Mark Levinson No5909 Wireless Headphone Review & Comments

Great review, Ed. Did you use the headphone with a wired connection?, and, if so, does the fundamental sound signature continue across used that connection? Can it be used passively?
 
Last edited:
As a pedantic chemist, it’s lithium that has an atomic number of three. Beryllium has an atomic number of four. Oh, and if you are mentioning mass, you should use the mass number not atomic number, which in this case is 9!
 
Last edited:
I didn't read the whole review as I'm not really interested in this type of product, but I thought the conclusion was a very well balanced piece of reviewing! Then I read some more and now I want to have a listen to a pair :-D
 
Intrigued by these. I’ve come to realise wireless headphones enable me to listen to music far more than speakers ever will. Pretty happy with my B&W PX7, and I’m not sure these would be worth 4x the cost? Probably not. But cool nonetheless.
 
You mentioned that the headphones use compression for 24/96 - I take it that is lossless compression? If so, it hardly matters to sound quality. Perhaps to battery life...
 
And forgive me for being cynical, but ML is a high-end brand, there is simply no way they're going to do a pair of headphones for less than a high-end price.
 
Also sceptical of Bluetooth headphones at this price point due to data compression (at least until aptX lossless Bluetooth codec is available)

If you are in the market makes sense to wait for reviews of this future release of another pricey BT set ->

 
I don't think anyone is ever going to convince me throwing away digital data is not going to detrimentally affect the sound of a device.
I love my high sample rate PCM, DSD and high-end DACs too much to be persuaded to try Bluetooth.
 
Much prefer open standards like DLNA than propriety systems like Blueos, which don't even support DSD or multichannel.
Don't see what it has to do with Bluetooth headphones though.
 
I tried these and they are horribly bright, plus lack low end base.

The new Focal Bathys makes these headphones uncompetitive. The 5909 should be about £499 BECAUSE the Bathys sound better at £699 and new PX8 are more listenable/enjoyable at £599.
 
I tried these and they are horribly bright, plus lack low end base.

The new Focal Bathys makes these headphones uncompetitive. The 5909 should be about £499 BECAUSE the Bathys sound better at £699 and new PX8 are more listenable/enjoyable at £599.
Got to agree , I wanted to like the 5909 but the shop suggested an A/B with the bathys

build wise the focals look and feel far more expensive, while the 5909 felt a little bit cheap.

sound wise and this can always be a bit subjective but I felt the focals smashed it out the park in comparison. Just play massive attacks mezzanine and the difference is clear.
the cherry on the cake though was a several hundred pound saving with the focals.
End of the day, I couldn’t justify stumping up for the 5909 and bought the focals.
 

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom