Oppo PM-3 Headphones

REVIEW
by Steven Stone
Oct 16, 2015

You might say it’s time for Oppo’s round three of headphones. The esteemed Silicon Valley-based manufacturer—whose popularity appears to be on the rise—first offered the PM-1 headphones ($1099), which were soon followed by the PM-2 ($699). Now Oppo has added the PM-3 headphones to its lineup, priced at a modest $399. Using technology trickled-down from its more expensive models, the PM-3 promises to deliver the Oppo sound in a smaller, more portable, closed-enclosure headphone. Will the new PM-3 provide the same level of sound, ergonomic elegance, and style as its larger siblings? Let’s see.

Tech Tour
The PM-3 uses the same basic technology as the PM-1 and PM-2 with its sound emanating from a seven-layer planar diaphragm of double-sided spiraling coils made from flat aluminum conductors. Thanks to the double-sided diaphragm, the magnetic field is populated with twice as many conductors as a single-sided diaphragm. This, in turn, dramatically increases the headphone’s sensitivity and ability to withstand higher drive forces. Combined with Oppo’s FEM optimized magnet system, which employs high-energy neodymium magnets, the Oppo PM-3 achieves a 102dB sensitivity figure. With such high sensitivity, even a smartphone will easily be able to drive a pair of PM-3s to satisfying volume levels.

The physical design of the PM-3 is reminiscent in many respects of Oppo’s other models. It has a similar padded headband, except the PM-1 employs genuine leather while the PM-3 uses an artificial leather substitute. The PM-3’s earpads are also man-made rather than genuine cowhide. Pivoting yokes on all Oppo headphones have the same elegant design, but are constructed out of slightly different materials. I could see that the PM-3 yoke and pivot had fewer parts than the PM-1, but in overall fit and potential longevity both headphones were equal.

There are two big differences between the PM-3 and Oppo’s other headphones. The first is size. The PM-3 has a slightly smaller circumference than the PM-1 and PM-2, which means for some prospective users the PM-3 headphones will be an on-ear rather than an over-ear fit. Other users will discover that in actuality the PM-3 is an almost-over-ear design. On my 7-1/8-sized head the PM-3s cover my entire ear and the outside edges rest on my head around my ear, delivering a more complete seal than most on-ear headphones I’ve tried. This better seal around the ears translates into better isolation and less bass leakage.

Besides their smaller size, the other major difference between the PM-3 and Oppo’s other headphones is that the PM-3 is a closed- rather than an open-back design. This means that the PM-3 should provide more isolation from outside sounds and reduce the amount of “bleed” from your music that anyone will hear nearby. But the disadvantage of closed “cans” is that they have to attenuate the sound reflected off their closed backs, so it does not interfere with the direct sound coming from the headphones. This is a challenge. It is far easier to design and manufacture an open-enclosure headphone because there’s no “back wall” to reflect sound, out of phase and out of time, back into the mix.

Ergonomics and Fit
Like other Oppo headphones, the PM-3 has a removable cable connection, but unlike other Oppos, the headphone cable for the PM-3 attaches only to the left side of the headphone. If you already own another Oppo headphone and have purchased custom cables for it, you’ll be disappointed to know that, unlike the PM-1 and PM-2, which have the same connectors, the PM-3’s connector is not the same, so no cable swapping between models is possible. The PM-3 does come with two cables—a short one with navigation and volume controls for iPhone/iPad built in, and a longer one without any controls.

As noted, unlike the PM-1’s earpads, which are made of leather, the PM-3’s earpads are made of a man-made leather substitute. Natural leather has some ability to breathe and absorb moisture, but the artificial material has an impermeable surface where moisture remains until it evaporates. That means if it’s hot out or your ears are prone to perspiring when enclosed, you may find the PM-3 earpads are not as pleasant to use as the leather ones. Unfortunately, you can’t swap out the PM-1 earpads with the PM-3’s since their circumferences are different.

The PM-3’s ability to isolate your ears from outside noise is slightly better than some on-ear headphones such as the V-Moda M-80, but not as complete as the over-the ear sealed-enclosure Mr. Speaker’s Alpha Prime headphones or any in-ear monitor. In an open office environment, the PM-3s would shield fellow employees from your music, but would not insulate you from the sound of the approaching coffee cart. I like this level of isolation when I’m in an airport and need to hear the announcements, for instance, but it is not sufficient for the actual flight itself.

The PM-3 comes with a very nice selvedge denim carrying case. Like Oppo’s other models, the PM-3s can fold flat so the overall package of case and headphones is compact and thin enough to fit easily into an attaché case. The denim case also has enough room for the headphones, both cables, and the supplied mini-stereo-to-1/4″ headphone-jack adapter, with room left over for an energy bar or two.

The PM-3’s headband appears to be virtually indestructible, but this robustness does have a price—prospective users with larger than normal hat sizes could find the pressure from the headband oppressive. Adjusting the PM-3’s side-pressure isn’t an option, so if the fit is too tight, there’s little you can do in the way of on-location modifications to reduce the pressure. For me the PM-3’s side pressure and fit are perfect.

Sound
While it might be presumptuous to assume that a manufacturer with just three products in one category can already have a “house sound,” the PM-3 does sound more similar to the PM-1 than different. I hesitate to call the PM-3 a PM-1 “lite,” but it does have much the same sonic character as the PM-1, albeit in slightly lesser quantities.

The overall harmonic balance of the PM-3 is what I would call natural as opposed to razor-flat neutral, tipped-up, or bass-centric. The harmonic balance is relaxed without being dark or murky. The PM-3s are more forgiving of recordings with excess energy in the 2kHz to 4kHz regions than the PM-1s, but that also translates into slightly less sparkle and dynamic energy. I found the PM-3s were also less revealing than the PM-1s because they have less energy in the presence range.

The PM-3 displayed decent dynamic contrast throughout their frequency range, but were not quite as responsive as the PM-1 headphones. While I would not characterize the PM-3s as over-damped, they do not generate the same level of dynamic verve as the PM-1s.

PM-3 bass response was well controlled with excellent midbass definition. Although I wouldn’t call the PM-3s bass monsters, they did an excellent job of keeping the low end clean yet warm. In comparison the PM-1 had greater bass extension, but the PM-3 was its equal in the midbass.

I expected that I might hear some of the less desirable aspects of the closed-enclosure coloring the PM-1’s midrange, yet I found its sound was largely unaffected. The PM-3’s midrange character was very much like the PM-1’s, except that it lacked some of the dynamic verve of its more expensive sibling. I detected no additive colorations that I could attribute to the PM-3’s enclosure.

Upper-midrange and treble energy through the PM-3 was also a bit truncated when compared to the Oppo PM-1. While the PM-3 did not sound hooded or noticeably rolled-off when I listened to it by itself, compared with the PM-1 the lesser amount of upper-frequency air was immediately obvious.

Although the imaging that a headphone produces is quite different than what comes from a pair of loudspeakers, it is still three-dimensional, and different headphone designs do produce differently sized images with varying degrees of specificity and focus. The PM-3’s images were well focused with excellent individualization within the soundstage. But when I compared the PM-3’s imaging with that of the PM-1, it was obvious that the PM-1 produces a larger overall soundstage with more space between each instrument and vocalist.

Admittedly, it is somewhat unfair to compare a $399 headphone with a $1095 headphone from the same manufacturer—the more expensive model had better be superior, and in the case of the PM-1 and PM-3 that is certainly true. So it was time to compare the PM-3 with several other headphones that were closer to it in price. I began with the longtime audiophile go-to headphone, the Sennheiser HD-600, which has an MSRP of $399, although its current street price is lower.

The HD600s lack the easily removable cable of the PM-3s, although its cable is replaceable. Another difference is the HD600s are an open- rather than closed-can design, so they do not provide isolation from outside sounds or shield anyone nearby from your music. In terms of portability, the PM-3’s folding design is a clear winner, allowing for a much narrower package that will fit more easily in your luggage.

Listening in a quiet environment to provide a level playing field between the two headphones, I immediately noticed how much less sensitive the HD600 headphones were. To achieve the same volume level on the HD600s as the PM-3s required turning the volume control on the headphone output on the Vinnie Rossi LIO modular system from 19 to 31. The HD600’s upper midrange had a noticeable peak when compared to the PM-3’s. This “tizziness zone” around 3kHz wasn’t unpleasant on good recordings, but on anything with an even slightly hot top end the HD600 headphone took on an edgy and slightly grainy character. On the same material the PM-3 was more listenable. In overall comfort I preferred the PM-3’s softer earpads and more padded headband to the HD600’s harder pads with their around-your-ear fit.

My go-to headphone for use in airports and other places where I need some, but not complete, isolation has been the V-Moda Crossfade M-80 on-ear headphones ($230). It didn’t take more than a few seconds of listening to the same song that I had just heard on the PM-3s to note the M-80’s added colorations in the lower midrange, almost like a hollow echo. Also, the M-80 didn’t have the same level of control of the lower frequencies—its bass sounded somewhat sloppy compared with the PM-3. Although the M-80s are an extremely well built headphone with an elegant overall design, sonically the Oppo PM-3 is clearly in another league with far less additive distortion and more musical finesse overall.

For a final comparison I chose the Sennheiser Momentum headphones. Although now superseded by the Momentum II, the last supplies of on-ear Momentum headphones have been getting blown out for anywhere from $70 to $160 (depending on color). The Momentums had a more bass-centric frequency response that gave every tune a bit more boom than I would consider neutral, but its bass was cleaner and more tuneful than that of the V-Moda M-80. The Oppo PM-3 delivered slightly better isolation than the Sennheiser and had a smoother upper-midrange and lower-treble response, but the Momentum and PM-3 were very similar in sensitivity. In comfort, the PM-3 won by a wide margin—the Momentums weren’t uncomfortable, but they required a lot more fiddling and minor adjustments to get the fit right.

Near the end of the review period, the AK Jr portable player from Astell&Kern arrived. Priced at $500 the AK Jr is A&K’s new entry-level player. The PM-3 and AK Jr proved to be a potent combination. Even on my own live recordings, which are on average 10dB lower in level than commercial releases to allow for their wide dynamic contrasts, this combination produced adequate volume levels without turning up the level control to maximum. I was especially impressed by how well the soundstage was presented—all the depth cues on my recordings were apparent with little truncation of three-dimensionality. Even on “thick” mixes such as a 96/24 digital recording of Brahms’ German Requiem that J. Gordon Holt and I made several years ago, the AK Jr and PM-3 remained lucid and unfazed.

Conclusion
When I reviewed the Oppo PM-1, I found that “Oppo’s PM-1 headphones take the prize as the best all-around general-purpose headphones I’ve ever used, even though they are not the best performers in any particular category.” Although the PM-3s do not achieve quite the same level of overall sound quality as their larger sibling, for one-third the cost they deliver a good portion of the sonic goodness that made the PM-1 such a fine all-around performer.

If you’re looking for a pair of headphones for situations where you still need to hear some outside sounds but don’t want to bother others with your music, the PM-3 would be a savvy option. It’s comfortable, extremely well made, and cleverly designed. Couple it with one of the new generation of portable players such as the Astell& Kern AK Jr, and for under $900 ($500 for the AK Jr and $399 for the PM-3) you have a portable rig that will keep you enthralled for as long as the batteries last.

SPECS & PRICING

Type: Closed-back, planar-magnetic, over-the-ear headphone
Impedance: 26 ohms
Frequency response: 10Hz-50kHz
Sensitivity: 102dB in 1mW
Max input power: 500mW
Pulse max input power: 2W
Cables: 3m detachable cable (3.5mm with 6.35 mm adapter); 1.2m detachable cable (3.5mm)
Output: 3.5mm stero jack, 3.5mm stereo jack
Input: 6.35mm stero jack, 3.5mm stero jack
Weight: 320g (without cable)
Price: $399