dalethorn 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 woo hoo if dale listens to it via iphone. a dac would be a greater combo o2 + odac time to save up for the odac I might get a combo ODAC plus O2 someday, but in the meantime I now have iStreamer, Headstreamer, Audioengine D1, FiiO E17, and Dragonfly. So all of these are good for improved detail and less distortion. I think the E17 would probably do good with the DT48. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nekatrall 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) hehe too much poison but nwavguy poison too strong dragonfly? havent heard of tt one b4 Edited July 12, 2012 by nekatrall Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dalethorn 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 hehe too much poison but nwavguy poison too strong. dragonfly? havent heard of tt one b4 http://www.audioquest.com/usb_digital_anal...r/dragonfly-dac Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maniacal71 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) Switching from the DT48A to the DT48S, immediately unveiled more details. edit, song tested, Carly Rae Jepson - Call me maybe. Wonderfully mastered track imho. Thanks to Nekatrall for that sumptuous buffet treat. Edited July 12, 2012 by Maniacal71 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nekatrall 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) hahaha dale - yup i say it sounded interestingly gd in the reviews for the dragonfly Maniacal71 - ya its really madness dt48a i tot was already at the top of the game but dt48s is a totally step up hearing the guitar strings which i did not know even existed the test track as stated call me maybe at first i listened using the dt48a, hmm ya ok much like my dt48a (courtesy of dalethorn) then maniacal passed me his dt48s, no settings was changed but somehow everything was softer so naturally i turned up the volume, i was shocked there was even more details that can be heard ....guitar strings near the background dt48 series i have to say is just epic thanks maniacal for ur sudden appearance with loads of beautiful gear esp ur $10 headphone which is worth 10x the price Edited July 12, 2012 by nekatrall Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dalethorn 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 In 1974 I bought a DT48 25 ohm, then a DT48s 8 ohm, then a DT48 200 ohm. When I put some oval pads on the DT48s (silver, 8 ohms) they all sounded the same. Actually they sounded the same from a receiver and integrated amp, but from a preamp only (similar to headphone amp) the DT48s sounded different because of the low impedance. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maniacal71 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 In 1974 I bought a DT48 25 ohm, then a DT48s 8 ohm, then a DT48 200 ohm. When I put some oval pads on the DT48s (silver, 8 ohms) they all sounded the same. Actually they sounded the same from a receiver and integrated amp, but from a preamp only (similar to headphone amp) the DT48s sounded different because of the low impedance. I have to disagree on this Dale, the DT48S sounds light and with more clarity, less the sub-bass that you can find on the DT48A. It has better resolution on the mids and highs, possibly on the upper lows too. I've tried and compared them in all ways conceiveable, through my vintage receiver amp headphones output, Meier Arietta, LDmk4SE, Objective2, direct from all my DAPs and Laptop. The 3 major models have their differences, and the last is the Vintage E which has the most mid centric presentation, while the new E version sounds closer to the A but not as resolving. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dalethorn 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 I have to disagree on this Dale, the DT48S sounds light and with more clarity, less the sub-bass that you can find on the DT48A. It has better resolution on the mids and highs, possibly on the upper lows too. I've tried and compared them in all ways conceiveable, through my vintage receiver amp headphones output, Meier Arietta, LDmk4SE, Objective2, direct from all my DAPs and Laptop. The 3 major models have their differences, and the last is the Vintage E which has the most mid centric presentation, while the new E version sounds closer to the A but not as resolving. You didn't clarify about earpads like I did, also didn't mention using the same earpads and integrated amps etc. to minimize impedance differences. Mine all sounded identical, and I bought them new directly from Beyer corp in New York. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maniacal71 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 All the DT48 i mentioned have the same ear pads. The new E pads. I have also the soft ovals and the round rubber pads, which i can try, as the new E pads can be removed easily as they are stuck on only by double sided tape. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nekatrall 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) hahaha this is complicated all im doing now is enjoying the dt48a Edited July 12, 2012 by nekatrall Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dalethorn 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 So apparently we have some driver differences. Then it's my guess the biggest driver differences were before 1974, probably in the 1960's? I don't know about changes since 1974 to now, but I'm going to guess there was very little change, or none. It's good to remember these were not designed as audiometric headphones originally, so maybe someone could find out when the DIN standard was applied the first time to the DT48, to make them (or the one version) official as audiometric. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
nekatrall 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 well some thread i read it could be due to the minerals in the magnets used hence resulting in diff sound or even all the material quality i guess Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maniacal71 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 (edited) You didn't clarify about earpads like I did, also didn't mention using the same earpads and integrated amps etc. to minimize impedance differences. Mine all sounded identical, and I bought them new directly from Beyer corp in New York. Try this link, it says the DT48 since 1937 has been following the DIN standard 45620 DT48 DT48A Edited July 12, 2012 by Maniacal71 Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
dalethorn 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 Try this link, it says the DT48 since 1937 has been following the DIN standard 45620 DT48 DT48A Not clear at all. In the first link they mention 1937 and also the DIN standard, but do not say when that standard was applied to the DT48. I'm certain that the 1937 model is very different from the 1974 model. Then in the second link, the 45620 standard is applied to the DT48E, not the DT48A. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Maniacal71 0 Report post Posted July 12, 2012 Not clear at all. In the first link they mention 1937 and also the DIN standard, but do not say when that standard was applied to the DT48. I'm certain that the 1937 model is very different from the 1974 model. Then in the second link, the 45620 standard is applied to the DT48E, not the DT48A. That is true they did not specify when they applied it but in context, that the particular DIN standard meant for Audiometry is applied in general to all DT48 models. I could not find a date for the implementation of the actual DIN 45 620 but have seen through Google search, an article of review that dates mid 1940's, just couldn't manage to open that PDF file. In the second link, that picture depicts the DT48A and not the DT48E, DT48E was mentioned as a variant. Share this post Link to post Share on other sites