*sigh*. I was only going by this:The review index lists them as Recommended even without EQ.
Headphone Review and Measurements Index
Headphone Review and Measurementswww.audiosciencereview.com
“As is, the Utopia sounded just fine. Not a whole lot to rave about but no glaring, annoying response errors. As expected, deep bass was absent so out came the EQ:”
And this: “Objectively we have the "old school" frequency response tuning with deficient sub-bass response and some in the upper mid-range, lower treble. What is missing is not significant enough to leave you disappointed if you paid $400. But at $4,000, you better find a way to add EQ and get the sound to the next higher level.”
I did indeed pay $4,400 for my Utopias. I consider comparing them to $400 headphones to be far from a positive review, and frankly a glaring exception to Amir’s usually fair-minded, sensible approach. Maybe he was sleep-deprived. But these precisely-designed headphones with the most exacting components and attention to detail are not worthy of comparison with cheap Amazon knock-off cans in quality, by any estimation whatsoever. Hence the “panned”. If there’s a better word, I’m open to suggestions.
As a post-script I am left to wonder whether the concerns about missing bass response is an actual flaw in the Utopias or simply an inherent aspect of open-backed cans in general. The Sennheiser 800s have often been lauded as a reference point for years, but my Utopias trounce them in bass detail AND response with no EQ applied at all. I can’t speak for the Dan Clarks, but I would call into question any comparison between a planar magnetic and a dynamic driver headphone to begin with, is that not fair?
Last edited: