New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best Studio Headphones - Page 4

post #46 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post
 

 

I listed the DT 770 Pro because it's the model Beyerdynamic bills as their top closed model for the studio. Do you think it should be replaced by the DT 250?

 

(Tyll measured the DT 770 [600 Ohm], but not the DT 770 Pro, and I'm uncertain as to the sonic differences.)

 

The DT770 have a more uneven FR curve, but are more of what people think of as the Beyer "house sound" (i.e. bass and treble emphasis). I've met people that like it for monitoring, studio use, and just general use. The DT250-250 sounds pretty different and I wouldn't really consider them substitutes for one another.

 

The DT250-250 have a more even response curve, a more "neutral" sound as it were. To me, they sound a bit like a closed Sennheiser HD580/600. Tyll already pitched the NAD Viso HP50. (And I'd second that too). I think the two compliment each other very well. The HP50 has much better quality, far better extended bass and overall better imaging. The DT250-250's bass rolls off quite early and isn't nearly as forcefully present. On the other hand, the DT250-250 have very good detail and aren't as warm as the HP50. 

 

IMO the strength of the DT250-250 (like the Sennheiser HD600) is that they never, ever, ever, ever cause listening fatigue. Ever. The mild bass emphasis and (quite excellent) impact on the NAD can tire you out on marathon listening sessions. Cosy at both ends - the DT250-250 are a real good workhorse. As a bonus, I could probably throw them out my third floor window and the DT250's wouldn't break. 

 

Speaking of things that won't break even if I parked a mid-sized sedan on them: I'd also second the earlier vote on the HD 25-1 II/HD-25 Amperior/HD 25 Aluminum (and presumably the HD26) line. I have two pairs of the Amperior (in silver and blue) and if you can tolerate their clamp and don't are fine with On Ear headphones, these are also spectacular. 

 

Extra Note: I'd take what companies bill as their "top" model with a grain of salt. Of course a company is going to market their latest product as the best thing since vegemite on toast. Notice how no recent Denon models have popped into the conversation yet? I'm sure that they have some to market as excellent professional headphones, but marketing sure doesn't make it so!

post #47 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzlybeast View Post
 

home studios for the lcd-x

 

how much does the hp50 leak and would it do better than a momentum in that regards for recording purposes?

 

I find the HP50s leakage to be very minimal. They very isolate well too. 

 

I'd definitely use the HP50s over the Momentum for recording. 

post #48 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinValentine View Post
 

 

I find the HP50s leakage to be very minimal. They very isolate well too. 

 

I'd definitely use the HP50s over the Momentum for recording. 

I wanted to leave the hp50 alone because of its form and small cups but that makes it an automatic winner if the leakage is really low.

post #49 of 353

My own monitoring set-up is this:-

 

Grace m903 monitor controller

ME Geithain RL906 nearfield monitors

Sennheiser HD 800 open headphones

Sennheiser HD 25-1 closed headphones

Sennheiser HD 250 closed headphones (I have both Mk.I and Mk.II versions of these)

 

I record mostly classical music and specialise in recording solo piano recitals and chamber music - though I have also recorded opera and larger orchestras.

 

My monitors are co-axial and give an excellent impression of stereo image and depth and are very top end small nearfields.

 

But you can't always hear everything in a monitor, so the HD 800 supplement those and for use in a quiet control room where, for some reason, I cannot use monitors.

 

The HD 25-1 are used for listening to detail and are normally my first choice for location recording with a portable recorder.

 

I master on an AETA 4MinX and Nagra VI recorders (both 8-track top end battery portables) and edit on a computer with Sequoia.

 

My choice in recording and monitoring is "accurate and revealing".

 

My comments on the HD 800 are comparing them to the real instrument in the room, not on their subjective sound.

 

When I record I keep it simple - most being just two microphones into a recorder and the results edited - no EQ, no compression, no messing about in post - just a pure natural recording of a real performance (even if it is a recording session, it's recorded as a performance, because if the musician is not putting his (or her) heart and soul into the performance, the CD will be boring and uninteresting and will only get played once.

post #50 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Willett View Post
 

 

The HD 800 are the most neutral and revealing headphones I have ever heard.

 

They are *very* revealing of the source - so they will show up the fact that a bright microphone was used in the recording and everything that was used in the chain from the mic. to your ears - so they will reveal all the deficiencies of the amp. you used (which is why I use the Grace m903).

 

I use mine with my own recordings made with top-end microphones, recorded at 24/96 and with no artificial effects added.  Listening like this to a solo piano recording I made the recording through the HD 800 sounds exactly like the real piano sounded in the room when I put out the microphones to make the original recording.  So my opinion of the HD 800 is comparing the sound to the original live instrument.

 

So, you are saying that the HD800 is telling you that your recording of the piano sounds exactly like the live piano in the room?

post #51 of 353

I know this is kinda off topic but how much would it cost to get that binaural set up thing where they put the mics in the dummys ears and such. I think that is so cool... I wish all albums had some of that!

 

Engineering is a majorly unappreciated part of music. I have used cheapy headphones like 80 dollar ones and when I heard a sound from that kind of production I still turned my head regardless of hp quality. 

 

That is the future of music I hope that that becomes standard.

post #52 of 353

Headphones seldom have problems with the middle frequencies and overtones of guitar, but piano? The full spectrum, reverberating sound-board? Balderdash! My planars do better than the 800's used too.......

post #53 of 353
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinValentine View Post
 

The DT770 have a more uneven FR curve, but are more of what people think of as the Beyer "house sound" (i.e. bass and treble emphasis). I've met people that like it for monitoring, studio use, and just general use. The DT250-250 sounds pretty different and I wouldn't really consider them substitutes for one another.

 

The DT250-250 have a more even response curve, a more "neutral" sound as it were. To me, they sound a bit like a closed Sennheiser HD580/600. Tyll already pitched the NAD Viso HP50. (And I'd second that too). I think the two compliment each other very well. The HP50 has much better quality, far better extended bass and overall better imaging.

 

I wonder if it's worth listing a Beyerdynamic at all. There seems to be clearly better options out there.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinValentine View Post
 

Speaking of things that won't break even if I parked a mid-sized sedan on them: I'd also second the earlier vote on the HD 25-1 II/HD-25 Amperior/HD 25 Aluminum (and presumably the HD26) line. I have two pairs of the Amperior (in silver and blue) and if you can tolerate their clamp and don't are fine with On Ear headphones, these are also spectacular. 

 

Tyll rates the Amperior very highly -- higher than the regular HD 25-1 II. I do wonder how it compares to the HD 26, though.

 

 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinValentine View Post
 

Extra Note: I'd take what companies bill as their "top" model with a grain of salt. Of course a company is going to market their latest product as the best thing since vegemite on toast. Notice how no recent Denon models have popped into the conversation yet? I'm sure that they have some to market as excellent professional headphones, but marketing sure doesn't make it so!

 

True enough.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzlybeast View Post
 

I know this is kinda off topic but how much would it cost to get that binaural set up thing where they put the mics in the dummys ears and such. I think that is so cool... I wish all albums had some of that!

 

Engineering is a majorly unappreciated part of music. I have used cheapy headphones like 80 dollar ones and when I heard a sound from that kind of production I still turned my head regardless of hp quality. 

 

That is the future of music I hope that that becomes standard.

 

Binaural recordings haven't gained momentum (alas) because most producers still care more about how something sounds on speakers than on headphones.

 

I very much enjoy binaural recordings myself, though preferably with better microphones than what you mentioned!


Edited by Sinocelt - 2/2/14 at 4:52am
post #54 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Beagle View Post
 

 

So, you are saying that the HD800 is telling you that your recording of the piano sounds exactly like the live piano in the room?

 

Basically, yes - or, rather, as close to the original as I have ever heard it.

 

But my comparison was with my head in the same place as the microphones and the recording was a simple recording with no messing about with it.

post #55 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzlybeast View Post
 

I know this is kinda off topic but how much would it cost to get that binaural set up thing where they put the mics in the dummys ears and such. I think that is so cool... I wish all albums had some of that!

 

Engineering is a majorly unappreciated part of music. I have used cheapy headphones like 80 dollar ones and when I heard a sound from that kind of production I still turned my head regardless of hp quality. 

 

That is the future of music I hope that that becomes standard.

 

The Neumann KU 100 is about £7,000 in the UK (which I assume is about  $11,000 at 1.6 $ to the £).

 

post #56 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tyll Hertsens View Post

 

I like the HP50 as an all-arouder, tonal balance is close and detail resolution very good.

 

I think the Focal Spirit Pro may be more neutral for pros mixing for tonal balance, but don't quite resolve in the treble as well as the HP50.

 

 

I, and I think a good many others, would love you to do a review of the Sony MDR-7520.  Measurements, (AFAIK nobody has done any independent measurements yet) review, and your personal comparisons to the above mentioned headphones please, Sir!

 

Please....... pretty please?!

post #57 of 353

I'd say the Shure SRH 1840. The mids are even flatter than the mids of a $1200 HD800. It sounds like studio monitors on your head :)

 

It's also quite cheap since these $499 headphones don't require amplification. 

 

red = Shure SRH 1840

blue = HD800.

 


Edited by ubs28 - 2/2/14 at 10:06am
post #58 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post
 

 

I wonder if it's worth listing a Beyerdynamic at all. There seems to be clearly better options out there.

 

 

 

Tyll rates the Amperior very highly -- higher than the regular HD 25-1 II. I do wonder how it compares to the HD 26, though.

 

 
 

 

True enough.

 

 

 

Binaural recordings haven't gained momentum (alas) because most producers still care more about how something sounds on speakers than on headphones.

 

I very much enjoy binaural recordings myself, though preferably with better microphones than what you mentioned!

I see...it will one day probably. Especially with how mobile everyone is. Everything being so personalized now for travel and such. I will buy one one day.

post #59 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by ubs28 View Post
 

I'd say the Shure SRH 1840. The mids are even flatter than the mids of a $1200 HD800. It sounds like studio monitors on your head :)

 

It's also quite cheap since these $499 headphones don't require amplification. 

 

red = Shure SRH 1840

blue = HD800.

 

 

 

A little tilt lowering towards 3khz is actually ideal to being more neutral on the headroom and innerfidelity graphs.  The 1840 there are shown to have elevated upper mids-- not flat upper mids.

post #60 of 353
Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post
 

 

 

A little tilt lowering towards 3khz is actually ideal to being more neutral on the headroom and innerfidelity graphs.  The 1840 there are shown to have elevated upper mids-- not flat upper mids.

 

All headphones that try to sound neutral have elevated mids due to how we perceive sound. The graph I posted is how we perceive the sound so it should not have a lowered mid. The flatter the line, the more neutral the headphone is. 

 

edit: According to innerfidelity (the top graph), the mids of the Shure SRH 1840 are also much flatter. 

 

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/ShureSRH1840.pdf

 

http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SennheiserHD800.pdf


Edited by ubs28 - 2/2/14 at 2:20pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home