Beagle
His body's not a canvas, and he wasn't raised by apes.
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2001
- Posts
- 9,196
- Likes
- 3,475
For some strange deranged reflex impulse insane reason, I purchased yet another headphone Tuesday. It was the Sony 7506.
See, it's this board which can sometimes make you do crazy things. The V6 is not available here, so based on the discussion on the similarity to the 7506, I decided to demo them. They sounded somewhat bright and honky with solid low registers, plugged into the demo source, whcih was a bit shaky. I also tried the Beyer DT250, which were smoother in the mid and much less bright at the top. Extended listening brought me to the conclusion that the 7506 would probably sound nice through a decent amp. I attributed some of the nasal honkiness in the midrange to the demo source.
Getting Down To Brass Tacks
Using the 7506 with the Grado RA-1, the sound was detailed in the highs and chunky and firm in the lows. The bass extended down further than any other headphone I have used except for the Yamaha HP-1. I also noticed that the 7506 emphasised the tiny hiss coming from the RA-1. This is normally barely audible using Grado cans.
The sound (once the ear adjusts, like any headphone) was initially very impressive. One gets the impression that the 7506 is a very revealing and unforgiving headphone. Yet, despite the apparent clarity, it still seemed like there was a light warmth or murk lurking in the upper midrange. I then realized that what was actually happening was a detailed top end laid on top of a solid bottom, with nothing in between. Like a ham sandwich without the ham. Acoustic guitars and cellos had no body. When the Grado Reference Platinum cartridge lacks midrange warmth, you know something is amiss. It was like someone chopped out the upper bass/midrange area and surgically connected the top and bottom together. The treble is providing clean detail, but not the actual music that it is supposed to be detailing, if you get my drift. Also, the bottom end sounds somewhat synthetic, which I believe Kelly touched on in another review. It almost sounds like sampled low bass notes at times, lacking a distinct character of each recording. It is often difficult to differentiate between an acoustic and an electric bass, because the upper bass is not being provided with enough detail. And while the top sounds detailed, it does not 'breathe' or seem open. This headphone has the odd distinction of sound dark and bright at the same time.
I decided to reference an older pair of Sennheiser HD480 phones in order to get an understanding on what I believed I was hearing. Now the HD480 has a wonderful midrange (open, transparent, tonally accurate) but sounds very cut off and muted in the highs, and rolled off very early in the bass. In other words, the opposite to what the 7506 sounded like. But the HD480 did confirm that the 7506 sounded very dipped and sucked-out in the midbass up to the upper midrange. Or in laymans terms, the 7506 was one big huge smiley-face EQ job. And the closed shut-in style of the headphone was annoying, discomforting and claustrophobic.
More madness
Having determined what I liked about the HD480 and disliked about the 7506, I spent a day and a half tweaking, trying to pull some top and bottom out of the HD480, to no avail. But that midrange....
I then realized then that I had gone completely off the track, so I corrected my course by going back to the Grados, starting at the "bottom" with the SR80. There it was! The sound I had lost. Up through the 125, 225, 325 and RS-1 brought more 'refinement' to that SR80 sound. I was back! It was like spending two days trying to figure out what was wrong with McDonalds and Burger King when I had prime rib in the fridge. The AKG501 brought the midrange detail of the HD480 along with the appropriately balanced top and bottom, whcih the 480 lacked.
So, what is the lesson to be learned from all of this? The same lesson we are always being taught but never seem to fully absorb. And that is, when a headphone seems to be doing something impressively right in part of the audio spectrum, it is likely doing something else seriously wrong in another. And this is why we recognise those good qualities...we are so blown away by the strong points that we overlook the weak ones....initially. Then when the truth hits home, we feel cheated and deceived. I suppose it is just human weakness to be seduced by a different sound. I still like that low bass effect and detail in the 7506 but knowing what I am giving up makes it hard to listen to for any length of time.
See, it's this board which can sometimes make you do crazy things. The V6 is not available here, so based on the discussion on the similarity to the 7506, I decided to demo them. They sounded somewhat bright and honky with solid low registers, plugged into the demo source, whcih was a bit shaky. I also tried the Beyer DT250, which were smoother in the mid and much less bright at the top. Extended listening brought me to the conclusion that the 7506 would probably sound nice through a decent amp. I attributed some of the nasal honkiness in the midrange to the demo source.
Getting Down To Brass Tacks
Using the 7506 with the Grado RA-1, the sound was detailed in the highs and chunky and firm in the lows. The bass extended down further than any other headphone I have used except for the Yamaha HP-1. I also noticed that the 7506 emphasised the tiny hiss coming from the RA-1. This is normally barely audible using Grado cans.
The sound (once the ear adjusts, like any headphone) was initially very impressive. One gets the impression that the 7506 is a very revealing and unforgiving headphone. Yet, despite the apparent clarity, it still seemed like there was a light warmth or murk lurking in the upper midrange. I then realized that what was actually happening was a detailed top end laid on top of a solid bottom, with nothing in between. Like a ham sandwich without the ham. Acoustic guitars and cellos had no body. When the Grado Reference Platinum cartridge lacks midrange warmth, you know something is amiss. It was like someone chopped out the upper bass/midrange area and surgically connected the top and bottom together. The treble is providing clean detail, but not the actual music that it is supposed to be detailing, if you get my drift. Also, the bottom end sounds somewhat synthetic, which I believe Kelly touched on in another review. It almost sounds like sampled low bass notes at times, lacking a distinct character of each recording. It is often difficult to differentiate between an acoustic and an electric bass, because the upper bass is not being provided with enough detail. And while the top sounds detailed, it does not 'breathe' or seem open. This headphone has the odd distinction of sound dark and bright at the same time.
I decided to reference an older pair of Sennheiser HD480 phones in order to get an understanding on what I believed I was hearing. Now the HD480 has a wonderful midrange (open, transparent, tonally accurate) but sounds very cut off and muted in the highs, and rolled off very early in the bass. In other words, the opposite to what the 7506 sounded like. But the HD480 did confirm that the 7506 sounded very dipped and sucked-out in the midbass up to the upper midrange. Or in laymans terms, the 7506 was one big huge smiley-face EQ job. And the closed shut-in style of the headphone was annoying, discomforting and claustrophobic.
More madness
Having determined what I liked about the HD480 and disliked about the 7506, I spent a day and a half tweaking, trying to pull some top and bottom out of the HD480, to no avail. But that midrange....
I then realized then that I had gone completely off the track, so I corrected my course by going back to the Grados, starting at the "bottom" with the SR80. There it was! The sound I had lost. Up through the 125, 225, 325 and RS-1 brought more 'refinement' to that SR80 sound. I was back! It was like spending two days trying to figure out what was wrong with McDonalds and Burger King when I had prime rib in the fridge. The AKG501 brought the midrange detail of the HD480 along with the appropriately balanced top and bottom, whcih the 480 lacked.
So, what is the lesson to be learned from all of this? The same lesson we are always being taught but never seem to fully absorb. And that is, when a headphone seems to be doing something impressively right in part of the audio spectrum, it is likely doing something else seriously wrong in another. And this is why we recognise those good qualities...we are so blown away by the strong points that we overlook the weak ones....initially. Then when the truth hits home, we feel cheated and deceived. I suppose it is just human weakness to be seduced by a different sound. I still like that low bass effect and detail in the 7506 but knowing what I am giving up makes it hard to listen to for any length of time.
