New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best Studio Headphones - Page 21

post #301 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post
 

A very interesting website:

http://www.sonicsense.com/blog/category/headphone-shootouts/

I've posted about this before. https://soundcloud.com/sonic-sense-pro-audio/sets/headphones-test

 

I used that site to decide the ATH-M40x are what I'm looking for. I own a couple of studio cans and they all literally sound just like that website's recordings. I can attest at least for the K240S, ATH-M40x, HD 280 Pro, ATH-M50, SRH440, MDR-7506, and MDR-V6 all sound just like their recording of them, as long as you compare the original track they provide with the sound from the headphone you are interested in at the same part of the track. That is how you can discern colorations, and that's how I came to the conclusion that the most neutral closed headphone under $100 is probably the ATH-M40x.


Edited by metal571 - 6/19/14 at 2:19pm
post #302 of 374
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by metal571 View Post
 

I've posted about this before. https://soundcloud.com/sonic-sense-pro-audio/sets/headphones-test

 

I used that site to decide the ATH-M40x are what I'm looking for. I own a couple of studio cans and they all literally sound just like that website's recordings. I can attest at least for the K240S, ATH-M40x, HD 280 Pro, SRH440, and MDR-7506 all sound just like their recording of them, as long as you compare the original track they provide with the sound from the headphone you are interested in at the same part of the track. That is how you can discern colorations.

 

Sorry for having missed that. And thank you for sharing your impressions on the testing reliability!

 

And on an unrelated note, here's another interesting post in an interesting thread (which also mentions the Alpha Dogs).

post #303 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post
 

 

Sorry for having missed that. And thank you for sharing your impressions on the testing reliability!

 

And on an unrelated note, here's another interesting post in an interesting thread (which also mentions the Alpha Dogs).

I agree with that post, that's a good one. The Teac actually pretty good, and I think Sonic Sense has it. You can easily hear that the DT880 Pro 250 is one of the closest cans to being neutral as well on the site if you compare the recording to the reference track. They will easily beat the M40x, which I just happen to be wearing right now, in treble detail and soundstage, and in a big way, and they have a price to match that advantage. I'm looking very closely at those as my first pair of >$100 cans.

post #304 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post
 

A very interesting website:

http://www.sonicsense.com/blog/category/headphone-shootouts/

 

Thanks for the link, Sinocelt. I too missed it earlier.

 

I have to say that I'm rather sceptical about comparing headphones in this way. I'd agree with the comment below from this SS YouTube comparison:-

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXD6wFEpYeA

 

derbigpr500
 
'They sound totally different in person...what you're hearing is your own headphones when listening to this video, I don't know why this has to be said and why people don't get it themselves. These videos are very deceiving, because they don't tell you at all how these headphones actually sound. You can't reproduce the soundstage, clarity, resolution, detail, frequency balance, etc. while recording, first of all because the microphones used aren't capable of reaching the sound quality level that these headphones reproduce, and second, because what you're hearing goes trough several compression processes and trough you own sound system. I can listen to my T1's with my high end setup, and T1's in this video don't sound anywhere near as good. All the headphones they record end up sounding like 50 dollar headphones.'
 
In addition, presumably all of the headphones are amped in the same way. That, especially with the high-end headphones in this comparison, is bound to favour some headphones whilst giving additional colouration to some others.
 
I also listened to the microphone test which included the Neumann U87. Although it sounded good in some ways it sounded thin and coloured compared to the other three, much cheaper, mics. Clearly the U87 cannot be worse than the other mics (unless countless studios and recording engineers have got it wrong), so evidently these 'comparisons' are not telling the whole story. In all fairness to SS they do say that the particular application of the mics is important(!).
 
 

Edited by Mike F - 6/20/14 at 9:48am
post #305 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post

 


 

Thanks for the link, Sinocelt. I too missed it earlier.


 

I have to say that I'm rather sceptical about comparing headphones in this way. I'd agree with the comment below from this SS YouTube comparison:-


 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DXD6wFEpYeA


 

derbigpr500

 
'They sound totally different in person...what you're hearing is your own headphones when listening to this video, I don't know why this has to be said and why people don't get it themselves. These videos are very deceiving, because they don't tell you at all how these headphones actually sound. You can't reproduce the soundstage, clarity, resolution, detail, frequency balance, etc. while recording, first of all because the microphones used aren't capable of reaching the sound quality level that these headphones reproduce, and second, because what you're hearing goes trough several compression processes and trough you own sound system. I can listen to my T1's with my high end setup, and T1's in this video don't sound anywhere near as good. All the headphones they record end up sounding like 50 dollar headphones.'

 
In addition, presumably all of the headphones are amped in the same way. That, especially with the high-end headphones in this comparison, is bound to favour some headphones whilst giving additional colouration to some others.

 
I also listened to the microphone test which included the Neumann U87. Although it sounded good in some ways it sounded thin and coloured compared to the other three, much cheaper, mics. Clearly the U87 cannot be worse than the other mics (unless countless studios and recording engineers have got it wrong), so evidently these 'comparisons' are not telling the whole story. In all fairness to SS they do say that the particular application of the mics is important(!).

 

 

But I think that SS comparisons on SoundCloud are meaningful - it is not about absolute sound, but about COMPARISON - I do not need to have $1000 headphones to see that some HPs sound good, some mean and some weird. Also there is learning curve - when I listen to music on my headphones 8hrs per day - I simply learn them and they become flatter due to brain adjustment. Simply put my brain strongly adapts to them :)
 

post #306 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sempoo View Post
 

But I think that SS comparisons on SoundCloud are meaningful - it is not about absolute sound, but about COMPARISON - I do not need to have $1000 headphones to see that some HPs sound good, some mean and some weird. Also there is learning curve - when I listen to music on my headphones 8hrs per day - I simply learn them and they become flatter due to brain adjustment. Simply put my brain strongly adapts to them :)
 

 

I certainly agree with that. I admire the amount of time and effort that SS has put into this, but, although I'd love to believe that the idea really works, I'm dubious as to the results. I totally understand the point about it being a COMPARISON (I can shout too), but when I compare hps which I own and know, the results are not as I would expect.  For example, the results of comparing the HD650 and the HD800 don't seem representative to me. Some aspects of what comes across seem right, but listening on different hps and speakers, the HD650 seem to consistently have more treble presence to me than the HD800 which is most certainly not the case. The HD800 also sounds more coloured to me than the HD650 which, again, is not the case in reality.

 

Additionally, comparison between the Sony 7506 and V6 reveals that the V6 has more bass presence. Whilst I don't have the V6 to compare to my 7506 I do know that they are the same hp apart from the gold plated plug on the 7506. Some sample variation is inevitable, but the differences apparent on SS make it sound like a different hp, which it is not.

post #307 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post

I certainly agree with that. I admire the amount of time and effort that SS has put into this, but, although I'd love to believe that the idea really works, I'm dubious as to the results. I totally understand the point about it being a COMPARISON (I can shout too), but when I compare hps which I own and know, the results are not as I would expect.  For example, the results of comparing the HD650 and the HD800 don't seem representative to me. Some aspects of what comes across seem right, but listening on different hps and speakers, the HD650 seem to consistently have more treble presence to me than the HD800 which is most certainly not the case. The HD800 also sounds more coloured to me than the HD650 which, again, is not the case in reality.

Additionally, comparison between the Sony 7506 and V6 reveals that the V6 has more bass presence. Whilst I don't have the V6 to compare to my 7506 I do know that they are the same hp apart from the gold plated plug on the 7506. Some sample variation is inevitable, but the differences apparent on SS make it sound like a different hp, which it is not.
The 7506 and V6 use the same driver but the 7506 has a different magnet and the two channels are grounded separately. It has a little less bass and a little less upper mid in real life. I've owned both. They don't sound exactly the same and that's a fact mainly because of the magnet. They're really close sounding to each other but not the same though.
post #308 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by metal571 View Post


The 7506 and V6 use the same driver but the 7506 has a different magnet and the two channels are grounded separately. It has a little less bass and a little less upper mid in real life. I've owned both. They don't sound exactly the same and that's a fact mainly because of the magnet. They're really close sounding to each other but not the same though.

 

Thanks metal571, I didn't know that. All I can say is that if the V6 has more upper mid and bass than the 7506 I can see why Sony introduced 7506! ;)  Well, I could hear that on the SS comparison tracks. I just wish I could understand what I'm hearing regarding the HD650 HD800 comparison.

post #309 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post
 

 

Thanks metal571, I didn't know that. All I can say is that if the V6 has more upper mid and bass than the 7506 I can see why Sony introduced 7506! ;)  Well, I could hear that on the SS comparison tracks. I just wish I could understand what I'm hearing regarding the HD650 HD800 comparison.

They essentially tried to flatten the FR a bit for the 7506. I find the 7506 lacks a lot of detail, and its upper mids are quite shrill although its bass is very well extended and accurate however. Really not a fan of that can at all, it just sounds dated. I've only heard the HD600 in terms of higher end open cans so I can't comment on the comparison between the 650 and 800 unfortunately.

post #310 of 374
I rather agree with you about the 7506, I just picked up a pair to have them around as they're such a classic standard.

As I say, there are many things about the HD650 and HD800 comparison which seem very representative of the actual phones - more extended bass on the HD800 as well as greater detail, but I still don't understand why or how the 650 sounds more 'toppy'.
post #311 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post

I rather agree with you about the 7506, I just picked up a pair to have them around as they're such a classic standard.

As I say, there are many things about the HD650 and HD800 comparison which seem very representative of the actual phones - more extended bass on the HD800 as well as greater detail, but I still don't understand why or how the 650 sounds more 'toppy'.
It's fun to have the 7506 around but when stuff like the M40x comes around in the same price range, that's when I sold mine. The 7506 is so alluring and I'm a big fan of understated design so in a way I still miss mine lol.

You never know what effects the amp they used for the cans could have, that could be part of the reason why the 650 sounds that way. I was also a bit taken aback as I thought the 650 was always a thick and smooth can, deviating more from neutral than the 600.
post #312 of 374

Hello guys. I bought my first pair of professional headphones, the DT 770, and I am using them as a jack of all trades since its the only one I have. I use them for movies (I watch a lot of them), gaming and music, but since I also study cinema, I use them for mixing and location recording.

 

I am wondering which headphone would be the best addition to my collection. An open-back like the he-400/400i, shure 1840, dt 880? Another closed-back like the alpha dog, sony 7520? Or maybe an on-ear like the dt 1350? The last would be good for location recording, but would it be suitable for mixing? What about the he-400, is it a good mixing headphone?

 

Thanks

post #313 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nytkim View Post

Hello guys. I bought my first pair of professional headphones, the DT 770, and I am using them as a jack of all trades since its the only one I have. I use them for movies (I watch a lot of them), gaming and music, but since I also study cinema, I use them for mixing and location recording.

I am wondering which headphone would be the best addition to my collection. An open-back like the he-400/400i, shure 1840, dt 880? Another closed-back like the alpha dog, sony 7520? Or maybe an on-ear like the dt 1350? The last would be good for location recording, but would it be suitable for mixing? What about the he-400, is it a good mixing headphone?

Thanks

I would personally go with the Alpha Dog. I've heard a wide range of cans including the DT770. I actually own the DT880 which is a fantastic balanced headphone with a very flat response with slight sparkle in the highs. The Alpha Dog is even more balanced than the DT880 (deeper bass, less etched sounding treble, liquid midrange, handles female vocals without sounding bright.) These should really be any professionals dream studio headphones because they are so incredibly accurate its breathtaking. Only thing I still use my DT880 for is gaming and acoustic tracks. DT880 is still better for positioning in gaming but the Alpha Dogs have little weaknesses and sound "open" for a closed headphone.

If you get the Alphas you will find yourself frequenting Head-fi a lot less than you used to. I mean they sound so good the only pairs of headphones I really consider purchasing someday are the LCD-3F or the HE-560 smily_headphones1.gif



They are metallic black Alpha Dogs. Modded headphones FTW smily_headphones1.gif
Edited by wahsmoh - 8/10/14 at 11:58am
post #314 of 374
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post

I rather agree with you about the 7506, I just picked up a pair to have them around as they're such a classic standard.

As I say, there are many things about the HD650 and HD800 comparison which seem very representative of the actual phones - more extended bass on the HD800 as well as greater detail, but I still don't understand why or how the 650 sounds more 'toppy'.

I believe you are not at all sensitive to the hd800s treble response. But you are sensitive to what I call upper mid response...others call lower treble. The hd800 I heard exhibited a high volume characteristic of easy uppermids...the hd650 has more uppermids.
post #315 of 374
Thread Starter 
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home