Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › most ACCURATE / NEUTRAL headphones (non-stats)?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

most ACCURATE / NEUTRAL headphones (non-stats)? - Page 3

post #31 of 40
10/23/02 at 12:25am
Quote:
Originally posted by The Quality Guru
in regards to John Grado/George Alessandro MSP vs. Joseph Grado HP-1000, in terms of neutrality I am sure that the HP-1000 will win by a long shot. It is considered by many to be the most neutral can one can purchase.
Please don't make these kinds of assertions unless you have actually heard the headphones yourself.
Reply

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

post #32 of 40
10/23/02 at 12:41am
Quote:
Originally posted by DanG
Please don't make these kinds of assertions unless you have actually heard the headphones yourself.
I have edited my post so that I can set an example for others not to make the mistake I did. My wording made it seem as if I personally could vouch for the fact I put forth about MSP vs. HP-1000. I should not do this and other Head-Fiers should not do this. DanG is right, one shouldn't make claims they themselves cannot stand behind.

For the record, though, even Alessandro-Grado themselves calls their MSP's "warm." Not that it is justification for the mistake I made above, but it is from this third-party opinion that I have deduced the theory that perhaps the opinion of the company that made the MSP headphones has a bit of merit. However, it is NO SUBSTITUTE for listening.
Reply
post #33 of 40
10/23/02 at 1:39am
Luke, consider that the headphone just below the MS Pro in the Alessandro line is the MS-2, similar to the SR-325. This is a very bright headphone, and in comparison the MS Pro may well be warm. Take it from someone who owned the MS Pro for about nine months and heard it before owning it as well -- it's not a warm, mushy, or wooly headphone at all. It's slightly brighter than the HP-1000. I would suspect that the frequency response extends higher than the HP-1000. Please read my impressions above for a comparison of the two headphones. I think I also posted some stuff back on Headwize.
Reply
post #34 of 40
10/23/02 at 4:20am
Make your own headphones. Ask setmenu to show you.
Reply
post #35 of 40
10/23/02 at 5:12am
Quote:
The problem is finding a sound source that is NOT a loudspeaker (I don't need to take the room into account), but is not either a generic HTRF-function tweaked headphone that tries to sound neutral to all ears (and probably fails on quite a few accounts).
halcyon,

if you want speaker-like flatness of response without room effects, JaZZ's recommendation of the expensive AKG K1000 makes a lot of sense. It's designed like a single-driver nearfield monitor that you wear on your head. If you donwload the user manual from the AKG site, there's a frequency response chart in it that claims a response flat within plus or minus 1 or 2 dB from 60 Hz to 20 kHz. I have never heard it, though. By the way, nearfield monitor speakers might be an alternative to headphones for your purpose.

I have heard the three Ergo headphones JaZZ has mentioned, and they have a steep roll-off starting in the upper bass. A response measurement that the online headphone retailer "Headroom" did some time ago showed them to run into problems around 150 Hz. I guess this is mainly due to cancellation effects from bass soundwaves travelling around the membrane to the backside of the driver (and vice versa).
Reply
post #36 of 40
10/23/02 at 9:38am
Quote:
Originally posted by ai0tron
Make your own headphones. Ask setmenu to show you.
NOOO DON'T DO IT!
There be dragons there


Setmenu

Team flat thingys
Reply
post #37 of 40
10/24/02 at 12:11pm
Thread Starter 
Thanks again to all who contributed to this thread.

I've been already spanked by some psychoacoustic researches telling me that I can't get a set of headphones that measures flat without the LINEAR distortions (I said non-linear earlier) of the ear canal (and perhaps even pinna).

I've been mailed some AES papers on headphone related measurements, which I hope to learn more from in my quest for proper headphones.

Once I find what is the consensus in the field of pscyhoacoustic research for a set of neutral cans for testing, I will report back here.

regards,
Halcyon
Reply
post #38 of 40
10/24/02 at 4:11pm
It seems that you need an unequalized headphone. The only one that I know of is the AKG K1000 mentioned above. Very flat response down to 50 hz, where a 2nd order rolloff kicks in. This can be corrected to some extent by adding padding close out the back wave. I suspect that some of the rolloff is also due to a built in L-C network to limit excursion of the drivers.

Keep us updated on your project!

gerG
Reply
post #39 of 40
10/24/02 at 4:24pm
A question: why are speakers out of the question? Room effects can be minimized in nearfield, and controlled. Down side is they will cost more, and will require tweaking to get as accurate as the K-1000s (I have tried).

And another: is halcyon a reference to dive gear (as in cave diving?).


gerG
Reply
post #40 of 40
10/25/02 at 7:35am
Thread Starter 
Speakers I already have, but no, they are not out of the question. They just offer a different view to the same research question.

I've been looking at AKG K 1000 long and hard. There are still some questions remaining, but yes, this looks like a decent model.

If I don't go for those, I will try to find the best closed circumaural, two wire (separate cables for each earpiece), ultrasonic capable phones that I can find (with some available calibration data).

Seems to be a tough one that latter one as well.

regards,
Halcyon

PS My preferred Halcyon reference is to thet track of the same name by Orbital, but diving gear is fine by me too
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)

Head-Fi's Best Sellers

Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › most ACCURATE / NEUTRAL headphones (non-stats)?