or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Yes another HD590 vs HD600 question
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Yes another HD590 vs HD600 question - Page 7

post #91 of 159
bifcake, well if someone were to not go with META42 because they were scared about risk, even though there hasn't been a single complaint about these guys, and are all well respected here, especially by me , I'd say they are pretty ignorant, and quite frankly, must have bad taste or something, I mean, why would you not want the best?
post #92 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by kelly
bifcake
Some of these "kids" have engineering degrees. Tell me this -- do you know a single employee at Creek? (Now some other people here do, so this question is aimed squarely at bifcake.) I personally don't know anyone at Creek so I see that as being equally a risk. In fact, while Creek may be a fine and upstanding company, I have indeed bought many commercial products that sucked, had poor product support, etc. So, how am I to know that any amp manufacturer isn't like this? The risk is equal.

I communicate with several of the META guys regularly. If any of them screwed a single person over, their accountability would be far more personal and severe than any employee of any commercial company. It doesn't happen because they're good guys.

This shouldn't have had to be stated at all. This is brought on from simple closed mindedness and unwillingness to believe that a "meer DIYer" could make something better than a product you happen to have purchased. Get over it and stop insinuating things about people you OBVIOUSLY know nothing about. It is your credibility that will be destroyed in this thread if you continue it, not theirs.
Kelly,

I'm not quite clear as to where you read that I've stated that someone cannot make a better product that I've purchased or why you're taking things so personally. Let me address some of these issues:

a) I never said META was a bad amp. In fact, I've never said ANYTHING about the quality of that amp. I simply don't know how good or bad it is and I've made it a point to state that very clearly.

b) I'm not married to Creek, or any other company. Therefore, I have no desire to espouse the virtues of these companies or become their prophet. I bought a product from Creek, with which I am very happy. Does that mean that someone on this forum or anywhere else is incapable of creating a better product? Absolutely not. I thought I had stated that as well.

c) Is it possible for a company to provide poor support, produce bad products, etc? Absolutely! Is purchasing products for large companies abate all risk? No. Is purchasing products for small companies or guys on this forum completely risk free? The answer to that is no.

Every purchase decision contains certain risks whether you're buying from a large or small company. The risks are different though. I feel it is important to identify these risks when recommending components to others. I feel that I have stated facts and I have been as neutral as possible.

So, I'm not quite sure what caused you to get so bent out of shape. I hope this clarifies things for you.
post #93 of 159
Man, you screwed up now but thanks for taking the heat off me.

Anyhow, regarding your opinions of the DIY crew around here all of them involved in the META 42 have great reputations as far as I know and the amp is an underground hit of the first magnitude. As far as warranty service goes or what have you the componenrts are all well known, readily available products and can be purchased easily in case they fail.

In the meantime, keep the inflamatory stuff coming while I get some rest.

Haven't you got any more good comebacks like the "sheep" thing.





Best
Brian
post #94 of 159
For one claiming to be the champion of neutrality you should stop using offcolor remarks such as META42 designers/diyers as "kids".

FYI the Creek OBH-11 series designer has shown up on the boards and I believe he himself considered the OBH-11 to be a little "outdated". Funny thing is, in that class range not too many new commercial offerings has really popped up IMO. Also most of these commercial offerings had DIY startup/spinoffs. If you look at Wheatfield, or Corda, or even Headroom at grassroots level you can see that it does not delineate so much from DIY work. They have polished up (or down) their products to be produced en masse and have the framework necessary for a commercial venture. You pay extra for that framework or overhead, and wheter or not the extra costs pays off is unknown. Etymotics for example aren't cheap...but I am quite happy that the extra cost do go into their excellent customer support. Then again there are instances for products where you could be told that a repair would cost 1/3 or 1/2 of the retail price of the given product, and you end up being better off with a new product entirely. It depends on the company. Companies like Etymotic and Grado for example has top rated support and service. While some companies like Melos flop, and expenses for repairs are not going to be cheap.

As for DIY support or warranty for a product, there are also DIY contracts for support and warranty.
post #95 of 159
Wow, I went out for a couple of hours and look what happens.

bkelly,

I'm not sure that I agree with your analogy of compression. Compression squeezes dynamics so that loud parts are softer and soft parts are louder. Listen to Sinead O'Connor's "Troy" and you can literally hear the compressor working on her voice. (I honestly don't think there is a compressor out there that can deal with the power that woman has.) The reason compressors are used are 1. To balance out the dynamics of a certain instrument as in Sinead O'Connors case it's used so she doesn't peak levels on the board. 2. To reduce the dynamics of an overall recording to make it more listenable on radio and car stereo's. Radio has a very limited dynamic range therefore compressing the recording balances the volume levels out. Car stereo's have to deal with road noise and therefore you cannot hear low volume level information, by compressing the track you basically equalize the volume levels so the low level stuff can be heard.

Compression will not make a multi track recording sound like it all happened together in the same place as you describe. Basically what you are saying by that is somehow a compressor can miraculously change the overall sound of the instruments and their effects. Gimme a break. Compressing a complete recording is a relatively new "trend", I would say within the last 10-15 years. I believe, and I could be wrong here, that Butch Vig popularized the process.

So I'm sorry, I just can't agree with what your saying in regards to compression in headphones, or in particular the HD 600's. Not because I've heard them and disagree I just don't believe the analogy makes any sense.

Audio & Me,

You make some very valid points!

Phil
post #96 of 159
Brian,

A come back like the "sheep thing" would be quite inflammatory at this juncture. Don't you think? Kelly doesn't strike me as someone who'd appreciate that sort of a quip. hehehehe

Besides, I felt someone needed to come to your rescue given that you were digging your own grave quite frantically. You are the General Custar of headphones, making your stand at the HD-590 hill, surrounded by VERY hostile Indians.
post #97 of 159
elnero
bkelly!=kelly !
kelly = likes HD600
bkelly = likes HD590

bkelly
No one said you could go home, yet. Honestly, if your problem with the HD600 is the midbass boost, then yeah, I agree with you, I consider it a flaw of the HD600 even though some people like it. I consider an upper midrange recession to be another flaw. Both of these flaws are somewhat addressed by the Cardas cable and neither seem as pronounced on good amplifiers.

It's the OTHER things you said about the HD600 that struck me as odd. You may want to actually try some other tubes in your Melos and try the HD600 again. I think the Melos mates well with the HD600 and is still in my top 5 favorite headphone amps so it's not anything against your amp, per se. Of course, you could just have a different preference of something else the HD590 actually does do better in some way--it's only the way you described it that raised a flag. If you do like it better, you like it better. Go to a headphone meet somewhere if you can and then others can AB and you can try it on other amps.

Tyll's comments were, frankly, exaggerated. The HD590 is not a turd, but most of us agree that it's not at all better than the HD580 and can be called a "mistake" in that way, or that it detracts from the HD580 or HD600 sale or whatever. It's not a terrible headphone it just doesn't seem like a particularly good value to most of us compared to its similarly priced siblings. Also, keep in mind that Tyll is in the amp selling business and if ever there was a headphone that expressed the benefit of a good amplifier, it's the HD600.

bifcake
You said, explicitly, that there was a GREATER risk with the META42 than there is with commercial amps. I took issue with this. Your followup comment alters the opinion to there being DIFFERENT risks. I'm not sure I agree, but since you haven't stated the differences yet, I'll hold out. If the risk is that you won't like the amp or will want to upgrade, I think the risk is the same both in quantity and type. Failure? Same--but the DIY guys are probably more likely to help you figure out whats wrong with it or fix it for free. What other risks are you thinking of? They're solid state amps, they're built in similar ways--probably better/more name brand parts in the DIY ones. That strikes me as being less risk. I'm struggling here. Which risks are you referring to?
post #98 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by bifcake
If something is unclear or ambiguous, then it may or may not be so. Therefore, if someone does not have a long term record, they may or may not be trustworthy. I don't know how much more clear or neutral I can be.
But my point, and the point of everyone else responding to you on this issue, is that these people DO have long-term track records and have proven to be trustworthy, knowledgeable, and skilled. You want reputation? Check out JMT's thread in the "Buyer/Seller Feedback" forum. Check out the DIY forum here, and (even further back) the DIY forum on HeadWize.

Quote:
With regard to risk, let's face it, the guys producing META42 amp are kids.


(I love using that emoticon )

Kids? I'll have to let their spouses know that. You can go to jail for that!

I would suggest reading Kelly's earlier post on this topic:

kelly wrote
Quote:
I'd suggest you do a search here and at HeadWize and tread carefully when it comes to insinuating that kind of thing.
Not much more to be said. You may want to consider simly admitting that maybe you were a bit hasty in your statements with respect to the META team.
post #99 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by bkelly
MacDEF,
Agreeably the "590's are flawed in their own way". My point is that their flaws are noticeably less than the 600's.
Which is your opinion, and nothing more. I, and many other people, disagree.

Quote:
I disagree about the mids being better on the 600's. They are bigger and more lifelike on the 590's.
Again, your opinion, while I and many others disagree.

The key word here is "opinion."


Quote:
As far as whether or not the 590's are "decompressing" (I assume by this you mean providing more detail and dynamics than are actually on the recording)
No, I was simply joking that if the HD 600 are "compressing" the music due to your perceived lack of detail in them, then the excessive brightness of the HD 590 must mean they are "decompressing" music. It was a joke about both being inaccurate.


Quote:
It is possible that the 590's are just giving you the facts but you don't like it, anyway.
Wish it were true.

Quote:
You really need to go back and read some of this stuff again because, once again, you are taking your reactions to my comments and recasting them as my opinions.
There's no "once again" because there was no "first time." I apologize for saying "when you said" when I meant to refer to what you said the "engineer" said. However, let's be honest here: after I disputed that "engineer's" position on Grados in studio environments, you disputed what I wrote, so it's not too far off to say that I was disputing your position as well. But this is silly. Let's just discuss the topics rather than discussing the discussion semantics.

Quote:
A great example is how you have taken my comment the "There is no real need for headphone accuracy in a recording environment" and even though you reprinted that you rephrased it to say that I said that "There's no need for accuracy in the recording environment".
*sigh* You know what I meant. So change "accuracy" to "headphone accuracy." That's what I meant, and I think most people read it that way, considering that I quoted you immediately above. If I had taken it out of context with no reference to the original, maybe I could see someone being confused.


Quote:
my opinions have have been presented here with very strong arguments based on what I know to be facts.
See, that's the problem. Your arguments about these headphones are nothing but your opinions. We all have them, but you're presenting yours as facts, and claiming that they are based on other facts, when they're based on nothing but your own preferences and opinions. Which is why I'm responding. Other people like the HD 590 better than the HD 600, and that's cool. But they say "I like the HD 590 better." You say "the HD 590 are better because they're FAR more accurate than the HD 600" etc. and try to tell people who disagree that they aren't hearing right or don't like accuracy. Which not only isn't "factually" true, it's not even the opinion of most listeners.

Quote:
In your next response please state your experience with these two phones. Have you owned both of them and listened to them side by side for a week or more. I have. Taphil has also and although he prefers the 600 he likes both of them and his overall opinion of the 590's is positive. Read his comments.
Great for Taphil and for you. I'm glad you've found that you personally like the HD 590 better than the HD 600. Seriously. Just stop trying to claim that "factually" they're "far more accurate" than the HD 600, which you can't support, especially when the HD 600 are in a very good system with cables that don't choke them.

As for me, while I've never owned the HD 590, I've heard them quite extensively. And I have a pretty good deal of experience with plenty of headphones and headphone systems (see my profile to see what I've owned, and I've auditioned a heck of a lot more).
post #100 of 159
DOH! Sorry kelly, needless to say I'm A Moron!

I edited my previous post to read correctly.

Phil
post #101 of 159
wanna hear the deepest of the deepest of the deepest of the deepest bass extension?

Try a pair of beyerdynamic dt770-250's
post #102 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by kelly
elnero

bifcake
You said, explicitly, that there was a GREATER risk with the META42 than there is with commercial amps. I took issue with this. Your followup comment alters the opinion to there being DIFFERENT risks. I'm not sure I agree, but since you haven't stated the differences yet, I'll hold out. If the risk is that you won't like the amp or will want to upgrade, I think the risk is the same both in quantity and type. Failure? Same--but the DIY guys are probably more likely to help you figure out whats wrong with it or fix it for free. What other risks are you thinking of? They're solid state amps, they're built in similar ways--probably better/more name brand parts in the DIY ones. That strikes me as being less risk. I'm struggling here. Which risks are you referring to?

Ok, I'll quantify the risks:

One of the major risks with getting a Meta amp is that you won't like it. Since it's not commercially available, there is no way to preview the amp at a store with one's own phones to see how they play. The same holds true for Headroom products, however, they offer a 30 day return policy, which abates this particular risk. If the DYI guys offer the same type of policy on custom built amps, I will be MAJORLY impressed.

Another risk is the one that I stated previously and that is should these guys decide to move on and no longer produce META amps, there will be no support. Granted, there are schematics available and the parts are readily available. However, for those audiophiles who are not handy with electronic assembly, troubleshooting the META amp would be quite a hassle.

The same holds true for warranty repairs. If META is no longer supported during the warranty period, there is no recourse.

I don't think I'm being unreasonable in identifying these issues as risks. The price/performance may negate some of them, or make them manageable, however, they're still there and should be identified when recommending META amps to others. I think it would be simply unfair not to let others know that META amps are produced by guys on this forum, rather than a big company and let the buyers make their own decision with regard to whether or not they think the risks are significant.
post #103 of 159
Fair enough bifcake.

But what about the other issue? You know, is bkelly the MacDef of the HD590, or is MacDef the bkelly of the HD600?
post #104 of 159
Quote:
Originally posted by pigmode
Fair enough bifcake.

But what about the other issue? You know, is bkelly the MacDef of the HD590, or is MacDef the bkelly of the HD600?

Oh, that's easy! Those guys should take the wax out of their ears!!!
post #105 of 159
when i purchased sen580 I could not tell the difference between sen600. That was probably because I was listening out of headphone out on amp.
sen580=portable system
sen600=home system
good luck
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Yes another HD590 vs HD600 question