Dan Clark Stealth Review (State of the Art Headphone)

[edahl]

They should send a pair to crinacle.com too, I want to see where this thing ends up on the ratings

 

[maxxevv]

I'd love a cost reduced version of these, like Arya is to the HEK

I believe that is in the product road map once the sales of the Stealth plateaus and start declining. Its what Hifiman did too.

 

[bluefuzz]

Apparently the body and arch are titanium, carbon fiber and aluminum with suede and vegan leathery stuff I think it was when I read it.

So, a few hundred grams of plastic and metal ... ;-)

 

[Doodski]

So, a few hundred grams of plastic and metal ... ;-)

Well... Price aside the materials are premium and should last for many years. I'm curious if the drivers are serviceable or replaceable in case they get blown or damaged accidentally. That's a biggy for me especially at this price range. @Dan Clark care to elaborate on the serviceability of the drivers?

 

[aandres_gm]

Biggest question at this point is where to buy DC headphones in Europe. My girlfriend hates my Ananda because of the sound leakage, and something like the Aeon RT Closed would be great. Issue being I can't find it anywhere in Europe.

 

[ririt]

Biggest question at this point is where to buy DC headphones in Europe. My girlfriend hates my Ananda because of the sound leakage, and something like the Aeon RT Closed would be great. Issue being I can't find it anywhere in Europe.

I strongly support the idea that Europeans need to have a better access to DCA headphones!

 

[pavuol]

No test track in this kind of review?

 

[Kyle / MrHeeHo]

Sure, Abyss are snakeoil, pure and simple where these seem to get the basic engineering right. But, even with an argument like 'recouping R&D costs' I can't believe there is anything in these phones to justify this kind of price. It's after all just a few hundred grams of plastic and metal. I'm sure Mr. Clark would still turn a handsome profit if these sold for $400 - which is still an expensive headphone in my book.


They look like pretty bog-standard gamer phones to me. Not really an æsthetic I find particularly appealing.

I'm pretty sure you're really underestimating the cost of the materials and the cost of labor

 

[solderdude]

Hi,

Here are some thoughts about the EQ.

Notes about the EQ design:

• The average L/R is used to calculate the score.
• The resolution is 12 points per octave interpolated from the raw data (provided by @amirm)
• A Genetic Algorithm is used to optimize the EQ.
• The EQ Score is designed to MAXIMIZE the Score WHILE fitting the Harman target curve with a fixed complexity.
  This will avoid weird results if one only optimizes for the Score.
  It will probably flatten the Error regression doing so, the tonal balance should be more neutral.
• The EQs are starting point and may require tuning (certainly at LF).
• The range around and above 10kHz is usually not EQed unless smooth enough to do so.
• I am using PEQ (PK) as from my experience the definition is more consistent across different DSP/platform implementations than shelves.
• With some HP/amp combo the boosts and preamp gain need to be carefully considered to avoid issues
• Not all units of the same products are made equal. The EQ is based on the measurements of a single unit.
• YMMV with regards to the very unit you are trying this EQ on.

Good L/R match.

This headphone does not really need EQing...
I have generated one EQ, the APO config file is attached for those who still want to try.

Score no EQ: 77.8
Score with EQ: 90.0

Dan Clark Stea APO EQ Flat@HF 96000Hz
August202021-094250

Preamp: -2.1 dB

Filter 1: ON PK Fc 108.23 Hz Gain -2.70 dB Q 1.13
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 282.93 Hz Gain -1.05 dB Q 2.63
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 540.35 Hz Gain 1.29 dB Q 2.57
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 981.29 Hz Gain -1.60 dB Q 1.82
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 3588.49 Hz Gain 2.06 dB Q 2.70

View attachment 148555

I wonder is the score calculated between 20Hz and 8kHz ?
Everything above 8kHz should be ignored when doing the calculations.

 

[thewas]

But I think there's a difference between getting to the target with DSP and getting there analog, especially achieving the less peaky highs. It just sounds so easy.

That is also my impression in now 10+ years equalising loudspeakers, headphones and rooms, it does not sound as good when trying to "force" a transducer and/or acoustic environment to a very different than their natural responses, especially using high magnitude PEQ filters, possibly as positive ones are in the end resonators (making the sound boomy) and negative ones anti-resonators (making often the sound lifeless). I used to be a big EQ fan but now I only use them for good transducers and only for correcting small peaks with negative PEQs.

 

[restorer-john]

Sure, Abyss are snakeoil, pure and simple where these seem to get the basic engineering right. But, even with an argument like 'recouping R&D costs' I can't believe there is anything in these phones to justify this kind of price. It's after all just a few hundred grams of plastic and metal. I'm sure Mr. Clark would still turn a handsome profit if these sold for $400 - which is still an expensive headphone in my book.


They look like pretty bog-standard gamer phones to me. Not really an æsthetic I find particularly appealing.

Let's face it, the price is utterly ridiculous for a pair of headphones. It's beyond stupid and so out of step with reality, it's funny. But there are people who will pay the money because they want what is being touted and tested as a very respectable sounding "reference" headphone. They have money to burn and good on them.

I've spent what I considered high prices for gear in the distant past (when I had more money than wisdom). Equipment where the cost of R&D was NOT costed into the retail price as much as it appears here. Very large companies with huge R&D dollars could bring statement pieces to market, heavily subsidised and the audiophiles got true bargains. A small company can't use its halo products as loss leaders to get people in the door with their brand, they just don't have the breadth of products to offset the margins they compromise.

I would certainly be expecting a hell of a lot longer than 2 years warranty on US$4k headphones. Most loudspeakers, regardless of price offer 5 years. I'd also be wanting a committment to reasonably priced and consistently available spare parts. I see no mention of this.

 

[Nemo]

Impressive achievement, and kudos to DCA for using modern technologies and good engineering in their designs.

I am curios about the ~2.5db "bump" at around 100-150Hz, that is the only deviation from the Harmann target, and clearly was well received by @amirm: I'll definitively try to add that to the EQ of my Ether CX and see how I like it next week when I am back at home

 

[amirm]

am curios about the ~2.5db "bump" at around 100-150Hz, that is the only deviation from the Harmann target, and clearly was well received by @amirm: I'll definitively try to add that to the EQ of my Ether CX and see how I like it next week when I am back at home

Let me clarify this. On the original sample this was boosted more and I dialed it out with a filter completely and liked it better. In the second sample whose measurements here, the level was reduced enough that I did not bother to try to take it out. It is possible that it is better without it. I just didn't have the time to experiment and the amount is not enough to worry about in grand scheme of things. So no, it is not a recommended boost for me.

 

[daftcombo]

Why do those headphones sound cleaner than others measured here with low distortion (which should already be inaudible) and following the same FR curve after EQ?
Are distortion audibility thesholds different from what we thought? Is impulse response more important than we thought?

 

[amirm]

Video review posted and added to the review:

Hopefully it adds some flavor to the text review.

 

[Doodski]

I'd also be wanting a committment to reasonably priced and consistently available spare parts. I see no mention of this.

Yes. For sure.

 

[amirm]

Are distortion audibility thesholds different from what we thought?

I don't have a provable answer but will comment that we routinely boost certain parts of the response in other headphones and thereby increasing their distortion. This headphone gets superlative distortion ratings without any need to further boost the response.

 

[solderdude]

The less EQ is needed the better it sounds to me as well.
Finding a good closed headphone is not that simple.
Only found just a few.
Too bad it's too expensive for me.

At least with @Dan Clark there is correlation between price and performance.
That said...4 years of development has to be paid for as well and sales won't be in the same numbers as the Noire.
If I ever had to spend $4k on a headphone this would be it.

I'm trying to calculate a rough sensitivity in db/mw for these, would anyone mind helping me out?

99dB/V and 82.5dB/mW does require a beefy amp to reach 120dB SPL peaks undistorted but will be well worth it for those that like to turn it up for a minute or so at immensely impressive levels.
That requires 11V = 5.5W
For music enjoyment and turning up the volume to comfortable loud levels one can endure for a whole song the numbers are: 3.5V (0.5W) which is possible with many desktop amps.

 

[amirm]

Let's face it, the price is utterly ridiculous for a pair of headphones. It's beyond stupid and so out of step with reality, it's funny.

The world has changed around us John. When I got into photography in early 1980s, I bought an $800 telephoto lens and thought that was so much money. Fast forward 20 years later and I go to photo shoots with my $10,000 telephoto lens and look around and everyone has similar telephoto lenses costing $6K to $12K (all are white Canon lenses and are large so you can spot them for a mile away). People spend a lot of money on their hobbies these days. Samsung announced their new fold 3 phone and it is almost $2,000.

 

[MayaTlab]

That is also my impression in now 10+ years equalising loudspeakers, headphones and rooms, it does not sound as good when trying to "force" a transducer and/or acoustic environment to a very different than their natural responses, especially using high magnitude PEQ filters, possibly as positive ones are in the end resonators (making the sound boomy) and negative ones anti-resonators (making often the sound lifeless). I used to be a big EQ fan but now I only use them for good transducers and only for correcting small peaks with negative PEQs.

But what do we mean by "DSP" exactly ? Fixed values PEQ bands ? Or the sort of feedback mechanism seen in some ANC headphones for example ? The latter is a pretty terrific way to solve many issues that have plagued closed backs in particular at lower frequencies, and we're nearing the point where its drawbacks are getting eliminated.
In general the main issue that I personally have with PEQing headphones is less the application of PEQ per se but knowledge of the actual FR on my head. I'd be curious to learn whether or not and how the AMTS improves the desirability of the HPTF. From what I understand it's tuned to eliminate some resonances in the front volume at higher frequencies, but it's also in the range where HPTF diverges quite a bit between individuals unless I'm mistaken, and some of the divergences may not be desirable.