By aspect — in detail
Tonality
Moderate · 14 srcMost sources land on “neutral with a bright tilt” — flat-to-warm through the bass and mids, then the Beyer treble. The lab-minded sources call the shape studio-correct below 5 kHz and wonky above it; the sceptics say it still needs EQ before it is honest. The stock Producing pads add roughly 3 dB of bass and low-mid warmth over the Mixing pads, which is the only tone control you get.
“The overall sound signature of the DT 1990 PRO mkII could be called ‘neutral’ when using the (stock mounted) ‘producer pads’.”
DIY-Audio-Heaven (solderdude)
“the beyerdynamic open‑backed model has a gently ‘scooped’ tonality in comparison, with a broad treble boost starting around 5kHz and extending well above 10kHz complemented by a slight bump in the ‘upper bass’ region”
Sound On Sound (Sam Inglis)
“The DT 1990 Pro MkIIs are bright, lively headphones with a boost in the treble, a smaller boost in the bass, and an overall huge sound.”
SoundStage! Solo (Geoffrey Morrison)
“Highs are somewhat wonky and quite a ways off of both our Headphone Preference curve and Studio Curve.”
SoundGuys (Christian Thomas)
Measured
RTINGS files it as a flat sound signature (bass −2 dB, treble −1 dB against its target). On the GadgetryTech data, compensated to Harman 2018 and normalised at 500 Hz, the Producing pads sit within about 3 dB of target from 100 Hz to 6 kHz, then +8.6 dB at 8 kHz. DIY-Audio-Heaven adds the catch of a 30 Ω driver: on a 120 Ω headphone output the balance shifts noticeably toward the bass and low mids, which the 250 Ω original never did.
Praised for quality rather than quantity — tight, fast, low-distortion and extended to the bottom octave, with a mild upper-bass lift on the stock pads. The lab sources call it a little light in punch and sub-bass for an open-back; nobody calls it bloated, and everyone says it takes EQ well.
“The DT 1990 PRO mkII has a slightly boosted (mid)bass and good bass extension.”
DIY-Audio-Heaven (solderdude)
“The sub-bass range has strong impact and depth when required but does not bleed over into the mid bass and disappears into the background when it is not the focus.”
ecoustics (W. Jennings)
“The bass is tighter and overall they sound brighter but with less around 8kHz.”
r/headphones, u/InTheMixOfficial (7-year original owner)
Measured
On the GadgetryTech rig the Producing pads run about +1.5 to +2 dB from 40–200 Hz relative to 500 Hz and stay flat to 20 Hz (roughly 4 dB under the Harman 2018 shelf); the Mixing pads take about 3 dB out of the bass and low mids, which DIY-Audio-Heaven measures the same way. RTINGS reads the bass as slightly underemphasised (−2 dB). DIY-Audio-Heaven puts second-harmonic distortion in the bass near 1% and finds no compression to speak of up to 100 dB SPL.
⚠ vs. listeners — The graph is flat rather than shelved, which is exactly why the same low end reads as “strong impact when required” to the studio-minded and “missing a bit of punch and thump” to a Harman-referenced bench like RTINGS. Owners who want more simply add a low shelf.
Mostly heard as natural, clear and present — the region most sources trust for mixing. A smaller group (Sound On Sound, SoundStage! Solo, SoundGuys' EQ) reads a faint presence-region scoop that leaves vocals a shade less forward than neutral.
“their mid-range closely follows our target curve, rendering natural and clear vocals and instruments”
RTINGS (David Abraham, Nicholas Lim, Yannick Khong)
“The midrange is well balanced without any portion being particularly recessed or jumping out to the front”
ecoustics (W. Jennings)
“On balance I felt that they were still a shade mid‑recessed compared with my personal idea of neutral, but it was a close‑run thing.”
Sound On Sound (Sam Inglis)
Measured
GadgetryTech's Harman-compensated curve dips about 2.7 dB at 3 kHz and returns to target by 4 kHz — a shallow presence notch that SoundGuys' EQ preset fills with +4 dB at 3 kHz. Small enough that most listeners call the mids correct; large enough for the fussier ones to hear it.
Sources split, and the split is the review. Every rig finds the classic ~8 kHz peak still there — narrower than the original's and only a decibel or two lower at its apex. One camp hears sharpness and fatigue that survives EQ and says treble-sensitive buyers should keep walking; the other hears a bright but clean, non-fatiguing top end that is finally manageable next to the original. Which side you land on tracks your own 8 kHz sensitivity, your pads, and how long you listen.
Measured
Two hobbyist rigs agree closely: on GadgetryTech's KB006x the Producing pads peak at +11.9 dB (8.1 kHz, relative to 500 Hz; about +8.6 dB against Harman 2018) and the Mixing pads at +9.2 dB, against +13.7 dB for the original's Analytical pads on the same rig; Exound's rig reads +10.9–12.1 dB at 7.9 kHz versus +13.4–13.6 dB for the original. What changed most is the shape: the original's second shoulder at 7 kHz (+10 dB on both rigs) is gone, so the MKII's peak is a third-octave spike rising from roughly 0 dB at 7 kHz and back to +5 dB by 9 kHz. SoundGuys' B&K 5128 sees the same spike (“more narrow than it looks … due to smoothing”), RTINGS reads treble fluctuations that swing from under- to over-articulated, and DIY-Audio-Heaven's passive in-line filter takes the peak down about 5 dB.
⚠ vs. listeners — The measurements explain both camps rather than picking one. A narrower peak with the 7 kHz shoulder removed sounds less sibilant and less “ragged” than the original — hence “finally manageable” — while an apex only 1–2 dB lower still lands squarely on the 8 kHz band many ears flag as harsh, hence “still Beyer.” Beyerdynamic's own FAQ says only that 8 kHz was “slightly attenuated,” which is what the graphs show. DIY-Audio-Heaven adds a second-order point: the response above 2 kHz is more ragged than the original's, so after EQ the original's treble is the smoother of the two.
Where it splits
still the Beyer peak — sharp, prominent, needs EQ or a filter62%
“Above 7kHz there still is elevated treble resulting in sharpness (home audio).”
DIY-Audio-Heaven (solderdude)
bright but clean — not fatiguing, and a real step down from the original38%
“although you might expect to find that treble emphasis a little fatiguing, in practice it really isn’t”
Sound On Sound (Sam Inglis)
Soundstage
Moderate · 10 srcWide, open and well organised is the consistent read — “enormous” to SoundStage! Solo, “wide and spacious” with real depth to ecoustics, better separation than the original to Major HiFi. RTINGS is the dissenter on mechanism: its PRTF test finds little interaction with the outer ear, so the space is a headphone's, not a room's.
“The treble performance certainly plays a part in the creation of a rather wide and spacious soundstage with enough depth and height to sound rather realistic”
ecoustics (W. Jennings)
“the sense of space they create is just unreal”
Thomann, Lilyan Petrov (verified buyer)
“Though they're open-backed headphones, they don't produce audio that interacts much with your outer ear, so their sound doesn't closely resemble that of two angled reference monitors in an acoustically treated room.”
RTINGS (David Abraham, Nicholas Lim, Yannick Khong)
Measured
RTINGS' PRTF measurement scores the pinna interaction low for an open-back; the perceived width most reviewers describe is the treble lift and the open cups doing the work.
Imaging
Strong consensus · 9 srcStrong agreement: precise placement and channel separation good enough that the studio and gaming crowds both cite it as the reason to buy. RTINGS measures the left–right match as well aligned, and the raw data agrees.
“Both channels have incredible separation, giving each individual sound element a place where you can easily localize it.”
Major HiFi (Alex Schiffer)
“they have well-aligned left and right drivers, ensuring objects are accurately placed in the stereo field”
RTINGS (David Abraham, Nicholas Lim, Yannick Khong)
Measured
GadgetryTech's left and right channels track within about 1.5 dB below 10 kHz on both pad sets; DIY-Audio-Heaven calls the channel balance of its store-bought unit good. Its one caveat is that the stock cables' return-wire resistance measurably reduces stereo separation on a 30 Ω load, which the 250 Ω original was immune to.
Detail
Strong consensus · 11 srcNear-unanimous: resolving, transparent and fast, with timbre and micro-detail retrieval that several reviewers rank at or near the top of what a dynamic driver does at this price. The sceptics don't dispute it — they say the detail comes with the treble bill attached.
“Each instrument’s timbre was more realistic than I’ve heard with most dynamic-driver headphones.”
SoundStage! Solo (Geoffrey Morrison)
“Exceptional resolution and micro detail retrieval”
Head-Fi, derici2800 (owner review)
“the 1990s definitely held that crown”
r/headphones, u/Patolini (demoed against HD 660S2, R70xa and FT5)
Dynamics
Strong consensus · 9 srcStrong agreement on punch, transient snap and composure at volume — the TESLA.45's lower distortion and 10 dB sensitivity gain over the original show up in every listening note and in the compression sweeps.
“When it comes to transients, the DT 1990 Pro MKII do an admirable job, reproducing them with equal parts precision and punch.”
headphonecheck (Carsten Kaiser)
“The 2nd harmonic distortion level (around 1%) in the bass is quite good. It is not at the same level of most planar headphones but impressive low for a dynamic headphone.”
DIY-Audio-Heaven (solderdude)
Measured
DIY-Audio-Heaven measures lower distortion than the original and only 0.5 dB of compression at the lowest bass notes at 100 dB SPL; RTINGS finds no audible harmonic distortion even at elevated levels. Sensitivity is 114 dB/V (about 10 dB above the original), which is why phones and interfaces now drive it — but the continuous power rating is a modest 30 mW, so keep desktop amps in check when it is off your head.
Good to very good for most: plush, glasses-friendly velour, deep cups, weight that reviewers say they stop noticing, and a recessed headband that owners of the original credit. The dissent is real and physical — about 4.5–6 N of clamp on a 376 g headphone — and it produced returns: a Thomann buyer and a month-long Reddit owner both gave up on long sessions over clamp and cup fit.
“Construction feels extremely solid, and at 377 and 376 grammes respectively, the 1770s and 1990s are a little heavier than many rivals, but I found them very comfortable.”
Sound On Sound (Sam Inglis)
“If you’re going to be wearing headphones for a long time, the Beyerdynamic DT 1990 PRO MKII is an excellent choice, as the pads are very plush”
SoundGuys (Christian Thomas)
“I liked everything about them but the clamp pressure and the part where the headband touches the top of the head made it just too uncomfortable to wear for an extended session.”
Thomann, sonfx (verified buyer, returned)
“the high clamp pressure of the 1990 can be a bit fatiguing (it does get better over time)”
r/HeadphoneAdvice, u/kneepel
Measured
372 g and 4.5 N of clamp on DIY-Audio-Heaven's rig (Beyerdynamic quotes 376 g and 6 N; headphonecheck averages 812 g of contact pressure across head sizes). DIY-Audio-Heaven notes the spring-steel band can be bent to lower the clamp, and that the cup wires touching the head can be twisted away — both are owner fixes, not stock behaviour.
Build
Strong consensus · 13 srcThe strongest consensus on the page: metal frame, made in Germany, nearly every part sold as a spare, two cables and a hard case. The only recurring gripe is mechanical — swapping the ear pads is a fiddly, elastic-band affair that took one reviewer nearly an hour, and the connector is still a 3-pin mini-XLR, so no balanced cable without surgery.
“The Beyerdynamic DT 1990 PRO MKII is a tank of a product, with padded metal band, metal chassis, and large, deep ear cups.”
SoundGuys (Christian Thomas)
“Having swapped the first one with no fuss at all, it took me nearly an hour to do my second earpad.”
Sound On Sound (Sam Inglis)
“It’s a simple design, but not a good one. It’s a bit too fiddly.”
SoundStage! Solo (Geoffrey Morrison)
Isolation
Strong consensus · 3 srcNot a design goal — it is a fully open back. Expect to hear the room and to be heard in it; SoundGuys measured both pad sets and found the same minimal attenuation.
“For starters, the Production pads offer minimal isolation. It’s to be expected from a set of open-back headphones, so it’s not too surprising that you’re going to hear just about everything around you.”
SoundGuys (Christian Thomas)
Sources split, with the sceptics slightly ahead by weight. One side sees a complete, repairable, lifetime studio package with class-leading build and calls the price fair; the other points at the Sennheiser HD 490 PRO and Beyerdynamic's own DT 900 PRO X doing most of the job for far less, and says the treble should not cost this much to fix. The US price rose from $599.99 at launch to $699.99 in 2025, which is where the second camp got louder; Amazon's own owner tally on value runs 8 positive to 6 negative.
Where it splits
worth it — a complete, buy-once studio package45%
“The $599 asking price is well within the reach of most professionals and consumers and with the typical Beyerdynamic build quality that will guarantee that they last many years.”
ecoustics (W. Jennings)
overpriced — cheaper rivals and siblings get most of the way there55%
“They are quite expensive compared to the DT990-Pro and DT900 pro X but the build quality is better.”
DIY-Audio-Heaven (solderdude)
