Quote:
if you consider any grado a "basshead" can then your opinions are null and void. You're digging you're own grave by using the least bass heavy set of cans on the planet as an example of how to make huge bass...ALSO the porta pro is not vented it sits ON the ear............
WOW. I thought Head-Fi was a community forum, and that everyone's opinions were welcome... I realize things have gotten a bit more shouty and impolite between members in the past few years since I first joined, but we should all respect each other's point of view, or what's the point?
I'm not trashing the person in the above quote, I'm just noticing that all over Head-Fi things have been a little ...hostile? What I wanted to mention regarding the quote was about the Koss PortaPro (and consequently the KSC35, and SportaPro) which are a family of models utilizing the SAME driver/capsule, and are, in fact, vented (rows of holes on the top/ball-socket side of the driver/capsule, on the OTHER side from where the foams or pads sit). I guess it's a "semi-closed/semi-open" design since there isn't a grille for the rear of the driver, like on a Sennheiser HD 580/600/650, but those Koss drivers ARE "vented". So is the KSC75, which is essentially a PortaPro driver with a 2-mil layer of titanium coating.
Whether or not the PortaPro "family" is _THE BASSIEST_ of phones isn't something I'd debate. However it merits inclusion in the stable of "bassy" headphones since it is far from a "flat" frequency response/neutral headphone and has a more pronounced level of bass-orientation over "neutral".
I'm not going to argue about whether or not a Grado is "bassy enough" for somebody. I had a SR-60 as my first pair of "cans", and a pair of ER-4S as my first IEM. Compared to the Etymotics, the Grado _was_ bass-heavy. I've read that the top-tier Grado's have more and better bass than the entry-level model(s), and that a custom woody styled as a "grado-replacement" with Magnum drivers may be bassier than an actual Grado. Do I think a Grado/Magnum signature is as bassy as a PortaPro "family" driver? No. Or a pair of Audio-Technica ATH-ESW9A? Again, no. A pair of say, Apple stock earbuds, or MOST of the IEM's I've listened to? (owned roughly 13 different pairs at different pricepoints), sure the Grado is bassier than the Apple earbud, and for instance the Phonak PFE and HiFiMAN RE-0 I've had.
What is the general consensus on a "bassy" or "basshead" -oriented 'phone? I think this is an important question for this thread. It sort-of shaped MY "headphone journey", as a self-confessed "bass aficionado". Should the only valid 'phones for discussion be ones with a disproportionate amount of bass, at the expense of the other frequency bands, meaning the $5.10 Kanen KM-92 are a fine example? They're VERY bassy, almost as bassy as the Victor HP-FX500, but not quite as textured in the bass regions, and while the HP-FX500 was and still is considered quite a bassy 'phone, it managed to have good mids and treble (though some say the treble can be "bright" or "harsh"; but the bass is more "noticeable").
I think it would be fantastic if members could come up with some kind of "barometer" or "index" of how much weight or emphasis there is for each region of the frequency spectrum, that could be applied to all headphones in a comparative fashion. That idea is a bit Off-Topic (sorry), but it makes more sense than random claim-staking that one headphone is a bass-/mid-/treble- "monster" compared to another; and could generally help folks figure out which 'phone(s) fit the bill for them for their preferences. In the context of this thread, if a 'phone has "enough" bassiness for the user.
I've been watching this thread, and the releated "treblehead", "midhead", and "neutralhead" threads for a little while, and have (mostly) been enjoying them. I hope they can stay fun and informative and away from name-calling, character-assasination, and the like, and let everybody feel welcome here.
Peace.
