Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › The sound of the Ultrasone Pro (Proline) 750 Headphones
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The sound of the Ultrasone Pro (Proline) 750 Headphones - Page 9

post #121 of 459
8/1/08 at 8:43pm
It would seem that the 750 is just a trap for people to fall in to buy the Edition 9. Isn't that so?
Reply
post #122 of 459
8/1/08 at 11:20pm

The Engineers...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Pinna View Post
And, by contrast comparison, there was a post on here I read not long ago where someone indicated that the bass on the Pro 750 is better than the 02.
I do not have to strain to hear the tone of the bass line. I don't know why you do. Maybe the Pro's you heard were faulty or maybe there is some type of mismatch with the amp you use. As I said, I don't know.
BTW, Shpongle's "Tales of the Inexpressible" sells for $99.99 on Amazon. I think there are other less costly ways to evaluate the bass and other frequencies such as with a tone generator, which, btw, I have done.
My best guess, catscratch, is that your negative opinion of these headphones must be as a result of something faulty somewhere in your audio chain (perhaps even the headphones themselves) because I find no validity in your negative comments about the Pro 750. I would also like to ad that more and more I am hearing about other recording professionals who are using the Pro 750's.
The music engineers/pros appear to uniformly rave about the 550-750s - but, I think their requirements are a bit different from an audiophile's.

They seem to be more interested in the flat transparency, clarity and details required to complete a balanced mix - than the "musicality," which implies some coloration, which most audiophiles seem to prefer/require.

Such flat transparency isn't always the most enjoyable sound.
Reply
post #123 of 459
8/2/08 at 12:21am
Thread Starter 

Reply to Covenant

Quote:
Originally Posted by Covenant View Post
x2 for Tales of the Inexpressible. Dorset Perception by itself is hell for any dynamic to handle. The only time I've heard a dynamic handle it without apparent difficulty was the Sony SA5000, which is the electronica headphone IMO. Electrostats show off their strengths well with Shpongle.

And Peter, I wouldnt be too hasty to blame recording quality or components in the audio chain to blame for someone disliking the Pro 750. In the words of Donald Trump:

"Angelina Jolie is often touted as being a very beautiful woman, but I just dont find her attractive. This is why there are menu's in resteraunts"
Cov,
I'm not exactly sure what you're saying here. I don't always blame recording quality or audio chain components as the reason for someone disliking the Pro 750. There are other reasons such as:

Having become accustomed to the "house sound" of another headphone;
A different perception of sound;
Partial deafness;
Insanity (Calm down, those of you who would protest, I'm joking.)

There are indeed different tastes in headphones based on any number of factors and I never meant to indicate otherwise. It truly amazes me that someone can say that a headphone has a certain audio quality that I know from extensive use of that same headphone is simply not true. I believe they hear that audio quality but exactly what it is that causes them to hear it is unknown to me. Based on my experience I would say that the source is not the headphone. But, that is with my system and my recordings. We would have to do side-by-side in person comparisons to determine the source of the negative audio quality that they are hearing.
Cov, do you have "Tales of the Inexpressible"? If you do, how well does the Pro 750 handle it?
Reply
post #124 of 459
8/2/08 at 12:41am
Thread Starter 

Reply to DefectiveAudioComponent

Quote:
Originally Posted by DefectiveAudioComponent View Post
It would seem that the 750 is just a trap for people to fall in to buy the Edition 9. Isn't that so?
The way you phrased your question sounds like something Raymond Burr while playing the part of Perry Mason would have said.
The answer to your question is "No."
The type of logic you used to ask this question would be, it seems, similar to saying "It would seem that the Buick is just a trap for people to fall in to buy a Cadillac." No, some people prefer a Buick while others prefer the Cadillac, whatever their reasons might be. And some people, like myself, are very happy with their Pro 750's. Is it out of ignorance that someone might be happy with the Buick / Pro 750? I can only speak for myself and tell you that I've ridden around in Rolls Royce Automobiles. And, I really would "rather have a Buick" (Advertising slogan for Buick during the 1960's, 70's and 80's was "Wouldn't you really rather have a Buick?").
I have heard some very good things about the sound of the Ed 9. And, how it compares for the individual with the Pro 750 is definitely a matter of personal taste.
Reply
post #125 of 459
8/2/08 at 12:52am
Quote:
Originally Posted by DefectiveAudioComponent View Post
It would seem that the 750 is just a trap for people to fall in to buy the Edition 9. Isn't that so?
yes, much as just about any Grado is a trap for RS1
Reply
post #126 of 459
8/2/08 at 1:00am
Thread Starter 

Reply to Gradofan2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gradofan2 View Post
The music engineers/pros appear to uniformly rave about the 550-750s - but, I think their requirements are a bit different from an audiophile's.

They seem to be more interested in the flat transparency, clarity and details required to complete a balanced mix - than the "musicality," which implies some coloration, which most audiopphiles seem to require.

Such flat transparency isn't always the most enjoyable sound.
I have been involved in a number of professionally recorded productions over the span of several years. To some degree the message in your post would be correct and apply to my taste in headphones. I listen for what sounds like accuracy (as compared to the way that same audio sounds through studio monitors) in the sound of the audio from headphones. The 750's have been my favorite, so far, of the headphones I've heard (in that previously mentioned 'comparison to studio monitors' regard). I do disagree, however, if you are implying that the Pro 750's are not musical. I find them to be very musical and very enjoyable. They are seemingly not colored by comparison to other headphones but, for my own listening tastes and requirements, they suit me fine.
With the Pro 750's I enjoy the idea that, IMO and in the opinion of other recording pros, I am hearing the audio the way the Sound Engineer intended the listener to hear it.
A "Candy Apple" tastes really sweet and is a fun confection. However, it doesn't taste like the apple would taste minus the candy coating. And, I prefer the "natural" apple without the candy coating.
Reply
post #127 of 459
8/2/08 at 4:36am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter Pinna View Post
Cov, do you have "Tales of the Inexpressible"? If you do, how well does the Pro 750 handle it?
I have two of Shpongle's albums, Tales of the Inexpressible and Nothing Lasts, But Nothing Is Lost. Best electronica I've ever heard.

The Pro 750 does measurably better than the HD600 for Shpongle as you would expect. It does struggle somewhat with the most complex passages, but I cant be sure if thats just the Pico being a bottleneck or not. And then the HD600's strong suit was never its speed or micro-detail. A better matchup would be Pro 750 Vs SA5K for electonica
Reply
post #128 of 459
8/2/08 at 6:13am
Even if the pro-750 was a trap for the edition9,. I wouldnt even beable to afford the edition9 even if I wanted it. I would have to take out a couple of loans.
Reply
post #129 of 459
8/2/08 at 9:18am
Quote:
Originally Posted by Covenant View Post
I cant be sure if thats just the Pico being a bottleneck or not...A better matchup would be Pro 750 Vs SA5K for electonica.
This is where I would look as the weakest link in your chain. The Prolines are showing the system components upstream. Amps can be as much a FR bottleneck as any other part.

The Sony's simply don't go down as deep as the Ultrasones, even with the best amp/source. Therefore, it doesn't even try to reproduce those deepest frequencies.
Reply
post #130 of 459
8/2/08 at 11:15am
Until today, I'd never heard an Ultrasone headphone. It was at our local Guitar Center - admittedly not the perfect place, but there were some other phones to compare it with. Nearly all were in the $100-200 range.

A pair of AKGs came out on top - the K141S, as I recall - nicely detailed but not as good as their top models. The Ultrasone was adequate, and better than most of the Sonys, but I liked most of the Senns better. I was unimpressed by the Ultrasone build, and could not catch the "something special" about the phones.
Reply
post #131 of 459
8/2/08 at 1:22pm

Way Too Many...

Quote:
Originally Posted by spinali View Post
Until today, I'd never heard an Ultrasone headphone. It was at our local Guitar Center - admittedly not the perfect place, but there were some other phones to compare it with. Nearly all were in the $100-200 range.

A pair of AKGs came out on top - the K141S, as I recall - nicely detailed but not as good as their top models. The Ultrasone was adequate, and better than most of the Sonys, but I liked most of the Senns better. I was unimpressed by the Ultrasone build, and could not catch the "something special" about the phones.
Just way too many obserations like yours with these phones.

I don't understand how there can be such divergent opinions about them - moreso than any other phones.

Did the Guitar Center have some good sources, and amps to demo them with?

That may be one issue.

But... I've seen a lot of comments that "they have to grow on you over time" - I'm not sure I get that. It would seem you ought to A/B them with other phones - to see how they compare (assuming matching source and amp for each).
Reply
post #132 of 459
8/2/08 at 1:50pm
Source was matched with my listening session, and I did a quite a bit of A/B comparisons (along with /C, /D, /E etc samples for context).

These are by no means a bad headphone. One could "get used" to the sound without much complaint. It has an honest accuracy that never edges toward boominess or bloat; it's just that the AKG was noticeably more precise. Perhaps all this is just that the Ultrasone fits your taste in sound better than any other headphone you've heard. Nothing wrong about having your personal taste.

I admit, I was rather disappointed that Ultrasone's unique driver technology didn't seem to be evidenced in the tracks I sampled. I'm very curious about it.
Reply
post #133 of 459
8/2/08 at 2:38pm
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by spinali View Post
Source was matched with my listening session, and I did a quite a bit of A/B comparisons (along with /C, /D, /E etc samples for context).

These are by no means a bad headphone. One could "get used" to the sound without much complaint. It has an honest accuracy that never edges toward boominess or bloat; it's just that the AKG was noticeably more precise. Perhaps all this is just that the Ultrasone fits your taste in sound better than any other headphone you've heard. Nothing wrong about having your personal taste.

I admit, I was rather disappointed that Ultrasone's unique driver technology didn't seem to be evidenced in the tracks I sampled. I'm very curious about it.
Please take a few minutes to read the very first post (mine) in this thread, especially the part about the "theory" close to the end of the post.
Reply
post #134 of 459
8/2/08 at 2:45pm
Thread Starter 

Reply to spinali

Quote:
Originally Posted by spinali View Post
Until today, I'd never heard an Ultrasone headphone. It was at our local Guitar Center - admittedly not the perfect place, but there were some other phones to compare it with. Nearly all were in the $100-200 range.

A pair of AKGs came out on top - the K141S, as I recall - nicely detailed but not as good as their top models. The Ultrasone was adequate, and better than most of the Sonys, but I liked most of the Senns better. I was unimpressed by the Ultrasone build, and could not catch the "something special" about the phones.
Which Ultrasone headphone did you hear? They are not all equal, you know.
Reply
post #135 of 459
8/2/08 at 8:16pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpelg View Post
This is where I would look as the weakest link in your chain. The Prolines are showing the system components upstream. Amps can be as much a FR bottleneck as any other part.

The Sony's simply don't go down as deep as the Ultrasones, even with the best amp/source. Therefore, it doesn't even try to reproduce those deepest frequencies.
I'd be inclined to think the amp section of the Pico more than the DAC section would be struggling here. One of these days I'll have to try Pico as a preamp to a desktop amp and see if that improves matters.

And agreed, the Sonys lack lowbass definition. Its there, but very recessed and unnoticable. Bass was always their biggest flaw, which is why I ended up selling them (closet basshead )
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › The sound of the Ultrasone Pro (Proline) 750 Headphones