Comfortable, open, flat/neutral, highly detailed and resolving headphones? (< ~$500) - Page 7

Quote:

Originally Posted by ac500 

Sanity: That's what I thought. That's why I'm kind of curious to hear from people who've heard both, it's too bad it seems there are very few comparisons between the SRH940 and DT880. The only one I could find said they're very similar in signature, except the SRH940 is better quality sound and the DT880 is vastly better comfort.

"Better quality", and even comfort are rather subjective, unless there is a clear big difference. Different people look for different aspects of the sound to judge quality. If possible, you should probably just try both, and decide which one is better yourself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by liamstrain 

Get a decent vintage receiver ($100 - you can find a Harman Kardon 430 for under $75) and the SRD-7 ($150 or less) - that plus the well priced Pro's out there should keep you right around $500 for a fantastic rig. 

SRD-7s are Normal bias-only without modification (save for a few rare variants), which would result in an underdriven Lambda Pro...are you sure that would still sound good?

If so, I might as well start shopping for some Pro bias sets already in spite of only having an SRD-7/SB (again, only two Normal bias jacks).

My understanding was since they use the power output from the amp - the normal bias should be a non-issue (they are not a power amp)...  I'll have to check and see what the specs were are on the set I got rid of ten years ago (before I knew better). Maybe I had a variant. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by ac500 

Also I disagree that sound quality is subjective. As long as we can objectively define various areas of sound quality, then logically it must be objectively quantifiable. It may be subjective as to which coloration or sound signature you prefer, but not the sound quality observations themself.

What makes it subjective is that it is not a measurable single dimension quantity, and when making the comparison in every possible aspect gives mixed results, some weighting has to be applied to get an overall "quality" that can be compared, and this will include personal bias in the absence of an universally agreed standard.

Additionally, listening tests are inherently subjective to begin with, and the same headphone may not even sound exactly the same to different people, because everyone has ears and head of different size and shape, which will interact differently with the acoustics of the headphone.

Graphs are not fully reliable either, because of the difficulty of measuring headphones (especially the frequency response) accurately with a dummy head. If you look at the frequency response graphs of the same headphone from different sources, they are often very different, and what you hear when actually trying it could be different again.

Sticking with the SRH-940 and DT880 as an example, which one of these two sets of graphs at here and here is better objectively, and why (keeping in mind the known unreliability of graphs as well) ?

Quote:

Originally Posted by ac500 

We can measure quantities with characteristics of infinite dimensionality scientifically, so why not with headphones too? :P

I did not refer to dimensionality as a problem by itself, only that to make a simple "greater than"/"less than" comparison, we need two single-dimensional, real numbers in the end (i.e. something like headphone A has an overall quality of 1.738, while B is 1.925), and that making reliable measurements (whether by ears or instruments) is not without practical difficulties.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ac500 

I already described my sound signature preferences in this thread and what I'm looking for.

Well, if it is down to preferences after all, it is probably best to just try the available options as I suggested originally

Quote:

Originally Posted by ac500 

Well all the Stax from the buy/sell forum already sold it seems, so nevermind that I guess. Also I don't have a speaker amp so using a "energizer" doesn't seem like it would work well anyway.

 

Also I disagree that sound quality is subjective. As long as we can objectively define various areas of sound quality, then logically it must be objectively quantifiable. It may be subjective as to which coloration or sound signature you prefer, but not the sound quality observations themself.

You're still thinking in terms of better/worse.  "better" is absolutely subjective and is the most useless word on this whole forum.  There are certain things that can be measured, but it's usually not that objective becasue we don't know how to measure headphones very well.  There are very limited things we know how to measure and we're not good at doing those measurements in a very accurate or consistent way.  Which is why you can't compare even FR graphs done by different people. 

The best measurements I've seen are Purrin's (see his CSD Waterfall Plot thread in the headphone forum) and Tyll Hertsen's (see innerfidelity.com) but those are still limited.  Purrin has measured a number of headphones that sound better than his plots suggest and also phones that sound worse. 

"Better" is subjective because there is no perfect headphone, or anywhere near perfect.  Every headphone has artifacts in it's presentation that color the sound signal in a different way.  There are a very few cases where a headphone is better than another because it actually has fewer flaws all the way around.  But almost always, it's a matter of choosing which flaws are important to you.  Some people prefer the HD650 to the HD800 because despite the many technical superiorities of the HD800, it has elevated treble and if that is really bothersome for someone, the HD650 still might sound better.

Yes, but how often is someone choosing between ibuds and an LCD-3?  There are certain times when one headphone is better than another, but no one is ever seriously choosing between two headphones like that on this site.  For the vast majority of comparisons on head-fi there is no better or worse, you have to pick your poison and pick your strengths. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhythmdevils 

Yes, but how often is someone choosing between ibuds and an LCD-3?  There are certain times when one headphone is better than another, but no one is ever seriously choosing between two headphones like that on this site.  For the vast majority of comparisons on head-fi there is no better or worse, you have to pick your poison and pick your strengths. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by rhythmdevils 

 

You're still thinking in terms of better/worse.  "better" is absolutely subjective and is the most useless word on this whole forum. 

Agreed.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ac500 

I don't think it's so hard to EQ two headphones flat then make the observation that headphone B has better treble than headphone A.

 

Not wanting to prolong the "off topic" however your above quote is evidence of how useless the word "better" is.  You state that you can EQ two headphones flat, and then determine which one has the "better" treble, but what's missing is agrement or common understanding on what "better" treble is.  More, extended, focussed, highlighted, clear, peircing, sibilant; the asumption is that everyone agrees what better treble is.  That is why "better" is useless, as it doesn't describe what people actually mean.