Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › A Concise View of Why The ATH-M50 is No Longer King
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

A Concise View of Why The ATH-M50 is No Longer King - Page 27

post #391 of 746

What would you say is the most forgiving headphone you have ever heard?

post #392 of 746
Jesus. So much passion.

Didn't mean to stir the pot again. My bad.
post #393 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by N8RV View Post

Jesus. So much passion.
Didn't mean to stir the pot again. My bad.

lol, no problem. :D

post #394 of 746
Forgiving? Usually, all the low end headphones are muddy enough to masks bad recordings. As far as higher end, the ESW9, KSC35, Creative Aurvana Live, and DT770 Pro 80 were pretty forgiving.

As far as really well regarded forgiving headphones, I believe the HD650 is the most popular.
post #395 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

Forgiving? Usually, all the low end headphones are muddy enough to masks bad recordings. As far as higher end, the ESW9, KSC35, Creative Aurvana Live, and DT770 Pro 80 were pretty forgiving.
As far as really well regarded forgiving headphones, I believe the HD650 is the most popular.

okay I see. I just wanted to let you know I did mix up analytical and forgiving. Sorry for all that lol.

post #396 of 746
It's all right. Schiit happens.
post #397 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

It's all right. Schiit happens.

lol :)

post #398 of 746
All you have to remember is that if a headphone is detailed enough to be analytical, it's going to be unforgiving. The Pro 900 isn't analytical in a sense that it's too V-shaped to be analytical, but the detail that is there (mostly in the treble region), is brutally detailed. While the mids are quite recessed, it's clean sounding, so it comes off pretty detailed. Also, the bass is very quick, making it not bleed into the mids the way slower headphones tend to do. The M50 is a slower headphone with not as snappy a bass impact, so it masks bad recordings a bit better than the Pro 900.
post #399 of 746

"unforgiving" doesn't come from headphones being "detailed".  It comes from peaky, resonant response that makes problems in recordings much worse than they actually should be.  When something hurts your ears on the Pro900, it is the heapdhone that's doing it, not the recording.  Because no recording has that much coloration. 

 

Most of the headphones regarded on head-fi as "forgiving" are actually pretty neutral.  Because for some reason on head-fi people think music is supposed to hurt.  Comes from people making excuses for their "revealing" super bright headphones. 

post #400 of 746
Pretty sure some really high end headphones are unforgiving, regardless of resonant response.

As for recordings not having that much coloration, you surely haven't heard some hip hop, edm, and other music where coloration is pretty evident. One of my favorite tracks 'Room For Happiness (Fire)', is very sibilant Even on the He400, the vocals are quite sizzling.
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 8/9/12 at 11:17pm
post #401 of 746

A lot of people are confused on head-fi as to what is coming from what.  Most people like to play the "blame the recording" game because in their lust for a sense of clarity and no idea what neutral is either from inexperience or lack of proper reference, they get headphones that are so colored with so much treble that the only recordings that are tolerable anymore is souless audiophile garbage. 

 

Detail doesn't make recordings sound bad.  It sounds good.  More detailed does not mean more harsh.  Harshness comes from problems in the headphones. 

 

What do you think happens when a recording with a little emphasis at 7k is played through a 15dB 7k peak in an Ultrasone?  It turns into something unbearable.  But only a small percentage of the final peak is coming from the recording. 

post #402 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

A lot of people are confused on head-fi as to what is coming from what.  Most people like to play the "blame the recording" game because in their lust for a sense of clarity and no idea what neutral is either from inexperience or lack of proper reference, they get headphones that are so colored with so much treble that the only recordings that are tolerable anymore is souless audiophile garbage. 

 

Detail doesn't make recordings sound bad.  It sounds good.  More detailed does not mean more harsh.  Harshness comes from problems in the headphones. 

 

What do you think happens when a recording with a little emphasis at 7k is played through a 15dB 7k peak in an Ultrasone?  It turns into something unbearable.  But only a small percentage of the final peak is coming from the recording. 

right. Harsh means overly-bright, shrill and piercing, right? A headphone can be warm (not harsh), and can have tons of detail. A recording and a headphone is like a guitar and a guitar amp..( I have been playing guitar for 6.5 years btw :) ).  If the guitar amp (drivers of the headphones) has a 13 db emphasis on 10K, and the guitar (recording) has a little emphasis at 10K, it has mostly to do with the guitar, not the amp. Maybe that's a good example. People think, ohhhhhh, I need a better guitar, even though I have a crappy amp. Well, a great amp will significantly make the average guitar sound great.


Edited by LazBro123 - 8/9/12 at 11:29pm
post #403 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post

All you have to remember is that if a headphone is detailed enough to be analytical, it's going to be unforgiving. The Pro 900 isn't analytical in a sense that it's too V-shaped to be analytical, but the detail that is there (mostly in the treble region), is brutally detailed. While the mids are quite recessed, it's clean sounding, so it comes off pretty detailed. Also, the bass is very quick, making it not bleed into the mids the way slower headphones tend to do. The M50 is a slower headphone with not as snappy a bass impact, so it masks bad recordings a bit better than the Pro 900.

okay, will do. Thanks for the help! :) lol. 

post #404 of 746
Quote:
Originally Posted by rhythmdevils View Post

"unforgiving" doesn't come from headphones being "detailed".  It comes from peaky, resonant response that makes problems in recordings much worse than they actually should be.  When something hurts your ears on the Pro900, it is the heapdhone that's doing it, not the recording.  Because no recording has that much coloration. 

 

Most of the headphones regarded on head-fi as "forgiving" are actually pretty neutral.  Because for some reason on head-fi people think music is supposed to hurt.  Comes from people making excuses for their "revealing" super bright headphones. 

 

Don't agree at all with the bold part. My garbage tracks sound bad on nearly all headphones that I've ever had as long as they're halfway decent. I find it hard to believe that the dozens of headphones I've had are that colored. I know you probably think 99% of all headphonese are junk. Maybe you haven't listened to enough crappy Jpop perhaps? If you think no recording has enough coloration to sound bad on a neutral headphone, you haven't listened to any of it. The only reason it sounds acceptable on my HD-600 is due to it's recessed treble. Not because it's neutral (and I don't think it is at all). The only way I can get these tracks to sound good is to listen to them on a REALLY dark headphone. To me it's almost as if it's trying to "fix" my bad recordings to make them easier on my ears. Some moron at the studio must have cranked the mids and treble to max. These tracks are so bad they're nearly un-listenable on nearly any setup. Check into anything from a singer named Hitomi. Even some of Utada Hikaru's stuff is unbearably bad.

 

Half these headphones on Head-Fi listed as "forgiving" and neutral pretty much seem to have recessed treble. That'll sure make my bad music sound better. It doesn't help that most of them have huge mid-bass humps AND a severe lack of treble.

 

When I don't want to be bothered with garbage tracks I can listen to my DJ100 or HD-598. Both are very detailed, but not due to any extra treble. I would actually say my bad tracks sound a tad bit worse on the HD-598 compared to the HD-600.

 

Also..for SOME it could also be due to very colored amp/dac combined with a very colored headphone. I could understand this. People say amps mostly sound the same and I sure wish this was true. My Asgard made my K601 sound horribly harsh. That was the rare case where it wasn't the headphones fault, but poor amp synergy or something else weird going on. It was fixed on other amps. Luckily amps are much less colored than headphones! At least l sure hope so.

 

And yep, I do think headphones can make bad recordings a little worse if the headphones have majorly huge peaks. Not always. Just have never found they should sound perfectly OK on a flat/neutral headphone. Depends on the recording for me. Some are worse than others.

post #405 of 746
Perfume... their music is very treble heavy. VERY.

Of course, we can get a treble recessed headphone like the LCD2 and call it neutral. smily_headphones1.gif

I've noticed this about head-fi. The most preferred headphones for those with 'golden ears' are headphones with recessed treble. Good thing I'm not one of those people. I actually prefer a little treble peak than treble recession. Hell, my Turbines are quite smooth sounding. I'd have returned them, but I prefer to just EQ the hell out of the treble (major boost) and keep them.

I was scared to own the HE400, until I got them and put on the velours. The treble is right where I consider perfection. If I had owned the old HE400, I'd probably think it was the worst thing ever.

I should add 'Punching treble recession the face' for the sheer lulz. biggrin.gif
Edited by Mad Lust Envy - 8/10/12 at 12:26am
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › A Concise View of Why The ATH-M50 is No Longer King