This is the 4th Ananda, v1, v2(kind of a stealth revision, Ananda Stealth and now the Nano also the cups are plastic, just the grill is supposed to be metal
I didn't realize that on v2, so good to know. Also correct on the grill being metal only. I did not clarify that well. It truly feels all metal, but correct on plastic outer.
Man the 109 pro sounds waaaaay more metallic in the treble range and sibilant to me than the Ananda Nano. So much so that I can’t really listen to the 109 pro for more than one song before my ears are hurting even at very low volumes. But I can still hear up to 16 kHz so maybe I hear something you can’t. But the beryllium on the 109 pro is straight up harsh to me.
thats why I dont like Hifiman, fake harsh trebles, they even bleed into upper mids, do pls review of Arya organic but I neither dont believe they fix that in that model
How does the treble comparing to Ananda OG? I'm a bit concerned of the brightness and not sure the tuning is good for me - I used to have Ananda OG but don't think it's too bright...
It's still has that brightness going on. I do believe the rest of it is a better tuning and it also has great technical ability. Perhaps a bit of EQ can assist with the treble if that is a concern. If not, then this may not be for you if the treble is concerning.
It's a Grumpy Goose stand. His shop can be found on etsy and he sells them out in about 5 minutes when he has new ones available. www.oneillscreationworkshop.com/grumpy-goose-headphone-stands
I can't say no as I've not heard every combination out there...but I somewhat doubt it. My liquid platinum didn't smooth it out but that's a hybrid tube. It's just how many hifimans are tuned.
Cable change can tame highs too, like stock hifiman cables can cause some harsness on the highs, thats why im using a full copper tripowin granvia balanced cable. (it gives body and soothes highs, good for bright HPs)
Planars tend to have faster responsiveness to notes/sounds. It makes a lot more sense once you hear it and compare to a dynamic that doesn't do it. It's not always preferred, just a description of what it can do to the sound. Think of a start/stop point of a note being more sudden then something that is more rolled off.
@@Skeeb23that's even more confusing. I really don't want for this to come off rude but how do people measure this fastness? I recently started watching audiophile channels and every single time I find a word or a description that doesn't make sense I can't help but think "where do they get this info from". Every time I hear the term "faster" I think of the speed of the diaphragm of the speaker. For example, frequency response being 20hz to 20khz. If the specification says it caps at 20khz, there no way the speaker can move any faster than that. On these high end headphones for example, some can go up to 58khz. In terms of speed thats a fast moving diaphragm.. but when some say "the top end is faster on these as opposed to those" I wanna punch the screen. As for the example of a sound being rolled off... Are you referring to the amount of time the headphones takes from the moment you hit STOP to the moment the music actually stops? Because if you are saying "it's a more rolled off sound" I can only assume you are referring to the less ABRUPT STOP of a track when you hit STOP. If people referred to "rolled off sound" to the overall smoothness of a track for example not being "sharp" or with "less texture" that only has to do with the fidelity of the frequency response and this is why I go crazy whenever I hear those terms. I would like to recommend to anyone who would be interested, to check the video " every sound is sine" by Posy. It's the way headphones work to reproduce sound. Even if I look completely stupid to some, there is no such thing as "faster sound" anything that you get is 100% the recorded audio wave of a track. If it sounds garbage is because the fidelity of the frequency response in the headphone is garbage, not because it's "slower". Is the only explanation for how the same exact song sounds complete different in different headphones. Thanks for the response. Next time I hear a term like that I'll be sure to leave my rant.
@@shul5684 fair enough. I'm not a measurements guy and I don't look at graphs because I don't put stock in that translating to what I hear. I know you aren't referring to a graph either to be clear. I report on what I hear. If I hear a difference of something, I report on that and try to describe it the best I can. Simple as that.
@@Skeeb23 totally understand that as sound is very subjective but I just wish the objective part of sound would be more of a focus in some of the sections of audiophile world. I say this in the most respectful manner, I don't know much of your content this is the first video I see from you so if I'm talking out of my ass I apologize. I appreciate the dialogue though it's always great when people exchange thoughts and ideas. Cheers!
Honestly that's because these are very easy to drive. I use my ADI2DAC, Cayin iHA6, Liquid Platinum, simple dongle and my RU7. The extra power didn't make a difference to me to even mention if that helps. These are meant to be portable, which they accomplished.
