Head-Fi.org › Forums › Help and Getting Started › Introductions, Help and Recommendations › Searching for a monitoring headphone
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Searching for a monitoring headphone - Page 2

post #16 of 35
Thread Starter 

what about soundstage ?

post #17 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleWave View Post
 

what about soundstage ?


Open and semi-open cans are almost always better--often much better.

post #18 of 35

K612 - I trust them more than my K701s or HD650s

dt880 - great phones for monitoring but very treble happy

 

don't forget to buy a headphoneamp

post #19 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiSenn5 View Post
 

K612 - I trust them more than my K701s or HD650s

dt880 - great phones for monitoring but very treble happy

 

don't forget to buy a headphoneamp

what about dt 770 ?

post #20 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleWave View Post
 

what about dt 770 ?


V-Shaped frequency response, not suitable for mixing. For tracking OK. If you'd like to buy a closed one, try the Shure SRH840 or Audio Technica ATH M50.

post #21 of 35
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by HiSenn5 View Post
 


V-Shaped frequency response, not suitable for mixing. For tracking OK. If you'd like to buy a closed one, try the Shure SRH840 or Audio Technica ATH M50.

isnt ATH M50 DJ style ? 38 ohm impedance and not so wide frequency range .


Edited by PurpleWave - 7/4/14 at 4:37am
post #22 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleWave View Post

isnt ATH M50 DJ style ? 38 ohm impedance and not so wide frequency range .

What's wrong with the impedance? And "not so wide frequency range?" What do you mean? It's 15 - 28,000 Hz.
post #23 of 35
Thread Starter 
eh I prefer specs like sennheiser hd600
Edited by PurpleWave - 7/5/14 at 4:08am
post #24 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by PurpleWave View Post

eh I prefer specs like sennheiser hd600

You know, an extended frequency response isn't all that important. I don't think it's even necessary. Besides, we can only hear up to 20 - 20,000 Hz. I don't see why you would discount the M50's specs over the HD600, when the M50s are less than $200 while the HD600s are about $200-300.

 

Also, why do you care about the specs so much? Who knows, you might not even like the sound of the HD600s or any other headphones with an extended frequency response.

 

Just my 2 cents.

post #25 of 35
Extended frequency response is important due to distortion towards the ends of the spectrum. Extending the bandwidth allows the hearing range to be away from the ends. Still not necessary? wink.gif
post #26 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eran483 View Post

Extended frequency response is important due to distortion towards the ends of the spectrum. Extending the bandwidth allows the hearing range to be away from the ends. Still not necessary? wink.gif

Then again, isn't 15Hz -- 28KHz okay?

My point was, why would you need a super-extended response when the M50s' FR is pretty okay? Hey, I don't have a degree in acoustic physics, so cut me some slack, man. That was just my opinion; I don't see why you have to attack it so smugly.


Edited by thatBeatsguy - 7/5/14 at 7:19am
post #27 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eran483 View Post

Extended frequency response is important due to distortion towards the ends of the spectrum. Extending the bandwidth allows the hearing range to be away from the ends. Still not necessary? wink.gif

Really? So how much extra extension is necessary if that's true? The extra extension is more a benefit to marketers who know that some people pay attention to that without a clear basis for understanding how much range is important.

Meanwhile, there is frequency range and there is usable response. Unfortunately, the headphone industry has not begun to adapt the standard that many in the speaker industry are following of providing the +/-db variation for the range. A headphone that plays 15-30,000 hz which rolls off dramatically on the low end and high end in response is not going to be as good as a headphone for monitoring that plays say 20-20K +/-3db.
post #28 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by thatBeatsguy View Post

Then again, isn't 15Hz -- 28KHz okay?

It's more than enough. Unless one is buying for bragging rights about frequency response listed by the manufacturer, which isn't very meaningful anyway since how does one know that they are accurately playing that high? None of the headphone reviewers that I know of that do testing have measurements above 20K.
post #29 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by cel4145 View Post


It's more than enough. Unless one is buying for bragging rights about frequency response listed by the manufacturer, which isn't very meaningful anyway since how does one know that they are accurately playing that high? None of the headphone reviewers that I know of that do testing have measurements above 20K.

Well, IIRC Tyll Herstens' measurements include the frequencies above 20KHz, but is usually just roll-off.

post #30 of 35
Quote:
Originally Posted by thatBeatsguy View Post

Well, IIRC Tyll Herstens' measurements include the frequencies above 20KHz, but is usually just roll-off.

D'oh! My bad, you are right. redface.gif

It is distortion that he is not measuring higher up.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
Head-Fi.org › Forums › Help and Getting Started › Introductions, Help and Recommendations › Searching for a monitoring headphone