Me x3
Member of the Trade: FiiO Store Argentina
- Joined
- Nov 22, 2012
- Posts
- 4,832
- Likes
- 929
A promise is a promise! Here are some pictures of my new headphones (Sorry for the bad quality of the pictures)
Price: I've paid for them about 138 dollars.
(Coming from AKG K44)
Sound: Warm and detailed. Clear highs and good bass for open headphones. Particularly great for the sound of guitars. Yamaha says: "Created to convey the authentic sound of every musical instrument." And that's pretty much what I felt when I got them, they sound pure and real.
Soundstage: Very good but as you might know, it could vary quite a bit from track to track.
With the right recordings the soundstage is really convincing, and definitely out of your head.
Built quality: it's good, nicely made. I think there are some sturdier headphones for the price, but despite of this, nothing to complain here.
Confort: As some Grado headphones you have to find the way you prefer to wear them. These are not the most comfortable headphones in the world, just comfortable I must say. I use them to listen to music for an hour and a half, often 2 hours with no problems at all.
Specs:
Driver Type: Dynamic, open air
Driver Unit: Φ40 mm (1-5/8”)
Impedance: 48 ohms
Max Input: 1,000 mw
Sound Pressure Level: 98.5 dB ±3 dB
Frequency Response: 20 Hz – 20 kHz
Weight (without Cable): 180 g (6.35 oz)
They don't need amplification, an ipod is enough for them to be very enjoyable.
Conclusion:
By comparison with AKG K44, I've found this headphones pretty balanced, with more bass extension, bigger soundstage and more detailed treble.
Update: Since I did this review, I've been listening and comparing very different headphones and I think I have aquired some extra experience with sound.
After all I have to say that I still enjoy my HPH-200, every time I put on them.
The sound of this Yamaha HPH-200 is, at least for me, more on the 'lively' side of neutral (rather than flat). They have some extra energy between 50Hz and 500Hz (too much for some) that makes them sound warm with good impact. They also have some extra energy around 8500Hz that provide good attack and brings some cymbals to the front.
Its soundstage is not the biggest, but is still very nice. Instrument separation is very good, and timbres are really convincing at its price point.
More subjectively talking:
This headphone demands your atention, especially when playing good recordings, maybe this are not the best choice if you are looking for a completely polite and neutral sounding headphone to sit and relax while an orchestra plays for you. But with the right recordings this headphones can make you feel in the middle of the band. I find their sound really engaging.
I never get tired of listening to Procol Harum live in Copenhagen and At the Union Chapel with my Yamaha HPH-200.
Right out of the box they sounded very good but often quite agressive with some recordings (coming from K44). After one or two month of use bass notes become more present and their highs less agressive to my ears.
Update 2 ( and New Pictures!): I've edited the main review a little bit in order to make it more useful. Our hearing is pretty comparative, so I've added the headphone (AKG K44) that I used before getting my HPH-200. I'm sure some of you will find my first impressions much more useful now and some of you will now find them useless. I like it better this way!
Mostly based on what I remember I'll add a short comparison between Yamaha HPH-200 and other headphones.
Yamaha HPH-200 vs AKG K44
Yamahas have the edge in terms of soundstage, bass quantity and extension.
K44s have slightly darker treble, and an overall less detailed presentation, that is often pretty engaging for people that like listening to music at high volume.
Yamaha HPH-200 vs Philips Fidelio M1
Fidelios are dark sounding headphones, with big mid bass emphasis and dark treble. M1s are superior in terms of isolation, comfort and build quality, but HPH-200 easily outclass them in terms of sound quality (timbre, soundstage, air, etc)
Yamaha HPH-200 vs Philips Fidelio L1
L1s are dark too, with big sub bass emphasis. Depending on the recordings L1's soundstage is bigger or smaller than HPH-200's. But HPH-200 have more air, more detail, and overall more realistic presentation. Both are forgiving of poorly recorded material, both have better soundstage than most closed back headphones I've tried, both have boosted bass in some way, but HPH-200 sound clearly more natural to my ears.
In terms of build quality Fidelios are superior (Aluminium cups, detachable cable, foam earpads, etc)
Yamaha HPH-200 vs Pioneer Se-A1000
Se-A1000s are a relaxing version of HPH-200, with similar sound signature but not as pronounced. Bigger soundstage and an overall more neutral presentation with a slight veil. Coming from HPH-200, I really enjoyed my Pioneers. HPH-200 are more intimate, kick harder and make you feel closer most of the times, while Se-A1000s sound quite distant in comparison.
Yamaha HPH-200 vs Takstar HD2000
Pick Yamaha HPH-200. (Even if you care for isolation)
Yamaha HPH vs Takstar HI-2050
These are very different headphones. While Yamahas are warm and forgiving, Hi-2050 are pretty neutral, more precise and unforgiving of poorly recorded material. For people looking for a 'fun' sound signature these Takstars can sound sterile or even boring. Hi-2050s are better for classical music, neutral/warm jazz, acoustic audiophile recordings, etc.
Apples and oranges.
Yamaha HPH-200 vs Philips Uptown and Downtown
Uptowns are definitely more comfortable, and one of the most comfortable headphones I remember.
In terms of sound, I find that HPH-200 outclass all the Citiscape line, so there's not much to say here.
Conclusion:
Yamaha managed to make a consumer headphone (fun sounding and forgiving), easy on the ears, easy to drive, compact and durable, that has proven to be capable of reaching a level of naturalness able to please many audiophile ears.
x3
Price: I've paid for them about 138 dollars.
(Coming from AKG K44)
Sound: Warm and detailed. Clear highs and good bass for open headphones. Particularly great for the sound of guitars. Yamaha says: "Created to convey the authentic sound of every musical instrument." And that's pretty much what I felt when I got them, they sound pure and real.
Soundstage: Very good but as you might know, it could vary quite a bit from track to track.
With the right recordings the soundstage is really convincing, and definitely out of your head.
Built quality: it's good, nicely made. I think there are some sturdier headphones for the price, but despite of this, nothing to complain here.
Confort: As some Grado headphones you have to find the way you prefer to wear them. These are not the most comfortable headphones in the world, just comfortable I must say. I use them to listen to music for an hour and a half, often 2 hours with no problems at all.
Specs:
Driver Type: Dynamic, open air
Driver Unit: Φ40 mm (1-5/8”)
Impedance: 48 ohms
Max Input: 1,000 mw
Sound Pressure Level: 98.5 dB ±3 dB
Frequency Response: 20 Hz – 20 kHz
Weight (without Cable): 180 g (6.35 oz)
They don't need amplification, an ipod is enough for them to be very enjoyable.
Conclusion:
By comparison with AKG K44, I've found this headphones pretty balanced, with more bass extension, bigger soundstage and more detailed treble.
Update: Since I did this review, I've been listening and comparing very different headphones and I think I have aquired some extra experience with sound.
After all I have to say that I still enjoy my HPH-200, every time I put on them.
The sound of this Yamaha HPH-200 is, at least for me, more on the 'lively' side of neutral (rather than flat). They have some extra energy between 50Hz and 500Hz (too much for some) that makes them sound warm with good impact. They also have some extra energy around 8500Hz that provide good attack and brings some cymbals to the front.
Its soundstage is not the biggest, but is still very nice. Instrument separation is very good, and timbres are really convincing at its price point.
More subjectively talking:
This headphone demands your atention, especially when playing good recordings, maybe this are not the best choice if you are looking for a completely polite and neutral sounding headphone to sit and relax while an orchestra plays for you. But with the right recordings this headphones can make you feel in the middle of the band. I find their sound really engaging.
I never get tired of listening to Procol Harum live in Copenhagen and At the Union Chapel with my Yamaha HPH-200.
Right out of the box they sounded very good but often quite agressive with some recordings (coming from K44). After one or two month of use bass notes become more present and their highs less agressive to my ears.
Update 2 ( and New Pictures!): I've edited the main review a little bit in order to make it more useful. Our hearing is pretty comparative, so I've added the headphone (AKG K44) that I used before getting my HPH-200. I'm sure some of you will find my first impressions much more useful now and some of you will now find them useless. I like it better this way!
Mostly based on what I remember I'll add a short comparison between Yamaha HPH-200 and other headphones.
Yamaha HPH-200 vs AKG K44
Yamahas have the edge in terms of soundstage, bass quantity and extension.
K44s have slightly darker treble, and an overall less detailed presentation, that is often pretty engaging for people that like listening to music at high volume.
Yamaha HPH-200 vs Philips Fidelio M1
Fidelios are dark sounding headphones, with big mid bass emphasis and dark treble. M1s are superior in terms of isolation, comfort and build quality, but HPH-200 easily outclass them in terms of sound quality (timbre, soundstage, air, etc)
Yamaha HPH-200 vs Philips Fidelio L1
L1s are dark too, with big sub bass emphasis. Depending on the recordings L1's soundstage is bigger or smaller than HPH-200's. But HPH-200 have more air, more detail, and overall more realistic presentation. Both are forgiving of poorly recorded material, both have better soundstage than most closed back headphones I've tried, both have boosted bass in some way, but HPH-200 sound clearly more natural to my ears.
In terms of build quality Fidelios are superior (Aluminium cups, detachable cable, foam earpads, etc)
Yamaha HPH-200 vs Pioneer Se-A1000
Se-A1000s are a relaxing version of HPH-200, with similar sound signature but not as pronounced. Bigger soundstage and an overall more neutral presentation with a slight veil. Coming from HPH-200, I really enjoyed my Pioneers. HPH-200 are more intimate, kick harder and make you feel closer most of the times, while Se-A1000s sound quite distant in comparison.
Yamaha HPH-200 vs Takstar HD2000
Pick Yamaha HPH-200. (Even if you care for isolation)
Yamaha HPH vs Takstar HI-2050
These are very different headphones. While Yamahas are warm and forgiving, Hi-2050 are pretty neutral, more precise and unforgiving of poorly recorded material. For people looking for a 'fun' sound signature these Takstars can sound sterile or even boring. Hi-2050s are better for classical music, neutral/warm jazz, acoustic audiophile recordings, etc.
Apples and oranges.
Yamaha HPH-200 vs Philips Uptown and Downtown
Uptowns are definitely more comfortable, and one of the most comfortable headphones I remember.
In terms of sound, I find that HPH-200 outclass all the Citiscape line, so there's not much to say here.
Conclusion:
Yamaha managed to make a consumer headphone (fun sounding and forgiving), easy on the ears, easy to drive, compact and durable, that has proven to be capable of reaching a level of naturalness able to please many audiophile ears.
x3
