or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Video Games Discussion › Mad Lust Envy's Headphone Gaming Guide: (3/18/2016: MrSpeakers Ether C 1.1 Added)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Mad Lust Envy's Headphone Gaming Guide: (3/18/2016: MrSpeakers Ether C 1.1 Added) - Page 1434

post #21496 of 37315
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gr34td3str0y3r View Post

this is the same for high frame rate video (like the Hobbit movies)

God no. High framerate video literally craps all over what makes movies look like movies. Instead they start looking more like soap operas, or the behind the scenes. It's unnatural, and should be removed from all existence.

You want high framerate movies, buy yourself one of bajillion TVs that have dejudder processing that interpolates frames between frames. things like Sony's Motionflow, Samsung's Auto Motion Plus, etc. It's the same effect you see on those tvs, except more consistent in the theatres.

Sorry, that's one thing I will ALWAYS hate. Movies should be 24fps to retain their cinematic, surreal look. At the most, I'd accept 30fps for movies, if only to eliminate 2:3 pulldown cause by 60hz refresh rates on 24hz content.

48fps for movies is something I will be against until the day I die. I'm a cinema purist, and a high framerate ruins that cinematic look completely.

To be fair, I had a Samsung and I used that high framerate dejudder for video games, and even used it on CERTAIN movies that I've watched many times before. it's a cool trick, but it's just that, a trick. Not something that should ever, ever be a standard.

At least with dejudder, you can turn that option off. Even my TV has that nonsense, and I leave it off. But if Hollywood tries to cram 48fps down our throats like they do with 3D... it will be a bad day for cinema indeed.

I would love to watch IMAX without 3D, but guess what? You basically can't now. Stupid, stupid 3D.

With virtual surround, all you're doing is trading off a limited headphone's sound presentation, to one akin to a room full of speakers. You're just changing the presentaion of the sond, you're not altering the actual source.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 3/6/14 at 11:53pm
post #21497 of 37315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kriss92 View Post
 

Anyone?

Do you have a mix amp of any kind or plan or buying any. 

I have astro mixamp and swear buy it. To be  100% honest with you, what brought me to head-fi in the first place and into audiophile equipment is a blog entry someone wrote saying how awesome the astro mixamp is, but ANY 150$ pair of head phone is better than the Astro A40s. That started me down a dark hole (don't get me started. just spent 1k in less than 2 months and don't regret a ******* dime of it!) 

 

I am just curious. You found this particular forum thread. Did you not read it? Mad Lust has a billion reviews and recommendations in the initial thread. Based on his thoughts, my tastes, and budget, I narrowed it down to 4 cans and just bought the x1s. What are you looking for and at what cost? 

I really wanted the DT 990s but a lot of people talked me out of them because of the their high treble spike which really turned me off. The X1s were 40 bucks more but are 10000 times sexier and are supposed to have a much better frequency response across the board and have some of the best bass, sub 300 cans, for open back (please correct me if I am wrong. Also I have not opened my x1s yet, I am waiting until I get back to Japan next week) 

post #21498 of 37315
Thread Starter 
Sounds pretty good to me. Open backed headphone don't tend to have as much bass as the 990/X1/HD650. Of course you have planar bass, which is even better, but more linear so it won't be 'emphasized' like the 3 I have mentioned.
post #21499 of 37315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post


God no. High framerate video literally craps all over what makes movies look like movies. Instead they start looking more like soap operas, or the behind the scenes. It's unnatural, and should be removed from all existence.

You want high framerate movies, buy yourself one of bajillion TVs that have dejudder processing that interpolates frames between frames. things like Sony's Motionflow, Samsung's Auto Motion Plus, etc. It's the same effect you see on those tvs, except more consistent in the theatres.

Sorry, that's one thing I will ALWAYS hate. Movies should be 24fps to retain their cinematic, surreal look. At the most, I'd accept 30fps for movies, if only to eliminate 2:3 pulldown cause by 60hz refresh rates on 24hz content.

48fps for movies is something I will be against until the day I die. I'm a cinema purist, and a high framerate ruins that cinematic look completely.

To be fair, I had a Samsung and I used that high framerate dejudder for video games, and even used it on CERTAIN movies that I've watched many times before. it's a cool trick, but it's just that, a trick. Not something that should ever, ever be a standard.

At least with dejudder, you can turn that option off. Even my TV has that nonsense, and I leave it off. But if Hollywood tries to cram 48fps down our throats like they do with 3D... it will be a bad day for cinema indeed.

I would love to watch IMAX without 3D, but guess what? You basically can't now. Stupid, stupid 3D.

With virtual surround, all you're doing is trading off a limited headphone's sound presentation, to one akin to a room full of speakers. You're just changing the presentaion of the sond, you're not altering the actual source.

Sorry. I totally respect your audio opinion but I totally disagree with you video opinion. You are just plain wrong. I 100% agree about the soap opera effect. I HATE it. But the Hobbit was SHOT in high frame rate. It was not up scaled.  I am not saying 48fps is the best or the future, but it is the NOT the same as the up-scaled crap that all of our TVs do today. I am not smart enough to argue this... but IMHO you are wrong. 48fps is different. And the reason you may not like it now is because you have only seen one movie with it. Scientists have said it will take 3 to 5 movies for your brain to get used it. That is why it looks weird for some people now. They say when people first started watching 24fps movies that they experienced that same slow down effect that many of us report when first watching 48fps movies. This is TOTALLY different from that crap upscale that our TVs do. Our TVs are adding fake frames. Movies like Hobbit actually shoot and show 48 frames. Our brains are not 100% sure how to proccess it yet and the more we see it the less we it will seem werid to us, unlike the upsacling. 

 

Honeslty. This is a great thread about gaming audio. I dont want it to get off topic about this... but if you want I can start posting about 100000000000000 links why you dont like 48fps and are wrong. 

 

And I do not understand your hate of 3d. It is useless in many movies. Movies that would be bad either way. 

It also adds to many movies. IMHO Imax is more of a gimmick than 3d. Explain to me what Imax is? 

Louder speakers. double projectors. 

I mean... movies like batman where only 20% IMAX anyway so the ratio of the movie changed through out the movie... totally lame. 

post #21500 of 37315
Quote:
Originally Posted by NamelessPFG View Post
 

MLE's even flat-out told me that the X1 probably isn't my cup of tea in terms of signature to begin with. Only a first-hand audition can prove that, but it just makes me think about how my tastes probably aren't lining up with everyone else's here.

 

It isn't for me either and I had it for quite a bit of hours. I like pronounced or stronger bass but I can't stand the lack of detail of the X1 in that spectrum. 

post #21501 of 37315
Quote:
Originally Posted by VORZ View Post
 

What would be a good pair of closed back headphones to use with the stereo adapter for the xbox one? Ideally I don't want to have an amp dangling from my controller. My budget is $400. Currently have the HD 280 Pros. 

you bought an Xbone......

post #21502 of 37315
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gr34td3str0y3r View Post

Sorry. I totally respect your audio opinion but I totally disagree with you video opinion. You are just plain wrong. I 100% agree about the soap opera effect. I HATE it. But the Hobbit was SHOT in high frame rate. It was not up scaled.  I am not saying 48fps is the best or the future, but it is the NOT the same as the up-scaled crap that all of our TVs do today. I am not smart enough to argue this... but IMHO you are wrong. 48fps is different. And the reason you may not like it now is because you have only seen one movie with it. Scientists have said it will take 3 to 5 movies for your brain to get used it. That is why it looks weird for some people now. They say when people first started watching 24fps movies that they experienced that same slow down effect that many of us report when first watching 48fps movies. This is TOTALLY different from that crap upscale that our TVs do. Our TVs are adding fake frames. Movies like Hobbit actually shoot and show 48 frames. Our brains are not 100% sure how to proccess it yet and the more we see it the less we it will seem werid to us, unlike the upsacling. 

Honeslty. This is a great thread about gaming audio. I dont want it to get off topic about this... but if you want I can start posting about 100000000000000 links why you dont like 48fps and are wrong. 

And I do not understand your hate of 3d. It is useless in many movies. Movies that would be bad either way. 
It also adds to many movies. IMHO Imax is more of a gimmick than 3d. Explain to me what Imax is? 
Louder speakers. double projectors. 
I mean... movies like batman where only 20% IMAX anyway so the ratio of the movie changed through out the movie... totally lame. 
Motion Interpolation essentially makes 24fps content look like 48-60fps. So, no, it's still very much the same as the Hobbit, albeit with artifacts and framerate stutters. The same effect is there, they both look artificial, and makes movies NOT look like movies but more akin to something happening in real time. That RUINS what makes movies movies. But anyways, you can argue that until the end of time, but I stand by my words. it's garbage.

As for 3D... I don't hate it, however I hate that the studios are shoving it down our throats. I don't like it. I like how movies look as they have always looked. I don't need these stupid gimmicks to enjoy a film. As long as HFR and 3D are OPTIONS, they won't bother me, as I can just pay less and get more enjoyment out of a standard 24fps 2D film.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 3/7/14 at 12:36am
post #21503 of 37315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Change is Good View Post

Nameless, have you thought about giving the K612 a try?

Yep, I can testify to this..I gave up the X1's for a pair of K612's and haven't looked back,

post #21504 of 37315
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post


Motion Interpolation essentially makes 24fps content look like 48-60fps. So, no, it's still very much the same as the Hobbit, albeit with artifacts and framerate stutters. The same effect is there, they both look artificial, and makes movies NOT look like movies but more akin to something happening in real time. That RUINS what makes movies movies. But anyways, you can argue that until the end of time, but I stand by my words. it's garbage.

As for 3D... I don't hate it, however I hate that the studios are shoving it down our throats. I don't like it. I like how movies look as they have always looked. I don't need these stupid gimmicks to enjoy a film. As long as HFR and 3D are OPTIONS, they won't bother me, as I can just pay less and get more enjoyment out of a standard 24fps 2D film.

Oh, and I see that high framerates of motion interpolation everywhere I go. My friends never turn that crap off, so when I'm watching a movie or a show at a friend's house... I have to painfully sit through that soap opera/behind the scenes look at all times.

http://www.bigbrownboxblog.com.au/av-talk/beating-the-soap-opera-effect-what-the-hobbit-can-teach-us-about-motion-interpolation

so you hate change. got it. 

 

edit: and I agree that interpolation crap is a joke. I just spent 2 weeks with my best friend and 2 weeks at my paretns house. They both have that crap turned on their TVs. They have no idea its even on... I was about to explode. But its not my place to say anything. My best friend is like "dude I just bought a 240hz TV" I was like... good for you... I guess... Then when I came to say I got to "enjoy it" 

 

I will agree to disagree with you about imax, 3d, and 48fps. 

I do agree much of it is a gimmick. I disagree that is doesn't have a place in SOME films. 

Resident Evil 5 with is 3d effects is total BS. Take off your glasses and there isnt even a differnt in 90% of the film. But I 100% LOVED Hobbit high frame rate. My wife did not. I am going to see the sequal (in Japan when we get back next week, still playing there. so we will see if I still like) 

Other movies are amazing in 3D. I have a 3D and I will tell you. It if VERY hit or miss with 3D movies. Most are a joke. Some are great and better. Its 3 am and I am drunk as **** so I am not going to enter the mental library at this time to pull out titles. Anyway. 

Good night! I love this thread. 


Edited by gr34td3str0y3r - 3/7/14 at 12:44am
post #21505 of 37315
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by gr34td3str0y3r View Post

so you hate change. got it. 

I don't hate change. I hate change that ruins what it's trying to improve.

Quote:
“It looked uncompromisingly real — so much so that it looked fake … Hobbiton and Middle Earth didn’t feel like a different universe, it felt like a special effect, a film set with actors in costumes. It looked like behind the scenes footage. The movement of the actors looked… strange. Almost as if the performances had been partly sped up … It didn’t look cinematic.” – Peter Sciretta of Slashfilm

Precisely my point.

Oh, I'm very senstitive to framerates. Not many people are. I can easily tell the difference between 24/48/60fps.

Some people can't tell a diff between 24 and 60, which is shocking to me.

You enjoy HFR and 3D, good for you. I prefer to keep movies looking like movies, not some behind the scenes or soap opera.
post #21506 of 37315
Quote:
Originally Posted by gr34td3str0y3r View Post

so you hate change. got it. 

He hates me?!?

*tear*

:P
post #21507 of 37315
Quote:
Originally Posted by gr34td3str0y3r View Post
 

i am not sure if you are talking about me.... if you are I didnt mean anything was wrong with YOU, but rather something in the string of sound. Meaning it could the game, your cans, or yes it COULD be you, that you are not used to the DD sound, which is EXACTLY what Mad Lust said (you may just not be used to the DD sound). Mad Lust said basically the exact same thing I was trying to say, but he explained it much better and of course he carries more weight around here.  then again you may be talking about someone else. 

 

I may have misinterpreted what you wrote as "you don't agree with me so your ears are wrong".  I respect anyone's views and opinions regardless.  I have been using it constantly since and I am beginning to appreciate it.  Thing is though, like with a lot of things, the longer you use it the more 'normal' it will seem to you, this doesn't equate to better.

post #21508 of 37315
Quote:
Originally Posted by gr34td3str0y3r View Post
 

Do you have a mix amp of any kind or plan or buying any. 

I have astro mixamp and swear buy it. To be  100% honest with you, what brought me to head-fi in the first place and into audiophile equipment is a blog entry someone wrote saying how awesome the astro mixamp is, but ANY 150$ pair of head phone is better than the Astro A40s. That started me down a dark hole (don't get me started. just spent 1k in less than 2 months and don't regret a ******* dime of it!) 

 

I am just curious. You found this particular forum thread. Did you not read it? Mad Lust has a billion reviews and recommendations in the initial thread. Based on his thoughts, my tastes, and budget, I narrowed it down to 4 cans and just bought the x1s. What are you looking for and at what cost? 

I really wanted the DT 990s but a lot of people talked me out of them because of the their high treble spike which really turned me off. The X1s were 40 bucks more but are 10000 times sexier and are supposed to have a much better frequency response across the board and have some of the best bass, sub 300 cans, for open back (please correct me if I am wrong. Also I have not opened my x1s yet, I am waiting until I get back to Japan next week) 

 

I am planing to buy one mixamp pro 2013. And first i looked at many headsets but everyone just had ****ty mics so i was thinking about buying headphones and then a mic like blue yeti or something like a boom mic instead. I Checked alot of forums and then i found this. And i did read most of the reviews numerous times and checked the prices in my country and the ones i listed are around the same price and since i want the best for the money i asked about it.

 

But i have narrowed it down to the MA900's or the Fidelio X1 now. The Fidelio's look more sturdy but seems a little small, but that can be fixed i read, so that might not be a problem. But how are they compared to the MA900's for "sound whoring", is there a big difference?

 

I have heard that the Mixamp pro has a pro mode for FPS games. How much better will it make them for sound whoring? If anyone has tried that.

post #21509 of 37315
Thread Starter 
Pro mode basically just removes all the bass. That would do the X1 wonders, and even the MA900 can benefit from bass removal if you want to soundwhore that much. Personally, I don't think removing the bass is really necessary for either headphone, as I can hear everything with both, and enjoy the sound. Pro mode sucks the life out of the headphones, IMHO. Unless you're in some tournament setting, I would just leave the mixamp Pro on standard or something.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 3/7/14 at 3:24am
post #21510 of 37315
Quote:
Originally Posted by SaLX View Post
Bad day at the office Nameless? :smile:

 

1. Yes.... having one cable is far far better than two cables hanging off your skull.

 

2. The X1 does bass when it has to, otherwise it's pretty neutral. PC users can EQ out any bass (easier to EQ out something than to add it). So maybe it's not ultra perfect for console sound whoring, but most users would, I bet you a ****onne, love the sound of it over a bassless headphone: it's still a superb all rounder.

 

3. Grab yourself a pair.

 

I wouldn't say a bad day, no. Sorry if I sounded too harsh.

 

I'm just a natural skeptic, especially on a place like Head-Fi where things regularly get hyped to the moon, people have different tastes, and we're frequently talking $200+ headphones whose purchases are not made lightly. On top of that, I've hardly evaluated every single headphone on the planet, so it's difficult to say whether one set is truly better or worse than another, especially given the subjectivity. I mean, I certainly expected people to be skeptical of my statements when recommending vintage Stax Lambda systems for gaming; I would have myself, if I never got to try a few sets!

 

Speaking of subjectivity, the first thing you mentioned about the X1 was the bass, one of its strengths by most people's accounts, then followed it up with "bassless". Here's my question: what constitutes "bassless"? I'd say the AD700 definitely qualifies, but not many others above the $100 mark do. I found all those "Stax have no bass!" statements unwarranted, even for the bright Lambda lineup. I've heard similar things about the HD800 as well, for that matter.

 

But other people might not be satisfied with anything less than a Pro 900, LCD-2 or D7000, for all I know.

 

I do agree that the less cables dangling around, the better, especially if it means I don't have to worry about the cables hitting each other and making noise. It's actually the reason why I can't bring myself to part with the MMX 300; the mic that's built-in is just too good for me to go back to that old desk mic, and the headphone portion (DT770-derived) is capable enough for competitive and cinematic gaming alike. Music needs a boost in the mids to truly shine for me, but it doesn't sound totally awful to the point where I really want to reach for another headphone.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Change is Good View Post
Nameless, have you thought about giving the K612 a try?

 

I have. Several times, in no small part due to that MA900 vs. K612 review.

 

But again, I don't have the money to buy and review the K612, just as I don't have the money to buy and review the X1.

 

I'd totally take up any audition offers, though; for me, Head-Fi is about broadening perspective. It's just that that's kind of hard to do in the world of audiophilia without spending some serious coin, and I must be lucky to ever have had the luxury of listening to those Stax setups and MLE's HE-400 to begin with.

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Video Games Discussion
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Video Games Discussion › Mad Lust Envy's Headphone Gaming Guide: (3/18/2016: MrSpeakers Ether C 1.1 Added)