Dan Clark Audio AEON RT Review (closed headphone)

[Feelas]

Now I don't want 600 ohm headphones, heck even 300 is plenty from the Sennheiser line. Something like 100 seems like a decent compramise between the two extremes no? So I'm wondering, is this not simply possible in Balanced Armature IEM designs, and Planar Dynamic drivers for some reason? Or is it manufacturers making cell-phone usage a top priority so no one complains their headphones can't get loud running off of their phones under any circumstances?

Well, weren't there any very sensitive, yet high-impedance headphones on the market? I think there's no real reason to get the impedance to any exact value, I suppose, thus maybe the impedance is not a design target, merely a result?

I believe that I've also read these studio stories, but told different way: since the studio gear wasn't really about headphones anytime (and still it isn't), the output impedance of a given jack output was relatively unknown, designing for high-impedance gets you into more universal & versatile territory, since with high output impedance there won't be a lot of mismatch on 600ohm pairs, and the power wasn't a problem with the pro units, I guess.

If you're designing modern headphones and can go with low impedance, while losing nothing, why would you give it up?

 

[Veri]

These look pretty good.

Though, if anyone here knows, I was wondering. What's up with this low impedance facination everywhere you look these days? I know for dynamic headphones, it's pretty trivial to switch up the impedance to a prefered value. But for planars, it seems universal, that they're all quite low. Is there a reason to have all of them go so low?

My conclusion would be that low impedance is inherent to a modern planar design.

 

[voodooless]

For Equalizer APO users:


For more info, see List of Amir's Headphone PEQ filters.

Not to discourage anyone, especially @amirm , but these are always done as a trail and error process, aren't they? I think with a few simple tools a much better result can be had: Just take the deviation response, load it into REW, AutoEQ to your liking (flat, slanted or otherwise) and based on that apply it to your favourite EQ software. Would be fun to compare Amirm's presets with a generated one.

 

[SpinifexV]

Very nice review. I really love my own copy, even if they don't see much action these days, having been supplanted by two other, but open, headphones: the Focal Elex and the Hifiman HE-6SE v2.

One graph I would love to see is the effect of the 4 filter pads on the frequency response. I have tried EQing headphones, but I never liked the result, so knowing the effects of the pads would be welcome. I switch back and forth between the black felt (clearer, but peakier treble) and the white one-notch (softer sound).

 

[AudioSmell]

These look pretty good.

Though, if anyone here knows, I was wondering. What's up with this low impedance facination everywhere you look these days? I know for dynamic headphones, it's pretty trivial to switch up the impedance to a prefered value. But for planars, it seems universal, that they're all quite low. Is there a reason to have all of them go so low?

I heard the only reason high impedance headphones exist was due to studio use. Where plugging headphones in various sources benefits you (the user) from having your ears blown to pieces in case another source around the studio was left with higher volume output. With something like 600 ohm headphones, there's not much chance you're going to get something extremely loud from one source to another around the studio. But something like modern day IEMs for example, I can imagine plugging into something very loud and being greeted very rudely.

Now I don't want 600 ohm headphones, heck even 300 is plenty from the Sennheiser line. Something like 100 seems like a decent compramise between the two extremes no? So I'm wondering, is this not simply possible in Balanced Armature IEM designs, and Planar Dynamic drivers for some reason? Or is it manufacturers making cell-phone usage a top priority so no one complains their headphones can't get loud running off of their phones under any circumstances?

I have the same kind question. Please correct me if I am wrong.
Could it be that they use lower impedance because they need a higher current? According to the product page they use lighter magnets.
The lighter the diaphragm, or bigger the magnets, or lower the impedance, the more (voltage) efficient headphones are, correct?
Thank you.

 

[Newman]

"ÆON RT (Re-Tuned) delivers a vibrant new take on our award-winning and critically acclaimed ÆON Flow. ÆON RT embodies everything you loved about the classic ÆON Flow - its tough, yet ultra-light, all-metal headband and baffle, and incredibly comfortable ergonomic design - but with a significant sonic upgrade. While ÆON RT Closed has had its bass presence boosted and its tone adjusted to be smoother and better-balanced (basically, a more playful vibe), ÆON RT Open lightens up the midrange and expands the soundstage for a more immersive experience. "

So what is the message to take out of that? That the RT Closed has a dark midrange, congested soundstage, and could be more immersive?

Not so great after all, then?

cheers

 

[solderdude]

Though, if anyone here knows, I was wondering. What's up with this low impedance facination everywhere you look these days? I know for dynamic headphones, it's pretty trivial to switch up the impedance to a prefered value. But for planars, it seems universal, that they're all quite low. Is there a reason to have all of them go so low?

The reason is the airgap and amount of 'windings' differs enormously from dynamics.
Dynamics can have a lot of windings and have a very narrow and intens magnetic field.
This makes dynamic headphones have a high dB/mW efficiency.

Planars have huge magnets, the more force the more they cost. The number of 'windings' also is less. On top of that there must be enough magnet-membrane distance to allow for larger bass excursions. Because of this the dB/mW efficiency is lower.
In order to get enough acoustical power from you thus need a low impedance.

One of the higher impedance ortho's is LCD-4 (200 Ohm) 89dB/1mW (96dB/V)

In order to get a higher dB/V efficiency the resistance thus must be low. The dB/V rating is directly comparable between headphones as amplifiers do not have an output power but an output voltage.

 

[Ilkless]

Curious about Aeon RT Open (red curve here, green curve is the old tuning of the open Flow before RT) as well, seems less wiggly 3-8kHz compared to RT closed (from Dan on Head-Fi):

Have not been looking at headphones for a long time, but DCA is stoking some real interest - love the colour, design and materials, as well as the way they balance boutique cred with technical competence.

 

[dmac6419]

Oh, forgot to say that these are my everyday headphones.

About to be mines too

 

[dmac6419]

Anyone, what does the RT stand for?

Re tuned

 

[BigSweeny]

Long time lurker here, and finally first time posting!

Really nice review and these look ace. I'm thinking about upgrading my headphones (hd700) + dac/amp combo (objective2 + ODAC) with being at home more of the time, but I'm a bit confused about how much power these things (it would be the v2 model I get in reality) actually require. For example, the dac/amp combo I have my eyes on is the SMSL M500 V2 but in amirm's review he said the output of the amp was fairly low. Can anyone point me in the direction of an amp that would be sufficient for driving these properly? I'm a bit lost in all the technical details when it comes to voltages required and finding an amp that would match up nicely to it.

 

[F1308]

What amir actually uses after testing so many headphones at high spl

View attachment 106165

I am afraid it might not be sufficient...
Another option...with some better deep bass for sure.

 

[Veri]

Really nice review and these look ace. I'm thinking about upgrading my headphones (hd700) + dac/amp combo (objective2 + ODAC) with being at home more of the time, but I'm a bit confused about how much power these things (it would be the v2 model I get in reality) actually require. For example, the dac/amp combo I have my eyes on is the SMSL M500 V2 but in amirm's review he said the output of the amp was fairly low. Can anyone point me in the direction of an amp that would be sufficient for driving these properly? I'm a bit lost in all the technical details when it comes to voltages required and finding an amp that would match up nicely to it.

Any decent class single ended DAC + an Atom amp will power them fine.

 

[F1308]

Very nice. I may have to order a pair. Does anybody know if these are available in Europe?

EDIT: Just ordered from the website, before the stock runs out

Without waiting for the AKG371 review...?

 

[weasels]

@amirm It would be greatly appreciated if you could provide the interior dimensions of the earcups.

 

[MZKM]

Note: 12PPO & Left channel

Preference Rating
SCORE: 61

 

[SpinifexV]

@amirm It would be greatly appreciated if you could provide the interior dimensions of the earcups.

You should try asking the manufacturer instead. They probably already provide that info.

 

[Zensō]

This is fantastic. Instantly on the top of my most wanted list. Thanks for the review!

 

[weasels]

You should try asking the manufacturer instead. They probably already provide that info.

Sure - and I did check the manufacturer's website and that information isn't listed.

 

[bobbooo]

Did you mean that it fails to activate the pinna, or to emulate the pinna gain?

The latter. Just look at the huge (down to an extreme of ~ -8dB), broad, low-Q (more audible than high-Q) scoop in the compensated frequency response around 2-5kHz:

That's just poor, especially at this price. The pinna gain region is one of the most important features of a headphone's frequency response to get right for accurate tonality, and this headphone gets it very wrong. This large deviation from the target is reflected in the mediocre 61/100 preference rating as seen above. There are many better headphones than this at much lower prices.