kwkarth
Electronics guys... we have our plusses and minuses. With advent of digital everything, we're being phased out
- Joined
- Sep 30, 2001
- Posts
- 10,307
- Likes
- 100
Quote:
He was snoring, so you didn't.
Ahh, he must be a sleep typist!
He was snoring, so you didn't.
Sound trumps all IMO.
So if a pair of headphones came along that had razor blades, broken glass and thorns on the headband and ear pads, but they sounded like a slice of pure heaven, that would be acceptable? You, sir, must have a head of steel.
I was speaking rationally, of course.
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I'm not sure what you're saying here. Are you saying that the HP1000 and HD580 were FOTM? or do you disagree that the HP1000 has accurate timbre?
All true. In my case I wouldn't necessarily say they were true to timbre and accuracy. I put it that to me they sound natural. What that means is that they gel in a way that sounds organic and realistic. I wouldn't go so far as to claim they are either accurate or realistic to source of original instruments, that all seems way too subjective. But sounding natural is a different thing.
All true. In my case I wouldn't necessarily say they were true to timbre and accuracy. I put it that to me they sound natural. What that means is that they gel in a way that sounds organic and realistic. I wouldn't go so far as to claim they are either accurate or realistic to source of original instruments, that all seems way too subjective. But sounding natural is a different thing.
All true. In my case I wouldn't necessarily say they were true to timbre and accuracy. I put it that to me they sound natural. What that means is that they gel in a way that sounds organic and realistic. I wouldn't go so far as to claim they are either accurate or realistic to source of original instruments, that all seems way too subjective. But sounding natural is a different thing.
And this is the way I would describe the original RS-1 w/flats. So I guess it's still different strokes...
Neither. When they arrived on the scene, they were hailed as being extremely accurate in truth of timbre, which I assume would mean they sound rather like the real thing. Recording and mastering engineers were using them in their decision making. I have heard both, and each sounds very different, yet they are (were) both accurate to different people. That's why I take these "true to life" comments/hype with a rather large grain of salt. Everybody says they know what "reality" is, yet they have different opinions on what it should sound like through headphones.
Just listen to them yourself and make an informed choice.
Neither. When they arrived on the scene, they were hailed as being extremely accurate in truth of timbre, which I assume would mean they sound rather like the real thing. Recording and mastering engineers were using them in their decision making. I have heard both, and each sounds very different, yet they are (were) both accurate to different people. That's why I take these "true to life" comments/hype with a rather large grain of salt. Everybody says they know what "reality" is, yet they have different opinions on what it should sound like through headphones
I guess I don't see a discrepency between the HP1000 and HD580 both sounding real to people. I think they both focus more on tone and timbre than excitement/fun/energetic treble, etc. But the HD580 just sacrifices more to get there than the HP1000. But I agree that "real life" seems to sound different to different people through headphones. I still don't understand this, and feel it has more to do with preferences and what sacrifices people choose to make (because no headphone is perfect) than what "real life" sounds like. We all listen to the same "real life" But that's another thread (or a past thread)