Audeze Sine Deluxe

I think it's great to have an option from Audeze to add DSP and EQ on top of that, if one wishes, through their Cipher cable. Now with that being said, call me old fashioned if you want but, I'm a purist when it comes to my signal chain. I won't ever introduce EQ to my listening experience as it colors the signal. Now I do use Audirvana+ which can be considered DSP so there's that but I just want my source content coming through as unadulterated as possible. It is really interesting to read about how many people put so much importance in DSP and EQ to the point that it not having it would make it a deal breaker! I guess that's why I am the kind of audiophile that uses music to listen to my headphones. I do have a pretty decent collection of cans because they don't sound the same. I can see someone preferring to add EQ into the mix to make a headphone more chameleon like but takes away from the soul of the headphone. Anyways just my .02 on that.

I'm spending some time tonight exclusively with my LCD-Xs so I can have some fresh insight for tomorrow when my DXs arrive!! I'm so excited!!

 

Nice looking set of cans, what have you compared it to thus far? Aside form the EL 8

 

Did you get the 2016 version? Very honest headphones in my opinion...

 

But how does one get the Cypher for the new Sine?

 

Personally I believe that there's a lot more to the character of a headphone than just the frequency response. In fact I'd probably say that impulse response, ringing, signal decay, damping etc all have a far greater impact on a headphone's character than frequency response alone would impart.

Also consider that most recorded music has already been put through the ringer with EQ, compression, limiting etc in the studio, so in that respect adding a bit of your own EQ to taste isn't really that sacrilegious.

That said I tend not to EQ unless I come across an album that really has been awfully mastered - a lot of the early CDs, with treble that would double as paint stripper, would fall into that category for me.

 

I believe that there is more to a headphone than frequency response too. As you stated, there are other factors that shape a headphones sound and I absolutely recognize that. The other measurable factors such as impulse response, signal decay, ringing, square wave data, and dampening are all going to be unique to the given headphone though. What isn't is EQ.

I also get that there is a lot of processing of the actual recorded music before the final cut is realized but isn't that what you want to be able to distinguish? That being "what the artist intended"?

You are very true about your findings with those early (even recent too) cd's that have treble glare for days. For those cd's I just reach for my more forgiving headphones.

This is were the DX's come in. I feel that, at its price point, it will be more than good enough on all sound frequencys without falling into being U shaped without extension at either end. I feel that with <$500.00 HPs it is easier to find a forgiving sound signature. Whereas $500.00-$1k one should try to audition a headphone before purchasing or read up on trusted reviews. Based on reviews I've read; the Sine had some flaws that I wasn't willing to live with for the sake of having a closed headphone. I'm glad I waited for the DX. According to DAR Audio the DX is more mid- forward with a more linear presentation as well as extension at either end. I still have my fingers crossed. I am due to receive my DX's any hour now.

 

So....

I sent an email to Audeze about the Cipher being made available for the Sine DX, and this was the response:

"Hello Jeffrey

Thanks for your interest in the SINE DX. We do not currently have a CIPHER cable made for the DX, as it has a different frequency response curve than the regular SINE. This also means that the SINE CIPHER cable will apply an incorrect EQ curve to the DX, so we do not recommend that our customers use it. Let me know if you have any further questions!

Best Regards
Jaren"

 

Yeah, that's a bit of CYA jibber jabber. My understanding is that frequency response on the original and dx are pretty close. Certainly not so much as to make the cipher cable a bad thing with the dx.

I asked Sonarworks if they thought it was a good idea to use their profile for the hd800 with the 800S. They said NO. I tried it anyway and it was brilliant. Point is just because Audeze said so, doesn't mean it wont work.

 

I agree with my man, Ice-man up there. They did say they "do not recommend" it but i still find the Cipher cable with the DX is the most resolving configuration I've tried so far (I favor this over the Dragonfly Red). If u call their sales dept u can custom order a Cipher cable.

 

"What the artist intended" is a very slippery subject indeed. So slippery in fact that the chances are that you'll never really hear exactly what the artist intended.

First off you'd need to recreate the artists studio space using the same dimensions, materials, furniture, positioning and acoustic treatments. Then you'd need the exact same equipment (not accounting for sample variation). That means monitors, audio interfaces and any other equipment that formed part of the signal chain.

With me so far? Great, but we're still only halfway down the rabbit hole.

Next you'll need to book yourself in with a good plastic surgeon and have your pinnae modified so they match the artists, your ear canals would need to be adjusted to the same dimensions as the artists so the natural resonances would be the same. Then the eardrums would need to match dimensions and have the exact same distribution of mass. Then you're onto the Malleus, Incus and Stapes (the mechanism that connects the Eardrum to the Cochlear), then the Cochlear itself would need to match exactly, including but not limited to the dimensions, the hair cell distribution, and also which hair cells are dead. Does the artist have tinnitus? If so then you'd need to recreate that.

So, all of that, and then what if you don't like what you hear?

A bit of EQ is far quicker, far less costly, far less painful, needs far less recovery time, and is far easier to revert from

Yeah, I know - it's one hell of an exaggeration, and I am having a friendly little troll with you.

I've been in this audio hobby for so long now that I've found that chasing the 100% accurate reproduction is a fruitless task, and that I'd much rather listen to gear that I find enhances the music, rather than gear that lays everything bare, and perhaps loses musicality in the process.

Which brings me neatly back on topic, as I consider the SINEs to be very musical headphones, and I'm very interested to hear your opinions of the DX.

 

Looks like I'm due for the dx on Wednesday. I usually don't buy blind but the original was an "almost keeper" for me and I was impressed with it. It was the best Audeze I've heard. I found the overall frequency response to be pretty neutral. In fact, I typically applied a little EQ to make it more musical. This is a very different than the other Audeze line up and I feel their best effort.

I've heard Maxx refer to the Sine as a baby Uptopia. It's kind of a gross exaggeration but I certainly understand his comparison. The Sine loves power and I always used high gain on the Jot with it. In fact, I considered it my most power hungry headphone. So in terms of getting the best performance from the Sine, I was only really happy with it from a desktop amp.

I'll be looking forward to the "tweaks" Audeze has done but I'll be honest and say that I expect to make use of the 30 return period. Hopefully it will surprise me.

 

Long story short, I am really enjoying the Sine DX's. The Dx's do indeed sound open. I've been listening to my 24bit/192khz audio files of Melissa Menago and Amber Rubarth and the spatial details/cues are all intact with vibrancy. I still get all the linguistic detail without sibilance. A major feat in my books

The bass is not lacking in any way nor is it emphasized in relation to the mids and highs. It digs real deep without fading which took me by surprise more than a few times. It is incredibley fast and delicate too. Chello plucks in the lower octaves will send chills down your spine. Whew.

The mids are really a standout with these headphones! I am hearing all the detail I expected and they have this smooth quality to them. Not smooth as in overly warm. I mean to say smooth as in male and female vocals are on par as well as attaining a very spatial separation; effortless. The mids presentation here make acoustic and piano accompaniment in songs very well portrayed too.

The highs are delicate with a slight nudge upward at around 8-10khz. It is smartly accomplished though as this allows for the portrayal of detail without the premature fatigue brought about with typical flagship headphones that have an emphasis around 5-7khz imho. I found this to be the case with the HiFiman HE560's which have splashy treble with thin bass. So the Dx's are definitely a value in my opinion and more so with the current discount.

The Dx's definitely benefit from amplification. Out of my iPhone 6s+ they sound thin and uninvolved with a lack of dynamism. Proper amplification will bring about proper dynamic swing and gestalt in the bass while adding wetnes to the mids. The treble all of a sudden present with natural decay and add more separation to the mix while opening up the soundstage even further still.

When briefly compared to my LCD-Xs I found that the Dx's were noticeably warmer overall but just slightly so. Surprisingly the soundstage was about the same. Where the biggest difference was heard was in general separation or air if you will. The Xs have a more delicate take in the lows and better integration of the mids to highs.

These are my initial impressions. I hope I was able to lend a little insight for anyone on the fence.

 

Nice impressions @musiclvr. It would help if you'd make a few comparisons to other headphones. And indicate what your preferences are. Thanks.

 

Some brief impressions as I just got these about an hour ago. These are good sounding headphones. They sound quite similar to the original with better staging. I don't detect any loss of bass presence from the original which is great. The pads seem ever so slightly bigger on the interior circumference than the original. I could be imagining this but I don't think so. My ear fit inside the new pads but barely.

I used damping material inside the cups on the original to cut the treble a touch. So far I don't feel the need to do that with the dx. With just a little bump with EQ the bass hits damn hard and will kick you in the teeth with EDM. I like that the vocals are not forward or recessed...just right where they should be. The dx still need a good bit of power. I can't imagine enjoying these from a phone. The dx does however LOVE current mode amps, ie qp1r. That is the only DAP that I've found that works well for these.

When I first plugged them in, I got no sound. When I reseated the connectors I found them not firmly in place. It was weird. I never had that problem with the originals. These just didn't seem to snap into place like the original. More to come...

 

These are my favorite Audeze headphones so far. Light and comfortable, pretty neutral and responds well to EQ. Does not sound as if you are listening through a barrel of dark maple syrup like other Audeze hp's.

 

These sound good. Pretty much balanced; slightly pushed base and mids, not dynamic at all. Sounds very closed after I've been listening to open cans all night (Utopia, HEK2). Very little noise leakage from the back, reminds me of the OPPO PM 1/2 for that quality (not sound). Sounds like a closed can they took the back off.

Actually they specifically sound like a closed in HD650, without the top end sparkle. Smaller sound stage, smaller dynamics. Smaller everything.

These are much better than the EL8 suckfest mentioned a few posts ago.

Obviously much lighter than the LCDs, short cord, meant as portables. Unfortunately they didn't ship with a case, the nice metal yokes will be dinged to hell without one.

Biggest issue I have right now is head clamp. After wearing these for about and hour and a half last night my ears were throbbing. Left them stretched over a box today to open up, they are a little better tonight, will need a few days.

 

I found your comments pretty spot on except for the one about the dx sounding like closed 650. I don't get that, at all. And for me, the comfort is actually improved over the original with less clamp and pads fit a little looser around my ear.

After spending a few more hours with them last nigh, I'm hearing a small spike in the lower treble that bugs me. Not big deal and I may be able to get rid of it with EQ. But it adds an air of unnaturalness to some instruments.

 

So I finally got my closed Sine in and have had a chance to A/B them. The lower impedance of the DX help with overall loudness. I find myself having to turn up the volume more on the Closed to match levels to the DX. DX has a slightly wider, more natural sounding soundstage vs. Closed. With the Cipher Cable, DX sound improves with better dynamics and separation, but this cable was designed to be optimized with the Closed. Cipher sounds more natural with the Closed. With the DX, there was a odd "hollow" or maybe veiled sound with vocals I noticed. Hope this helps those considering DX + Cipher.