Here are my initial impressions of the Immanis. Take these all with a truckload of salt, as they’re based on 3 hours of listening / burn-in, and I am going only from memory when comparing to other equipment (no direct A/B’ing yet). Not only is it possible my impressions will change over the next couple weeks, but I think that’s likely based on my experiences with my other HPs.
I also listened to a pretty circumscribed range of music so far: instrumental progressive metal and rock, and acoustic guitar—Night Verses, Syncatto, Rodrigo y Gabriela, and one Dream Theater track. And I’ve only listened on the VM1a, and only on Pentode mode, thus far.
Though I plan to try the other modes on the VM1a, and to try driving the Immanis with other amps, including testing out various setting on those other amps, I haven’t had a chance to do any of that yet. Ditto on more diverse music genres. Have not tried any EQ.
Other caveats: I have no connection to RAAL, and paid the same price as everyone else for my gear. I am a huge RAAL fanboy, though, and already knew I loved the ribbon sound signature. Also, I listen at really low volume compared to everyone else. More on that below. Finally, I listen to music to be energized, not to relax. That inevitably colors my impressions.
SQ Impressions
Staging: Staging is not as big as the Senn HD800S, but is noticeably larger than anything else I’ve heard. With the Immanis, rather than causing a loss of definition, it almost seems to increase it. Imaging and instrument separation are simply ridiculous. Every instrument is distinct, and very easy to place precisely in space. The CA1a and SR1a also image very well, but the instruments seem a little more 3-D on the Immanis. Though instruments seem farther away than on some other HPs (and MUCH farther away than on the Valkyria, on which every instrument feels so close you can reach out and touch it), nothing seems to get lost in that distance. The Immanis is insanely holographic, with amazing layering.
Dynamics: After reading that the Immanis is not as punchy as the Magna, I’ve been worried if I ordered the wrong one. I haven’t yet heard the Magna, but hope to this weekend (thanks to
@MokhaMark ). Compared to the CA1a, I would say the Immanis is quite close. But, it requires a higher volume than the CA1a to really come alive. With the CA1a, my preferred listening volume is around 63 dBs (told you I listen quiet—I’m weird). Dynamics are great on the CA1a at that volume. With the Immanis, dynamics are lackluster at that level. If I keep the attenuator at the same setting on the VM1a for both the Immanis and CA1a, that puts the Immanis at 67-68 dBs compared to CA1a at around 63. At that 67-68, the Immanis dynamics are pretty impressive. That’s a bit higher volume than I would prefer, but I suspect nearly everyone else listens a lot louder, so I can’t imagine this would be a problem for many people.
Dynamic range: Dynamic range is simply phenomenal on the Immanis. It extends forever at both ends.
Timbre: The Immanis’ timbre is exceptional. Drums and guitar plucks--just spot on. It competes with the Valkyria here (can’t say yet which is ahead). Speaking of timbre, I listened to a track from Dream Theater’s 1992 album Images and Words. I love this album, but it’s so lacking in dynamic range and compressed that it always sounds disappointing on a good kit. The dynamic range sounds every bit as lacking on the Immanis. But, the guitar plucks and vocals seem to have more texture than I recall hearing before. Maybe that album has a bit more information hidden in it than I realized, and it just needed the Immanis to bring it out. (But that’s not to say the recording is good—it is still frustrating to think of how great it could have been with better mastering and production).
Resolution: The Immanis seems every bit as resolving as the CA1a and SR1a. Which is to say, excellent. To my ears, the DCA Stealth is also remarkably resolving (and is always resolving no matter what amp is used). I will need more time to assess how the Immanis and Stealth resolving ability compare. Both are amazing, though.
Bass: The subbass extends noticeably lower than on any other HP I have heard, with the possible exception of the 1266 TC. The extension is not subtle, but neither is it distracting. The Immanis bass is simultaneously deep and rich, yet extremely precise and controlled, and with amazing texture. The Valkyria is substantially fuller in the mid-bass with similarly great texture, but the Immanis crushes the Valk on extension into the lower regions. The 1266 competes on extension and richness, but I would give the nod to the Immanis on the other categories. From memory, the 1266 also has a bit more slam and overall bass quantity. But, the 1266 has a very U-shaped FR curve, while the Immanis sounds much flatter to me. (Has anyone seen a FR graph for the Immanis yet?) That makes me wonder: if the 1266 were fuller in the midrange, would its bass still seem to have as much slam and quantity? And conversely, if the Immanis were more U-shaped, would it still seem to have less? I don’t know. What I can say, though, is that if you value bass extension and texture as much as slam and quantity, I can’t imagine you being disappointed with the bass on the Immanis.
Comparison to Senn HE1: I heard the HE1 for about 10 minutes at CanJam, though in Sennheiser’s separate room so the noise was more manageable. That’s obviously not enough for a legit assessment, so lots of salt with this one. I thought the HE1 had absolutely incredible technicalities. Its tuning struck me as safe, though. It tried so hard to be polite and diplomatic that I think it fell too far over that line for my preferences. The Immanis has similar technical prowess but seems to strike a better balance between polite and wild to my ears. It clearly does not take the risks the SR1a, and to a lesser extent the CA1a, did, but it seems to let loose more than the HE1. I could easily see people having different opinions on this. But if you are thinking about an HE1, I think you owe it to yourself to audition the Immanis before pulling the trigger.
Non-SQ Impressions
Weight: The Immanis is on the heavy side, but I’d never know it if no one told me. Not only does it feel of average weight on the head, but it feels of average weight in the hands. (Admittedly, I have some real porkers in my stable with the Abyss 1266 TC and Valkyria, though).
Fit: I don’t have a particularly big head, and am usually about 1/3 of the way up from the smallest fit setting on most HPs. I am slightly over the mid-point toward the largest setting on the Immanis, though. Those with big noggins might find themselves maxing out the adjustment range. (
@littlej0e , are you bumping against the end of the adjustment range?) I think I recall hearing about this before, though, and that Aleks was looking at a tweak. Overall comfort seems great, though.
Quality of Materials: The Immanis is beautiful. It looks great in photos, but even better in person. The grill is classy, and the ribbons viewed from the inside just look incredibly high-end (can’t think of a better way to describe it). The pads in particular look and feel more luxurious than any I’ve seen before.
Case: The aluminum case is very nice. I like the monochrome embossed branding. It’s prominent enough to reflect that RAAL is proud of its work, but not ostentatious. The case appears identical to the Audeze aluminum case, except for the inside, embossing, and color. That’s a good thing—the Audeze case is fantastic. My RAAL case locks, but did not come with any keys. The Audeze keys work on it, though.
