or Connect
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Oppo PM-1 Planar Magnetic Headphone Impressions Thread
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Oppo PM-1 Planar Magnetic Headphone Impressions Thread - Page 23

post #331 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxx134 View Post

Haha this is a "shark tank"?
I didn't notice since I HAD TO SKIM OVER ALL PAGES to this last page!

Soooo much sound techno jargon ha.
I thought this was some audio school thread and not the Oppo thread..
Wew!
No ONTO IMPRESSIONS...


So my thoughts on the new Oppo PM-1, from the NY Headfi meet:

1- It is slightly overpriced..
2- It scales high
3- Very polished and quality feel, really excellent except for tiny plug in sockets for wire I thought too tiny..
4- very comfortable, excellent pads both leather and velour type. Just excellent..
5- very very nice size and looks
6- soundstage not very large for an open can.
Not like an HD800, but still very good.
Just slightly larger than an AlphaDog and older LCD models.
Air and soundstage was good..
7- Impact, detail, and bass were all there.(!)
No faults at all to nitpick...
AGAIN, NO FAULTS I CAN DETECT, THATS A HUGE PLUS..
8- Oppo efficiency was just marginally better than an Alpha Dog.. Not a huge jump.
The new LCDs X versions seemed slightly more efficient.
Still it was a noticeable improvement.

So to sum up and spill the beans,
Overall, the Oppo PM-1 had very good sound, superior to, say an AplhaDog or a HE500..
But not by much..
Not enough to justify that price.

So I really don't feel it was any better than say, an HE-6 optimally amped, or say an LCD..

To me, the best planar/or tho type at the meet was only the LCD X... And I listened to the LCD3, XC, Alpha, etc. some others...

Yet the Oppo is very close up there, and a very, very nice alternative..

I would buy one if it was cheaper,
Edit: or similar priced,
.. than the HE-560 I already pre-ordered tongue.gif

 

 

Just looking at the small aperture opening for the driver and ear pads, I was concerned about the soundstage and airiness being compromised.  I guess my concerns are perhaps valid.  compressing the soundstage with that design seems wasteful, as having a huge driver like that would give you a large soundstage and airiness practically for free.  Perhaps it was to minimize distortion?  I'm wondering if the cover with the small circular opening for the driver were removed how it would sound?

post #332 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matias View Post
 

If PM-2 sounds the same as PM-1 without all the fancy materials I would take it.

Of course I would need to hear the PM-1 first to see if I like it. :)

Thats my first take on these new headphones.  Like the comments so far in this thread.  Waiting for more opinions.


Edited by HiFiAudio - 4/6/14 at 1:55pm
post #333 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwood View Post
 

 

 

Just looking at the small aperture opening for the driver and ear pads, I was concerned about the soundstage and airiness being compromised.  I guess my concerns are perhaps valid.  compressing the soundstage with that design seems wasteful, as having a huge driver like that would give you a large soundstage and airiness practically for free.  Perhaps it was to minimize distortion?  I'm wondering if the cover with the small circular opening for the driver were removed how it would sound?

I think by designing the PM-1 for portable use, Oppo wanted to make a headphone that'd isolate a bit or at least does not leak much.

From my understanding, the headphone acts more like a semi-open headphone.

It perhaps does not leak as much and isolates a bit more than conventional open headphones [hence the statement that covering the grills does not change the sound].

The grills themselves aren't too transparent looking to begin with. I think it was a design choice to really make this headphone a portable solution.

The possible lack of soundstage or air comes as a little side effect of this design.

I don't think that removing the cover would thereby cause any notable change in air or staging. But I might be wrong, obviously.

 

IMO. YMMV. I am just speculating of course but it seems logical to me. I am in no way criticizing Oppo or anyone involved, they did a great job nonetheless. I am just thinking out loud what the shortcomings might be.


Edited by conquerator2 - 4/6/14 at 1:57pm
post #334 of 3447
Thread Starter 

For me, the PM-2 would be better suited for mobile use.  At $699, it won't hurt so bad if I get robbed because they look so great.  :)

Reply
post #335 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Articnoise View Post

The sound from an instrument like a violin or voice don’t sound the same or shows the same frequency respond then you listen to it on different distance.

Unless the distances are quite different- very closely miked or from a great difference- it really doesn't matter. Balanced response only needs to be balanced to the tolerances of typical human ears to sound good. It doesn't have to be exact to the standard of measurement with machines.

I always see people dismissing the importance of balanced frequency response by saying, "But it's impossible to achieve perfectly flat response in the real world to within a fraction of a dB." Yes, that is true, but human hearing is variable enough that your tolerances don't have to be that strict. *Flattish* response is the best sound there is. If it varies by a few dB here and there, it probably doesn't matter. You just don't want 10dB midbass humps to add fake "fullness" and 20dB boosts in the treble to add spurious "detail".

Balanced response is a process of refining things for typical human ears, not a specific destination that only machines can measure.
post #336 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by tinyman392 View Post

We've seen this statement way to much.  People believe something is perfectly flat, they state it is.  2 months down the line, we find out through proper measurement that it isn't.  He's one blimp on the graph.  If they conducted medical research with one person, would you trust it to be true? 

I used two different techniques (tuning by music / tuning by tones) and two different sets of ears (my own and my sound engineer friends'). Our tolerances for accuracy are the same as any other human beings... +/- several dB with significantly reduced accuracy in the last half octave or so at the edges of human hearing. Take the results we shared with that grain of salt in mind. I'm giving you a broad strokes idea of how these sound to normal human ears. I'm not claiming to be any more accurate than the typical person's hearing is.

Luckily, we listen to music on headphones with human ears, not microphones sensitive to fractions of a dB.
post #337 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maxx134 View Post

Bottom line is I think the Oppo is on par with other top cans, only when amped well.

The most noticeable difference is in the bass impact and extension.
From a portable source the signature remained clear and similar in all respects except the bass.

I didn't find that at all. Amped or direct from my iPhone or iMac, it sounds exactly the same to me. The volume level unamped was much more than I needed too. Lots of headroom. I don't think the Oppos really require amping.
post #338 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headphoner View Post

With the phones on your head, and the music is turned off, how much reduction of environmental noise (air conditioning, traffic noise, someone talking, etc.) is there?

I'm estimating about -15 dBish maybe 20.
post #339 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Edwood View Post


Just looking at the small aperture opening for the driver and ear pads, I was concerned about the soundstage and airiness being compromised.  I guess my concerns are perhaps valid.  compressing the soundstage with that design seems wasteful, as having a huge driver like that would give you a large soundstage and airiness practically for free.  Perhaps it was to minimize distortion?  I'm wondering if the cover with the small circular opening for the driver were removed how it would sound?

PM-1/TEM (The Edwood Mod): coarser exterior grill, perforated inner baffle wink.gif
post #340 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by Headphoner View Post

Yes, exactly true.  That is why, when reproducing a frequency sweep of sine waves, a speaker must be nonflat to produce what sounds flat to your ears.  But, when reproducing music, and comparing it to your memory of live music, a speaker must be relatively flat to sound like live music (assuming that you have an experienced ear).

With a recording of music, the engineer who mixed the recording theoretically already compensated for the sensitivity of human ears listening to calibrated studio monitors, so playing the recording on speakers with a flat response would have the same results as a tone sweep. The only time you would need to compensate is if you had a mike hooked up live to a PA. You don't need to compensate with recorded music.
post #341 of 3447

Reading the impressions from the NYC meet, I think we need Jerg to make some mods to these to pull the grills off and make them sound more open.

 

Someone send him a pair :D.

post #342 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post


I used two different techniques (tuning by music / tuning by tones) and two different sets of ears (my own and my sound engineer friends'). Our tolerances for accuracy are the same as any other human beings... +/- several dB with significantly reduced accuracy in the last half octave or so at the edges of human hearing. Take the results we shared with that grain of salt in mind. I'm giving you a broad strokes idea of how these sound to normal human ears. I'm not claiming to be any more accurate than the typical person's hearing is.

Luckily, we listen to music on headphones with human ears, not microphones sensitive to fractions of a dB.

 

The moderator that walked through here is right, this talk is for the Sound Science forum.  I'm free to talk over PM if you like, but I'll leave it at this.  Our hearing is processed hearing.  That processing may not be linear.  Accuracy of human hearing is not universal, nor is it constant for a given person. 

 

On the other hand.  I'm not saying the Oppo is a bad headphone, I'm not saying you can't hear (or your hearing isn't accurate).  I'm not saying any of that. 

 

I'm sure Oppo made a great headphone.  On paper, it looks extremely promising:

  • It's a lightweight planar magnetic
  • It's got high sensitivity that's higher than the HiFiMAN HE-400 and probably the 400i

Those were two missions HiFiMAN were looking to hit with their planers.  These are two things a lot of Head-Fiers have wanted planers to do for a while now.  Having a second company do this is a great thing.  I personally can't wait until someone can get their hands on both of these models and compare them. 

post #343 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by meetoo1 View Post

More dynamic range than the T1s?  I feel the T1s have great range, clarity and soundstage... and yes I think the T1s do accent the trebles a little bit.  Are you saying you think the PM-1s sound better than the T1s in range and clarity?
no direct comparison made with T1..
Just overall impressions from hearing both same day..
post #344 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

When someone else is wearing the headphones, you can hear the music pretty clearly. You wouldn't be able to crank Led Zeppelin in the public library without getting in trouble. I have trouble hearing people speaking to me when I'm wearing the headphones. Does that answer your question?

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by conquerator2 View Post
 

I think by designing the PM-1 for portable use, Oppo wanted to make a headphone that'd isolate a bit or at least does not leak much.

From my understanding, the headphone acts more like a semi-open headphone.

It perhaps does not leak as much and isolates a bit more than conventional open headphones [hence the statement that covering the grills does not change the sound].

 

I was hoping for a semi-open kind of design, with minimal leakage but bigshot's post (above) seems to indicate it's the usual open-headphone leakage, which would seem to preclude portable use.

 

Quote:
Originally Posted by HiFiGuy528 View Post
 

For me, the PM-2 would be better suited for mobile use.  At $699, it won't hurt so bad if I get robbed because they look so great.  :)

 

:biggrin:

post #345 of 3447
Quote:
Originally Posted by bigshot View Post

I didn't find that at all. Amped or direct from my iPhone or iMac, it sounds exactly the same to me. The volume level unamped was much more than I needed too. Lots of headroom. I don't think the Oppos really require amping.
that's great I'm happy for you..
Yet,
you haven't heard it through my Galaxy Note 3 it needed volume all the way up what sounded great nevertheless..

Aaaannnd maybe you haven't heard it through the woo wa7 with the new power supply ..
It was Huge monumental difference maybe not in another set up but in that setup yes it was spectacular..
Woops that was a lil hype..
Correction,
it was stellar..
Edited by Maxx134 - 4/6/14 at 4:09pm
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Headphones (full-size)
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Equipment Forums › Headphones (full-size) › Oppo PM-1 Planar Magnetic Headphone Impressions Thread