But doesn't the ML 5909 also operate in passive mode? They even provide 4m cable for that purpose which suggests they were also designed as an all-rounder (Audio Range Rover!), both as a portable ANC h/phone, but also intended for home use with hi-fi system. And now they have dropped their price a little from £999 to £899 (sorry, I'm in UK) that's starting to look like good value.
I believe that ML 5909 are the first, and Solitaire T are the second, to have passive and active modes. The differences are in specific areas, but for me, the voicing. Solitaire T are voiced and engineered as high-end closed-back headphones, and it's digital mode is very close to the sound quality of the passive mode. ML 5909 are voiced as wireless headphones, like typical wireless cans. This isn't a bad thing, but at its price, I'd rather go either towards Focal Bathys and B&W PX8, or go up to the Solitaire T. As it happens, I've been honeymooning with the Solitaire T for just under 48 hours, and used it at work in conference meetings too! Value is subjective, but I like that I have: - Two wireless Bluetooth pathways - Wired integrated DAC/amp via USB-C* - Single-ended or balanced fully passive operation (all digital circuitry bypassed and turned off) *(USB-C connection is, unfortunately, the weakest and flawed pathway, due to heavy volume cap limitation. New app, released yesterday, does not allow users to defeat this limit). This combination is wholly unique to the Solitaire T!
For passive vs ANC, AVForums wrote, "Sat at home, running with the ANC off, the 5909’s point of comparison isn’t really the Bowers & Wilkins PX7 or its ilk, it’s the Focal Celestee." So, I'm also confused how the ML N5909 was left out of this conversation when they were comparing the Solitaire T to the Focal Celestee, since they also compared the ML N5909 to the Focal Celestee. Okay, they did say the Solitaire T in some areas are better than the Celestee, but it sounded like just a bit better they way they said it. From what I read on majorhifi on the Solitair T's comfort, "the otherwise soft and comfortable leather pads provide minimal ventilation and had my ears heating up a bit over the course of an extended listen". ML N5909 has more praise in general for comfort. Then in this video, they said the ML N5909 is the better wireless headphone. So, for the money, the impression they end up giving is that the N5909 is the better value than the Solitaire T, since the ANC off is comparable to the Celestee and they say it's the better wireless headphone. What confuses me is that they praise the Solitaire T as one of its kind here, but if it's only a bit better wired than the ML N5909, and if the ML 5909 is the better wireless headphone, then any audiophile should skip the Solitaire T, because we already have good open/closeback headphones that are better than the Celestee. So if we are looking for a wireless headphone, then we'd be stupid to pay more for the Solitaire T when the ML N5909 is the better wireless headphone.
@@Viewer13128 If you are simply looking at value only, on price to performance ratio, then you are right; 5909 is superior. However, Solitaire T, in terms of pure sonics (how they were tuned and voiced) are superior to the ML No 5909, wireless or passive. How much of a difference, and whether the cost difference is worth it to you, is eny subjective. Regarding wireless and ANC, 5909 has slightly better ANC 'tech'. However, the incredible passive noise reduction of the Solitaire T is, in my opinion, a market leader over most wireless headphones, and with ANC, extremely competent. Yes, it won't block out the lowest of roars, but those roars are very quiet purrs on the Solitaire T. 5909 makes said roars as a whisper. If you want better ANC, Sony WH-1000XM5 and Apple AirPods Max beat everything. Wireless operation is more complicated. 5909 are excellent. Solitaire T are also excellent. Both use the generally used Bluetooth + ANC pathways: Qualcomm chip to Sony ANC tech to amp (or DAC in certain cases before amp). However, Solitaire T has a single advantage, Bluetooth HQ. Here, the Sony ANC chip is bypassed, so Qualcomm to quad ESS ES9218 DAC chip. This is the only wireless headphone to do this, not even the Audio Technica ATH-WB2022 can. The difference in sound quality is discernable, but, like most audio products at the higher end of their games, is not huge, but enough. Finally, Solitaire T is wired internally balanced. Unfortunately, T+A don't supply a balanced cable, but it can run in balanced mode. Once again, unique with no other competition, as long as you can obtain a cable for use with balanced gear. To reiterate, 5909 is superior in terms of pure value, but so is the Solitaire T when considered on its unique features that, in certain cases, are only existent to itself. For me, I did not feel stupid to get something special for long term use, and went all out, based on its features and early reviews/impressions of its sonics, which at the end is what's important; how it sounds and performs in my use cases. YMMV (Yes, I consider your last paragraph a little insulting, and unnecessary. Not needed in an open discussion of shared hobby interests).
But doesn't the ML 5909 also operate in passive mode? They even provide 4m cable for that purpose which suggests they were also designed as an all-rounder (Audio Range Rover!), both as a portable ANC h/phone, but also intended for home use with hi-fi system. And now they have dropped their price a little from £999 to £899 (sorry, I'm in UK) that's starting to look like good value.
I believe that ML 5909 are the first, and Solitaire T are the second, to have passive and active modes.
The differences are in specific areas, but for me, the voicing.
Solitaire T are voiced and engineered as high-end closed-back headphones, and it's digital mode is very close to the sound quality of the passive mode.
ML 5909 are voiced as wireless headphones, like typical wireless cans. This isn't a bad thing, but at its price, I'd rather go either towards Focal Bathys and B&W PX8, or go up to the Solitaire T.
As it happens, I've been honeymooning with the Solitaire T for just under 48 hours, and used it at work in conference meetings too!
Value is subjective, but I like that I have:
- Two wireless Bluetooth pathways
- Wired integrated DAC/amp via USB-C*
- Single-ended or balanced fully passive operation (all digital circuitry bypassed and turned off)
*(USB-C connection is, unfortunately, the weakest and flawed pathway, due to heavy volume cap limitation. New app, released yesterday, does not allow users to defeat this limit).
This combination is wholly unique to the Solitaire T!
@@TheOneInYellow just compares it to px8 and Bathys... Dude I love the flexiblity. It sounds so good wireless
For passive vs ANC, AVForums wrote, "Sat at home, running with the ANC off, the 5909’s point of comparison isn’t really the Bowers & Wilkins PX7 or its ilk, it’s the Focal Celestee."
So, I'm also confused how the ML N5909 was left out of this conversation when they were comparing the Solitaire T to the Focal Celestee, since they also compared the ML N5909 to the Focal Celestee. Okay, they did say the Solitaire T in some areas are better than the Celestee, but it sounded like just a bit better they way they said it.
From what I read on majorhifi on the Solitair T's comfort, "the otherwise soft and comfortable leather pads provide minimal ventilation and had my ears heating up a bit over the course of an extended listen". ML N5909 has more praise in general for comfort.
Then in this video, they said the ML N5909 is the better wireless headphone.
So, for the money, the impression they end up giving is that the N5909 is the better value than the Solitaire T, since the ANC off is comparable to the Celestee and they say it's the better wireless headphone.
What confuses me is that they praise the Solitaire T as one of its kind here, but if it's only a bit better wired than the ML N5909, and if the ML 5909 is the better wireless headphone, then any audiophile should skip the Solitaire T, because we already have good open/closeback headphones that are better than the Celestee. So if we are looking for a wireless headphone, then we'd be stupid to pay more for the Solitaire T when the ML N5909 is the better wireless headphone.
@@Viewer13128 If you are simply looking at value only, on price to performance ratio, then you are right; 5909 is superior.
However, Solitaire T, in terms of pure sonics (how they were tuned and voiced) are superior to the ML No 5909, wireless or passive.
How much of a difference, and whether the cost difference is worth it to you, is eny subjective.
Regarding wireless and ANC, 5909 has slightly better ANC 'tech'. However, the incredible passive noise reduction of the Solitaire T is, in my opinion, a market leader over most wireless headphones, and with ANC, extremely competent.
Yes, it won't block out the lowest of roars, but those roars are very quiet purrs on the Solitaire T. 5909 makes said roars as a whisper.
If you want better ANC, Sony WH-1000XM5 and Apple AirPods Max beat everything.
Wireless operation is more complicated.
5909 are excellent.
Solitaire T are also excellent.
Both use the generally used Bluetooth + ANC pathways: Qualcomm chip to Sony ANC tech to amp (or DAC in certain cases before amp).
However, Solitaire T has a single advantage, Bluetooth HQ. Here, the Sony ANC chip is bypassed, so Qualcomm to quad ESS ES9218 DAC chip. This is the only wireless headphone to do this, not even the Audio Technica ATH-WB2022 can. The difference in sound quality is discernable, but, like most audio products at the higher end of their games, is not huge, but enough.
Finally, Solitaire T is wired internally balanced.
Unfortunately, T+A don't supply a balanced cable, but it can run in balanced mode.
Once again, unique with no other competition, as long as you can obtain a cable for use with balanced gear.
To reiterate, 5909 is superior in terms of pure value, but so is the Solitaire T when considered on its unique features that, in certain cases, are only existent to itself.
For me, I did not feel stupid to get something special for long term use, and went all out, based on its features and early reviews/impressions of its sonics, which at the end is what's important; how it sounds and performs in my use cases.
YMMV
(Yes, I consider your last paragraph a little insulting, and unnecessary. Not needed in an open discussion of shared hobby interests).
@@Viewer13128 Thanks Tia. I had read those comments too. I think I'm definitely edging towards the 5909s!
The Audio-Technica ATH-WB2022 are more expensive wireless headphones at around $3,000 USD.
yes
any comparison to the Solitaire T and the Mark Levinson 5909?
@@Viewer13128There is no ANC in the ATH