D2000 vs HD650 | Comparison & Review - Page 3

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terdinus Asus 

I think the best way to judge the phones is how closely they reproduce the real sounds of instruments in the studio before they are ever touched by folks in the mixing booth in digital format. Graphs and charts and numbers are great math, but ultimately tell a very shallow and oft times false story.

Now experience with what real instruments sound like in person is limited for most people.

In my experience the D2000 reflect reality more accurately more often than the HD650, which tends to be more accurate to the digital mixed version of the music. Which is why it's a more clinical boring pair of cans. It does not reflect as well the raw reality, but a restrained interpretation of the person in charge of mixing.

When I listen to my music (from classical, soundtrack, to jazz, rock, pop) I want to feel like I'm there amongst the instruments, not in a booth. Others like to hear what the person in charge of mastering and mixing decided to convey.

I can see a musician wanting to feel 'amongst the instruments' - but others of us like to feel as though we are a bit more 'birdseye' so that we can take in the entirety of the performance with the space intended BY THE MIX/MASTER PRO.

Why?  Because the mixer can decide, (hopefully in cooperation with the artists, although the mixer's objectivity is an asset here) what the 'optimal' vantage point is.

It's part of the art of recording to make these decisions before the recording reaches the intended audience.

The headphone/speaker system is NOT a cognizant member of the group of artists deciding on the sound - hence, a headphone may be 'fun' in altering it, but it shouldn't be regarded as 'superior' - and in fact, on many levels can be considered 'inferior' for interfering with the synergistic intents of the artists and mixer/master-er - mostly because it can't be applied to all recordings in such a way that it 'improves' them in the intended way.  

Now, if they come up with software/hardware that can map our sound preferences (assuming we're AWARE of them) and interfere with each recording reliably to produce a personalized soundscape that we prefer -  well, at that point, won't the superior headphone STILL be the one that carts the sound to the processor or from the processor with the least amount of interference or distortion?

Of course, by that time, the machines revolution will have happened and we'll be much more interested in starting a 'Butlerian Jihad' than getting a good sound from headphones.

(*Worries if the word 'Jihad' has put him on some sort of watchlist*)

The contents of any headphone review discussing the sound signature of any particular phone give insight into the actual sound reproduced by the phones as well as letting the reader know more about the sound preferences of the person writing the review.

Thanks for taking the time to write the review.  I enjoyed reading it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terdinus Asus 

I think the best way to judge the phones is how closely they reproduce the real sounds of instruments in the studio before they are ever touched by folks in the mixing booth in digital format. Graphs and charts and numbers are great math, but ultimately tell a very shallow and oft times false story.

Now experience with what real instruments sound like in person is limited for most people.

In my experience the D2000 reflect reality more accurately more often than the HD650, which tends to be more accurate to the digital mixed version of the music. Which is why it's a more clinical boring pair of cans. It does not reflect as well the raw reality, but a restrained interpretation of the person in charge of mixing.

When I listen to my music (from classical, soundtrack, to jazz, rock, pop) I want to feel like I'm there amongst the instruments, not in a booth. Others like to hear what the person in charge of mastering and mixing decided to convey.

Personally I think the 650 is more accurate to the music as heard in free air from a distance.

As soon as distance is introduced treble is reduced. I believe the 650 designers took this into account in attempting to reproduce a typical concert hall or theatre sound, whereas other designers appear to be trying for a live, on-stage-next-to-the-performers effect.

At least, this is the only justification I can think of for some of the balances adopted by such brands as Grado, Beyer and Audio technica.  

Do they allow headphones in Guantanamo?

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terdinus Asus 

I think the best way to judge the phones is how closely they reproduce the real sounds of instruments in the studio before they are ever touched by folks in the mixing booth in digital format. Graphs and charts and numbers are great math, but ultimately tell a very shallow and oft times false story.

Now experience with what real instruments sound like in person is limited for most people.

In my experience the D2000 reflect reality more accurately more often than the HD650, which tends to be more accurate to the digital mixed version of the music. Which is why it's a more clinical boring pair of cans. It does not reflect as well the raw reality, but a restrained interpretation of the person in charge of mixing.

When I listen to my music (from classical, soundtrack, to jazz, rock, pop) I want to feel like I'm there amongst the instruments, not in a booth. Others like to hear what the person in charge of mastering and mixing decided to convey.

I actually feel the opposite. The HD650 is a more natural sounding headphone to me. I find that despite it not being the best in terms of soundstage, detail or treble (as opposed to competitors like the DT880 and the K701, etc.), the biggest advantage it has is its timbre and naturalness which the Beyer and AKG fail to convey.
 

It is not possible to recreate raw reality. 

The best you could ever do is get as close to the person in charge of mixing.

What you are asking is for the headphone to reach beyond the recorded mix,

chosen by the sound engineer, and grab reality. 

That's impossible simply because subtle changes in EQ by the engineer affects the final recording.

So you cannot possibly ask the headphone to be smarter than the original recording.

Even then, there are problems with what we think of as "reality."

Is reality a quartet, without mic, in a living room?

Is it a concert hall where every instrument is mic-ed?

The original recording room affects acoustics as much as mic positioning. 

When an instrument is using a microphone, it is already defying "reality" by going through its own speakers. 

You cannot recreate reality.

You can only get to the sound engineer, and you will likely fail in that endeavor as well.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Terdinus Asus 

It does not reflect as well the raw reality, but a restrained interpretation of the person in charge of mixing.

When I listen to my music (from classical, soundtrack, to jazz, rock, pop) I want to feel like I'm there amongst the instruments, not in a booth. Others like to hear what the person in charge of mastering and mixing decided to convey.

Nice review, Katun! Have you considered modding your D2000s or getting someone to mod them for you? That seems to be a pretty popular thing to do around here. Also, I thought the HD650 was a boring can when I listened to it as well. Warp08 states that this is because of the cable and says a TWag cable opens up the headphone and transforms it. I hope to hear the combo soon and see what I hear. Keep in mind the Twag cable is $425, which is more than the can it self.

I know I just suggested two pretty expensive things to try that you may not even like and are very expensive unless you do it yourself, so you are free to ignore it. just enjoy the closed cans with the nice bass and tipped up treble, as that is my sound as well. Music is so much fun that way. I am town between these and the Ultrasone Pro 900s, but I have been wanting to get the Pro 900s for a while and think I am leaning towards them.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Katun 

Quote:

Originally Posted by GeorgeGoodman 

I am town between these and the Ultrasone Pro 900s, but I have been wanting to get the Pro 900s for a while and think I am leaning towards them.

Well, I can give you my impressions when they come. Hopefully that can help you decide.

Awesome!
 

i chose the d2k's since they are about $100 cheaper than the hd650s and found them at a bargain through head-fi posts....my wallet hasn't felt the same ever since discovering this place 

I guess I am just not a fan of U-shaped headphones, seeing as I preferred the sound of the mid-centric D1001 to the D7000 (even if the D7k was technically better in all aspects).

Strange,.. My HD650 definitely have notches (on my HD650s both sides are 5 notches down ) and also do have a swivel mechanism. The swivel mechanism can turn around for about 20~30 degrees each way without bending the headband.

Good review btw! Never heard the D2000s, but according to your review i will probably like my HD650s betterrrr, smoothness! 

I noticed you'd had the m50s a while back; which (the 650 or d2000) would be closer in sound signature to the m50s?

I'm loving the m50s with a millet starving student amp, but the DBA-02s are so much more detailed and more refined (although much less bass and sound stage). I also have the MS1s, which I hardly use anymore tbh. The highs are too harsh, which is what worries me about the D2000s. I'm sure I'd love the HD650s, but the D2000s are closed and more in my price range  :/