The first headphone that I purchased was an Audio Technica ATH-A500 back in 2006. Since then, I've had a soft spot for Audio Technica. That doesn't mean I'm willing to accept bad products from Audio Technica–on the contrary, in fact. After owning many of Audio Technica's more modern products like the ATH-W1000X, ATH-W5000, and ATH-A2000Z, I'd lost faith in Audio Technica. Before hearing the incredibly expensive Narukami setup at this past CanJam New York, the ATH-AD2000 (released in 2004) was the most recent headphone of theirs I'd actually felt comfortable recommending people try. I've wanted a win for Audio Technica since the mid-2000s, and when last month, Daniel at Audio Technica offered to let me review the newly released ATH-ADX3000 and compare it to the ATH-ADX5000, I couldn't say yes fast enough.
Comfort
I haven't talked about comfort in many reviews because it's hard to estimate how comfortable a headphone will be on different people. But the ADX3000 and ADX5000 are the most comfortable headphones I've put on my head since the featherweight (195g!) Sony MDR-MA900. The ADX3000 only weighs 257g, 3 grams lighter than the already light Sennheiser HD600. Unlike the plastic Sennheisers, the ADX3000's frame is made of a magnesium alloy, which gives it a more "premium" feel in hand. The headband fits my head in a way that it feels like having a hat on, so combined with the lightness, I can't think of many other headphones that feel less like wearing anything.
But the comfort does give a false sense of security, because the sound isn't exactly what I would call easygoing.
Associated Equipment
HQPlayer (sinc-mg filter) → Afterdark Rosanna Diretta Network Bridge → USB Fiber Isolator → Accurate Audio DIP-B660 DDC → Metrum Adagio → Esoteric A100/Kenwood L-07M/Millett Sangaku DIY/Mass Kobo 475
Sound
I'm normally a big stickler about reviewing the stock experience, which means not even using EQ. However, I was actually recommended by Daniel to use the ADX3000 with the ADX5000's pads, and I quickly heard why.
The ADX3000 is bright. It's too intense for me to listen for long stock. The ADX5000 pads were a huge help, and Audio Technica, historically, has been pretty good about selling replacement parts. I've written this review with this combination in mind, because, frankly, I can't use the stock configuration for very long and this was a sanctioned combination.
But even with the ADX5000 pads on, the ADX measures among the two brightest headphones I've measured on my KB500X clone rig: the Stax SR-X9000 and the Hifiman Shangri-La Sr.:
I'm somewhat treble sensitive, and did find myself listening quieter with the ADX3000. But I found myself actually enjoying the ADX3000 so much more than measurements would have suggested to me. Of course, HpTF and HRTF likely have a big role in this, but more simply, it's colored in a way that makes a lot of music more fun for me.
Bass
The ADX3000 has a healthy lift in midbass and upper bass. This was something I really didn't care for in the Grell OAE-1, but it does sound cleaner and less congested than the OAE-1. I think I may have a possible explanation for this, as the center midrange and treble are both elevated to compensate for the bass lift. The OAE-1, in contrast, has neither, so the bass was so much more noticeable and likely masked everything above it.
This is a tuning decision I've seen more often in the IEM world than the headphone world. Many IEM companies have been making incredibly bassy IEMs; one of my favorites, the Nightjar Acoustics Singularity, is able to actually sound "normal" because they balance out the sound with an elevated center midrange:
It is able to balance out coloration through additive coloration. It's not really a representation of "neutral" but rather showing an understanding of how to make certain goals work. While I usually want music to sound how I'd want to hear it played live, that's not always the case. Sometimes, I want an intentionally colored signature to augment certain characteristics of an album. For example, if I'm listening to Massive Attack or Infected Mushroom, a transducer that is colored in a way to make the sound more aggressive gives me more enjoyment than a clinical headphone. The combination of elevated upper bass, center midrange, and treble gives me that sense of driving force.
Don't believe me? The Focal Utopia, widely recognized to be one of the most dynamic-sounding headphones, actually follows a similar W-shaped tuning, to a less extreme degree.
Midrange
I've already gone into the center midrange of the ADX3000; while that does a lot to keep the bass from masking the midrange, it's a bit more hit or miss for non-amplified music. Elevations in this region tend to sound shouty, and the ADX3000 isn't an exception. Vocals and brass especially are quite forward in a way that reminds me a lot of the Klipsch Forte IIs I used to own. I've historically liked Grados for providing a sound reminiscent of the Klipsches, but the ADX3000 gets much closer. It's not quite there, as the ADX3000 portrays horns with too much treble up top, but I think the ADX3000 scratch that itch better than my vintage RS1s did. But like most colorations, this presentation does mean it's harder to recommend without hearing it.
Treble
The ADX3000's treble is unfortunately its hardest sell. With ADX5000 pads it's wildly bright, and with stock pads, I feel like I either need much darker music or a few more decades of living to taper my ears' treble sensitivity. While the ADX3000 is incredibly comfortable to wear, I did have to take rests between albums for the sake of recovering from the treble. I do think that this is part of what gives the ADX3000 its charm, but those sensitive to treble may find this headphone to be less than agreeable.
Comparisons
Colored headphones such as the ADX3000 make it hard to create comparisons, as comparing the ADX3000 to something "normal" sounding, like an HD650, doesn't really teach you much that simply looking at the FR would tell you. For most music, the ADX3000 probably wouldn't be my first choice. The headphone I actually feel might have been the best headphone to compare it with is one I've bought and sold an embarrassing number of times: the Fostex TH900. I wasn't able to get one in on time, but if I have to rely on my auditory memory, the TH900 is W-shaped like the ADX3000, so on paper it makes some sense to compare to it. But from memory, the TH900 sounds drier overall and less integrated in a way that always led me to leave it on my shelf. I don't get the subterranean, head shaking sub bass of the TH900 with the ADX3000, though. So, as with all of audio, it's a matter of what coloration is preferred.
Versus ADX5000
The most obvious comparison I can make is comparing it to the ADX5000. I've had a bit of time with the ADX5000 before being lent this unit, but even when using it with my curated chain, it's still pretty underwhelming. The ADX5000 has always sounded confused to me. It's more polite than the ADX3000 and sounds a little more distant, vaguely attempting to emulate what the Sennheiser HD800 and many other flagships do in dipping the upper midrange. It's like Audio Technica wanted to make a modern flagship with their unique colorations, but played it safe. Normally, this would be fine, as "safe" usually means more agreeable to more people, but it's still too weird sounding for its own good. So the ADX5000 unfortunately combines the worst of both worlds.
What's interesting though is that on my rig, they actually measure within the threshold of placement variation:
The best theory I can give is that the ADX3000 does have more treble, and that helps with the sense of congestion and dynamics. Whatever it is, after getting good enough notes for this review, I stopped using the ADX5000 because I struggled to find any reason to use it over the (much cheaper) ADX3000. The bass on the ADX3000 sounded cleaner, the midrange sounded less hazy, and the treble sounded less grainy. If I were blindfolded, I would expect the ADX3000 with the ADX5000 pads to be the higher-tier headphone.
Versus PhilPhone
The ADX3000 reminds me of another headphone–fittingly, one that happens to the bones of an Audio Technica headphone: the PhilPhone.
Both the ADX3000 and PhilPhone have a bombastic W-shaped sound signature but manage to appeal to me in different ways. The PhilPhone is basically what I wanted the Fostex TH909 to be. It has boosted sub bass which, in an open headphone, is like having your cake and eating it. This contrasts with the slightly less dry ADX3000's presentation. I think it rocks, and while I do want to disclose that Phil is a personal friend, I would simply not bring the PhilPhone up in this review if it didn't have my highest praise. If I could have some of the upper bass from the ADX3000 in a PhilPhone, that would be like adding a scoop of ice cream to my cake. I do think that the ADX3000 ends up being slightly more of a generalist than the PhilPhone because it's less bassy, but that's at the point of splitting hairs.
I haven't been able to measure an open PhilPhone, but I was able to measure an experiment Phil has made that sounds pretty close to how I remember the open PhilPhone to sound:
Conclusion
It's difficult to review colored headphones because they often shine in specific niches. My Yamaha YH-5000SE review is a good example because, while I eventually found music that I felt worked with it, the majority of music I actually listen to does not work with its colorations. The ADX3000 in contrast does sound very colored, but in a way that seems to highlight its strengths and can be argued to be fairly consumer-friendly. It's probably not a headphone for the majority of people reading this review. But, for those that think they want a V-shaped headphone but sometimes miss midrange presence, the ADX3000 makes a compelling case for letting "neutral" take a backseat.
Comments?
Leave us your opinion.