beyerdynamic DT 1990 PRO Open Studio Reference Headphones

These headphones are very hard to evaluate for me since i started my path auditioning headphones that have relatively different properties to these in some ways that end up being somewhat more desirable to me. The headphones terrain is such a weirdly satisfying and also somewhat of a frustrating hobby since you actually never get to find perfection. These are an interesting blend of imperfections because they were not exactly as i expected them to be but are better in some ways and relatively worse in others. I really thought these headphones would hit or punch me very hard with big beefy sound but what they actually did is they slapped me really hard with a satin or velvet (still not sure which and it's kinda part of what they do, maybe the satin is when using the analytical pads and the velvet would be while using the balanced pads) glove. They are refined in some ways i would describe as definition and articulation but it could be due to the treble boost they are forward with, but i feel that helps it with how well defined most instruments sound in the mix and that is a good thing in a way, i probably should still go back and forth my other options to analyze how good they actually are at this. They have dry mids and also dry bass that don't overwhelm you. I probably would say these might be like the HD800s without the soundstage, with more focus on the treble sound, mids are more laidback and the bass is about as laidback as the mids so in some way they sound less analytical and somewhat less 'musical' but around as lively though a bit less beefy as well. I think i would criticize the forwardness of the highs because they for sure could annoy people (and they for sure have as far as i've seen). So the main strengths i would say these have when presenting music are the strong treble sounds (even though piercing to some), the liveliness of the sound (as in it doesnt sound dull, though you might need an amp for that, also the analytical pads would bring this out more than the balanced pads), the articulation, and the definition of the sounds (Specially with analytical pads). I wish they made these with a balanced option of cabling, i think this is somewhat unforgivable for high-end headphones. I am sure most people checking the reviews already know about the convenience of having 2 different set of pads that do different things to the sound, while they don't change how the sound is produced, they do change how it arrives to your ears and you could go as far to say that you have 2 signature sounds for the price of 1 (or you can think that you have paid for 2 pair of headphones which can make you feel you are getting your money's worth) with the small caveat of pad swapping which could feel like a hassle depending on how good you can get at changing the pads (first set of headphones that i have come across that provide an incorporated design to make it as seamlessly as possible, yet i wouldn't say it's a perfect way to do it). It is hard for me to recommend these to people because it is hard to justify what these do in relation to the price, there's headphones that cost around 1/3 of the price that have less of the strenghts of this pair but still provide a very nice experience and will not set you back this much amount of money, considering that for some of those you also don't need an amp to get the most out of while for this one i think you do it gets even harder to justify acquiring these, for example if you ever are thinking if to get these or the hd800s and u can pay for the hd800s i think those could be way more satisfying in their sound signature and arent THAT far appart in price). The construction in these is fairly high, they do feel robust, not sure if i would call it a refined build because the yokes specially are a bit rough in finishing, not a bad finish, just not as refined as the cups for example, and as the headband, both of which are very comfortable as well, with just enough clamp to for them to sit mostly tight and enought to make them feel very light even when they are not that light, also with enough room for your ears specially with the slightly thicker pads that i think are the balanced ones. So all in all the only reason i would recommend these is if you can just spend the money and are not expecting this to be your end game because for all the downsides that i have cited in the review you might just be frustrated with the experience, but if you are open-minded enough i am sure you will find (without much effort) stuff to love about them. If these were somewhere around 250-275 tops i would feel they would be more unmissable. For 350+ i can't justify it, better save the extra you need for end-game headphones.

You know what the pro's and con's of an open-back are? ...great separation, depth and reality, yet is more likely to distort when driven hard - and does leak sound in and out! That said, *on balance* this is THE best headphone out there. You do need an amp or audio-interface to drive it though. / HIGHS : airy, elevated from flat but no troublesome spikes, involving and revealing. Slightly grainy - which masks some detail & reality. Possibly too metallic to be positively refreshing. The clarity stands above the MT8 (which is similarly elevated) though the highs at times can be a tad brash and lack a width of frequency separation. The highs are a tricky area, it’s where you hear the material of the driver cone, and it’s coating, here it’s titanium, and that’s what I hear - and not a lot of instruments sound like titanium. By comparison the DT770 are slightly slower in the highs yet have a very very prominent sibilance spike - making the high freq response wavy, not settled; the DT1990 don't have the sibilance issue - so do win out. The B pads help to soften the highs (and everything) a touch, and the extra bass of the B pads means you’ll run the ‘phones at a lower volume - which will also lower the highs (but also lower the mids!). Overall, slightly elevated, very detailed and no unwelcome surprises. HIGH-MIDS : can sound rather papery against the metallic highs, in general there is a lack of reality to the highs, instruments become ‘reproduced sounds’. The subtler qualities and magic they have in themselves, is somewhat lost. Comparing to the MT5’s, such as with dark cymbals (gently tapped) the MT5’s have real forward presence here - which the DT1990’s lack. That said, I am being critical here; I still think these have some of the best highs I've heard, for inspection more than total pleasure. MIDS : slightly recessed (relative to the elevated and detailed highs and lows), far ‘thicker’ than the DT770 with more detail - so more present (towards the MT5), just a dip down from flat, nothing drastic but can push vocals and acoustic instruments slightly back from what might be familiar. For mastering this acts inversely, and encourages you to increase the presence of your mids - which is not a bad thing at all. For listening you may feel like you are missing out, but then everything in the whole freq range is so detailed you would rarely be dissatisfied though certainly in the low mids does lack definition and some thwack (which is so perfectly present in the MT5’s). As with the lows at higher volumes there can distortion - a warbling of continuous notes, just not holding the delivery (with the lows distortion is a pop); this characteristic is the same as the DT770’s even though they have different drivers. LOWS : deep, powerful, fairly detailed (slightly wooly) and lacks some warmth - but then that is an overall characteristic of this headphone - not that it’s cold or clinical but it’s not the most embracing of listens (A pads are a bit too thin & dry for my liking, so I’m using the B-pads). The v.forward highs and soft lows creates a unsettling hole in the mids. Higher lows (towards the mids) such as woody kick drum sounds, disappear into a bass sogginess, whereas the MT5 everything in the lows is amazingly defined, has super presence, clarity and is spread out over a wide freq response. Definition of the lows by the DT1990’s is better than most, but falls just short of the MT5’s (the MT5's lows are not as deep or wide though). In complex passages at high volume the bass distorts - pops; adding EQ, a 20Hz HPF -6dB shelf, stops this popping and in anycase as anything below 20Hz is not audible the EQ has little adverse affects (in fact I wish the headphones incorporated a gentle <20Hz HPF, as EQ in software or players is not always possible). GENERAL OBSERVATIONS : what's the big issue? - the above mentioned distortion, at higher volumes in the mids a warbling and in the lows a pop, you will hear this, it’s a negative for studio use - as you won’t be trusting your source material. This isn’t at super high volumes, but starts at ‘just right’ high-ish volume (or maybe I listen for inspection louder than most!). As a comparison, the MT8 do not distort nor do the MT5’s, though many headphones do distort at high volumes, especially open-backs (due to 'freer' driver throw) so this isn't a specific issue with the DT1990, but if you need to avoid it, go for either the HD6xx range or MT5. DESIGN : despite these headphone being 250 ohm, their high sensitively Tesla drivers means in terms of driving they are similar to the DT770 80 ohm, possibly slightly easier to drive in fact. On a MacBook Pro you’ll be at 100% for an low to average listening level. So just as the DT770 they NEED an amp - or audio interface with a HP out. / This is based on years of studio use ...and pleasure ...of A/B comparisons between : CLOSED BACK : Yamaha HPH-MT5 Yamaha HPH-MT8 Beyerdynamic DT770 PRO 80ohm Audio Technica ATH-A990Z AKG K550 MkIII Sennheiser HD25-1 II OPEN BACK : Beyerdynamic DT1990 PRO Sennheiser HD600 Koss PortaPro Philips Fidelio X2HR / So ok, what about a closed-back? - driven from your portable device / laptop : I recommend the Yamaha HPH-MT5. Yes that is the 2nd greatest headphone out there. Surprising I know (for it's price) but it's such a reliable tool, no distortion driven hard, fast & accurate, super tight & powerful, but slightly dark, it's 90% great, nothing else can touch it, except the DT1990. Which is why I recommend both. Which headphone do I use the most, the MT5. Each are valid in their own way, not least one is closed-back the other open-back. Both have the best presence and power of the lot, are for studio use are the most balanced over their frequency range - no unusual spikes or wavy EQ. That said they have different characters: the MT5 is non-fatiguing and fairly ‘dark’ (yet still fast and detailed), the DT1990 is higher resolution, brighter, more clinical (still flat but bitingly critical). The DT1990 certainly reveals if highs scream in your mix (useful as part of the studio process) - whereas the MT5 is more velvety - with punch but not as much aggression. As a result the MT5 can be used at higher volumes for deep immersion without ear strain, the DT1990 can run at lower volumes and retain all it’s detail - but is not as listenable at high volumes. In overall audio terms the MT5 (for me) is like a step up from Sennheiser’s renowned HD600/650, I’d say it’s better in every way though of course it’s closed back - so is not quite as ‘open’ in the mids, yet just as forward. The DT1990 is a different animal, I have the DT770 as well, and that relationship is similar to the HD600 > MT5, the DT1990 is a step up from the DT770. Immediately swapping headphones exposes their differences, it takes a while for your ear/brain to settle in, and ‘normalise’ the signature, in this respect I prefer the MT5’s as they are closed back so I can use them everywhere. With the DT1990’s I have to swap to the MT5’s when I need isolation, so swapping is not ideal, I guess the DT1770 closed-back might be an option, but I like the airiness of the DT1990 and love the confident though unexaggerated signature of the MT5. So that’s my twin pick. For pure listening the ATH-A990Z’s are the choice, everything there, no oddities, they lack the grating immediacy demanded of a studio headphone, but if you don’t want that, the 990Z are a good choice (though I’m not a fan of their fussy build). The DT1990’s are supplied with two different types of pad, A & B. B are fitted by default, they have slightly deeper, firmer foam and more entrance holes at the back - intended result is to increase bass. This they do, which relatively reduces the mid and highs, though also there’s more to their sound than that. I’d say the highs are not as confused as with A pads, as with the A pads there’s a push that clumps the high-mids into the highs and also a slight messy confusion in the highs - lack of space. I know many will hear the extra highs as definition - but it isn’t, it’s like an EQ on top of an EQ, things get ‘over-processed’ or sound like 8 bit. With the B-pads as the bass is larger, you can run the headphones with slightly less amp, which cuts the highs and relaxes them a touch, and reduces bass distortion - which is an issue with the DT1990’s. The B’s reducing highs is good, as they are already v.elevated, reducing the mids is not good as they are already recessive! So putting the A pads on, the bass recedes - too much, the mids pick up slightly though are still recessive, and highs get far too high. So here we have the issue, the pads do alter the sonic characteristics but neither has the best blend (and between both wouldn’t help either), basically you’ll have to accept either a rich bass but recessive mids, or recessive bass & mids and v.aggressive highs. What’s the outcome, which pads have I chosen - as an audio engineer, unlike everything else you might read, I’ve gone for the B pads - despite the slightly ‘blooming’ bass - they give a truer representation of a delivery mix and are less fatiguing - which actually means your brain can adapt to the DT1990 signature rather than fighting it, as a result you do start hearing further into a mix. The A pads while super-precise keep you at arms length and not close to end reproduced delivery. / COMPARATIVE SCORES : 1- 10, higher the number the better. 1st score : BODY (Presence - Power) / 2nd score : DETAIL (Speed - Accuracy) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . MT5. . . . . . MT8 . . . . . . DT770 . . . . DT1990 . . . . A990Z . . . . PORTA . . . HD25-1II High. . . . . . . . . . . . 9 / 8. . . . . .10 / 8 . . . .10 / 9 . . . . .10 / 8 . . . . . . 9 / 0 . . . . . .6 / 6 . . . . . 4 / 3 High-Mid. . . . . . . . 7 / 8. . . . . . 9 / 7. . . . . . 8 / 9. . . . . . 8 / 8 . . . . . . .8 / 9 . . . . . 7 / 6. . . . . . 4 / 4 Mid. . . . . . . . . . . . . 9 / 8 . . . . . 10 / 7. . . . . 5 / 8 . . . . . . 6 / 8 . . . . . . 6 / 7 . . . . . .7 / 5 . . . . . 4 / 4 Low . . . . . . . . . . . .10 / 10. . . . 6 / 8. . . . . . 8 / 7. . . . . . 9 / 8. . . . . 10 / 6 . . . . . 9 / 5. . . . . 11 / 7 V.Low. . . . . . . . . . . 8 / 6. . . . . . 9 / 7. . . . . . 7 / 6 . . . . . . 9 / 9 . . . . . . 8 / 5. . . . . . 4 / 4 . . . . . 9 / 7 Soundstage. . . . . . 6 . . . . . . . . 6. . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . . 9 . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . 1 Stereo width. . . . . 9 . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . . 9 . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . .5 . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . 3 Efficiency. . . . . . . . 9. . . . . . . . 10 . . . . . . . . 5. . . . . . . . . . 5 . . . . . . . . .9 . . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . 7 Isolation . . . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . 9 . . . . . . . . . 7. . . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . .7 . . . . . . . . . 1 . . . . . . . . 5 Portability. . . . . . . 8 . . . . . . . . 7. . . . . . . . . .5. . . . . . . . . . 4 . . . . . . . . 3 . . . . . . . . . 10 . . . . . . . 8 Comfort. . . . . . . . . 9 . . . . . . . . 6. . . . . . . . . 10. . . . . . . . . 8. . . . . . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . . 7 . . . . . . . . 4

I can't tell the difference between these and the Focal. The sound is very clear and neutral. It's not colored or modified. It sounds just like your music should sound. The build quality is very good with one exception. The sliders (square hubs attached to the headband) are plastic. On my Beyerdynamic T90s which is very similar in design, these cracked after a while. I don't think careful use matters much. They may crack over time which is the only drawback of the headphone. It fits good and is comfortable. If you like you can search some sites for "wool headphone headband cover" and get a washable knitted wrap that snaps on with 5 snaps and will keep the headband like new. The unit comes with two cables and two sets of pads which should last you quite a while. Third party earpads are available at inexpensive prices for replacement if you ever need them. I like everything about the headphone except the sliders. They should be made out of metal. On the Focal Elex I think the sliders are aluminum. Fortunately you can order replacement parts for Beyerdynamic products. It's a good headphone that doesn't meddle with the sound. These are MUCH better than the Beyer DT-880 headphones I had in the past. I don't notice any piercing treble problems with these either. The discontinued T90 is a good heaphone with more treble but it doesn't bother me. If you want great sound go for a pair of DT1990s.

Beautiful product like what you expect The headphone and the all parts included coming with a good way, and with a good original shape my package coming with a problem a little damage in the box and I contact with the seller I mean the owner miss Mariyam She contacted me personally very quickly to confirm that the mistake was actually not on their part, and showed the professionalism of their work with conclusive evidence. However, she compensated me with the value of the damage. Therefore, this act of ethics requires that If you wanna buy this product, this is the right choice %100

So good for music production, you can hear absolutely everything, every pop and every bit of static, comfortable as well. Definitely one of the best around this price range.

J'ai mis longtemps à me décider au regard du prix demandé, mais au final je n'ai pas été déçu. Venant d'un AKG K702 puis d'un Sennheiser HD660s, je trouve le Beyerdynamic plus homogène dans son rendu sonore. Il n'enjolive rien, ne pousse pas trop en avant les voix, comme le sennheiser, n'exagère pas la largeur de scène, comme l'AKG. La restitution est précise et fidèle, et le casque est de belle qualité.

Vous pouvez le garder sur la tête pendant des heures sans fatigue. C'est un des meilleurs casque que j'ai eu jusqu'à présent (12).