Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › NAD Viso HP50 : Another superb headphone from Paul Barton?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

NAD Viso HP50 : Another superb headphone from Paul Barton? - Page 17

post #241 of 1992

I'm at day 6 of the M-100s, but not convinced yet that I want to keep them.  Looking at these HP50s and perhaps the Momentums, but having a hard time deciding.  If anybody else has any input on the HP50s and especially input in relation to the M-100s, that would be greatly appreciated. :)

post #242 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by BenF View Post


According to Tyll's review, HP50. They are now on the Wall of Fame instead of the Momentums. 
Do the Momentuma and the NAD HP50 have a big SQ diffrence? Because if not then I'll just get the Momentums just because of the design.
post #243 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by starkste View Post


Do the Momentuma and the NAD HP50 have a big SQ diffrence? Because if not then I'll just get the Momentums just because of the design.

 

"And my previous favorite, the Sennheiser Momentum, may have the edge in upper-treble air, but sound somewhat loose and bloomy in the bass relative to the HP50."

...

"Yup, "Wall of Fame" bound, they'll knock off the Sennheiser Momentum largely due to ergonomics, but I also like the sound a bit better."

post #244 of 1992
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by starkste View Post


Do the Momentuma and the NAD HP50 have a big SQ diffrence? Because if not then I'll just get the Momentums just because of the design.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by BenF View Post
 

 

"And my previous favorite, the Sennheiser Momentum, may have the edge in upper-treble air, but sound somewhat loose and bloomy in the bass relative to the HP50."

...

"Yup, "Wall of Fame" bound, they'll knock off the Sennheiser Momentum largely due to ergonomics, but I also like the sound a bit better."

Tyll's sentence above sums up the difference exactly.

post #245 of 1992
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltasun View Post
 

I'm at day 6 of the M-100s, but not convinced yet that I want to keep them.  Looking at these HP50s and perhaps the Momentums, but having a hard time deciding.  If anybody else has any input on the HP50s and especially input in relation to the M-100s, that would be greatly appreciated. :)

Take the M-100, give them more comfortable stock pads (or XL pads), tone down the bass and make the mids a touch more forward and you have the HP50.

post #246 of 1992
Saw post earlier that resolution of these was akg k550ish, and other people saying they weren't very clear. I guess they are aimed at being a warm non fatiguing HiFi sound rather than a clear monitoring one? So dt1350 probably have more clarity? Anyone compared? How bout sub extension/quality/quantity
post #247 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craigster75 View Post
 

Take the M-100, give them more comfortable stock pads (or XL pads), tone down the bass and make the mids a touch more forward and you have the HP50.

 

Here's the next question then - is there room for both?  Seems losing a bit of the mids is having a more impact than I imagined.  And this is just the SQ.  I'm also starting to feel the "clamping" effects that everyone's talking about, which is making the sound feel/sound claustrophobic, for lack of a better word.

post #248 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by starkste View Post


Do the Momentuma and the NAD HP50 have a big SQ diffrence? Because if not then I'll just get the Momentums just because of the design.

 

if u like classical music, complex music that thrives on good separation, i would pick the momentum/dt1350 type of portable cans.

 

i lump HP50 together with kef500 / ue6000/ PSB  type of cans that gives great enjoyment to pops/jazz/dubstep etc 

 

Just my simplistic categorisation to keep my brain from shortcircuiting :P

post #249 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by Craigster75 View Post
 

Take the M-100, give them more comfortable stock pads (or XL pads), tone down the bass and make the mids a touch more forward and you have the HP50.

Nice observation!  You've heard both, and I haven't heard the HP50, but check this out:  Take the M-100's frequency response, remove about 3dB of bass below 200Hz, add about 5dB at both 420Hz and 5.5kHz (maybe an octave width on the lower freq, more narrow at the upper freq), and you get something very close to that of the HP50. 

 

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/VModaM100.pdf

 

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/NADVISOHP50.pdf

 

Now look at every OTHER curve on both pages.  They look almost identical.  The additional isolation of the HP50 is at really high frequencies which probably does not matter (sound energy in both the natural and manmade world rolls off, unless you're a jackhammer operator).  Distortion and square wave responses match very closely.

 

I've got the M-100, so I may just play with EQ to see what I can get

 

Note:  All measurements are relative, but this is on the same measurement apparatus with the same measurement taker, so the correspondences matter more.   Also, frequency response does not take into account CSD (i.e. time domain) measurements, so there might be some bigger differences there, especially with headphones that have more peaks and dips in the standard frequency response. 

 

EDIT:  Distortion curves of the HP50 are lower, but have the same general shape. 


Edited by jazzman7 - 11/11/13 at 8:48am
post #250 of 1992
I purchased the HP50s on the strength of Tyll's review at Innerfidelity and a demo in my local Apple Store last week. Having owned Momentums, AKG 550s, demo'd the B&W P7s and B&O H6s, I felt these headphones brought something different to the table.

I wouldn't actually describe them as headphones but ear speakers because the sounstage and imaging you get from them are the equivalent of speakets.

I've read some comments that there is a lack of bass. This is not true, there is a natural bass presence, you can actually hear it as a natural instrument as opposed to the usual boom you hear on other headphones.

I am still breaking them in and at the moment i am finding it a unique experience, i have never listened to a headphone like it, or should i say "ear speakers".
post #251 of 1992
I demoed a pair today at my local store.They were quite uncomfortable on my head. I have too pointy ears for these. My UE6000 are much more comfortable and they don't fall that much behind in sound quality either.
post #252 of 1992
Do you notice a change on breakin because mine sound great out of the box
post #253 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzman7 View Post
 

Nice observation!  You've heard both, and I haven't heard the HP50, but check this out:  Take the M-100's frequency response, remove about 3dB of bass below 200Hz, add about 5dB at both 420Hz and 5.5kHz (maybe an octave width on the lower freq, more narrow at the upper freq), and you get something very close to that of the HP50. 

 

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/VModaM100.pdf

 

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/NADVISOHP50.pdf

 

Now look at every OTHER curve on both pages.  They look almost identical.  The additional isolation of the HP50 is at really high frequencies which probably does not matter (sound energy in both the natural and manmade world rolls off, unless you're a jackhammer operator).  Distortion and square wave responses match very closely.

 

I've got the M-100, so I may just play with EQ to see what I can get

 

Note:  All measurements are relative, but this is on the same measurement apparatus with the same measurement taker, so the correspondences matter more.   Also, frequency response does not take into account CSD (i.e. time domain) measurements, so there might be some bigger differences there, especially with headphones that have more peaks and dips in the standard frequency response. 

 

EDIT:  Distortion curves of the HP50 are lower, but have the same general shape. 

 

What type of music do you generally play on your M-100s?  What do you think works with it the best?

post #254 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by deltasun View Post
 

 

What type of music do you generally play on your M-100s?  What do you think works with it the best?

This is the HP50 thread, so I'll try to keep on topic (I think I can).  Actually, I generally EQ out the recessed mid dip at 434Hz of the M-100 as well as the dip at 6300Hz (boosts at both frequencies).  When you do that, the M-100 becomes very neutral-sounding.  When I first did it, I listened to a classical music album and was quite satisfied.  But my tastes tend to lean towards jazz as my username suggests.  I still EQ there, too.  

 

I'm thinking I don't need the HP50 if I have some EQ handy for my M-100.  I still may try to give them a listen though.  Maybe an Apple Store near me has the HP50 and the P7 so I can audition.  

post #255 of 1992
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzman7 View Post
 

This is the HP50 thread, so I'll try to keep on topic (I think I can).  Actually, I generally EQ out the recessed mid dip at 434Hz of the M-100 as well as the dip at 6300Hz (boosts at both frequencies).  When you do that, the M-100 becomes very neutral-sounding.  When I first did it, I listened to a classical music album and was quite satisfied.  But my tastes tend to lean towards jazz as my username suggests.  I still EQ there, too.  

 

I'm thinking I don't need the HP50 if I have some EQ handy for my M-100.  I still may try to give them a listen though.  Maybe an Apple Store near me has the HP50 and the P7 so I can audition.  

 

What DAC/Amp do you use with it?

 

I've been looking for a local place to audition the HP50 as well, not knowing Apple stores carried these.  I just called my local Apple Store and they don't have NAD's in their system.  Is this regional?

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › NAD Viso HP50 : Another superb headphone from Paul Barton?