Head-Fi.org › Forums › Summit-Fi (High-End Audio) › High-end Audio Forum › Does it get much better than the HD800?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Does it get much better than the HD800? - Page 17

post #241 of 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by Docks View Post


So the LCD2s have better 30hz AND 300hz square waves than the HD800, while the HD 800s are merely average (and more expensive).
Regarding your 100-20hz even look at a joke of a headphone - Monster beats tour - less distortion below 100hz to 20hz AND less distortion in its phase heh.
Again, the entire point of my argument here is that the HD 800s are painful for electronic music, the distortion and square waves just don't lie.
The HD800s are grossly overrated considering the performance for electronic music and considering the price.
Your waterfall does not address the easily distorted bass and painful highs either (but it does highlight a 5-6khz peak where the ear is very sensitive).

Do  you even bother reading my responses? confused.gif There is more to having a conversation on Head-fi than posting and waiting to post. Reading is a big part too. smile.gif Based on your response, I'll assume you haven't read the links I recommended as good starting points either.

 

1.) I asked for better 30Hz square wave responses that weren't the LCD-2/3? They are the best I've seen. No one will argue that. But please show me another headphone with a clearly better response here?

 

2.) No, the HD800s actually have a better 300Hz square wave response. You will notice the two large pronouced double bumps on the LCD-2 and LCD-3 (and HE-6s for that matter). Whereas on the HD800s its one single spike and then settles right down. That pronounced double bump is what is collapsing the sound staging of these orthos in comparison to the brilliant imaging of the HD800s. That's also the reason why the LCD-3's have better imaging than the LCD-2s; where that that second "spike" is less pronounced on the LCD-3s in comparison. Tyll mentioned that he thinks the listener is hearing the same information twice with these double bumps and thus the imaging suffers for it. Sorry, but claiming otherwise is simply incorrect. To date, I have not seen a better 300 or 500Hz response, nor a headphone that images like these headphones. 

 

3.) I have asked you twice (and olor1n once) what the upfront gear you heard the HD800s was? Without that, your comments are leaving us hanging with little ability to relate to your experiences. Feed them with starter FiiO gear and low bitrate music and all you'll hear the limitations of your dac/amp/source. That is the rub with highly transparent headphones like the HD800s...they really show you what "issues" you have upstream. Do some reading on the months and years (and $$$) people have spent to really get them to were they can be. 

 

4.) The waterfall addresses how clean the HD800s are throughout the frequency spectrum are and how they have basically no treble ringing (a common plague of headphones today). The waterfall actually contains more information than you think. wink.gif

 

5.) Your comments of distortion are still unfounded. And now it appears that you're grasping comparing IEMs to full sized headphones. Please so me better headphones with less distortion? BTW, here's anther measurement from Headroom:

 

http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=1&graphID[]=863

 

Pretty darn good. biggrin.gif

 

 

 

 

 


Edited by MacedonianHero - 12/10/12 at 3:00pm
post #242 of 348

Tyll describes the HD800 as lacking in the last one or two octaves for bass, and I agree.  Although to give the HD800 a lot of credit, its bass extends really well for what it is, an open can with a dynamic driver.  LCD2/3 are large planar magnetic drivers, and other closed headphones have the advantage of being closed to seal low bass pressure.  

post #243 of 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post

Tyll describes the HD800 as lacking in the last one or two octaves for bass, and I agree.  Although to give the HD800 a lot of credit, its bass extends really well for what it is, an open can with a dynamic driver.  LCD2/3 are large planar magnetic drivers, and other closed headphones have the advantage of being closed to seal low bass pressure.  

I agree with that with regards to bass oomph. No headphone does bass like the LCD-2/3s. They have the oompth, depth, control and details that no other can bring. But the quality and depth of the HD800s (when properly driven) is still a sight to behold and is truly spectacular.

 

The problem with all closed headphones that I've heard is while they bring the bass in terms of quantity, its nowhere as tight, deep or defined. Just sloppy in comparison to good open backed headphones (and only a few like the TH-900s bring the depth).


Edited by MacedonianHero - 12/10/12 at 3:25pm
post #244 of 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

 No headphone does bass like the LCD-2/3s. They have the oompth, depth, control and details that no other can bring. 

 

I'm sorry Peter I can't speak for the LCD-3.  However, the HE-6 does bass better in more areas than the LCD-2.2 does.  The only thing the LCD-2.2 does better is bass extension.  IMO..  Every other category of bass the HE-6 comes out on top. Again IMO..biggrin.gif

post #245 of 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

 

I'm sorry Peter I can't speak for the LCD-3.  However, the HE-6 does bass better in more areas than the LCD-2.2 does.  The only thing the LCD-2.2 does better is bass extension.  IMO..  Every other category of bass the HE-6 comes out on top. Again IMO..biggrin.gif

We'll have to then agree to disagree. smile.gif I hear things on the LCD-2s (and especially the LCD-3s) with regards to bass that no other headphone have been able to reproduce in terms of the total package (depth, control, detail, quickness, etc...). The HE-6s have very good bass too, no doubt.

 

The HE-6s have better imaging and offer more spacial clues than the LCD-2s and had the LCD-3s not equalled the playing level in that regard, I might still own the HE-6s.

post #246 of 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

We'll have to then agree to disagree. smile.gif I hear things on the LCD-2s (and especially the LCD-3s) with regards to bass that no other headphone have been able to reproduce in terms of the total package (depth, control, detail, quickness, etc...). The HE-6s have very good bass too, no doubt.

 

Yeah - that rumble that indicates a lack of bass control.

 

Control, detail, quickness etc.  is all a win for the HE-6.  Depth on the other hand I'll agree that the LCD wins.biggrin.gif

post #247 of 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

 

Yeah - that rumble that indicates a lack of bass control.

 

Control, detail, quickness etc.  is all a win for the HE-6.  Depth on the other hand I'll agree that the LCD wins.biggrin.gif

Not really. The superior square wave responses and flatter FR response under 50Hz shows that the rumble as you put it is there in the recording. Sorry, the last thing most would describe the LCD-2/3s as having a lack of bass control. They are tighter in that regard than the HE-6s to my ears. Funny, I can still hear it on similar recordings with my SR-009s, but not so much on the HE-6s, but it was still there, just not enough when compared to my LCD-3s and SR-009s. 

 

The TH-900s "rumble" even more and no one would describe them as having a "lack of bass control" either. 


Edited by MacedonianHero - 12/10/12 at 4:26pm
post #248 of 348

Funny thing about those charts and graphs.  I don't think they measured the HE-6 on speaker amps?  Also I've seen three different FR charts from three different places (IF, HR, GE) all three had different readings .  Not what I call objective.  So I really don't buy into them.  Sorry..

post #249 of 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacedonianHero View Post

I agree with that with regards to bass oomph. No headphone does bass like the LCD-2/3s. They have the oompth, depth, control and details that no other can bring. But the quality and depth of the HD800s (when properly driven) is still a sight to behold and is truly spectacular.

 

The problem with all closed headphones that I've heard is while they bring the bass in terms of quantity, its nowhere as tight, deep or defined. Just sloppy in comparison to good open backed headphones (and only a few like the TH-900s bring the depth).

 

Well, the problem is that not many closed headphones actually care enough to have the right application of damping inside.  *Cough* AKG K550 *cough*

post #250 of 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

Funny thing about those charts and graphs.  I don't think they measured the HE-6 on speaker amps?  Also I've seen three different FR charts from three different places (IF, HR, GE) all three had different readings .  Not what I call objective.  So I really don't buy into them.  Sorry..

Good point about them not using a speaker amp on those graphs. But while the HE-6s do open up on a good speaker amp, it wasn't night and day different as much to change them into entirely different headphones. 

 

We'll agree to disagree.

post #251 of 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post

 

Well, the problem is that not many closed headphones actually care enough to have the right application of damping inside.  *Cough* AKG K550 *cough*

The other issues are the resonances in closed headphones that are par for the course. But not having proper damping certainly isn't helping the situation either. smile.gif


Edited by MacedonianHero - 12/10/12 at 4:34pm
post #252 of 348

Cool...

post #253 of 348

Open headphones can be just as susceptible to resonance issues as closed headphones.  It all depends on the damping scheme, and how much the driver is affected by it.

post #254 of 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post

Open headphones can be just as susceptible to resonance issues as closed headphones.  It all depends on the damping scheme, and how much the driver is affected by it.

True there are many bad open headphones with resonances, but open headphones typically do have an advantage here. I truly think it is harder to make a good closed headphone than a good open headphone for that reason. 

post #255 of 348
Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

Cool...

 

 I wonder how they'll (HE-6s) sound on your GS-X in comparison to your F1?

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 › Does it get much better than the HD800?