Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Battle Of The Flagships (58 Headphones Compared)
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Battle Of The Flagships (58 Headphones Compared) - Page 156

post #2326 of 5202
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan.gheorghe View Post

Agreed, I don't care about where they put them, I just do not agree with the mentality. If the category would be Ultra High-End, well yes...it should not be there, but in high end it sure has a place. Who sets the price limit?

 

I have listened to a 7k vaughan near a 2k burson conductor and the differences were minor, actually preferred conductor in some aspects, and I am sure that some people owning vaughan or gear in that price category would say that Burson Counductor is not high end or the differences are enormous, without actually blind testing them both.

 

Beyond a level, It is very easy to be thrown into psychoacoustic . Blind testing in these cases would show this.

 

And if it is a price issue, I don't know why other headphones still in the high end category.... In Europe hd800 is the same price as lcd2, even cheaper .

 

 

 

Ok....that seems a rather good explanation, but the rules are kind of foggy and the existing rules should apply to all headphones from High-End .

The problem with head-fi is that people tend to over exaggerate small tiny differences making it seem like it is night and day, and then when you actually go and compare and listen yourself the differences could actually be trivial. In the end you must try the equipment yourself to see if they are worth the upgrade over what you have, I don't believe in spending money in things where the change or improvement is so small that you literally have to strain your ears till your eyes pop out to hear it, I believe spending money on upgrades, whether it the the headphone, amp, etc should have a clear and noticeable improvement. I wish there were more audio stores in America, meet conditions are suboptimal (people talking,etc. very distracting).

post #2327 of 5202
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan.gheorghe View Post

Agreed, I don't care about where they put them, I just do not agree with the mentality. If the category would be Ultra High-End, well yes...it should not be there, but in high end it sure has a place. Who sets the price limit?

 

I have listened to a 7k vaughan site by side to a 2k burson conductor and the differences were minor, actually preferred conductor in some aspects, and I am sure that some people owning vaughan or gear in that price category would say that Burson Counductor is not high end or the differences are enormous, without actually blind testing them both.

 

Beyond a level, It is very easy to be thrown into psychoacoustic . Blind testing in these cases would show this.

 

And if it is a price issue, I don't know why other headphones still in the high end category.... In Europe hd800 is the same price as lcd2, even cheaper .

 

 

 

Ok....that seems a rather good explanation, but the rules are kind of foggy and the existing rules should apply to all headphones from High-End . They can put it anywhere, I don't care, but they should apply the rules to all of them.

 

Of course they should. I bet LCD2 and HE500s are more like anomalies in the summit-fi forum, because they offer end-game performance without any fuss or picky upstream requirements.

 

Before they were introduced, there may have been a clear line between casual hobbyists and full-fledged audiophiles by nature, since almost all top headphones needed a lot of dedication and additional $$$ investment to sound half-way good.

 

But after they were introduced, that line is blurred.

 

 

My guess/prediction? There will be a whole lot more headphone additions and subsequent removals from summit-fi in the future, as more endgame-performance yet efficient + forgiving headphones are designed and produced. 


Edited by jerg - 1/14/13 at 2:44pm
post #2328 of 5202
Quote:
Originally Posted by zachchen1996 View Post

Quote:
Originally Posted by dan.gheorghe View Post

Agreed, I don't care about where they put them, I just do not agree with the mentality. If the category would be Ultra High-End, well yes...it should not be there, but in high end it sure has a place. Who sets the price limit?

 

I have listened to a 7k vaughan near a 2k burson conductor and the differences were minor, actually preferred conductor in some aspects, and I am sure that some people owning vaughan or gear in that price category would say that Burson Counductor is not high end or the differences are enormous, without actually blind testing them both.

 

Beyond a level, It is very easy to be thrown into psychoacoustic . Blind testing in these cases would show this.

 

And if it is a price issue, I don't know why other headphones still in the high end category.... In Europe hd800 is the same price as lcd2, even cheaper .

 

 

 

Ok....that seems a rather good explanation, but the rules are kind of foggy and the existing rules should apply to all headphones from High-End .

The problem with head-fi is that people tend to over exaggerate small tiny differences making it seem like it is night and day, and then when you actually go and compare and listen yourself the differences could actually be trivial. In the end you must try the equipment yourself to see if they are worth the upgrade over what you have, I don't believe in spending money in things where the change or improvement is so small that you literally have to strain your ears till your eyes pop out to hear it, I believe spending money on upgrades, whether it the the headphone, amp, etc should have a clear and noticeable improvement. I wish there were more audio stores in America, meet conditions are suboptimal (people talking,etc. very distracting).

I agree that the differences between cables, amps, dacs and tubes are exaggerated on head-fi.  It's too bad because a lot of people spend the big bucks and then wonder what happened, if anything.  For the noob, it can take a while to figure out how much and when to filter out the hyperbole.

 

Yeah, meets usually turn into gabfests so they are of limited value.  I've had good success at trying out cans via amazon.  Great return policy.  I've spent money but I didn't have to keep every single headphone I listened to.

 

Good post.

post #2329 of 5202
Quote:
Originally Posted by jerg View Post

 

... I bet LCD2 and HE500s are more like anomalies in the summit-fi forum, because they offer end-game performance without any fuss or picky upstream requirements.

 

...

 

Well said! And at the end of the day that's what it should all be about - not about chasing the horizon for some perceived never-appearing shimmer.

post #2330 of 5202
Quote:
Originally Posted by dan.gheorghe View Post

Hey guys. I have just seen my thread about LCD2 move from High-End forum to headphones section, to find out later that LCD2 was taken out of the High-End category  on headfi alltogether :)). 

 

Explained "why" here.

 

It may not be Ultra High-End, but saying that it isn't high end is funny actually (imo) :)) . 

 

What are you opinions on this? Is it not high end? 

 

If it isn't, many other headphones should be taken out of the high end section.


Ahh, I am not hi-end anymore, kids gonna make fun of me. tongue.gif

Who cares.

post #2331 of 5202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by dleblanc343 View Post

A friend of mine coming back from CES told me that HiFiMAN may be revising the design (looks/comfort) of the HE series in the future. I'm anxious to see this, and hear the difference if this is to happen.

That would be great! Look forward to it.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by bedlam inside View Post

Hi,

 

I recently tested the HE-500. I liked the sound a lot.

But I thought the build was a bit of a shambles and these may the least comfortable headphones EVER.

Let's hope they improve them a lot, so build quality and wearing comfort get in line with the sound. 

Cheers Rich

I can't say I agree that they're all that uncomfortable.  There's something un-ergonomic about the design in general though.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by preproman View Post

Maybe he's doing away with that horrible connector..

Hopefully! Of all the things that deserve re-design with Hifiman, that has to be #1 and #2 and #3 :D

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HybridCore View Post

David, any chance you could try to review the ATH-AD900x? I'm assuming it should start ending up in American stores now that it's up on the Audio-Technica's USA website. It would definitely be interesting.

 

Edit: on AudioCubes only as of now as far as I can see (besides for eBay).

I wasn't planning to include the AD900X:(  

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by jerg View Post

I think the rule of thumb for summit-fi now is that any headphone that does not explicitly encourage huge investment (both in terms of money and mind) into upstream gear as well as general technical audiophile / snake-oil knowledge, is not considered as summit-fi.

 

So it is more about the commitment one needs to give to a particular headphone in question, that determines whether or not the gear is considered top of the line; NOT about the performance or raw costs of headphones.

 

I guess from a discussion point of view that is fair, it puts a neat dividing line between casual audiophile hobbyists and the more hardcore types.

I was actually about placing this thread in the Summit-Fi forum initially, but it seemed better here.  There's still a lot of people who haven't read the thread that are not aware that there would even be in-ears in this.  I've wanted to spotlight them better, but I'm not sure how.  The in-ears were something I considered not including at all, but they constitute at least 50% of my listening time.  It's hard to compare the two types though.

post #2332 of 5202

Hifimans are more comfy than Audezes, especially after 30 minutes of use. Just my 2 cents. Though Audezes are OK generally; it's mainly the temple-area that presses too hard (in the LCD3).

I like the Hifiman feel pretty much.

[LCD3s smell really nice--great leather aroma.]

post #2333 of 5202
Quote:
Originally Posted by jnsaudiophile View Post

Review the current flagship of Vsonic, the GR07 and JVC's new series, JVC HA-FXZ100 / HA-FXZ200


I'd definitely like to see the GR07 on here, though it's technically not a flagship since the release of the GR01. I still consider it the best bang-for-buck headphone in the world (well...until the RE0 went dropped to under $60 retail). Sub-$200 headphones just shouldn't be that good. I take issue with some excessive midrange warmth (only slightly) and metallic treble/sibilance, but the presentation is great, and they are wonderfully quick for a dynamic IEM. Oh, and they have impossibly low distortion. Seriously, it's too low to even register in measurements until you get down to the lowest registers.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mad Lust Envy View Post


As far as I and a few others are concerned, its both different and better, noticeably so. I have already mentioned this on the Anniversary thread, that I didnt like the Q701 and especially not the old K701 for music, yet the Anniversary brought out quite a bit of musicality, warmth, bass compared to those, that they have become my main music can. This is coming from a mild basshead. I don't wanna go into specifics yet again, but check the K702 Anniversary topic.

I'm willing to bet that the reason why some people aren't noticing much of a difference is their choice of music. Because it'd be damn near impossible to not be able to tell which is which, IMHO.

Hifiguy was one of the first who got it here, and didn't hear much of a difference. Then he changed his mind. Looks like they need more than a brief audition, though I could tell immediately.

Whether the change is su btle or not, you also have to factor in the new memory foam pads and headband which increase comfort substantially. The Q701 was a hard 6 in comfort. The Annie . Basically perfect. 9.5.

Then there is the availability as well. All these things will raise costs, though they can be found for $405 or so.


I found the difference between the Q and the Annie to be negligible, if not imperceptible. Even with my library of almost exclusively metal. I think the pads have more to do with it than anything, though. 

I'm also not one who's bothered by the headband bumps, so they're much closer in comfort for me, as well (other than those wonderful pads on the Annie). 

post #2334 of 5202
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alondite View Post


I'd definitely like to see the GR07 on here, though it's technically not a flagship since the release of the GR01. I still consider it the best bang-for-buck headphone in the world (well...until the RE0 went dropped to under $60 retail). Sub-$200 headphones just shouldn't be that good. I take issue with some excessive midrange warmth (only slightly) and metallic treble/sibilance, but the presentation is great, and they are wonderfully quick for a dynamic IEM. Oh, and they have impossibly low distortion. Seriously, it's too low to even register in measurements until you get down to the lowest registers.


I found the difference between the Q and the Annie to be negligible, if not imperceptible. Even with my library of almost exclusively metal. I think the pads have more to do with it than anything, though. 

I'm also not one who's bothered by the headband bumps, so they're much closer in comfort for me, as well (other than those wonderful pads on the Annie). 

The GR07 is not worthy for this thread nor is it worth Dave's time (unless you wanna see it score last place tongue_smile.gif ), on the other hand how about those fitears and tralucents?

post #2335 of 5202
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMahler View Post

I wasn't planning to include the AD900X:(  

Aw...I was wondering if it fixes or improves on anything the AD900 had problems or was a bit on the fence with for you. Just curious. It's okay. smile.gif Beggars can't be choosers, you're already doing us a huge favor (at least in my opinion).

post #2336 of 5202
Quote:
Originally Posted by DavidMahler View Post

That would be great! Look forward to it.

 

 

I can't say I agree that they're all that uncomfortable.  There's something un-ergonomic about the design in general though.

 

Hopefully! Of all the things that deserve re-design with Hifiman, that has to be #1 and #2 and #3 :D

 

 

i thought comfort wasnt bad with velour pads

it was the heft of them that was the problem- shifted on my head if i didnt keep my head straight up

the redesign will be interesting as i would like for them to be more transportable

post #2337 of 5202
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HybridCore View Post

Aw...I was wondering if it fixes or improves on anything the AD900 had problems or was a bit on the fence with for you. Just curious. It's okay. smile.gif Beggars can't be choosers, you're already doing us a huge favor (at least in my opinion).

:) thank you

Quote:
Originally Posted by fuzzyash View Post

 

i thought comfort wasnt bad with velour pads

it was the heft of them that was the problem- shifted on my head if i didnt keep my head straight up

the redesign will be interesting as i would like for them to be more transportable

i dont think they're really uncofmortable

post #2338 of 5202
Thread Starter 

I'm listening to the LCD-2 rev 2 right now for the second time.  One thing I notice is that my pair sounds both brighter than than my previous LCD-2 and my LCD-3.  I haven't followed any deviations in the recent production changes, but these are my finding thus far.

post #2339 of 5202

David,

               My curiosity got the best of me and lead me to compare your previous 20 Headphone Review to your current 57 Flagship headphone review.  Needless to say, I found something interesting.  What I discovered is how some headphones in the old review fell only a few spots down when compared to their ranking in the new review.  This is inevitable as you discovered new headphones (like the Stax line).

 

Sony R10    were: 1 / now: 3  (held their place quite nicely)

 

Other headphones rank fell deep from the old review to the new review.  Once again, this seems to be due to the discovery of the Stax line along with stiff competition and new, excellent releases in the sub 1000$ headphone market.  Refined versions of some models were also released at this time.  Understandable.  A typical, usual and predictable occurrence.

 

K501     were: 9 / now: 37
D7000   were: 11 / now: 32
 

Others took the fight to the new-comers and ended up still in a very good position, even though it may appear that they fell deep in the ranking.

 

K1000    were: 5 / now: 19
HD650    were: 7 / now: 20
HD600    were: 8 / now: 21

 

What is interesting though are the next figures...

 

Certain headphones that were in the old review and are also in the new review overtook the previous leader in the new review.  Bare with me here and allow me to explain with an example of what I am getting at.

 

LCD2    were: 2 / now: 12

Vs.

HE-6     were: 3 / now: 9

 

What I see here are the HE-6's overtaking the LCD2's by 3 spots in the new review where as before before the HE-6's were a spot behind the LCD2's. Why is that?  Why did all of the sudden the HE-6 become the preferred headphone over the LCD2?

 

Another one...

 

K501      were: 9 / now: 37

Vs.

UE8 LE  were: 10 / now: 33

 

Here we see the Ultrasone's moving up 5 spots on the K501's were as before they were 1 spot behind the K501's.  Once again, what happened?

 

Now -- here are the figures which stood out the most...

 

HD-800   were: 4 / now: 6

 

The HD-800 fell only a couple of spots in the new ranking while their gain in the new review relative to the LCD2's were 6 spots and 3 spots on the HE-6's.

 

LCD2     were: 2 / now: 12

HE-6      were: 3 / now: 9

 

This anomaly peaked my interest.  Did you develop an appreciation for the HD800 sound that wasn't there before (in 2010)?  Or is it the opposite. Were you smitten with the LCD2's/HE-6's so much that a high ranking was given at the time?  Did your musical tastes change during the last two years that allowed you to develop an appreciation for the HD800?  Was it gear synergy?

 

My apologies for such a loaded question.  This BY NO MEANS is an attack of any sorts on you or your review but a simple case of my curiosity.  As a result, I too may be joining my cat shortly. :D

 

From those numbers I concluded that the R10's and the HD-800's are most likely your most enjoyed dynamic headphones and quite possibly your two favorite headphones in your collection (not counting Stax).  The R10's being the chocolate to the HD800's vanilla.  This is simply a guestimation on my part and no way represents your true feeling.  Although, please, correct me on this if I am wrong in my assumption :)

 

To others new to this hobby (and some that are knee deep in it), there's a lesson to be had here if you read between the lines. :)

 

Cheers.

 

P.S. You also developed quite the taste for the T1's but I won't get into that.

P.S.S. David's old rankings in relation to the new rankings

 

R10       were: 1 / now: 3

LCD2     were: 2 / now: 12

HE-6      were: 3 / now: 9

HD-800  were: 4 / now: 6

K1000    were: 5 / now: 19

T1         were: 6 / now: 13

HD650   were: 7 / now: 20

HD600   were: 8 / now: 21

K501      were: 9 / now: 37

UE8 LE  were: 10 / now: 33

D7000    were: 11 / now: 32

K702      were: 14 / now: 38

post #2340 of 5202
Thread Starter 

I broke out my frequency charts to confirm if what I was hearing would be reflected in their measurements as provided by Audeze.  Sure enough here it is "in black and white"....

 

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Battle Of The Flagships (58 Headphones Compared)