So, when we start to say this is 90% of that, I start to wonder if this is not awefully skewed by listener's taste and especially one's critical judgement. Suffice to say, we probably should clarify what we mean by better soundstage. if its sheer width down to getting fuzzy in placement, I'd say hd800. if we talk a about layering and placement (with recordings that enable such judgment), I have hard time believing the hd800 does better based on my past experience.
post #91 of 271
1/28/13 at 4:36pm
- arnaud
- Trader Feedback: +2
- Stax and Sushi
-
- offline
- 1,609 Posts. Joined 11/2002
- Location: Tokyo
- Select All Posts By This User
I also question the judgement of imaging. Even with my lowly 727 amp, the 009 instruments placement in depth and width is like no other headphone I heard. The HD800 had a massively wide and deep soundstage, but even the Omega 2 bettered it in actual precision of the placement and layering.
So, when we start to say this is 90% of that, I start to wonder if this is not awefully skewed by listener's taste and especially one's critical judgement. Suffice to say, we probably should clarify what we mean by better soundstage. if its sheer width down to getting fuzzy in placement, I'd say hd800. if we talk a about layering and placement (with recordings that enable such judgment), I have hard time believing the hd800 does better based on my past experience.
So, when we start to say this is 90% of that, I start to wonder if this is not awefully skewed by listener's taste and especially one's critical judgement. Suffice to say, we probably should clarify what we mean by better soundstage. if its sheer width down to getting fuzzy in placement, I'd say hd800. if we talk a about layering and placement (with recordings that enable such judgment), I have hard time believing the hd800 does better based on my past experience.























