Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Sennheiser HD 800 VS Grado PS 1000
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Sennheiser HD 800 VS Grado PS 1000 - Page 9

post #121 of 196
i think the ps1000 is a big step above the gs1000. i traded gs1000 for ps1000 a long time ago. i can't really explain the difference but it was big to me. the ps1000 may be the ultimate headphone for very low level listening. i can say it seems like things are 20 feet away like loudspeakers do. it is almost like they are planar. i think they pushed it as far as dynamic can go at this point. that goes for the hd800 as well even though they are different. the hd800 do need higher volume to really bloom.
post #122 of 196

I found the PS1000s a nice improvement over the overly harsh GS1000s. But not drastic. YMMV.

post #123 of 196

i think that the graphics don not say anything relatively the comparison between the hd-800 and ps-1000.

are two completely diferrent worlds

post #124 of 196

Thanks for the impressions, music and Macedonian.  I'll have to check out the PS1000 sometime if they're such a significant improvement over the GS1000.

post #125 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Elysian View Post

Thanks for the impressions, music and Macedonian.  I'll have to check out the PS1000 sometime if they're such a significant improvement over the GS1000.



i give you some friendly advice:if you want the ps-1000, buy it used

post #126 of 196

They aren't really selling as cheaply as you'd think used.  Someone's trying to sell one now for $1400, and they don't pop up as much on the FS forums as you'd think...

post #127 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Radio_head View Post

They aren't really selling as cheaply as you'd think used.  Someone's trying to sell one now for $1400, and they don't pop up as much on the FS forums as you'd think...



in U.S. is too much, for the Europe is different

post #128 of 196

It would appear that you really have no idea as to what would best suit your tastes and choices.  First you stress either Grado or Sennheiser, and two VERY different and disparate headphones, neither of which are suited for your music tastes.

And you mention that you have over 2000 tunes on your iPod which leads one to believe that all you listen to is very low grade MP3's (128kbps or less).  Very few head-fiers here can be bothered

by MP3's, preferring much higher quality Flac, WAV or better.

You go on to say:

"Dr. Dre headphones are crap, I want the best ones which are specialized in this stuff.

So, I just need 1 answer - HD 800 or PS 1000?"     - duh, NEITHER of these are 'specialized in this stuff' as you put it.

And in terms of your requirement for 'bass and comfort' - you're not going to get comfort from Grados, and the bass is not there for Sennheisers unless properly amped (oh and have you then factored

in the cost and quality of proper amplification and the likely need for a DAC?

Sorry, but have you done ANY research at all.

At this juncture, I'd say your best bet is to get out to some headphone meets and do some serious listening to different rigs and setups.

If you're not willing to invest the time and listening into your selection, then just flip a coin or go back to using ibuds with your 128kbps ipod files.

 


Edited by charliex - 9/25/11 at 7:53pm
post #129 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliex View Post

And you mention that you have over 2000 tunes on your iPod which leads one to believe that all you listen to is very low grade MP3's (128kbps or less).  Very few head-fiers here can be bothered

by MP3's, preferring much higher quality Flac, WAV or better.

.......or go back to using ibuds with your 128kbps ipod files.

Do you know that an Ipod have 64GB? I have ca. 8000 Songs on my Touch 4G an 98% of them you would never hear a diffrence to the original CD. Most LAME 3.98 V2-V0.

Some audiophile Herbie Hancock albums made with EAC+ LAME 3.98.4 V0, perfect for every Headphone contest.

Your MP3-128kbps-Ipod talk are nothing else then unreflecting prejudice.

 



 

post #130 of 196

 

[quote]And you mention that you have over 2000 tunes on your iPod which leads one to believe that all you listen to is very low grade MP3's (128kbps or less).  Very few head-fiers here can be bothered

by MP3's, preferring much higher quality Flac, WAV or better.

.......or go back to using ibuds with your 128kbps ipod files.[/quote]

 

 

Do you know that an Ipod have 64GB? I have ca. 8000 Songs on my Touch 4G an 98% of them you would never hear a diffrence to the original CD. Most LAME 3.98 V2-V0.
Some audiophile Herbie Hancock albums made with EAC+ LAME 3.98.4 V0, perfect for every Headphone contest.
Your MP3-128kbps-Ipod talk are nothing else then unreflecting prejudice.
post #131 of 196

*edit* ****, why I can't delete my own posts? angry_face.gif


Edited by Supersonic99 - 9/26/11 at 1:59pm
post #132 of 196


 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersonic99 View Post

 

Do you know that an Ipod have 64GB? I have ca. 8000 Songs on my Touch 4G an 98% of them you would never hear a diffrence to the original CD. Most LAME 3.98 V2-V0.
Some audiophile Herbie Hancock albums made with EAC+ LAME 3.98.4 V0, perfect for every Headphone contest.
Your MP3-128kbps-Ipod talk are nothing else then unreflecting prejudice.


 

Sorry, but I'm going to have to totally disagree.  Lame 3.98, although deemed by many to be a quality MP3 encoder, is still utilizing MP3 format.  Archiving music with a LOSSY format such as this is never recommended.

Using V2 to V0 is only providing bitrates of 190 kbps (V2) to 245 kbps (V0), still not even near the strongest bitrate (320 kbps) available to MP3 Lossy format which has the lowest risk of artifacts.

'Archiving' music using a lossy format like MP3 is never recommended – no matter how transparent the resulting files might sound. The best, and most recommended alternative is to use LOSSLESS formats like WAV, FLAC etc. that allow true archiving, bit for bit like on the original CD.

post #133 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by charliex View Post


 


 

Sorry, but I'm going to have to totally disagree.  Lame 3.98, although deemed by many to be a quality MP3 encoder, is still utilizing MP3 format.  Archiving music with a LOSSY format such as this is never recommended.

Using V2 to V0 is only providing bitrates of 190 kbps (V2) to 245 kbps (V0), still not even near the strongest bitrate (320 kbps) available to MP3 Lossy format which has the lowest risk of artifacts.

'Archiving' music using a lossy format like MP3 is never recommended – no matter how transparent the resulting files might sound. The best, and most recommended alternative is to use LOSSLESS formats like WAV, FLAC etc. that allow true archiving, bit for bit like on the original CD.


And the fact that one can buy a 2TB HDD for about $100 ish....lossless is a no brainer IMO.

post #134 of 196

If you are listening to music with $1k+ headphones it seems silly not to use lossless.

post #135 of 196
Quote:
Originally Posted by Supersonic99 View Post

Some audiophile Herbie Hancock albums made with EAC+ LAME 3.98.4 V0, perfect for every Headphone contest.
Your MP3-128kbps-Ipod talk are nothing else then unreflecting prejudice.


You've got to be kidding ...... perfect for every Headphone contest if your headphones are sub $50 and less cans, worthy of nothing better than

questionable sound reproduction - so we're back to the ibuds once again.

My MP3 - 128 kbps iPod talk is nothing less than aural reality.

Again, my recommendation is to attend some headphone meets in your local area and try out different gear before making a choice.


Edited by charliex - 9/27/11 at 6:55am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: High-end Audio Forum
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Sennheiser HD 800 VS Grado PS 1000