New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best Studio Headphones - Page 9

post #121 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post
 

I'd agree with him.  The V6 is a bright headphone.

i cant think of any hp i was more disappointed with even at the price. I treated them like they had a disease.

post #122 of 374

Several posts have mentioned about studio monitors rolling off at the bass end.

 

There are two reasons for this:

 

1) is the fact that you need to move a lot of air to get a good bottom end.

 

As a comparison, one range of professional monitors:-

  5" bass driver - goes down to 50 Hz (and this is very good for a 5" driver)

  6" bass driver - goes down to 40 Hz

  8" bass driver - goes down to 35 Hz

10" bass driver - goes down to 35 Hz

12" bass driver - goes down to 30 Hz

16" bass driver - goes down to 25 Hz

 

These are all top-end studio monitors ranging in price from about £ 2,500 for the cheapest to about £ 12,000 for the most expensive (and the most expensive is *not* the top of the range) - prices are UK price per pair including UK VAT - for US price multiply by about 1.6 to get a rough idea.

 

2) all loudspeakers (with the sole exception of the ME-Geithain "K" series) go omni-directional at low frequencies and throw as much bass out the back as they do from the front; a loudspeaker will also boost the bass if placed close to a wall or corner.  So - some monitors allow for this in rolling off the bass or having compensation curves to allow for this.  This omni-directivity of loudspeakers is partly why you need to sort the room, with bass traps and absorption to minimise reflections and cancellations. Bass reflecting from the rear wall will reflect and will cause both additions and subtractions, depending on frequency, which will muddy the bass end.  At higher frequencies, reflections can cause the same thing.

 

And seeing as several headphone response graphs have been posted, here is the frequency graph of a quality studio monitor for comparison:-

 

 

(This is for a ME-Geithain "K" series monitor as you can see the reduction in bass energy from the rear)

 

I hope this helps.

 

With headphones you are taking the room out of the equation.

post #123 of 374
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinValentine View Post
 

The problem of big cups is that they'll fit over everyone's ears, but then possibly not seal properly against their face/skull depending on their head shape and core facial architecture. The AKG 550 line has had a lot of problems with seal issues because of their large pads. 

 

But aren't they round, too? Couldn't they be oval, like the MDR-7520, and seal better while also accommodating normal ear sizes?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Claritas View Post
 

These new models are probably worth trying, especially if you're just getting started in the business. Otherwise, it would be better to use a decent model that you know very well: My neighbor works all day in a studio using one of his six pairs of stock Fostexes. All the other guys he works with use Sonys (V6 or 7506), which he calls bright and "hates."

 

Sure. Once you're used to something and knows how to compensate, you're better off sticking with it.

post #124 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post
 

 

But aren't they round, too? Couldn't they be oval, like the MDR-7520, and seal better while also accommodating normal ear sizes?

 

 

 

Exactly, and whilst I agree with much of what AustinValentine said about the possible reasons for the current trend in closed back low impedance hps, the Focal Pros were surely designed for professional monitoring, not for 'kids' to wear on the street. My ears are around 70mm top to bottom which is pretty much exactly the same as the inside dimension of the ear cup on the 7520. There's absolutely no way that 48mm is going to be circumaural for me, and, I suspect, the vast majority of male adults on the planet!

post #125 of 374
For professional monitoring what would work best, but with the most "fun" for listening and accurate but powerful bass as well:

spirit Pro
HD 25 1 ii
Senn HD 8 Dj
Hidiman HE400
NAD Pro Viso hd50
Momentum

For edm rock metal folk

I've spent like 30 hours this week searching around and this is what I've narrowed down to. Any recommendations or warnings about these? (currently have HD25-1 ii)
Edited by port11 - 2/14/14 at 10:24am
post #126 of 374
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by port11 View Post

For professional monitoring what would work best, but with the most "fun" for listening and accurate but powerful bass as well:

 

Er, "professional monitoring" and "fun" don't really connect, as a rule, since "fun" implicates a kind of coloration. According to Tyll, the HP50 would be the best compromise.

post #127 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post
 

 

Er, "professional monitoring" and "fun" don't really connect, as a rule, since "fun" implicates a kind of coloration. According to Tyll, the HP50 would be the best compromise.

I dont know if I agree all the way. Fun for how we at head-fi limit the word fun then yes.. but fun like it is supposed to mean then I kinda dont agree.

 

Also the x1 was supposed to be a fun hp just because its bass was strong but it lacks the dynamics, full tones, and attack everywhere else with the instruments too small to really be a fun hp.

 

transient response, impact on a bass that is slightly above neutral, and forward vs laid back presentation imo can be fun.

 

the 7520 and yamaha hph mt220 have all of the above that make them an even more fun listen to me imo than the very colored lcd2 which is better but lacks some of the dynamics,sparkle and energy of a lot of hp's under it though its bass is better and its vocals more transparent. 

 

Its also good to recommend hp's you have actually heard. I would actually go for the yamaha for the above because it has greater attack than the sony and is more balanced.

 

The yamaha hph mt220 was made for the modern producer so edm would be perfect for these.


Edited by grizzlybeast - 2/15/14 at 9:03am
post #128 of 374
Interesting the ATH-M50s are not on the list.

These cans are awesome monitors.
post #129 of 374
Quote:

Originally Posted by grizzlybeast View Post

 

I would actually go for the yamaha for the above because it has greater attack than the sony and is more balanced.

 

 

Really? Wow!

 

I'm sure you've said this previously already in the long 7520 thread grizzly, but please remind me what you prefer about the Sony's to the Yami's..............

 

I'm not sure I can imagine greater attack than the Sonys!


Edited by Mike F - 2/15/14 at 10:22am
post #130 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post
 

 

Really? Wow!

 

I'm sure you've said this previously already in the long 7520 thread grizzly, but please remind me what you prefer about the Sony's to the Yami's..............

 

I'm not sure I can imagine greater attack than the Sonys!

the sony's have fuller lower mids, better bass resolution, texture and layering but not impact, better fit for me, better build, faster decay, a tad more transparency but it becomes like splitting hairs after the yamaha burns in and the yamaha needs it.

 

the yamaha has even better attack/dynamics (i know its harder to imagine but its true they are both great but the yamaha takes that one easily), way better soundstage, more highs, better balance overall, better tones, less bass resolution, slightly more bass, less midbass hump, more sub bass qty.

 

the sony is borderline mid centric. the yamaha is not but its mids are not recessed either but in all fairness the yamaha has a tad of its energy more in the upper mids. 


Edited by grizzlybeast - 2/15/14 at 10:40am
post #131 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzlybeast View Post
 

the sony's have fuller lower mids, better bass resolution, texture and layering but not impact, better fit for me, better build, faster decay, a tad more transparency but it becomes like splitting hairs after the yamaha burns in and the yamaha needs it.

 

the yamaha has even better attack/dynamics (i know its harder to imagine but its true they are both great but the yamaha takes that one easily), way better soundstage, more highs, better balance overall, better tones, less bass resolution, slightly more bass, less midbass hump, more sub bass qty.

 

the sony is borderline mid centric. the yamaha is not but its mids are not recessed either but in all fairness the yamaha has a tad of its energy more in the upper mids. 

 

Thanks! I remember you saying they were close overall with pros and cons on either side.

 

I haven't heard the Yami's, but, for me, I think that more bass but less bass resolution on the Yamaha would make me prefer the Sony overall. However I know these are not big differences, so it would be a matter of taste.

post #132 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post
 

 

Thanks! I remember you saying they were close overall with pros and cons on either side.

 

I haven't heard the Yami's, but, for me, I think that more bass but less bass resolution on the Yamaha would make me prefer the Sony overall. However I know these are not big differences, so it would be a matter of taste.

that is a good reason. the sony is exceptional there, even above its price and nothing close to it can touch it. The yamaha won out for me later on because of the timbre and soundstage. The sony is one of the most narrow sounding hp's i can think of. If soundstage was ever described as  neutral - north of neutral - or recessed ....the sony would be clearly recessed and the yamaha would be slightly north of neutral.

post #133 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzlybeast View Post
 

that is a good reason. the sony is exceptional there, even above its price and nothing close to it can touch it. The yamaha won out for me later on because of the timbre and soundstage. The sony is one of the most narrow sounding hp's i can think of. If soundstage was ever described as  neutral - north of neutral - or recessed ....the sony would be clearly recessed and the yamaha would be slightly north of neutral.

 

Yes, I can understand that. For me though, a studio headphone should be as revealing and accurate as possible, placing you as apparently close to the recording as possible. If I want sound stage I listen on good open headphones, or better still, good monitors! ;)

post #134 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post
 

 

Yes, I can understand that. For me though, a studio headphone should be as revealing and accurate as possible, placing you as apparently close to the recording as possible. If I want sound stage I listen on good open headphones, or better still, good monitors! ;)

key term for you.. but I get it. hadn't I had the yamaha at the same time and compared them both a lot a lot then the sony would still be here. The yamaha barely won me over but I find that since it has less midbass hump next to the strong lower mids like the sony does that is it more accurately balanced, less congested and the tones/timbres are more true to the nature of the recording on the yamaha.

 

but yes monitors are better. but since i also want to really enjoy the music my taste is for less congestion.

post #135 of 374

German Maestro GMp 8.35D and GMP 400 are both excellent studio monitors

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home