Seems like they increased the micro dynamic contrasts and treble attack on the S, and then on the 9000 pulled that back a bit and added some more mid bass at the expense of bass flatness and extension of the prior two models. A little extra mid-bass and deviation from flat will also create an overall perception of increased warmth, even with slightly more treble than the OG. I can definitely see how the S would appeal to people that want just more crispness than the OG, and how the 9000 would appeal to those who want something that's between the OG and S on crispness but with bass & beat reproduction that's more rock, studio, and discotheque oriented. The 9000 seems like a more appealing headphone for a variety of genres than the other two, while the OG might be best for those who listen to recordings of acoustic stuff at louder volumes. Three interesting flavors of a very similar headphone, but I'm surprised by the rich harmonics and subtle stuff pulled out by the OG with such an extended but comparatively polite response and attack... maybe even more midrange harmonic subtleties than the later models at the expense of produced music's micro contrast crispness or bass emphasis. Also curious how soon after releasing the S that they've come out with the 9000, though. I guess the S must have sold well and they hoped many of the owners of the earlier models would upgrade. Seems to be the case, as the 9000 has been consistently sold out. It's also very hard to find measurements on the 9000 compared to the 009, other than response trace.
@mati I agree with that for this style of music, but I think if you put Rob Zombie into these it'd probably go 9000 > 009 < 009s. For low volume listening to a symphony that's undergone a small amount of compression prior to its vinyl cut while playing back with a high end Grado moving iron cartridge, I think it'd go 009s > 9000 > 009, as the Grado is already pretty euphoric and warm, and you're not blasting your ears with a dense studio production.
This just frequency response and it is gonna be very limited by UA-cams compression of sound. You need to demo them in person with a slew of songs in a quiet environment, over the course of days to really get a feel for them. One little you tube video is not capable of doing that.
Even on my little Bluetooth speaker here at work. That X9000 has a wow factor when compared to the others that's just delicious.
What a headphone.
As much as I like this style of music I feel like it isn’t really the best to showcase what these headphones are capable of.
good sound
Anyone else here prefered SR009 most?
Sounds like the x9000 has more lower treble ~4khz it's more hd600 like in tuning than the others which seem to have a dip in the mids.
Seems like they increased the micro dynamic contrasts and treble attack on the S, and then on the 9000 pulled that back a bit and added some more mid bass at the expense of bass flatness and extension of the prior two models. A little extra mid-bass and deviation from flat will also create an overall perception of increased warmth, even with slightly more treble than the OG. I can definitely see how the S would appeal to people that want just more crispness than the OG, and how the 9000 would appeal to those who want something that's between the OG and S on crispness but with bass & beat reproduction that's more rock, studio, and discotheque oriented. The 9000 seems like a more appealing headphone for a variety of genres than the other two, while the OG might be best for those who listen to recordings of acoustic stuff at louder volumes. Three interesting flavors of a very similar headphone, but I'm surprised by the rich harmonics and subtle stuff pulled out by the OG with such an extended but comparatively polite response and attack... maybe even more midrange harmonic subtleties than the later models at the expense of produced music's micro contrast crispness or bass emphasis. Also curious how soon after releasing the S that they've come out with the 9000, though. I guess the S must have sold well and they hoped many of the owners of the earlier models would upgrade. Seems to be the case, as the 9000 has been consistently sold out. It's also very hard to find measurements on the 9000 compared to the 009, other than response trace.
009>x9000>009s
@mati I agree with that for this style of music, but I think if you put Rob Zombie into these it'd probably go 9000 > 009 < 009s. For low volume listening to a symphony that's undergone a small amount of compression prior to its vinyl cut while playing back with a high end Grado moving iron cartridge, I think it'd go 009s > 9000 > 009, as the Grado is already pretty euphoric and warm, and you're not blasting your ears with a dense studio production.
@@dmitryovsyannikov4874 I hear 009>x9000.009s
>>>009x9000009s
is it
I heard very little difference certainly not enough to upgrade from my 009 .
This just frequency response and it is gonna be very limited by UA-cams compression of sound.
You need to demo them in person with a slew of songs in a quiet environment, over the course of days to really get a feel for them.
One little you tube video is not capable of doing that.
009 = x9000 > 009S
What is the songs Name?
Utsukushiki Mono
@John Waller thank you very much and thank you for the nice video!
Sound horizon - roman