Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › The Neutral / Balanced Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

The Neutral / Balanced Thread - Page 7

Poll Results: Best Neutral IEM and Headphone 2011 (Pick 1 IEM and 1 Headphone only)

This is a multiple choice poll
  • 18% (42)
    Etymotic ER-4S
  • 3% (7)
    Hifiman RE-272
  • 3% (9)
    Shure SE425
  • 1% (3)
    Sony EX510
  • 7% (17)
    Vsonic GR07
  • 3% (8)
    Westone UM3X
  • 8% (20)
    Audeze LCD-2
  • 14% (33)
    Sennheiser HD600
  • 11% (27)
    Sennheiser HD800
  • 7% (18)
    Beyerdynamic DT880
  • 3% (7)
    Shure SRH 840
  • 8% (19)
    AKG 702
  • 9% (22)
    Stax SR-009
  • 0% (1)
    Denon DN-HP1000
  • 0% (1)
    ESP950
  • 10% (24)
    Ultimate Ears Reference Monitor Custom
  • 3% (9)
    Unique Melody Miracle
  • 2% (6)
    KRK-KNS8400
  • 2% (5)
    Koss ESP950
230 Total Votes  
post #91 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikp View Post

What is your definition sir?

 



Consult post #83 of 90

post #92 of 353
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vonx View Post

Consult post #83 of 90

 


au·di·o  prime.gifdemacr.gif-omacr.giflprime.gif)
adj.
1. Of or relating to humanly audible sound.
2.
a. Of or relating to the broadcasting, reproduction, or reception of sound.
b. Of or relating to high-fidelity sound reproduction.

 

 

philo- or phil-
pref.
Having a strong affinity or preference for; loving: philoprogenitive.

[Greek, from philosbeloved, loving.]

 

Makes sense?

 

post #93 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikp View Post

 

au·di·o  prime.gifdemacr.gif-omacr.giflprime.gif)
adj.
1. Of or relating to humanly audible sound.
2.
a. Of or relating to the broadcasting, reproduction, or reception of sound.
b. Of or relating to high-fidelity sound reproduction.

 

 

philo- or phil-
pref.
Having a strong affinity or preference for; loving: philoprogenitive.

[Greek, from philosbeloved, loving.]

 

Makes sense?

 


 

That was the original definition, its just been severely contorted nowadays


Edited by Vonx - 10/17/11 at 8:25pm
post #94 of 353
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vonx View Post

I think so


Alrighty, we're on the same side. Let's keep moving.

 

post #95 of 353

Hmmmm... Maybe your uncle hasn't found "his" music, anyways i see your point there and will back own on my EVERYONE.  But past that i will still hang on to my definition of audiophile, every dictionary i've looked at goes past lover into enthusiast or some form of the word.

And human exist because their are other animals, i can't think of one reason to use audiophile if everyone is one.

Besides all that and into off-topic, any chance i could see any of your FL work? I've played with it and know my way around it pretty well but can't find myself to be the creative type.  Just interested to see what you've been able to do with it.

post #96 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by nikp View Post

Alrighty, we're on the same side. Let's keep moving.

 



Alright.

 

i would add the ATH-M50s to your list. They are very clear and detailed sounding. They have a strong low end but i wouldn't call it overpowering, maybe slightly emphasized...

 

Very good for reference, too. not as great for pleasurable listening though imo

post #97 of 353
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vonx View Post

Alright.

 

i would add the ATH-M50s to your list. They are very clear and detailed sounding. They have a strong low end but i wouldn't call it overpowering, maybe slightly emphasized...

 

Very good for reference, too. not as great for pleasurable listening though imo


Added. 

 

post #98 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by John In Cali View Post

Hmmmm... Maybe your uncle hasn't found "his" music, anyways i see your point there and will back own on my EVERYONE.  But past that i will still hang on to my definition of audiophile, every dictionary i've looked at goes past lover into enthusiast or some form of the word.

And human exist because their are other animals, i can't think of one reason to use audiophile if everyone is one.

Besides all that and into off-topic, any chance i could see any of your FL work? I've played with it and know my way around it pretty well but can't find myself to be the creative type.  Just interested to see what you've been able to do with it.


 

Haha, every human is a human, but i wouldn't hesitate to call a human, a human

 

i have to find a way to convert .fl files into sound files but once i do ill upload some to youtube

 

It's experimental hip hop/beatcore mostly. Stuff like flying lotus/j dilla/jazz libs


Edited by Vonx - 10/17/11 at 8:38pm
post #99 of 353

Go to file-export- and pick .wav .mp3 or whatever from FL.

You could also just send the .fl file.

post #100 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post

Here's what threw me from your first post:

 

 

 

 

And from Lunatique's excellent post "misconception of neutral/accurate" (http://www.head-fi.org/t/564465/misconception-of-neutral-accurate), his comment:

 

 

 

I could be wrong about the "neutral is balanced" - because to me the only way to avoid major colouring is to have a well balanced headphone.  I know this is difficult to find something completely neutral - but this is where we'd take a little 'poetic license' and just list iem/headphones that are 'reasonably close to neutral'.

 

Interested in other input ......


i agree about if something is forcing to be analytical then it's coloring the sound. analytical just mean detailed and true to the reproduction of sound so if the headphone or speaker is in fact analytical then they should be the perfect all rounder. why? cause they should be able to sound-shift with precise accuracy depending on the music/recording presented. basically like a chameleon on how it can blend into it's environment. downside is due to human hearing,especially treble cause a headphone with a flat treble response up to 20khz if one still has their hearing in tact will sound very bright on a lot of music especially on badly mastered recordings. everything nowadays are so poorly mastered that a headphone or speaker with ''modern treble/rolled off'' is a must cause things will sound very fatiguing and piercing to the ears. that's why it's impossible with modern pop music to find a song that's actually well mastered.

like i have love/hate relationship with my sextetts lp and 240DF's,cause on lot of music the treble is just piercing due to horrible mastering and bad eq techniques while if i listen to a song that's beautifully mastered the treble and bass presence is all there, have wonderful dynamic range in the process and the treble does not pierce whatsoever that has that artificial emphasized sizzle sound.

term ''audiophile'' has changed the past 30 years. it's no longer about the music. it's all a marketing gimmicks nowadays and no where steered towards audio professionals and audio enthusiasts anymore. there is a select few that still try to make the best they can for the individual but that's most likely only in the professional aspect of audio anymore nowadays. getting accurate sound is not as expensive or hard to achieve like most marketing that happens in the audiophile world of things that tend to have you believe. it's more about who has the best coloration,best specs,best marketed tech,ect. to be honest nothing has changed much in audio the past 30 or so years. just their marketing game has improved to be honest.
post #101 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vonx View Post

I agree that music is subjective, hence why i said "i find" 

 

There is nothing wrong with sharing interpretations, and it would make a good discussion thread imho

 

If i started one to help identify "musical" headphones, I would say what my interpretation of "musicality" is, and then share my collection of headphones that I think fits that description. I still think a large majority of people would have a general consensus of what musicality is, even if they are ever so slightly opinionated. 

 

From what ive gathered..

 

Cold, sterile, lifeless, thin = generally considered less musical

 

Warm, low frequency colored, thick = generally considered more musical

 

I think it has to do with how the ear interprets sound from loud speakers and/or real instruments. They tend to have more "body" and "thud" in real life. For example, some pairs of loud speakers that, on paper, have a flat response can still be audibly recognized to have a completely different frequency response to the human ear. I read a really good thread on Human vs Machine frequency interpretation but i cant remember where i saw it. 

 

I know that myself when i go to concerts (usually rock/metal) that the bass and guitar distortion and gain really overpowers the midtones and vocals almost to the point where they are difficult to hear. I think its because the thickness of the loud bass can be "felt" in your body which makes you think there is more of it there, and why lot of people like to have saturated bass in their music. 

You completely missed my point and sidestepped.  I never said sharing interpretations was negative... I'd be a hypocrite for being a member of this site if that were the case.

 

My beef isn't with you, it is that usually people accuse something of not being musical, acting as if the term is objective.  I find low end coloration, warm and thick sound all "unmusical" to me and would actually probably consider "cold, thin, and lifeless (whatever that means)" to be more musical.  There is just too much variation.  This is an analytical thread, not a musicality thread.  Those aren't the same thing, at all.

 

"Analytical" has some objective features to it (i.e. revealing of detail and impedance across the spectrum that aims to not overly favor some portion of the spectrum).  Correct me if my definition is flawed.

 

I think the thing that will make this thread much more difficult than the basshead thread is that bass quantity is much less variable in its definition.

 

post #102 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vonx View Post

Alright.

 

i would add the ATH-M50s to your list. They are very clear and detailed sounding. They have a strong low end but i wouldn't call it overpowering, maybe slightly emphasized...

 

Very good for reference, too. not as great for pleasurable listening though imo



I completely (but respectfully) disagree, if that counts for anything.

post #103 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by R-Audiohead View Post

I completely (but respectfully) disagree, if that counts for anything.



I'd agree with you.  IMO the M50 should appear nowhere near an analytical thread - if we're defining it as balanced / neutral.  The M50 is very V shaped with emphasis on highs and lows at the expense of the mids.

post #104 of 353
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by R-Audiohead View Post

I completely (but respectfully) disagree, if that counts for anything.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooko View Post

I'd agree with you.  IMO the M50 should appear nowhere near an analytical thread - if we're defining it as balanced / neutral.  The M50 is very V shaped with emphasis on highs and lows at the expense of the mids.


Okay, it's 2:1 so I've removed the ATH-M50 from the list. Anyone who thinks like/otherwise?

 

post #105 of 353
Make that 3-1.
The AKG K240 would fit there though.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Misc.-Category Forums › Members' Lounge (General Discussion) › The Neutral / Balanced Thread