Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Upgrade from the XB500 withouut losing much bass?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Upgrade from the XB500 withouut losing much bass?

post #1 of 17
12/13/11 at 8:08am
Thread Starter 

 

Right now I picked up some xb500s from best buy and i like them, but for pc gaming, the soundstage is quite small since its a "very in your face sound".

 

Would you consider the dt770s or hfi 580 as a major upgrade from the xb500s? (triple the cost of the xb500's) theres also the xb700 but i dont know how those compare to the dt770 or hfi 580, thanks again!

 

It's not for competitive gaming, it's for just being able to tell where the zombies are coming from wether its from above, or which side!

 

Priorities:

1. Hopefully, not much Bass lost from the xb500's obviously it wont be the same or more bass for more quality, that'd be pretty imposible! rolleyes.gif

2. Soundstage, dosent have to be huge, just be able to more or less picture the people/zombies and where they are at. (FPS)

3. Immersion, a "full" sound, for MMO's or other games that are not FPS.

4. Sound quality upgrade from the xb500's.

 

Someone said this, wanted your opinion on it: " I do have a Cowon X7 which has some fairly impressive bass boosting capabilities, and I can get way more bass (while retaining good SQ) out of my HFI-780 with it than I can with my XB-500 + iPod. "

 

Also peaking my interest is the audo technica 700 PRO MK II 

 

thanks fellow bassheads!

Reply
post #2 of 17
12/13/11 at 8:41am
I would go with the DT770's.

You might need an amplifier to drive them properly though. Do you have a soundcard? If so, which one?
Reply
post #3 of 17
12/13/11 at 8:43am

Denon D2000

Reply
post #4 of 17
12/13/11 at 9:00am

I'd personally go for the DT770-80.

Reply
post #5 of 17
12/13/11 at 10:40am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tilpo View Post

I would go with the DT770's.
You might need an amplifier to drive them properly though. Do you have a soundcard? If so, which one?


Fiio E10 amp/dac , would that work as a sound card? Or do you know a more quality one within the sub 100~ range and then would get a Zo2 to amp.

Reply
post #6 of 17
12/13/11 at 10:40am
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post

I'd personally go for the DT770-80.


 

How do they fair against the D2000? Other than price which is pretty big a dif.

Reply
post #7 of 17
12/13/11 at 11:46am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ineedmorebase View Post





Fiio E10 amp/dac , would that work as a sound card? Or do you know a more quality one within the sub 100~ range and then would get a Zo2 to amp.

I was assuming you didn't have an amp/DAC, but rather a sound card.

The E10 only puts out 2.2 V*, but the DT 770 isn't that difficult to drive, so you should be fine.
To be on the safe side, I would go with the lower impedance version, or buy a headphone amplifier and use the E10 only as a DAC.

If you want to do this then go for the FiiO E9. There are some cheap tube amps at the $100 range as well, but they aren't that great.
* (Click to show)
Deduced from 150mW @ 32 Ohm:
V = sqrt(P*Z) = sqrt(0.15*32) = 2.19 V
Reply
post #8 of 17
12/13/11 at 11:51am
Quote:
Originally Posted by ineedmorebase View Post


 

How do they fair against the D2000? Other than price which is pretty big a dif.



Besides the D2000 sounding more neutral and a bit more refined, the DT770 has the bass to satisfy you I think.  It also has the treble to make itself sound balanced (again not neutral, but balanced)

Reply
post #9 of 17
12/13/11 at 11:56am
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post





Besides the D2000 sounding more neutral and a bit more refined, the DT770 has the bass to satisfy you I think.  It also has the treble to make itself sound balanced (again not neutral, but balanced)

Could you clarify the difference between balanced and neutral? I thought the terms were fairly synonymous.
Reply
post #10 of 17
12/13/11 at 12:01pm

As I understand it.

 

neutral = more or less flat response across the frequency range. 

 

balanced = may deviate from flat, but a deviation in the bass, for instance, may be paired with a complementary deviation in the treble - that compensation results in a more balanced sound (neither treble heavy or bass heavy, despite both being higher than a neutral presentation). 

Reply
post #11 of 17
12/13/11 at 12:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by liamstrain View Post

As I understand it.

 

neutral = more or less flat response across the frequency range. 

 

balanced = may deviate from flat, but a deviation in the bass, for instance, may be paired with a complementary deviation in the treble - that compensation results in a more balanced sound (neither treble heavy or bass heavy, despite both being higher than a neutral presentation). 

What you are describing would be recessed mids, which I would personally not consider balanced.

I don't like the use of balanced when describing sound in any case, due to possible confusion with balanced interconnection.
Reply
post #12 of 17
12/13/11 at 12:11pm

Sounds pretty obvious to me.  The treble emphasis balances out the bass emphasis.  If not then the headphone would either lean towards dark or bright. I don't think anyone's going to confuse balance when describing sound signature vs balance when describing connections.  The word connection wasn't even used once in this thread.

Reply
post #13 of 17
12/13/11 at 1:02pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post

Sounds pretty obvious to me.  The treble emphasis balances out the bass emphasis.  If not then the headphone would either lean towards dark or bright. I don't think anyone's going to confuse balance when describing sound signature vs balance when describing connections.  The word connection wasn't even used once in this thread.

Even if the treble balances out the bass emphasis, there are still the mids to consider. That's why it's better to say neutral, or saying something like 'slightly forward/recessed mids, but otherwise neutral'.
Just my two cents.

And I am aware that in this case it was pretty clear we are talking about sound signature with the word 'balanced'. However sometimes it is unclear whether people are talking about 'balanced' as in wiring, or as in sound signature. Therefore I prefer to only use the word to describe wiring, to avoid any ambiguous situations.
Reply
post #14 of 17
12/13/11 at 1:27pm

Makes sense Tilpo - my example was more to say that you can have a sound signature that balances out overall (deviations are counteracted with other deviations from flat), without actually measuring as flat/neutral - which is where I see the difference between the terms. 

Reply
post #15 of 17
12/13/11 at 1:38pm
Thread Starter 

Right.......Anyways;

 

I'll just make a poll :D and research those! Yes, its a popularity contest but with popularity comes experience and knowledge and itl be better for me to picture what it will sound like withouut having to test it which will save me time.

Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Upgrade from the XB500 withouut losing much bass?