• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Audio Technica ATH-ADX5000 Review (Headphone)

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
Surely you have to conclude from this that either:
-a newer and more expensive flagship distorts (significantly) more than the older flagship, or
- by "different distortion measurement method" you mean one is less accurate?

I would conclude the drivers are very different and cannot be compared. In the reviews done here flagship and improved technical performance/competence do not go hand in hand. There really is no relation at all.

- by "different distortion measurement method" I mean different HATS, different analyzer, different methodologies used, very different compensation, very different target curves. They are incomparable but both will show some similarities overall when 2 similar brand/type headphones are measured.
Even the same headphone models can differ beyond measurement errors due to manufacturing tolerances.

It is obvious the 2000 driver performs technically 'better' but it does not mean most people will prefer a not EQ'ed (or EQ'ed but based on what ?) 2000 over the 5000.
This too depends on too many factors.

As an example. Take the HD600 or HD650 and look at the measurements objectively and it is very clear the HD600/650 measure clearly better in certain aspects compared to the HD800.
Some will claim the HD600/650 sounds better than the HD800 'abomination' as well.
Yet others who own them (like me) find the HD800 (granted with EQ) much better than the HD600/650 (even with EQ) on several aspects but on some niggles find the HD600/650 is superior. In this case it becomes a matter what folks find important.

In the case of the 5000 I would be highly surprised if the distortions above 1kHz will be audible in practice under normal music listening experience.
I don't KNOW this, I assume because I heard nor measured it. An educated guess. Simply because those distortion peaks are very narrow and few and you would have to play VERY loud in which case masking becomes more of a thing (that's how the hearing works which is not seen in the plots).
So some things may look bad on paper and do show issues with the headphone (regardless what causes it) but they may not be obvious listening to music.
 
Last edited:

John_M

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 17, 2020
Messages
62
Likes
51
Thank you. I don't have a technical background but I can (sort of) understand what you mean.

I am glad to hear this:

"It is obvious the 2000 driver performs technically 'better'..."

(Slightly different from phoenixsong's response, which suggested that Tyll's measurements weren't the most revealing and should be taken with a pinch of salt, perhaps that the 2000 has some distortion which wasn't showing in Tyll's measurements).

If it is right that the 2000 driver clearly performs technically 'better' this still seems a bit odd to me. Like some bright spark at Audio Technica thinks 'let's make a great new super light flagship, and who cares if it has a load of extra distortion'? I suppose this is the sort of thing that sites like ASR are supposed to reveal is happening.
 

JohnYang1997

Master Contributor
Technical Expert
Audio Company
Joined
Dec 28, 2018
Messages
7,175
Likes
18,292
Location
China
Thank you. I don't have a technical background but I can (sort of) understand what you mean.

I am glad to hear this:

"It is obvious the 2000 driver performs technically 'better'..."

(Slightly different from phoenixsong's response, which suggested that Tyll's measurements weren't the most revealing and should be taken with a pinch of salt, perhaps that the 2000 has some distortion which wasn't showing in Tyll's measurements).

If it is right that the 2000 driver clearly performs technically 'better' this still seems a bit odd to me. Like some bright spark at Audio Technica thinks 'let's make a great new super light flagship, and who cares if it has a load of extra distortion'? I suppose this is the sort of thing that sites like ASR are supposed to reveal is happening.
Hmm no. Tyll's measurements are only more noisy than better systems. If Tyll's rig showed better performance it must be superior.
Other differences, Tyll used stepped sine sweep, Amir uses chirp. So technically the method Tyll was using should give better resolution but the whole system is probably limited by other factors. Unless one wants to dig down 0.00x% range chirp signal is good enough.
 

John_M

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 17, 2020
Messages
62
Likes
51
Thanks JohnYang. I think the "no" is to what phoenixsong wrote (or my interpretation of it)?

Everyone is giving technical responses but, on a human level, does this not seem slightly odd to anyone else? That you would bring in a new and more expensive flagship one of whose features is that it distorts significantly more than the old flagship?
 

Robbo99999

Master Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Jan 23, 2020
Messages
6,874
Likes
6,672
Location
UK
Thanks JohnYang. I think the "no" is to what phoenixsong wrote (or my interpretation of it)?

Everyone is giving technical responses but, on a human level, does this not seem slightly odd to anyone else? That you would bring in a new and more expensive flagship one of whose features is that it distorts significantly more than the old flagship?
Yes, it is odd, it's a step backwards, certainly from a distortion point of view, but distortion isn't everything.....perhaps they made improvements in other areas like frequency response and soundstage (I've not compared them), but in general you'd expect them to not take a step back re distortion, but they did by the looks of it.
 

solderdude

Grand Contributor
Joined
Jul 21, 2018
Messages
15,891
Likes
35,912
Location
The Neitherlands
Everyone is giving technical responses but, on a human level, does this not seem slightly odd to anyone else? That you would bring in a new and more expensive flagship one of whose features is that it distorts significantly more than the old flagship?

The only way to really know is when the 2000 is measured on the same rig under the same circumstances.

Besides, there may be sonic benefits that aren't easily captured by some specific measurements but that subjectively make the headphone sound 'better'.
In the same vain as some prefer the objectively vastly inferior vinyl or tape 'sound' to near flawless digital recordings.

I have reviewed enough headphones by now to know that headphone measurements do say something about the sound but that frequency response does not say everything and measurable distortion doesn't mean it is audible.
 

John_M

Member
Forum Donor
Joined
Jun 17, 2020
Messages
62
Likes
51
The only way to really know is when the 2000 is measured on the same rig under the same circumstances.

Yes, that's the only way to know 100% but a technical expert poster earlier wrote that "Tyll's measurements are only more noisy than better systems. If Tyll's rig showed better performance it must be superior." So it seems pretty clear that they have just upped the distortion significantly? (I am feeling slightly better about my purchase of the 2000 now, although it would be interesting to see this measured on Amir's rig).
 

MiloTheFirst

Member
Joined
Jul 11, 2020
Messages
37
Likes
27
well, that was a disapointment. that frequency response is ... so wild. no, thanks.

last week I was able to try a pair of 900x and 1000x in a store, Personally I really enjoyed that Sound signature, when I tried the 900x I thought it fit very nicely to the kind of music I listened to the most, which is videogames OST, the instrument separation was brilliant and it made the orchestral-ish tracks stand out, but I found the performance for vocals quite lacking and in ocassions the treble was quite a bit harsh. When I switched to the 1000x I was pleasantly surprised by it sounding just like a straight upgrade, the same signature I liked but more refined, and tamed. nonetheless, I was still not satisfied. I later checked crinacle´s graph tool, and when comparing the 1000x to the 2000 (non x) I really liked what I saw.

If I may be forgiven for soliciting some subjective assesment, could those of you that have tried the 2000x please share your impressions? the closest place I could demo them is 300km away from me and I´d rather save the trip if they aren't that much better. at least, now thanks to Amir I know the 2000x is the final forn for that series
 

JJB70

Major Contributor
Forum Donor
Joined
Aug 17, 2018
Messages
2,905
Likes
6,148
Location
Singapore
The idea of expensive high end headphones is a relatively modern thing. Until probably about 15 years ago the headphone segment was an island of sanity in the dysfunctional world of audio. The Sennheiser HD580/600/650, Beyerdynamic DT770/880/990 and AKG K701/702 were high end and unless you went for rare exotica like Stax and very limited production stuff like the Orpheus were pretty much as high as it got. Then manufacturers realized that the 'more expensive = better' mantra would work for headphones, add premium materials, deluxe packaging, hype nonsense about cables and magic pixie dust and voila, the premium headphone was born. As with every other part of audio, price is probably the worst predictor of audio performance and you really don't need to spend much to get excellent performance, especially not if you're happy to EQ. Now the Sennheiser HD650 is probably the lower side of mid-range yet in many ways it remains one of the best all around headphones available regardless of price in my opinion. Extremely robust and reliable, it really is the sort of product you can buy and then never buy another headphone again. These Audio-Technica's are just pandering to the more expensive = bestest segment.
 

phoenixsong

Addicted to Fun and Learning
Joined
Nov 17, 2018
Messages
874
Likes
685
The idea of expensive high end headphones is a relatively modern thing. Until probably about 15 years ago the headphone segment was an island of sanity in the dysfunctional world of audio. The Sennheiser HD580/600/650, Beyerdynamic DT770/880/990 and AKG K701/702 were high end and unless you went for rare exotica like Stax and very limited production stuff like the Orpheus were pretty much as high as it got. Then manufacturers realized that the 'more expensive = better' mantra would work for headphones, add premium materials, deluxe packaging, hype nonsense about cables and magic pixie dust and voila, the premium headphone was born. As with every other part of audio, price is probably the worst predictor of audio performance and you really don't need to spend much to get excellent performance, especially not if you're happy to EQ. Now the Sennheiser HD650 is probably the lower side of mid-range yet in many ways it remains one of the best all around headphones available regardless of price in my opinion. Extremely robust and reliable, it really is the sort of product you can buy and then never buy another headphone again. These Audio-Technica's are just pandering to the more expensive = bestest segment.
Off topic, but is that so? Things like the Sony Qualia and R10 have existed for a long time
 

Somafunk

Major Contributor
Joined
Mar 1, 2021
Messages
1,302
Likes
3,011
Location
Scotland
Here’s another review, quite why AT would design such a poor headphone is confusing.

 

okok

Senior Member
Joined
Oct 31, 2020
Messages
377
Likes
161
Audio Technica W2022, can we measure this, don't Google the price
 

solid12345

Member
Joined
Feb 18, 2023
Messages
14
Likes
8
I have a great old timer friend of mine in the Industry that have been involved in many ways in audio trade shows, he was jokingly telling me how all of the rooms when he was in Japan were systematically bass light, like damn, I haven't heard any subs trough all weekend. Audio-Technica being THE Japanese big gun in headphones (with Sony of course but Sony's playing a different ball game), wondering if this "house sound" could have to do with the audiophile culture, some different taste in the audiophile community. Never been there so I won't pretend I know, just an anecdote.

Just my theory, Japan is a very different culture with millions of people living crammed together in high-rise apartments and respect for others and politeness is big over there, so anyone blasting a huge subwoofer isn’t going to be the most popular person. It’s probably trickled down subconsciously to them preferring a more softer sound, consequently this is probably why the Walkman and “portable” music evolved over there as there is just less demand for a rocking speaker-based stereo system.

Regardless I actually love my ADX5000 despite some of the negative comments I see in this thread and just had to register an account to defend it. I’m a natural bass head but it’s nice sometimes to just go the complete opposite end of things and I congratulate AT for going against the grain, they have a unique sound signature I don’t find replicated much elsewhere. I also find the treble on it oddly relaxing and smooth that I can listen to for hours, completely different from my Beyer DT990s which I like also but do sound like an ice pick on my ear drum in the highs on some songs.
 

ugur38

Member
Joined
Nov 5, 2022
Messages
44
Likes
85
Audio Technica W2022, can we measure this, don't Google the price
He needs that headphone to measure it. Someone should buy and loan to Amir to measure it or manufacturer should send him which I think they won't. It's luxury item that marketed with "Handcrafted in Japan, Japanese birch woods, 60th year anniversary, hand painted art..." and I never seen this kind of marketed stuff performed well.
 
Top Bottom