[Russ Arcuri]

Just a couple of comments.

If there was EVER a pair of headphones that would sound truly different from listener to listener, these are it. Vertical headphones use the listener's anatomy as the conduit from transducer to eardrum, rather than air normally found in the ear canal. Everyone is different anatomically -- even a slight difference in cartilage density or an extra 5-cell thick layer of fat will change the sound I get out of these things drastically compared to, say, Vertigo-1.

The comparison you're all planning on doing is pointless. Even assuming everyone involved in the test has similar listening preferences, (a very big "if," I'm sure you'll agree) only people with anatomy remarkably similar to Vertigo's will hear anything appreciably close to what he's hearing. Hell, these things will probably sound different depending on whether someone is mildly dehydrated or not!

I had a pair of vertical headphones when I was in college -- sorry, no idea what model. I loved them -- I thought they sounded great. (Of course, this was before my headphone "enlightenment.") In any case, one of the fun games I used to play with them was to see how different I could make them sound depending on how they were positioned in my ears and how much pressure I pushed on them with. Sound changes with any headphone depending on positioning, but the effect is much more radical with verticals. Why? Because you're using your ear tissue and head as the primary conduit for the sound.

Whoever wrote the ad copy on headroom's website laments the fact that nobody has come out with a great sounding vertical headphone. Maybe differences in anatomy make that goal impossible. Just something to think about.

 

[jude]

Quote:

Originally posted by Russ Arcuri If there was EVER a pair of headphones that would sound truly different from listener to listener, these are it....The comparison you're all planning on doing is pointless....

I'm of the belief that a pair of headphones will sound different from person to person, regardless of design (even Etymotics). Then, of course, there's individual sonic preference to top that off.

So are all reviews pointless based on how you've determined what makes a comparison pointless? Maybe. But we like to read most of them anyway, don't we?

I don't see this comparison as any more pointless than any other headphone evaluation.

 

[Peddler]

I have tried several vertical headphones in the past (and one pair quite recently) and have found them to be surprisingly good.

I'm aware of Vert's appreciation of the higher frequences - referring to his past posts regarding comparing his customised 888's (using the groove cap mod) and the Etymotic 4P's. Personally I prefer the Ety's but I think I know where he's coming from with this.

I like the 888's because of the comfort, sound quality and efficiency.

I like the Etymotics because in my opinion they are the best you can get at a reasonable price.

I like the EX-70's because they are fun, great to wear when walking in louder environments and I can lay on my side in bed with them.

Out of them all I much prefer the Ety's but I probably spend more time listening to the 888's - they are cheap enough to not worry about breaking them and they sound very very good.

 

[Russ Arcuri]

Quote:

Originally posted by jude I'm of the belief that a pair of headphones will sound different from person to person, regardless of design (even Etymotics).

Maybe, but not to the extent that verticals will -- not even the Etys, which are more likely to sound different from person to person than most others. There's a huge design difference here between headphones that send most of the sound above, say, 250 Hz through the air in an ear canal and headphones which emit most of the frequency range through skin, cartilage, fat, and water. I guarantee that no matter how different physically your ear canals are from mine, the air in them is going to be pretty similar. The tissue surrounding them is not.

Yes, everyone's going to hear HD600s slightly differently due to the particular shape and/or volume of their ear canals. But a significant percentage of audio enthusiasts are in substantial agreement about how the HD600s sound, despite those differences. Notice how the Etys don't quite enjoy the same agreement? Yet the midrange and treble frequencies still pass mostly through air with them. With verticals, very little is passing through the air, and what is passing through the air reaches the eardrum later than what's passing through surrounding tissue. Sound is significantly faster through a liquid or solid than it is in air.

Let me put it this way: how different do you really think your HD600s would sound if you gained 20 pounds? Or lost 20? I bet they'd still sound very similar to you. I doubt a vertical pair would. Quote:

So are all reviews pointless based on how you've determined what makes a comparison pointless?

Maybe I should have stated my concern more succinctly than just saying the comparison was pointless. How's this: There's no way any real concensus can be reached in this particular comparison, because I doubt any of you is going to hear even remotely the same thing that Vertigo-1 does. I'll still enjoy reading everyone's impressions, and I'm considering picking up a pair of the MDR-A44Ls myself, just for grins.

Just don't be too surprised if only one out of ten people agrees with Vertigo-1; that doesn't mean he's crazy. It just means his anatomy is well-suited to these particular cans.

 

[Vertigo-1]

A very good point actually Russ. It seems Etymotics receive a more even response from people because, by hook or by crook, you can usually get them to seal in just about anybody's ears, whether small or large. On the other hand, a person with a small ear canal would not be able to get the A44s into their ears very well at all, period. The final resulting sound would be equivilent to about stock earbuds or worse. The better the insertion with the A44s, the better the bass, and the fuller they will sound...which is about the same story with the Etymotics.

On another note, are these vertical 'phones side firing? I see tiny little holes along the edge of the 'phones which point into the ear canal which look like the bass ports, and then there's the big portion on the side that looks like where the driver lies...but which side is the sound really coming out from? If they're side firing then the way a person's ear canal is would very heavily play a role in how the sound is reflected into the ear...

 

[jude]

Quote:

Originally posted by Russ Arcuri ...I guarantee that no matter how different physically your ear canals are from mine, the air in them is going to be pretty similar. The tissue surrounding them is not... Maybe I should have stated my concern more succinctly than just saying the comparison was pointless. How's this: There's no way any real concensus can be reached in this particular comparison, because I doubt any of you is going to hear even remotely the same thing that Vertigo-1 does. I'll still enjoy reading everyone's impressions, and I'm considering picking up a pair of the MDR-A44Ls myself, just for grins. Just don't be too surprised if only one out of ten people agrees with Vertigo-1; that doesn't mean he's crazy. It just means his anatomy is well-suited to these particular cans.

Again, Russ, I don't think an evaluation of these 'phones is any less relevant than any other. To me it seems quite obvious that headphones -- again, vertical or not -- sound quite different to different people, regardless of design. It's hard for me to accept that sonic preferences alone account for the huge variation in headphone choices we make (though it is also obviously a big factor). And even with more conventional headphone designs, though the air in our ear canals may be pretty similar, the sensitivity to its movement experienced by each of us probably varies quite significantly.

Many like the Etymotics a lot. Some don't. I think it's safe to say that most people who've tried them like them (at least based on posts on Head-Fi and HeadWize). That's a consensus of sorts. Eventually, one may be reached here with the 44’s too, regardless of its design. If in the event the consensus isn't consistent with Vertigo's assessment of the 44's, I don't think it discredits his findings, as they're his individually -- it would, however, be helpful to have a consensus, one way or the other. Isn't that what we generally do here anyway? At the end, the ultimate judge is each person's individual experience with a piece of equipment -- but the broad brushstrokes beforehand guide us as we consider new things. That's why many here who haven't heard V600's before will probably never buy them, sound unheard.

 

[Duncan]

hehehe, I guess that means i might not be mad for liking my EX70s

 

[Russ Arcuri]

Jude -- I thought I made it clear that I agree with you on most of those points (about the subjectivity of headphone preferences, etc), with one real exception -- I believe verticals are far more likely to sound different from person to person than any other design, due to the physics of sound and the design of verticals. Apparently, you don't. That's okay -- we agree to disagree.

It was obviously poor wording on my part in the beginning -- I didn't want to suggest that you were wasting your time with the comparison. As I said, I'm thinking of getting a pair for myself. But earlier in the thread, someone (I don't think it was you) said that there was no possible way for the 44s to offer better detail and transparency than the Grado 325s. Later people decided to test it for themselves -- and what I was commenting on was the futility (IMO) of trying to do so when the treble range, more so than any other, will be drastically affected by differences in the anatomies of the various testers. It's entirely possible, in other words, that Vertigo-1's anatomy is such that more detail really is being transmitted to his eardrums, even if you or I don't hear it. (As opposed to simple differences in interpretation.)

Again, I'll point out that when you use air as a conduit for sound, its properties are well-understood and pretty consistent, regardless of temperature or relative humidity. An extra 2 mm of cartilage or fat between the transducer and someone's eardrum is capable, I'm quite sure, of radically changing the sense of detail and transparency one receives from a set of headphones that are using flesh and bone as the primary conduit for sound rather than air. Depending on the density of material between the transducer and the eardrum, the speed of sound is different as well.

I think we're running in circles now. Rest assured that I wasn't trying to be critical; I was simply pointing out something I think could put a serious kink in the results. Cheers...

 

[jude]

Quote:

Originally posted by Russ Arcuri Jude -- I thought I made it clear that I agree with you on most of those points (about the subjectivity of headphone preferences, etc), with one real exception -- I believe verticals are far more likely to sound different from person to person than any other design, due to the physics of sound and the design of verticals. Apparently, you don't. That's okay -- we agree to disagree.... ....Again, I'll point out that when you use air as a conduit for sound, its properties are well-understood and pretty consistent, regardless of temperature or relative humidity....

I understood what you meant, Russ. My point in the follow-up message is only that it's my belief that despite the consistent and well-understood properties of air as a conduit, what we actually hear from person to person is likely very different anyway. The head-as-conduit aspect of verticals is another variable.

Simple analogy (though not a perfect analogy): I have some color-blindness. Standing side by side, looking at a Matisse painting, I'd have to imagine that we'd see that painting differently (unless you also have some color blindness, but maybe even then....), despite the fact that we're looking at the same thing.

As you stated, we agree on some points and disagree on others. We agree on the subjectivity. We disagree on the "futility" and "kink in the results" points, in that I don't see the form factor of vertical 'phones as any more a kink than personal preference or other typical variables -- especially as more people try them.

Anyway, these are all just opinions, and so difficult to argue. I do agree that we're running in circles right about now.

 

[Russ Arcuri]

Quote:

Originally posted by jude Simple analogy: I have some color-blindness. Standing side by side, looking at a Matisse painting, I'd have to imagine that we'd see that painting differently (unless you also have some color blindness, but maybe even then....), despite the fact that we're looking at the same thing.

I agree with your analogy 100%, but you have to extend it to make it consistent with our discussion. We're both looking at the Matisse through the same medium -- air. What if you were looking at the Matisse through a thin, flat piece of glass, tinted slightly gray, and I was looking at it through a piece of glass 40% thicker and tinted pink? While it's true that your partial color-blindness is going to change your perception of the painting, there's still going to be a relatively consistent description of that painting amongst the majority of people who aren't color-blind when viewed through the same medium. Assuming Vertigo-1 is not color-blind, his perception of the painting is going to differ substantially from mine if he's viewing it through a wavy piece of glass tinted green.

No matter how different our perceptions are, the transducer of the HD600s is going to deliver roughly the same frequencies at roughly the same volume to your eardrums as mine; the transducers in a vertical headphone can't possibly do the same thing if I've got 20% more jawbone jutting into the area around the transducer than you do, or if you have 15% less fat in the skin around your ear.

I've beaten this topic into the ground about as much as is possible. I can be a curmudgeon sometimes, and for that I apologize. But it's not likely I'll be persuaded...

 

[jude]

Quote:

Originally posted by Russ Arcuri But it's not likely I'll be persuaded...

Nor I!

 

[Russ Arcuri]

Jude -- either the air between my eyes and monitor has changed substantially, or you changed your avatar while I was typing my last post.

 

[jude]

Quote:

Originally posted by Russ Arcuri Jude -- either the air between my eyes and monitor has changed substantially, or you changed your avatar while I was typing my last post.

My wife (who was with me in my avatar moments ago) found our little debate tiring, so she left!

 

[RickG]

Quote:

Originally posted by jude My wife (who was with me in my avatar moments ago) found our little debate tiring, so she left!

Lol, Jude

 

[coolvij]

This was one helluva thread for me to miss....where was I? Oh...doing useful stuff....doh....