I'm late to the game on this one, so I'll provide the following references below, and only limited commentary. Tyll reviewed the Walnut version. I am not sure if there are significant differences between the Walnut and Purpleheart version here. I would not say these are a baby TH-X00 Purplehearts because there are some differences, despite both headphones having a bassier nature. See @Hands Formal Review: http://www.superbestaudiofriends.or...heart-headphone-review-and-measurements.3511/ And Tyll's Formal Review (Walnut Version): http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/e-mu-walnut-creative-aurvana-live-woodied-measurements#KQ17yzi7x5zSsQu9.97 The E-MU Purpleheart is a supra-aural headphone with the pads lying on the ears. It's lightweight and perfect for travelling or more casual use. And Massdrop does it again with nut-so pricing at $75, see here: https://www.massdrop.com/buy/massdrop-x-e-mu-purpleheart The sound is bassy, warm, and lush. Midrange is a bit recessed and treble seems smooth with the exception of one tiny peak reminiscent of the TH-900s sharp sound, but to a much smaller extent. The bassy nature of the headphone also tends to mask any irregularities with the treble. The tuning can probably be said to be more consumer friendly and in more accordance to headphones found at the big-box stores. I've been told that these use bio-cellulose drivers, and it certainly does sound that way with timbral similarities to the Creative Aurvana Live and the AudioQuest Nighthawk, or even the legendary Sony R10 headphone of yesteryear. I love the sound of bio-cellulose drivers BTW. What I found most compelling with this implementation was how well the treble was tamed. Massdrop x E-MU Purpleheart Frequency Response Despite being a supra-aural with comfy pads that rest on the ear, the L and R channel matching is very good, maybe even exceptional considering the circumstances. We see a small peak around 7kHz which explains the slight bit of sharpness, but really in the overall scheme of things we are bit-picking. There are $1400 headphones with much worse behavior. Massdrop x E-MU Purpleheart CSD Nothing (bad) stands out in the CSDs. There are no long lived ridges that extend from the top of the bottom. No ear-piercing behaviors. The decay is actually pretty fast and clean for what is typically seen for a closed headphone. Frequency Response of E-MU Purpleheart Compared to Fostex TH-X00 Purpleheart Green = Fostex TH-X00 Purpleheart Purple = E-MU Purpleheart Frequency Response of E-MU Purpleheart Compared to AudioQuest Nighthawk Green = AudioQuest Nighthawk Purple = E-MU Purpleheart Despite the Nighthawk having some great characteristics such as low distortion, speed, and resolution, I would never quite get over its screwy tonal balance. I know a lot of members here who could never quite get over how the Nighthawk was tuned and couldn't hear past its frequency response to hear how good its technicalities were. As we can see here, the E-MU Purpleheart, although a bassy headphone by audiophile standards, does it's thing just right. It's not as technically proficient as the Nighthawk, but unlike the Nighthawk, the midrange isn't overly recessed, nor is the bass overly bloated. Not seen here, but I also found the 9kHz treble peak of the Nighthawk much more difficult.