CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS

Lobby => Headphone Measurements => Topic started by: Marvey on April 16, 2012, 07:28:10 PM

Title: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: Marvey on April 16, 2012, 07:28:10 PM
DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots

As many of us have suspected, no QC issues with the "classic" line.
(http://www.changstar.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=221.0;attach=846;image)

As usual, note CSDs start from 500Hz. Floor set to -36db. These confirm subjective impressions of flat midrange and good behavior - not too much ringing. Just a lot of treble. Best to EQ it down since EQ will actually work on this headphone.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: gurubhai on April 16, 2012, 07:40:52 PM
Would higher output impedance help?
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: Marvey on April 16, 2012, 07:58:20 PM
If the impedance graph has anywhere near the same shape as the 600ohm version, probably not. Maybe more mid-bass and a very slight increase in the last octave.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: ocswing on April 17, 2012, 06:56:29 PM
If the impedance graph has anywhere near the same shape as the 600ohm version, probably not. Maybe more mid-bass and a very slight increase in the last octave.

I do have the 600ohm version I can send in if people are interested in seeing if they measure differently at all. I don't really listen to it too much anymore. A little congested overall, and bass is slightly loose to me.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: fishski13 on April 18, 2012, 03:40:20 AM
i really enjoyed my time with the dt990/600.  i agree, it's a bit spot-lit in the treble and a bit warm in the bass, but nails the dynamics pretty well.  the tone was a bit too dry for my tastes over time.   
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: Marvey on April 20, 2012, 04:38:16 AM
I fail to see how the T1 is better than this headphone though. This headphone is EQ'able. The T1 not so much so.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: n3rdling on April 20, 2012, 05:48:56 PM
It's better because it's more expensive  :P
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: rhythmdevils on April 20, 2012, 06:45:45 PM
and it's assembled by guys in white lab coats!!!  And has sexy metal stuff inside to boot!!!
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: shipsupt on April 20, 2012, 08:03:55 PM
I haven't listened to my 990's in ages to really compare... but going on memory the two areas the T1 edges it out is in detail retrieval and sound stage.

Not that this would make them better headphones...

Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: anetode on May 03, 2012, 02:11:45 AM
The DT990 beats the T1 in bass and comfort (clamping/earpads). And fun.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: ultrabike on May 03, 2012, 05:33:18 AM
Today I was supposed to meet a very "motivated" buyer in Anaheim Hills. Waited for the dude for 45 min, called him twice (didn't pick up), and in the end gave up on him... I'm so keeping my DT990s! I'll call it the fun-phone, or maybe my reminder.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: ocswing on May 03, 2012, 05:46:39 AM
Today I was supposed to meet a very "motivated" buyer in Anaheim Hills. Waited for the dude for 45 min, called him twice (didn't pick up), and in the end gave up on him... I'm so keeping my DT990s! I'll call it the fun-phone, or maybe my reminder.

Heh, that's my neck of the woods. Thinking about selling my DT990s as well.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: rhythmdevils on May 06, 2012, 06:26:16 PM
It's interesting how similar the FR of the T70p is, it's got a very similar broad treble boost.  Except the T70p has a lot more resonance issues. 

You should post these on head-fi right below the T70p graph.   8)
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: RexAeterna on May 06, 2012, 10:30:38 PM
i forgot about these. they defiantly look bright. i can understand ''bit'' of a peak from 14k to around 18k with little slight dip at 20k to help headphone achieve good air response, but i think bump from around 8k-10k is where i think i would find annoyance and should be dipped a bit there in that range to sound less sibilant/bright with certain female vocals and most cymbals/hi-hats.

the CSD graphs look good though.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: ultrabike on May 06, 2012, 11:03:00 PM
One thing about the DT990 is that while very bright, I do not experience sibilant issues at all. Really the only problem I could find in my listening sessions was brightness. I have not tried the Tesla line, but from what I've read, it seems I'm not missing much in terms of quality.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: RexAeterna on May 07, 2012, 02:06:42 AM
One thing about the DT990 is that while very bright, I do not experience sibilant issues at all. Really the only problem I could find in my listening sessions was brightness. I have not tried the Tesla line, but from what I've read, it seems I'm not missing much in terms of quality.

you could be right. never heard them myself so i can't say. just some headphones is a problem i meant and was just saying. didn't mean to seem to indicate the 990's are. my fault if i did.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: ultrabike on May 07, 2012, 02:19:28 AM
One thing about the DT990 is that while very bright, I do not experience sibilant issues at all. Really the only problem I could find in my listening sessions was brightness. I have not tried the Tesla line, but from what I've read, it seems I'm not missing much in terms of quality.

you could be right. never heard them myself so i can't say. just some headphones is a problem i meant and was just saying. didn't mean to seem to indicate the 990's are. my fault if i did.

:) Nah dude, you didn't. Also, you are not missing much about the DT990, there are definitively much better cans out there.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: briskly on May 07, 2012, 03:36:45 AM
With any luck, the DT990 will be given the boot and be replaced by the T90, just like they did to the DT770 and the T70. Go Tesla!  ;)
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: ultrabike on May 07, 2012, 03:48:51 AM
With the mother of all FR curve smiles. With a sensitivity of 200 dB. Also known as the T90 hearing terminator.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: SanjiWatsuki on June 04, 2012, 09:02:08 PM
Are these measurements based on the 250 ohm Premium or the 250 ohm Pro lines?
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: ultrabike on June 04, 2012, 11:28:41 PM
The DT990-250 is from the Pro line.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: donunus on June 05, 2012, 12:43:48 AM
Just want to say that the dt990-32 ohm that I used to own gave me tinnitus when i listened to them for over a few seconds, It's not even funny. They should put a warning label on them saying that these headphones are for people that want to test if they have ears made of steel.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: Marvey on June 05, 2012, 01:38:52 AM
Amazingly the DT990-600 were very nice!
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: donunus on June 05, 2012, 02:42:45 AM
I've heard that too. The 32 ohm that I had was supposedly even brighter than the 250 ohm though hehehe.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: ultrabike on June 05, 2012, 05:50:53 AM
I occurred to me that one other possible explanation as to why the Valhalla sounded so good with the DT990-600 ohms is the output impedance from the amp. Schiit's website (about Valhalla tab) mentions that the amp was specifically designed for headphones in the 32-600 ohm input impedance range. They go as far as to specifically mention the Beyers 600 ohm and Senns 300 ohm cans. They discourage using the Valhalla with low efficiency, low impedance (probably flat impedance as well) orthodynamic cans such as Audeze's and HiFiMan's as well (Asgard recommended for those). It also probably helps that the Valhalla is a tube class-A amp.

I remember Purrin showed that relatively high output impedance amps can change sound signature of cans with peaky impedance. Both the Beyer and the Senn have a peaky impedance (Senns probably a little more so). Maybe the impedance of the amp is helping warm things up for the Beyer. I don't know about the mid-range though.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: maverickronin on June 05, 2012, 06:16:50 AM
Amazingly the DT990-600 were very nice!

After some EQ anyway.

They tend to make guitars sound too shrill and high-pitched.  The soundstage and bass is great for movies as well.  OTOH they make Kugi lolis amazingly painful.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rie_Kugimiya

As soon as Shana opened her mouth I knew they were going back.

Of course that assumes the ones I had are anything like the ones you heard.  The 880s and 990s seem to be more consistent but this is Beyer we're talking about.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: Marvey on June 05, 2012, 02:43:12 PM
Valhalla Z out is high at 20 ohms. The DT990-600 impedance curve is high, but not really that screwy (slight broad bump centered at 100Hz and leveling off by 1k), so there shouldn't be a major change in FR. However, small changes over such a wide range are usually noticeable.

There's no doubt there was some tube action smoothing out the treble edge. That amp sounded much different from all the others: Asgard, Lyr, Mjolnir. I wondering if a little negative feedback would make the Valhalla sound better.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: transparent201 on December 28, 2014, 10:06:18 PM
My eq settings for DT 990 pro 250 Ohm(bought in ~2008). EqualizerAPO(free) or similar software/hardware needed. PK=Parametric EQ:

Filter  1: ON  PK       Fc     403 Hz  Gain  -6,7 dB  Q  1,00
Filter  2: OFF  PK       Fc   4.654 Hz  Gain  18,0 dB  Q  3,04
Filter  3: ON  PK       Fc   1.527 Hz  Gain   5,9 dB  Q  1,03
Filter  4: ON  PK       Fc   7.025 Hz  Gain  -6,7 dB  Q  1,79
Filter  5: ON  PK       Fc     730 Hz  Gain   9,4 dB  Q  3,06
Filter  6: ON  PK       Fc   2.302 Hz  Gain  -3,8 dB  Q  2,34
Filter  7: ON  PK       Fc     102 Hz  Gain  -3,1 dB  Q  2,00
Filter  8: ON  PK       Fc     164 Hz  Gain  -3,0 dB  Q  2,00
Filter  9: ON  PK       Fc    66,0 Hz  Gain  -2,9 dB  Q  2,00
Filter 10: ON  PK       Fc    43,6 Hz  Gain  -2,7 dB  Q  2,00
Filter 11: ON  PK       Fc   5.159 Hz  Gain  -8,2 dB  Q  6,39
Filter 12: ON  PK       Fc     953 Hz  Gain   4,1 dB  Q  3,45
Filter 13: ON  PK       Fc     456 Hz  Gain   4,5 dB  Q  4,97
Filter 14: ON  PK       Fc   5.695 Hz  Gain  -4,4 dB  Q  4,89
Filter 15: ON  PK       Fc   3.959 Hz  Gain  -4,9 dB  Q  5,45
Filter 16: ON  PK       Fc    31,2 Hz  Gain  -2,1 dB  Q  2,48
Filter 17: ON  PK       Fc     648 Hz  Gain   3,3 dB  Q  4,69
Filter 18: ON  PK       Fc   4.307 Hz  Gain  -4,3 dB  Q 12,57
Filter 19: ON  PK       Fc     578 Hz  Gain  -1,8 dB  Q 13,25
Filter 20: ON  PK       Fc     557 Hz  Gain   0,5 dB  Q  4,95

Filter 21: ON  HS       Fc   6.000 Hz  Gain   3,0 dB

Automatically generated settings(REW) except for filter 21.
I consider this (seemingly weird)result as more accurate than stock HD650.
At first I thought it was placebo. But after many hours of listening to almost anything(including dolby headphone material) I still prefer this sound tonally(although there seems to be a little sibilance around 10Khz, because the correction was limited up to 8Khz). Main improvements include clearer/more present mids, less boomy midbass and very low fatigue(an indicator of good sound in my books).
I would like to hear other owners' opinions.
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: Skylark on February 25, 2015, 01:12:30 PM
Just want to say that the dt990-32 ohm that I used to own gave me tinnitus when i listened to them for over a few seconds, It's not even funny. They should put a warning label on them saying that these headphones are for people that want to test if they have ears made of steel.

Sorry I know this is a bit of an old thread but I experience this exact tinnitus thing with my DT880 250's, after a short listening session they give me serious tinnitus which seems to last for hours afterwards, I find the trebles very piercing. I have the option to rather get DT990 600's will they be smoother on the treble side that the DT880 250?
Title: Re: DT990-250 Frequency Response and CSD Waterfall Plots
Post by: Solderdude on March 18, 2015, 03:45:58 PM
(https://diyaudioheaven.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/dt990-pro-250.jpg?w=327&h=450)

My take on the DT990 Pro in 250Ω impedance.

This one has black velours pads, these pads measure exactly the same as the grey DT990 pads.
These headphones are very comfortable and have a decent clamping force, slightly higher than the edition version.

The cable for the Pro version is partly curled and rigid. Not ideal when using it on the go but it is not intended for that anyway.
The coiled cable is better suited for studio work. The plug is 3.5mm and comes with a 6.3mm adapter.

Below the frequency response of the DT990Pro (left, right):

(https://diyaudioheaven.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/dt990-250-fr.png?w=921&h=570)

This represents pretty well how it sounds. It is U-shaped and has lots of 'warmth' and is bassy. It also has a LOT of treble energy up top.

Below the CSD of the stock DT990Pro - 250 (left, right) It is actually pretty decent and doesn't show any long lived resonances that may be problematic.

(https://diyaudioheaven.files.wordpress.com/2013/03/dt990-csd.png?w=921&h=446)