- Joined
- Aug 2, 2008
- Posts
- 5,408
- Likes
- 1,327
Well to start off I'd like to say hello to everyone as this is my first post. I can't believe that I didn't know of the existence of these forums until recently - even though I had purchased several products from HeadRoom over the years.
I purchased a Grado RS-2 after some research on these boards. Many years ago, I got a chance to audition the entire Grado line (SR325 excepted) and the RS-1 (on a two week loan from a local audio shop in Ann Arbor). However, I couldn't quit recall how the headphones (mainly RS-1) sounded in relation to the RS-2 and SR225. A quick search on these boards allowed me to refresh my memory a little bit on how these sounded (oh ya I remember now - the RS-1 sounded way to bright to me). I would like to thank everyone who had posted their impressions on these headphones. It certainly helped with my final decision on the RS-2 (price was not really a concern)
Every now and then, I see posts from people asking about Grado's, so I figure I'd throw in my 2 cents:
To give you some perspective, I came from a set of STAX phones with the special tube amp (I don't even remember the model number) in the mid-90's. I briefly owned the Senn 580, but have pretty much stuck with the Grado SR-80 for the past six years until my recent RS-2 purchase a little bit over a month ago. My wife and I have too many little ones now for me to crank out the stereo late at night, so I've renewed my interest in headphones.
My choice to stick with Grado over the others brands I've owned in the past is that I really love their dynamic impact (good smack on drums and guitar) and their bass definition (being a bassist myself in a earlier life). It's pretty much impossible for Grado's to sound boomy. There is a certain rawness to the Grado sound - although the higher end Grados are much more refined. There is a liquidity to the vocal range that gets better as you go higher up the ladder.
BTW: I wrapped electrical tape around the Grado bowls. I tried the yellow Senn pads. While the yellow Senn pads increased the bass, it took away some of the airyness and soundstage of the bowls. The tape around the bowls gave me the bass and impact that I wanted while retaining the airyness and the soundstage.
Now here's the blasphemous part:
I think anyone considering the purchase of Grados should be aware of their shortcomings. I'm a big Grado fan, but I also believe that you've got to be honest with yourself. These comments apply to both the SR-80 and RS-2 phones that I own.
The last high treble octave is pure **** (OK, OK, maybe I'm over exaggerating). Despite the FR graphs (which I include below) and the FR graphs from Headphone.com indicating the existence of some high frequency content, I'm very inclined to believe that most of this consists of distortion products. The uneven, gritty, grainy, raw sound of the last octave is not necessarily a bad thing, but it sure reminds me of an old speaker experiment of mine where I used JBL 2245 compression drivers EQ'd +15-18db in the last octave to extend the response to 17kHz. Not exactly a good thing if you absolutely need a smooth buttery treble (if you do you are better off with Senns).
Second of all, the uneven response in the high midrange and low-med treble regions can definitely be bothersome (or a good thing if you love electric guitar distortion). I actually feel that the FR (just that - the FR in this specific range) of the SR-80 is a little bit easier on the ears compared to the RS-2. From 1kHz on to 9kHz, the SR-80 has a steadily rising response with a dip at 3.5kHz. I find this dip (as a speaker builder, it's my opinion that that dips are less noticeable than bumps) much less objectionable to the 2.2kHz and 7kHz (to a lesser extent) bumps of the RS-2. Of course frequency response is not everything as the RS-2 is much more refined with superior handing of micro-dynamics, detail, and "liquidness" in this range. The overall warmer presentation of the RS-2 from the slight mid-high bass bump also does a lot to balance out the bump in the midrange. [If I had my way, I'd take the bass FR and mid-treble refinement of the RS-2 with the mid-treble FR of the SR-80.]
Attached here is a FR graph smoothed 1/6 octave from a pink noise generator and measured with CLIO. I couldn't find a cable and therefore was too lazy to to an MLS gated response test. The FR response is "adjusted" for an "ear" interface that I created. My measurement system is nowhere as sophisticated as HeadRoom's gig with artificial head, ear canal, simulated skin, etc. However, the intent was less to find absolute FR rather than relative FR (the bumps and dips). However a comparison to HeadRoom's FR data does show good correlation. I did verify the obvious RS-2 bumps by listening to a frequency sweep.
So are the RS-2 worth the extra $$$$ over the SR-80? Well it depends - for most people the answer is "hell no". It's not that the RS-2's are that much better, it's just the the SR-80's are so good to begin with. If money is not a concern, then definitely go RS-2.
Anyways, I'm currently in the process of dismantling my six year old SR-80's - one of the wires is loose. I will be re-cabling my SR-80, applying gobs of Dynamat Xtreme, and attaching some 2" dia. plastic pipes to make deep RS-1 type bowls. I'm curious to know how much of the higher end Grado sound lies with the deep wooden cups and little glob of goo on the back of the drivers vs the actual drivers themselves.
I purchased a Grado RS-2 after some research on these boards. Many years ago, I got a chance to audition the entire Grado line (SR325 excepted) and the RS-1 (on a two week loan from a local audio shop in Ann Arbor). However, I couldn't quit recall how the headphones (mainly RS-1) sounded in relation to the RS-2 and SR225. A quick search on these boards allowed me to refresh my memory a little bit on how these sounded (oh ya I remember now - the RS-1 sounded way to bright to me). I would like to thank everyone who had posted their impressions on these headphones. It certainly helped with my final decision on the RS-2 (price was not really a concern)
Every now and then, I see posts from people asking about Grado's, so I figure I'd throw in my 2 cents:
To give you some perspective, I came from a set of STAX phones with the special tube amp (I don't even remember the model number) in the mid-90's. I briefly owned the Senn 580, but have pretty much stuck with the Grado SR-80 for the past six years until my recent RS-2 purchase a little bit over a month ago. My wife and I have too many little ones now for me to crank out the stereo late at night, so I've renewed my interest in headphones.
My choice to stick with Grado over the others brands I've owned in the past is that I really love their dynamic impact (good smack on drums and guitar) and their bass definition (being a bassist myself in a earlier life). It's pretty much impossible for Grado's to sound boomy. There is a certain rawness to the Grado sound - although the higher end Grados are much more refined. There is a liquidity to the vocal range that gets better as you go higher up the ladder.
BTW: I wrapped electrical tape around the Grado bowls. I tried the yellow Senn pads. While the yellow Senn pads increased the bass, it took away some of the airyness and soundstage of the bowls. The tape around the bowls gave me the bass and impact that I wanted while retaining the airyness and the soundstage.
Now here's the blasphemous part:
The last high treble octave is pure **** (OK, OK, maybe I'm over exaggerating). Despite the FR graphs (which I include below) and the FR graphs from Headphone.com indicating the existence of some high frequency content, I'm very inclined to believe that most of this consists of distortion products. The uneven, gritty, grainy, raw sound of the last octave is not necessarily a bad thing, but it sure reminds me of an old speaker experiment of mine where I used JBL 2245 compression drivers EQ'd +15-18db in the last octave to extend the response to 17kHz. Not exactly a good thing if you absolutely need a smooth buttery treble (if you do you are better off with Senns).
Second of all, the uneven response in the high midrange and low-med treble regions can definitely be bothersome (or a good thing if you love electric guitar distortion). I actually feel that the FR (just that - the FR in this specific range) of the SR-80 is a little bit easier on the ears compared to the RS-2. From 1kHz on to 9kHz, the SR-80 has a steadily rising response with a dip at 3.5kHz. I find this dip (as a speaker builder, it's my opinion that that dips are less noticeable than bumps) much less objectionable to the 2.2kHz and 7kHz (to a lesser extent) bumps of the RS-2. Of course frequency response is not everything as the RS-2 is much more refined with superior handing of micro-dynamics, detail, and "liquidness" in this range. The overall warmer presentation of the RS-2 from the slight mid-high bass bump also does a lot to balance out the bump in the midrange. [If I had my way, I'd take the bass FR and mid-treble refinement of the RS-2 with the mid-treble FR of the SR-80.]
Attached here is a FR graph smoothed 1/6 octave from a pink noise generator and measured with CLIO. I couldn't find a cable and therefore was too lazy to to an MLS gated response test. The FR response is "adjusted" for an "ear" interface that I created. My measurement system is nowhere as sophisticated as HeadRoom's gig with artificial head, ear canal, simulated skin, etc. However, the intent was less to find absolute FR rather than relative FR (the bumps and dips). However a comparison to HeadRoom's FR data does show good correlation. I did verify the obvious RS-2 bumps by listening to a frequency sweep.
So are the RS-2 worth the extra $$$$ over the SR-80? Well it depends - for most people the answer is "hell no". It's not that the RS-2's are that much better, it's just the the SR-80's are so good to begin with. If money is not a concern, then definitely go RS-2.
Anyways, I'm currently in the process of dismantling my six year old SR-80's - one of the wires is loose. I will be re-cabling my SR-80, applying gobs of Dynamat Xtreme, and attaching some 2" dia. plastic pipes to make deep RS-1 type bowls. I'm curious to know how much of the higher end Grado sound lies with the deep wooden cups and little glob of goo on the back of the drivers vs the actual drivers themselves.
