’t disappoint. The 840s have a warm, but detailed and balanced sound. They’re very easy to listen too, but not boring. Of all the phones I listened to today, the 840s probably had the sweetest midrange. The sound of rim-shots (when the drum stick is used against the metal rim of a drum) sound very warm and woody – just like they should.

Pros: The 840s are easy to drive and ran perfectly from iPod and laptop. They’re also comfortable on the head and have good padding all around.

Cons: My only real issue with these phones is the small cable running outside of the body of the headphones. Just about each cup, a small cable comes out of the housing and then loops back into the cup. This is obviously to allow for adjustment, but leaves a potentially fragile piece of the headphones exposed to accidental damage.

Verdict: These are still very much on my mind and may yet be my final choice given they are so easy to drive. They’re not as exciting to listen to as the Ultrasones, but they are more comfortable and have a beautiful smooth sound signature while still being detailed and crisp. They’re also a great deal at just under $200.

Ultrasone HFI 580 (approx. $250)

Ultrasone HFI 580

I knew nothing about the 580s going into this afternoon, but considered them because of their price and the fact that they’re easier to drive than the 680s. I was told that they are more bass oriented than the 680s, but can’t say that I was overly aware of that.

Having already listened to some other headphones, the 580s weren’t as good and therefore left the shortlist fairly quickly. That said, they’re a very capable headphone and would definitely suit a lot of people, but I like a bit of extra high-end sparkle and detail. It’s a very subtle gap in the 580’s sound signature and it took direct comparisons to realise that the 680s gave me the sparkle that the 580s lacked – it’s very minor and those who prefer a slightly warmer sound will definitely like the 580s.

Pros: The soundstage is huge (for closed headphones) and the sound is lively, detailed and exciting.

Cons: Although solid, the construction is a bit plastic and they’re not as comfortable as some comparable headphones.

Verdict: The HFI 580s are off my shortlist, but only because they were outdone by their senior sibling, the 680s and that was only by a hair. They’re a great headphone with balanced sound, solid bass and a smooth, slightly less bright signature than some others.

Ultrasone HFI 680 (approx. $300)

Ultrasone HFI 680

The 680s were high on my shortlist after reading plenty of good things. They didn’t dissapoint. Plenty of punch, plenty of detail and that awesome Ultrasone soundstage. It’s important to note that the 680s really do need amplification. I listened to the Shure SRH840 and the Ultrasone HFI 680 side-by-side and alternated between them across a variety of music. Initially, I was listening through a dedicated headphone amp, but soon moved over to my iPod and then laptop so I could hear some music I was more familiar with. I wasn’t using amplification at this stage and started to be amazed at the difference between the SRH840s and the HFI 680s. At first I put it down to the music selection, but soon realised it was amplification. Once an amp was added, the 680s once again edged ahead of the 840s in terms of their lively detail and punchy presence.

Pros: Punchy, lively sound in a great big soundstage.

Cons:
As per the whole HFI range, the comfort isn’t as good as some alternatives and the build quality isn’t spectacular. Also, the significant difference between amped and un-amped performance means an amp is a must.

Verdict:
A great headphone for the dollars. I listened to some $1000+ phones today and kept coming back to the fact that I couldn’t justify the extra for the type of listening I do and for the minimal difference in sound. I’m not suggesting the more expensive headphones aren’t better, but the 680s do such a great job across the board that they’re ahead of most other closed cans in terms of bang-for-buck.
I’d highly recommend a listen to these if you have a device that will drive them effectively. I’m personally looking at something like a Nu Force uDAC-2 (approx. $200), but it takes the 680s up to around $500.

Audio Technica ATH-A900
(approx. $250)

Audio Technica ATH-A900

As a massive fan of the open style ATH-AD900s, it made sense to listen to their closed equivalent, the A900s. I’d heard that they have a “darker” sound, but didn’t yet know exactly what that meant – I had my theories, but it’s a very subjective term. I know understand exactly what those people meant. The top-end and bottom-end are just like the AD900s – crisp, detailed and awesome, but then came vocals… The closed design of the A900s make the mid-range sound very closed-in. The mid-range and vocals were muffled and crowded – not very enjoyable.

Pros: Beautifully made and insanely comfortable (like all similar style Audio Technicas with their 3D fitting system)

Cons:
The mid-range is so muffled and crowded that it completely smothers the rest of the sound – such a shame.

Verdict:
There are much better options out there for the price. I would take the Shure SRH840s anytime over the A900s.

Beyer-Dynamic T50p
(approx. $300)

Beyer-Dynamic T50p

I had seen these online, but knew little about them other than funky looks and a good, reliable brand. Straight out of the box they were the most impressive in terms of build quality and style of all the phones listed in this “At a Glance”. The only comparable quality of build is the Audio Technicas, but the T50ps are funkier in style (but that’s also a matter of taste).

Before talking about the sound of these it’s important to note that they were straight out of the box with no burn-in or general play time whatsoever so the following description needs to be taken with a grain of salt as it were…

The T50ps had an interesting sound signature. While detailed and neutral, there was something I couldn’t put my finger on at first, but after a few tracks I think the mid-range is a bit too forward and the top-end not quite forward enough. The bass is sublime for a small on-ear headphone. It’s tight, but with plenty of mass and presence and this continues up into the mids, but somewhere that outstanding start falls away. The T50ps reminded me of the AKG Q460 headphones which I’ll be reviewing very soon. They’re probably a touch better than the Q460s, but still lack a little sparkle at the top-end.

Pros:
They’re sexy, made of metal (i.e. high quality) and have a quality sound if you like warm, mellow signatures.

Cons:
The lack of sparkle at the top-end was a deal-breaker for me, but that was the only issue I could find so if you like the sound signature you’ll love these phones!

Verdict:
Probably a great option for some depending on your music and sound tastes. I’d love to own a pair from a design and quality point of view, but just not sure if I can justify it when I don’t like the sound style. That said, I haven’t had a chance to try them with slightly boosted treble.

At a Glance Overview

After plenty of listening and switching between sources and music tracks, I definitely gravitated towards 2 options. The Shure SRH840s and the Ultrasone HFI 680s were clearly the best of the bunch. For non-amplified use I think the Shures are a winner. For amplified use, the Ultrasones take a slight lead. The tricky thing now is that I haven’t yet auditioned the Ultrasone HFI 780s, but will do so before purchasing because they’re easier to drive from a non-amplified source. I’ll keep you posted…

When Branding Meets Audio – Not Always a Good Mix

The other day I was in an electronics retailer that has a dedicated headphone room with plenty of models for demo. It’s a great idea, but I was disappointed with the lack of quality in their range. However, they were stocking a range I hadn’t seen before – House of Marley. I was instantly interested because of the status and legacy of Bob Marley, but I was equally wary because of my past experiences with musician branded headphones. Just because a musician’s name is used, it doesn’t mean the sound quality is top notch.

I was curious to check out the Marley range and listened to 3 models, the Destiny TTR, the Stir It Up and the Exodus. This isn’t a full review of any of them, but some initial impressions that might help.

Destiny TTR

House of Marley: Destiny TTR

My first impression of these phones was “wow!” Picking these up, they’re beautifully made with high quality metals and great design touches like the rasta red/green/yellow around the edge. The sound was punchy, the bass was tight and solid, but not overpowering and the detail was surprisingly good.

The TTRs are an active headphone – that little bezel you can see on the side of the phones is actually an on/off switch for the active amplification and noise cancellation circuit. The active style is what gives these phones their great sound signature and presence, but it also created the 2 issues that caused me to walk away a little unsatisfied.

Issue 1: In moments of silence I could hear a definite buzz from the circuit. I can’t confirm if the buzz was from the in-store source hookup or if it was the headphones themselves. If you’re looking at these headphones, just do a check with your music player plugged in, but the volume very low. If you can hear a buzz you might want to explore other options.

Issue 2: This is not a fault of the TTRs alone, but more a symptom of active noise cancellation. In order to stop us hearing the world around us, cancellation circuits use a microphone to capture the outside sounds and pump their exact opposite directly into our ears. As you know, -3 + 3 = 0 so the result we hear is nothing (or close to nothing), but that doesn’t mean there’s no sound happening. To create the pseudo-silence, the headphones are actually creating a certain level of sound pressure and this is my issue. If you have no music playing and switch the TTRs on and off you can feel a massive change in the pressure applied to your ears. For me, this pressure becomes fatiguing in time and I find the overall experience quite uncomfortable. I would choose a good pair of in-ear (noise isolating) earphones any day over noise cancellation.

Summary: As I said, this isn’t a full review, but the TTRs had a great sound signature and were fun to listen to across a range of music. They aren’t audiophile level by any stretch, but if you’re looking for good sound in a noise-cancelling headphone that looks awesome and is beautifully built then the TTRs could be just right. (Don’t forget to check for that buzz before you buy.)

Stir It Up

House of Marley: Stir it Up

Of all the Marley range, these were the ones I wanted to love. What looks yellow in the picture here is actually a beautiful real wood trim on each earphone cup. They feel like high quality headphones and they fit beautifully – comfortable with a good seal over the ear. Unfortunately the sound totally let me down. The mids were too forward and the sound felt muffled and stifled. The bass was solid, but there was just not enough treble detail and power to cut through the “mud”.

These are probably a great headphone for certain music styles where the high end isn’t a feature (R&B, hip hop, etc.), but I didn’t have time to test this specifically so give them a listen if you like those styles and please let me know your thoughts.

Summary: Great design and build quality, but disappointing sound signature. Not enough treble for the sound to come alive.

Exodus

House of Marley: Exodus

The Exodus phones were my last stop in the audition process because I wasn’t as much a fan of their design. That said, they’re still cooler than most other headphones I’ve seen. The top headband is wood with a second soft leather band that sits on your head. So far so good, but then the cups are covered in leather with a soft fabric over the hole to the drivers and here-in lies the problem.

When I put these headphones on, there was a slight bit of fiddling required to get the right stretch from the elasticised headband, but once that was adjusted correctly it was fine. What wasn’t fine was the feeling of the cups against my ear. The opening to the drivers has a rough edge. The leather’s soft so it’s not scratchy or anything, but I found the sensation of the flat surface against my ear was quite uncomfortable. I felt like the headphones weren’t fitted properly and I kept wanting to adjust them.

Another issue I had was that straight out of the sealed box there was a fault in the left earphone. There was some sound coming from the left, but not much. It sounded like the effect created if the headphone jack isn’t quite plugged in properly. All of that’s unfortunate, because it sounded like the sound quality would have been quite nice otherwise.

Based on the right side only (and a strange distant echo from the left) it seemed like the Exodus headphones have a really balanced sound with nice detail, but a smooth signature overall. The bass was still punchy and solid, but there didn’t seem to be any of the muddiness of the Stir It Up model.

Overall: These are probably worth checking out if you’re after a funky pair of phones with a good balanced sound, but make sure you try them on before you buy them. The ear cup design might be comfortable for some, but it wasn’t for me. Also, be aware of the cable quality. It may be that the fault I experienced is a sign of things to come in the life of these headphones. It could be a one off fault or it could be that the cable design is the weak link in the toughness of these phones.

Audio Technica ATH-AD900 Review

Audio Technica ATH-AD900 open style headphones

Audio Technica ATH-AD900 open style headphones

The ATH-AD900s are a well-known headphone made in Japan. They’re recognised as a clean, accurate and possibly under-priced headphone. I very recently purchased a pair and they’ve really opened my eyes in a number of ways.

On first listen, the AD900s sounded a bit “thin” for my liking. I’m definitely not a bass-head, but I was worried I would miss the presence of a solid kick in the bass. As I’ve listened to the AD900s more and more I’ve actually found that I’m loving the clean and possibly slightly understated bass from these phones.

In my article about compressed audio I discussed the phenomenon of “masking”. Masking is what happens when a loud sound prevents us from hearing a quiet sound. I’d never thought about it in relation to speakers or headphones before, but I’m starting to think it plays a part in the detail of any reproduction device. I am hearing details in music with the AD900s that I’ve never heard through other high quality speakers and phones I’ve used. That’s not to say the AD900s are the best phones on the planet, but they are definitely very, very good. What makes them so good is their balance. Because the different frequencies are so nicely balanced, the bass doesn’t overshadow the mids and treble and vice versa. There’s no harshness in the top end to get in the way of the rest of the music and the vocals don’t jump out over and above the instrumentation. Everything is exactly where it belongs.

It’s probably important to note that the AD900s are an open style headphone which means that even though they cover your whole ear, they don’t cut out any sound from the world around you. It also means that people around you can hear what you’re listening to pretty clearly so they’re not a good choice for open offices or situations where others don’t want to hear your music.

Let’s look at the individual characteristics of the headphones:

Quick Specs

Speaker Driver : 53mm
Frequency Range : 5 – 35,000Hz
Power Handling : 700mW
Impedance : 35 ohms

Bass

Attack: The attack from the AD900s is beautiful, but understated. They’re a very sensitive earphone with a relatively high impedance which makes them very responsive (a bit like a powerful sports car with excellent breaks). They go fast when needed and stop just as quickly. The result to your ears is accuracy and energy. The AD900s sound exciting and lively at all frequencies and this means a good attack in the bass. During Wayman Tisdale’s “Take the Lord Along with You”, the bass is crisp and sharp with plenty of detail. There’s no muddiness or lag in the bass – it’s agile. However, there will be a lack of punch for some people and this means you don’t feel as much of the attack as you might like. The AD900s are probably more accurate than some of the more exciting earphones around, but that does mean they lack the up-front excitement created by the feeling of some good, hard-hitting bass.

Rating: 7.5 / 10

Mass: As you’ve probably already gathered, this could be the one weak point of the AD900s if you like bass, but this is where audio becomes such a personal affair. I love the fact that the AD900s are so realistic. If a track was recorded with lots of bass, the AD900s reproduce it, but they also shine a very bright light on tracks recorded without much bass. The result can be a slightly thin-sounding experience. Even though that’s more a reflection of the recording and engineering of the track, many headphones will lend a little extra bass to music and cover these shortcomings.

I tried listening to “Halftime” by Nas and there’s plenty of bass, but it’s not thumping on my eardrums like an angry neighbour. It’s very present, but not overpowering and I know some people enjoy the hard-hitting thump.

Rating: 5 / 10

Vocals / Mids

It’s almost difficult to review the mids and vocals from the AD900s because they’re exactly what they should be and perfectly balanced with everything else. They don’t stick out as a flat spot or a highlight. The mids and vocals are smooth, realistic and perfectly placed within the overall musical picture. There’s really nothing to report (in a good way) – they’re perfect.

Rating: 8.5 / 10

Detail

Wow. If only I could give them a 12 out of 10. Detail is the AD900’s party trick. Their accuracy and agility is simply awesome so you hear every tiny detail in all of your music. Even driven straight from an iPod (5th Generation), the accuracy is outstanding. The iPod has to run at nearly 100% volume, but there’s still a little headroom to turn it up if necessary and the quality is still excellent.

When listening to “Learn to Love” by Harry Connick, Jr. there are some minor riffs and fills from the backing orchestra and a Hammond organ. On other earphones I’ve used, these riffs tend to get lost in the mix, but on the AD900s you can hear even the subtlest textures and details within the backing instrumentation – it’s quite an experience.

One of the best things about the level of detail the AD900s provide is that the music is exciting and energetic. There are so many different sounds and textures going on that you can really explore the music’s twists and turns. Even tracks you used to find boring can surprise you with a new detail or texture you’ve never heard before. This is true in all music, but it’s particularly noticeable in classical music. Listening to “Sarasate: Zigeunerweisen, Op.20” and “Capriccio Italien Op. 45” is quite amazing as you hear every pluck and pop and squeak from every instrument in the orchestra. I’m not a classical fan as such, but I love hearing the odd orchestral track just to experience all the textures and details I can hear through the AD900s.

Rating: 8.9 / 10

Staging

Staging was what initially attracted me to the AD900s. Other reviews I’d read suggested that the AD900s offered a broad and detailed soundstage and they really do. If you close your eyes while listening to a well recorded piece of music, the sound seems to come from a space outside of the confines of your head and the headphones. All that space also means that it’s easy to separate where different sounds are coming from.

I use Capriccio Italien Op. 45 to test for staging and placement of sounds because there are lots of quiet moments with individual groups in the orchestra playing. The AD900s paint a perfect picture of the orchestra. You can hear exactly where the horn section is placed and you can hear that they’re further away from you than the strings. The french horns are slightly to the right while the oboes and clarinets are more centred, but still slightly to the left. The detail is beautifully clear. I have heard headphones with slightly better staging (like the Ultrasone Edition 8s), but the AD900s are still extremely good, especially for the price.

Rating: 8.5 / 10

Overall

For around $300 you’ll have a very hard time finding a better pair of headphones in terms of accuracy, staging and comfort. I regularly wear these headphones all day (literally) and actually miss them when I take them off because they are SO comfortable. I have a shaved head so there’s no hair to add padding for headphones and most become uncomfortable in time, but the AD900s are hands-down the most comfortable thing I’ve ever worn on my head (including hats and beanies)!

If you love bass from a variety of music, don’t jump at the AD900s until you’ve had a good listen to a range of tracks to see if the “realistic” bass is enough for you. If accuracy, detail and clarity is your thing, do yourself a favour and check these out. If you’re not sure what you like you should definitely give the AD900s a try, but make sure you listen to them for a little while on a range of tracks before making your mind up. Most of us aren’t used to the kind of unbiased sound they give and you may feel a little underwhelmed at first, but give them some time, close your eyes and explore the music a bit – you might be surprised.

All-in-all I just love these headphones and often find myself turning to these instead of high quality speaker setups. I love the accuracy, detail and intimacy of the sound. If you’re buying headphones and have around $300 to spend you should definitely check these out. Even if you’re spending significantly more than $300, take a listen to the ATH-AD900s because they will embarrass many more expensive models.

Overall Rating: 7 / 10

Additional Note: The model below the AD900s is the ATH-AD700 and although Audio Technica completely missed the mark on the colour scheme (purple and gold), they’re an excellent headphone. There is absolutely no doubt that the AD900s are significantly better and are worth the extra $$$. The build quality and sound quality are both upgraded on the AD900s, but check out the AD700s if the AD900s are more than you want to spend.