This is a review and detailed measurements of the DROP + MRSPEAKERS ETHER CX CLOSED planar headphones (made by Dan Clark Audio for Drop). Company reached out to me a couple of years ago to see if I would review them. At the time I was not testing headphones so said no but that I could use a low impedance headphone to test headphone amps. They offered the Ether CX and that is the main role they have had. Currently the Ether CX costs US $900 from drop.com.
I have been remiss in reviewing these because I have so many loaner headphones to test. Alas, it seems every day someone reaches out to me asking when I will test them so here we are.
The Ether CX has a professional and stylistic look to it with the carbon fiber finish:
Two sturdy XLR cables terminate in a 4-pin XLR with supplied adapters to other sockets.
Ether CX is a bit on the heavier side given its large size:
I find them comfortable to wear despite the unique rectangular inside cup:
Inside dimensions are 58x38x16 mm (height, width, depth).
The one issue I have with comfort is how hot they wear. Due to generous pad area, they are quite warm to the point where I can't use them during summer. My lab is in the loft so heat rises and forces me to use IEMs for the most part during this time of year.
Note: The measurements you are about to see are made using a standardized Gras 45C. Headphone measurements by definition are approximate and variable so don't be surprised if other measurements even if performed with the same fixtures as mine, differ in end results. Protocols vary such as headband pressure and averaging (which I don't do). As you will see, I confirm the approximate accuracy of the measurements using Equalization and listening tests. Ultimately headphone measurements are less exact than speakers mostly in bass and above a few kilohertz so keep that in mind as you read these tests. If you think you have an exact idea of a headphone performance, you are likely wrong!
I expected difficulty in mating the Ether CX to my measurement rig due to rectangular opening but such was not the case. They fit instantly with little need for adjustments.
Ether CX Measurements
Let's start with our usual frequency response measurements:
It was interesting to measure these after two years of using them without such knowledge. It was as relief to see such a well-behaved response that hugs the preference curve above 100 Hz. Below that it is not some wild response either: it is flat which shows an intent to get proper response there, albeit, not fully matching latest research.
Relative response then looks very good:
The best news was yet to come in the form of exceptionally low distortion:
Even when pushed to 114 dBSPL, this headphone has less distortion than many at 94 dBSPL! We should be used to that with Dan Clark headphones but still nice to see in design after design:
Now you know why this is such a powerful tool for testing headphone amplifiers. When I hear distortion, it is almost always the amplifier clipping, not the headphone.
Group delay shows very response other than bass:
Impedance is low and flat as expected:
So best pay attention to my 32 ohm load testing of headphone amplifiers.
Sensitivity is slightly below average:
Drop Ether CX Headphone Listening Tests and Equalization
Out of box tonality his fine but not exciting. So I pulled out the EQ tool to add the needed sub-bass and touch up higher up:
The performance was stellar now. Spatial qualities which were non-existent before, showed up now. I would rate it a score B on that front. Sub-bass output post EQ was exceptional producing powerful notes that put a smile on my face.
Conclusions
The Drop Ether CX is a very well engineered headphone. It has vanishingly low distortion and a frequency response that is just missing sub-bass to be a complete presentation. That is easy enough fix as is a bit of treble boosting to improve spatial effects. Once there, you have a very nice closed back headphone which blocks out external noise nicely and produces very clean and faithful performance. Without EQ, it lacks excitement for me to use it but you may be different.
I can recommend the Drop+ Ether CX and strongly so with Equalization.
-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.
Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
I have been remiss in reviewing these because I have so many loaner headphones to test. Alas, it seems every day someone reaches out to me asking when I will test them so here we are.
The Ether CX has a professional and stylistic look to it with the carbon fiber finish:
Two sturdy XLR cables terminate in a 4-pin XLR with supplied adapters to other sockets.
Ether CX is a bit on the heavier side given its large size:
I find them comfortable to wear despite the unique rectangular inside cup:
Inside dimensions are 58x38x16 mm (height, width, depth).
The one issue I have with comfort is how hot they wear. Due to generous pad area, they are quite warm to the point where I can't use them during summer. My lab is in the loft so heat rises and forces me to use IEMs for the most part during this time of year.
Note: The measurements you are about to see are made using a standardized Gras 45C. Headphone measurements by definition are approximate and variable so don't be surprised if other measurements even if performed with the same fixtures as mine, differ in end results. Protocols vary such as headband pressure and averaging (which I don't do). As you will see, I confirm the approximate accuracy of the measurements using Equalization and listening tests. Ultimately headphone measurements are less exact than speakers mostly in bass and above a few kilohertz so keep that in mind as you read these tests. If you think you have an exact idea of a headphone performance, you are likely wrong!
I expected difficulty in mating the Ether CX to my measurement rig due to rectangular opening but such was not the case. They fit instantly with little need for adjustments.
Ether CX Measurements
Let's start with our usual frequency response measurements:
It was interesting to measure these after two years of using them without such knowledge. It was as relief to see such a well-behaved response that hugs the preference curve above 100 Hz. Below that it is not some wild response either: it is flat which shows an intent to get proper response there, albeit, not fully matching latest research.
Relative response then looks very good:
The best news was yet to come in the form of exceptionally low distortion:
Even when pushed to 114 dBSPL, this headphone has less distortion than many at 94 dBSPL! We should be used to that with Dan Clark headphones but still nice to see in design after design:
Now you know why this is such a powerful tool for testing headphone amplifiers. When I hear distortion, it is almost always the amplifier clipping, not the headphone.
Group delay shows very response other than bass:
Impedance is low and flat as expected:
So best pay attention to my 32 ohm load testing of headphone amplifiers.
Sensitivity is slightly below average:
Drop Ether CX Headphone Listening Tests and Equalization
Out of box tonality his fine but not exciting. So I pulled out the EQ tool to add the needed sub-bass and touch up higher up:
The performance was stellar now. Spatial qualities which were non-existent before, showed up now. I would rate it a score B on that front. Sub-bass output post EQ was exceptional producing powerful notes that put a smile on my face.
Conclusions
The Drop Ether CX is a very well engineered headphone. It has vanishingly low distortion and a frequency response that is just missing sub-bass to be a complete presentation. That is easy enough fix as is a bit of treble boosting to improve spatial effects. Once there, you have a very nice closed back headphone which blocks out external noise nicely and produces very clean and faithful performance. Without EQ, it lacks excitement for me to use it but you may be different.
I can recommend the Drop+ Ether CX and strongly so with Equalization.
-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.
Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/
)
