New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best Studio Headphones - Page 5

post #61 of 363
Quote:
Originally Posted by ubs28 View Post
 

 

All headphones that try to sound neutral have elevated mids due to how we perceive sound.

 

Our ears are most sensitive to midrange sounds. If a headphone elevates that part of the spectrum, it will make things less "neutral".

post #62 of 363
Quote:
Originally Posted by ubs28 View Post
 

 

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

 

 

While it is true that our ears are more sensitive to the midrange-- particularly upper midrange around 2-3khz, that only applies for the uncompensated graphs of the headphones (shown as the gray lines below the compensated ones on innerfidelity.)  Tyll has made a note of it several times, that due to the compensation he uses he considers a little dip in the upper midrange on the compensated versions of his graphs as closer to neutral.  The flatter the line the more neutral it is is only true for a pair of speakers measured at x distance in an anechoic chamber.  Measuring headphones is different, and a lot of different measurements have different methodologies and compensations.  Hell we don't even know a particular correct target response to give headphones yet-- hence the research at harman. 

post #63 of 363
For a closed model, I'm impressed with KRK KNS8400 so long as one replaces the hard, noise-bearing plastic they call a cable. Besides that, it's a little bright which you can mod with foam under the earpads (I didn't need to). The headroom chart seems quite inaccurate to me in this case.
post #64 of 363
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike F View Post
 

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?!

 

You can also vote on InnerFidelity's forum:cool: 

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzlybeast View Post
 

I see...it will one day probably. Especially with how mobile everyone is.

 

Oh yes indeed.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by ubs28 View Post
 

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

 

The bass seems to roll off a little early, but yes, the mids are impressively flat.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Claritas View Post

For a closed model, I'm impressed with KRK KNS8400 so long as one replaces the hard, noise-bearing plastic they call a cable. Besides that, it's a little bright which you can mod with foam under the earpads (I didn't need to). The headroom chart seems quite inaccurate to me in this case.

 

Could you compare it to other studio headphones?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by M-13 View Post
 

Your wait is now over:

 

 

(wallet slayed :evil:)

 

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


Edited by Sinocelt - 2/4/14 at 8:00am
post #65 of 363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post

 

Could you compare it to other studio headphones?

 

I wouldn't compare closed and open models. Every few months some new closed model is released, and people say "finally, a closed model that sounds open." That should tell you all you need to know. I don't think it's physically possible, except by using semi-open, which is cheating. KNS8400 sounds like what it is: closed, and yes, it "sounds open for a closed model."

 

As much as I enjoy planars, I wouldn't use one for studio work on a classical record because the sound doesn't come right at you the way it does in dynamic models. The KRKs surpass the resolution of all of the very good open mid-priced models such as HD600, K70x, &c. Because of vague resemblances to K70x, I suspect it's most like K550 (which I'm not buying because it's huge).

post #66 of 363
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claritas View Post
 

I wouldn't compare closed and open models. 

 

All the models I listed in the opening post -- except for the four last, filed under "Mixing/mastering only (open headphones):" -- are closed.

post #67 of 363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post
 

 

You can also vote on InnerFidelity's forum:cool: 

 

 

 

Oh yes indeed.

 

 

 

The bass seems to roll off a little early, but yes, the mids are impressively flat.

 

 

 

Could you compare it to other studio headphones?

 

 

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

fwiw he liked the shure 1540 as well.

post #68 of 363

In case anybody hasn't already read it, here's the latest IF article about the research at Harman for a new headphone target response curve: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/headphone-target-response-curve-research-update

 

I examined the target curve closely and interpolated its data to innerfidelity measurements, and this is what a headphone measuring very closely to that target curve would look like as per an innerfidelity frequency response measurement (photoshopped depiction-- not 100% accurate)  Yes, I rolled off the response after 10khz and made the channels imbalanced just for realism purposes.

 

 

 

The Harman curve basically calls for a gentle 5db boost from 200hz down to 20hz, a rise in 12-13db to 3khz and then back down 12-13db again at 10khz.

 

The Focal Spirit Professional is very mcuh like this in the bass to middle-mids, but could do without the lower treble null, otherwise is very close.


Edited by TMRaven - 2/4/14 at 8:32pm
post #69 of 363
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzlybeast View Post
 

fwiw he liked the shure 1540 as well.

 

I listed it, but all reports up to now point to clearly emphasized bass.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post
 

In case anybody hasn't already read it, here's the latest IF article about the research at Harman for a new headphone target response curve: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/headphone-target-response-curve-research-update

 

I examined the target curve closely and interpolated its data to innerfidelity measurements, and this is what a headphone measuring very closely to that target curve would look like as per an innerfidelity frequency response measurement (photoshopped depiction-- not 100% accurate)

 

 

 

The Harman curve basically calls for a gentle 5db boost from 200hz down to 20hz, a rise in 12-13db to 3khz and then back down 12-13db again at 10khz.

 

The Focal Spirit Professional is very mcuh like this in the bass to middle-mids, but could do without the lower treble null, otherwise is very close.

 

 

Good catch!

 

The NAD HP50 looks close too.

post #70 of 363

The HD580 and 600 are very close from mids to treble too (minus the same lower treble null), but they both roll off in the bass.  Based on the Harman curve and speculation, I'd say the NAD, Focal and the two Senns are top choices.  I can personally vouch for the HD600, I think it's the best Sennhesier headphone as far as balance goes.

post #71 of 363
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sinocelt View Post
 

 

All the models I listed in the opening post -- except for the four last, filed under "Mixing/mastering only (open headphones):" -- are closed.

 

Yes, I know. I've either heard them, heard something very similar (e.g., an earlier model), or haven't heard anything I can expect to be like it (German Maestro, Yamaha). I provided my reasoning in order to explain why I wouldn't use a planar. It's not obvious to me what principle informed the list. I don't see what they have in common except for being closed and being called "studio."

 

After I found something I trust for technical work, I stopped looking, so my main interest is open models. I'm not surprised that KNS8400 is an accurate monitor: KRK makes monitors. But you got me interested again, so I ordered CD900ST which been on my wish list for ages. Thanks.

post #72 of 363

I think the DT880 measures pretty flat with a mild treble peak. Anyone else who can vouch for this? I've heard the HD600 and they sound relatively similar with more polite treble and more mid presence.

post #73 of 363

do you guys think that flat measurements are the most important?

would the shure 1840 be just as worthy of being scratched off because it has absolutely no bass? where as the 1540 has too much?

^rhetorical


Edited by grizzlybeast - 2/5/14 at 6:14pm
post #74 of 363

I've seen certain instances where the 7506 measures flat. And I know from a few frustrating years that I would NEVER trust them for anything but tracking. Assuming the methods of those measurements aren't terrible, it should show that flatness isn't everything.

post #75 of 363
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Claritas View Post
 

It's not obvious to me what principle informed the list. I don't see what they have in common except for being closed and being called "studio."

 

Gotta start somewhere. They're all supposed to be neutral enough for recording purposes.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Claritas View Post
 

After I found something I trust for technical work, I stopped looking, so my main interest is open models. I'm not surprised that KNS8400 is an accurate monitor: KRK makes monitors. 

 

I added it to the list. (Here's a thread on it, too.)

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Claritas View Post
 

But you got me interested again, so I ordered CD900ST which been on my wish list for ages. Thanks.

 

My pleasure. But why the CD900ST? I know it's the standard in Japan, but the MDR-Z1000 is supposed to be Sony's top studio headphones there, much as the MDR-7520 is Sony's top studio headphones in the States (even though the cheaper MDR-7506 is more commonly seen in studios).

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kierkes View Post
 

I've seen certain instances where the 7506 measures flat. And I know from a few frustrating years that I would NEVER trust them for anything but tracking. Assuming the methods of those measurements aren't terrible, it should show that flatness isn't everything.

 

I've seen instances where the 7506 measured flat too. Those measurements, though, show a strong treble spike.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by TMRaven View Post
 

The HD580 and 600 are very close from mids to treble too (minus the same lower treble null), but they both roll off in the bass.  Based on the Harman curve and speculation, I'd say the NAD, Focal and the two Senns are top choices.  I can personally vouch for the HD600, I think it's the best Sennhesier headphone as far as balance goes.

 

From everything I read on Gearslutz, though, the HD800 (in spite of its being hot in the treble) is still the best Sennheiser can for mixing/mastering. Do you disagree?

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by wahsmoh View Post
 

I think the DT880 measures pretty flat with a mild treble peak. Anyone else who can vouch for this? I've heard the HD600 and they sound relatively similar with more polite treble and more mid presence.

 

Innerfidelity's measurements: 32 / 250 / 600 ohm

Golden Ear's measurements.

 

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by grizzlybeast View Post
 

do you guys think that flat measurements are the most important?

would the shure 1840 be just as worthy of being scratched off because it has absolutely no bass? where as the 1540 has too much?

^rhetorical

 

I don't have personal experience with either, so I'm obliged to rely on outside sources of information. According to this graph, the SRH 1840 is only -5 dB at 20 Hz. Is your experience different?


Edited by Sinocelt - 2/5/14 at 8:50pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home