[bkelly]

Friends,

It's getting quite busy on this thread. Good, I think.

Let me answer everyone briefly.

MacDEF,

You're really getting onmy nerves. I usually am not mean in the slightest but in your case I may make an exception.

As you admit, it is painfully clear that you have never owned or extensively tested a pair of 590's. So your opinions are not even opinions but only vague impressions as far as I'm concerned. Nuff said about that

Regarding my "opinions" if you have something to say about something I said as fact that you can actually muster up an intelligent response to please go for it. Your attempts at just writing off everything I say as just my opinion is puerile nonsense (look it up if you actually have a dictionary, your constant misinterpretations of my comments makes me doubt it). I give you fair warning though, before you get all brave and start saying crazy stuff you should know that when it comes to music production I didn't just ride into town last night on a punkin'.

Fire away if you feel lucky.

Phil,

Your comments are a little different. Obviously you have some experience with this so my simplified explanations may be a little too simple for you. Never-the-less I stand my explanations as being essentially correct and in the end technically correct especially for the purpose of this discussion.

I don't know why anyone here is having trouble with the comment I made that the 600's compress the sound. Any audio device that surpress dynamic information can be said to be compressing it. Tubes do this and that is the term often used to descriibe the effect. However let use the word supress just for clarities sake. You've heard dull sounding drivers before. Would you not agreee that if the amplfiers were sending a full signal but all you heard was a the dull, lifeless result that the driver could be said to be surpressing the signal. That's all I said.

As far as the comments about compression go you are absolutely correct in your explanations of the uses for it. However, I will stick with my comment that it is used on the in the mastering process to makle everything sound like it all happened together (same place and the same time) is a qoute from Bob Ludwig who as you may know is arguably the most respected mastering engineer in history. At least one of them. I agree and the reason is simple. If you compress everything it tightens it up just as you explain and as a result it gives everything on the recording the same or a similar dynamic characteristic making it sound like it's all the same recording which I think you know, it's not. This is a simplified explanation but I think you know what I am talking about.

By the way, are you a guitar player?

Oh yes, I hate to hear compressors "cycling" on a record. I've got that problem with an old (unplayed) LP we are trying to move to CD. You can hear the program opening and closing in the background everytime it gets quiet.

Anyhow, your comments are appreciated. It's also good to have someone around familiar with the recording process.

Kelly,

I'm saving the best for last.

As I think you know I have a lot of respect for you and I give credence to a lot of thngs you say. I didn't buy the W2002 only because you sold yours. If you would have been satisfied with them I would have purchsed them with confidence. It's a fact, you are very, very picky but I love the effort you put into your listening experiences.

The mid-bass hump doesn't bother me so much but what does get on my nerves is how many 600 fans simply don't hear it. The one that does bug me is the upper mid recession. No one other than you has ever pointed this out that I know of and I'll add that it sounds grainy in this area too. This flaw is the one that is most responsible (the added soundstage is the worst) for my comments that instruments sound unreal to me on this headphone. Why I feel that the the pick attack, the string bowing and the stick hitting the drum is so suppressed.

As far as my amp goes I have several sets of highly disoreable tubes with it ("markl" description, I don't really know which ones are good) but it sounds so good I have not been morivated to start rolling the tubes. I've also heard that the Melos was not as sensitive to tube roiling as other amps are, anyway. If you have a different opinion I would be glad to hear it since I know you have both owned and like this model.

I need to go but I will be back tomorrow evening defending the good name of the Sennheiser HD590. I didn't intend to become the Patron Saint of the 590 but during my tenure I plan to see that this under-appreciated and well deserving model finally gets its just deserts.

Bifcake,

Your in the clear for awhile.





Love To One And All, (even MacDEF)
Brian, Patron Saint of the HD590

 

[ai0tron]

Blah blah, listen, I have never even heard the HD590 and I can state with absolute confidence that it is inferior to the HD600. I can say this because it is an absolute like the rising and setting of the sun. Trying to prove to you otherwise, bkelly, is like trying to prove to someone the sun rises and sets when they cannot discern that it does in fact rise and set for themselves. Thus I have learned from this thread that you can never convince someone of the obvious if they refuse to see it. Watch the sun bkelly, it rises, it moves across the sky, then it sets. Take this new understanding and apply the same acceptance it required of outright fact to the HD600 and you shall reach a state of infinite headphone bliss. Ok the part about bliss was a lie, but the rest is TRuUUTH!!!

 

[RVD]

The hd600's are obviously better than the hd590, because the model number is higher.

 

[bifcake]

Brian,

I am certainly glad I'm in the clear with SOMEONE in this forum!!! hehehhhe I'm in the cross hairs of so many people, it's good to have someone neutral towards me.

With regard to the 590's vs 600's, if I hadn't heard the 600's, I would have thought the 590's were really great. They're snappy, and fun and have that 'wow factor', albeit a bit bright. I prefer a more laid back sound. I find the 600's to be more refined. I think 'refined' is the right word. I can't think of a better one that would define my impressions of the two. The sound coming out of the 600's is just smoother and more natural sounding. I wouldn't even begin to argue the objective qualities of the two. It really doesn't matter, I think. Whichever phone allows us to enjoy the music to the utmost, is the headphone to get. The same holds true for the Senn vs Grado argument. It's really moot. Whatever rocks your cradle. 580s and 600's rock mine. Orpheus REALLY rocks it.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by pigmode You know, is bkelly the MacDef of the HD590, or is MacDef the bkelly of the HD600? [/B]

Yay, another "MacDEF is an HD 600 fanatic" post

Funny how I don't get those when I defend any other headphone, which I do just as vociferously if someone trashing them without merit. When I've stood up for the K501, not a word...

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by bkelly MacDEF, You're really getting onmy nerves. I usually am not mean in the slightest but in your case I may make an exception.

Boy, that was necessary.


Quote:

As you admit, it is painfully clear that you have never owned or extensively tested a pair of 590's. So your opinions are not even opinions but only vague impressions as far as I'm concerned.

I guess you "overlooked" this sentence I wrote, in direct response to your question: while I've never owned the HD 590, I've heard them quite extensively. I'm sorry that something's "painful" for you, but I have indeed auditioned the HD 590 extensively. And the fact that many other people who have auditioned them extensively—more extensively than either of us—agree with me points to the fact that I'm not just making this up. It doesn't "prove" which is better, but it shows that I'm not as "inexperienced" as you keep implying.

That's the point I tried to make in my earlier post (the one that seemed to get on your nerves so much)—just because you think something, and you think you're right, doesn't mean that everyone is an idiot for disagreeing. If that's not how you're trying to come off, realize that it's how you are coming off.


Quote:

Regarding my "opinions" if you have something to say about something I said as fact that you can actually muster up an intelligent response to please go for it. Your attempts at just writing off everything I say as just my opinion is puerile nonsense (look it up if you actually have a dictionary, your constant misinterpretations of my comments makes me doubt it). I give you fair warning though, before you get all brave and start saying crazy stuff you should know that when it comes to music production I didn't just ride into town last night on a punkin'.

All I said was that your criticisms of me and the HD 600 have pretty much been your opinions, rather than "facts" as you claim. I argued that this whole discussion is one of opinions, rather than "facts" (which is painfully obvious since no "facts" have been presented). If you disagree, respond with actual facts, instead of making snide comments and childish attempts to insult me.

This is a discussion board, not a flame board. If you can't discuss without resorting to petulance, this isn't the place for you. If you want to actually discuss this topic, then please do so. In a civil manner.

Now, back to the actual discussion.


Quote:

The mid-bass hump doesn't bother me so much but what does get on my nerves is how many 600 fans simply don't hear it.

I said the same thing above. There are literally hundreds of places in other threads where even HD 600 fans readily accept this characteristic of the HD 600.

Quote:

The one that does bug me is the upper mid recession. No one other than you has ever pointed this out that I know of

Lots of people pont this out, too. However, the good news is that with cable upgrades this aspect of the HD 600 sound is largely corrected. You might find that, like Kelly pointed out, with a Cardas cable upgrade many of your criticisms of these headphones are somewhat or even significantly resolved.

 

[kelly]

bifcake

Quote:

Originally posted by bifcake Ok, I'll quantify the risks: One of the major risks with getting a Meta amp is that you won't like it. Since it's not commercially available, there is no way to preview the amp at a store with one's own phones to see how they play. The same holds true for Headroom products, however, they offer a 30 day return policy, which abates this particular risk. If the DYI guys offer the same type of policy on custom built amps, I will be MAJORLY impressed.

Was your case the META42 versus Headroom or the META42 versus all commercial companies? This is the first time you've stated specifically Headroom. Yes, Headroom does have a 30 day return policy. Most manufacturers and their retailers do not.
Quote:

Another risk is the one that I stated previously and that is should these guys decide to move on and no longer produce META amps, there will be no support. Granted, there are schematics available and the parts are readily available. However, for those audiophiles who are not handy with electronic assembly, troubleshooting the META amp would be quite a hassle

For the most part, I believe JMT has moved on to the META42. To use him as an example, I bet he'd be happy to help you out if you had a problem with your CMOY. In fact, he's been most helpful to me in helping me build mine and I'm not even one of his customers. Again, this is presumption--there's no grounds for this. There is certainly no reason to assume that ANY commercial company would give you as good personal service as the guys on this forum.
Quote:

The same holds true for warranty repairs. If META is no longer supported during the warranty period, there is no recourse.

This is basically the same argument. Is this like in grade school when you had to name the fifty states and you said Maryland twice hoping the teacher would count it right? Yes, I, again, believe that the DIY guys would meet or exceed the service of any of the commercial companies. Have you ever seen one complaint to the contrary? Even one?
Quote:

I don't think I'm being unreasonable in identifying these issues as risks.

You were unreasonable when you stated, with no experience or knowledge on the subject or individuals involved, that there were greater risks with a DIY amp than with a commercial amp.
Quote:

The price/performance may negate some of them, or make them manageable, however, they're still there and should be identified when recommending META amps to others.

There's real stress and there's imagined stress. I would certainly acknowledge any shortcomings of the amplifier. Service is simply not one of them.
Quote:

I think it would be simply unfair not to let others know that META amps are produced by guys on this forum, rather than a big company and let the buyers make their own decision with regard to whether or not they think the risks are significant.

It would be very difficult to purchase a META42 otherwise. How would you hope to place an order? Sears catalog? This is not a secret. I'm not sure how you could have felt left out of the loop.

You are now famous. We found your silliness to be worthy of discussion at the Dallas HeadFi meet tonight. You see, Edwin is a violin maker. In his field, it'd be considered most bizarre for someone to think that some Yamaha violin is better than a hand made and customized violin by someone with whom you've built a repoir.

Nick's room was filled with things that were either DIY (META42, PDAC), upgraded by an invididual (Bolder ART DI/O & PSU, Corda Blue) or built by a single ex-DIYer now running a regular company (Channel Islands DAC, Corda HA-1, EAR+, Oris horn speakers)--all fine products, by the way.

This is a silly argument and your position has no merit. I would concede defeat if I were you before you embarass yourself further.

 

[elnero]

bkelly,

That makes more sense, I just found your explanation rather confusing I agree that drivers can compress sound but not in quite the same sense that a compressor in a studio works. I've never heard of a compressor being used to make a recording sound as if it "all happened together (same place and the same time)", but maybe I'm just looking at it the wrong way. An engineer could still compress a recording that was done "live off the floor" where everything did happen in the same place at the same time (i.e. Cowboy Junkies "Trinity Sessions"). The reasons aren't to make it sound like it all happened to in the same space but to make it more listenable on the radio, car stereos and the cheap crap that most people use to listen to music.

No I'm not a guitar player, I was brought up playing Cello and eventually switched to bass guitar. I'm also trained as an audio engineer though I've never worked in a studio environment. I worked in a high-end audio store and with a speaker manufacturer. Although my official title there was sales/marketing I was involved to a limited degree in the design process, built crossovers and helped in the factory.

So yes I have some knowledge in these areas, I will admit it's somewhat limited so I just try to reason things out from what I do know. So if anyone ever feels I'm full of s**t just say so.

Now, I will offer some thoughts on 590/600 debate. Personally I think your all right. Why? Because everyone hears things differently and we all have different preferences in what we like to hear. For example, the place I used to work sold a speaker that was in the $80, 000 CAD range. To alot of people it was the be all and end all of speakers, yet it did absolutely nothing for me. It was impressive in some things that it did but I didn't find it involving in the least. Having not heard the 590's and the 600's only once I can only speculate but I get the impression from all the posts that Sennheiser wanted to make something different from the 600's, it's called covering all bases. The headphone market is far smaller than the speaker market so it looks to me like Sennheiser is trying to be everything to all people which makes sense as a business model. Just a thought.

Phil

 

[Duncan]

Wowzers... this thread has got busy since the last time i looked

Well, HD590 vs HD580/HD600

I've only heard the HD570 & HD590 in a shop environment, and... at that point I could hear no difference between the two (not that that says a lot)... but, with the equipment they shop was using (which eludes me) I was unimpressed... the Grado SR-60s sounded better!!

HD580... Personally, I try and try to love these headphones, but I myself tend to find that they bore me... there is nothing really there to inject life into the music, whether that be because of my amp / source / ears, I do not know... but, I love the HD580s for 1 day out of every month... doesn't say a lot

and... regarding the META42, I have a Meta42 V1.0... and i've already placed my order for version 1.1 / 2.0 (whichever has the bigger difference) when they are in production, and i'm going to go full blown... it'll probably cost $400, but I have 110% faith in the builders / designers of the META that it'll be pleasing to my ears... and I personally have no qualms about having someones DIY project sitting on my desk... if they quit the hobby, and my unit goes wrong ~ I have a wealth of knowledge in the DIY sections both here, and at headwize... I'm sure its not so hard to work out which IC or cap has gone wrong, and replace as neccesary???

Long live DIY!!

 

[scrypt]

Quote:

Originally posted by bkelly As far as the comments about compression go you are absolutely correct in your explanations of the uses for it. However, I will stick with my comment that it is used on the in the mastering process to makle everything sound like it all happened together (same place and the same time) is a qoute from Bob Ludwig who as you may know is arguably the most respected mastering engineer in history.

Did I miss something? Did someone really say your comments on using compression in the mastering process were incorrect? That person should talk to Howie in NYC, the mastering engineer whom everyone here sees eventually (look at the credits on various CDs in your collections, pals) or Stephen Betke of D&M (OK, him, I don't know, but I'll bet he'd agree). I've been in the room with Howie many times (OK, four) and of course final compression adds cohesion, however people describe it. Compression is also used to make a track radio-friendly.

>>This is OT, but on another thread I skimmed, you mentioned that certain Nashville engineers you knew preferred Grados to Sennheisers. Personally, I've never even seen Sennheisers in a studio (Sony V6s and 7506s are what you see in most rooms in NYC), but I've never seen Grados in use here at all. I'm curious -- which models of Grados do your engineer friends prefer and what kind of music are they recording?<<

I love 600s, but I'd never use them for reference the way I use the V6 -- as much as I love 600s, I've never found them to be terribly realistic. 580s and 600s are good for detailed non-fatiguing listening, not "mastering engineering," as Sennheiser ad copy claims.

Then again, I haven't listened to Senns after the Equinox cord graft. I'm still not sure what the Equinox does, exactly, but if someone wishes to defend the 600/Equinox sound, then there's nothing I can say because I haven't heard it.

I remember liking the 590s in the shop for the reasons you mentioned (though I chose the 580s to listen to while copy editing). I can see why a listener might not like them but also why they might be useful to someone who's tracking because the highs are emphasized to a degree and the lows sound important, which is all the guy playing drums in the studio needs to hear. After all, are we really using headphones to convey our sonic aesthetic to an audiophile with 600s and an $800 Sugden? No, we're checking minutiae and want the recording to sound great on cheap stuff as well as good. An audiophile is often an epicurean looking for a particular beautiful sound. Whereas headphones in a studio should sound ugly by comparison -- should reveal mistakes and discrepancies (like my V6s for example). In my experience, one *checks* a mix with phones but doesn't *mix* with them. The beautiful sound is what spills from the monitors.

The first time I heard 580s at home, I nearly screamed at the person who recommended them. They sounded lower-mid-heavy and distorted through the headphone out of my amp. But after burn-in and an additional headphone amp, 580s are what I use for casual listening and to forestall the inevitable: tinitus.

About the META42: I haven't heard it yet. But if by reliability, bifcake means being able to return or service a headphone amp he's had had custom-made, then people like JMT and Tangent have excellent track records. You'd be far safer buying a DIY amp from them than a Grado from some stranger on eBay.

I can also guarantee that JMT's portable CHA47 is quite good for what it is because I happen to own one. I *am* going to get a META42 instead because all DIY amps seem really inexpensive and the META is said to be better. For a home amp, I might get something else (the Sugden, for example). But then, I don't intend to pack a Sugden on my way to the market.

 

[MacDEF]

Quote:

Originally posted by elnero Now, I will offer some thoughts on 590/600 debate. Personally I think your all right. Why? Because everyone hears things differently and we all have different preferences in what we like to hear.

Phil: very well said, and what I've been trying to say from the start. Once you get to headphones of this quality, it comes down to personal preference. Both of these headphones are clearly better than most of the junk out there. Which is "better" depends on the person.


Quote:

I can only speculate but I get the impression from all the posts that Sennheiser wanted to make something different from the 600's, it's called covering all bases. The headphone market is far smaller than the speaker market so it looks to me like Sennheiser is trying to be everything to all people which makes sense as a business model. Just a thought.

And a very good thought. That's also my impression of Sennheiser's approach.

 

[bifcake]

Quote:

Originally posted by kelly bifcake Was your case the META42 versus Headroom or the META42 versus all commercial companies? This is the first time you've stated specifically Headroom. Yes, Headroom does have a 30 day return policy. Most manufacturers and their retailers do not. For the most part, I believe JMT has moved on to the META42. To use him as an example, I bet he'd be happy to help you out if you had a problem with your CMOY. In fact, he's been most helpful to me in helping me build mine and I'm not even one of his customers. Again, this is presumption--there's no grounds for this. There is certainly no reason to assume that ANY commercial company would give you as good personal service as the guys on this forum. You were unreasonable when you stated, with no experience or knowledge on the subject or individuals involved, that there were greater risks with a DIY amp than with a commercial amp. There's real stress and there's imagined stress. I would certainly acknowledge any shortcomings of the amplifier. Service is simply not one of them. It would be very difficult to purchase a META42 otherwise. How would you hope to place an order? Sears catalog? This is not a secret. I'm not sure how you could have felt left out of the loop. You are now famous. We found your silliness to be worthy of discussion at the Dallas HeadFi meet tonight. You see, Edwin is a violin maker. In his field, it'd be considered most bizarre for someone to think that some Yamaha violin is better than a hand made and customized violin by someone with whom you've built a repoir. Nick's room was filled with things that were either DIY (META42, PDAC), upgraded by an invididual (Bolder ART DI/O & PSU, Corda Blue) or built by a single ex-DIYer now running a regular company (Channel Islands DAC, Corda HA-1, EAR+, Oris horn speakers)--all fine products, by the way. This is a silly argument and your position has no merit. I would concede defeat if I were you before you embarass yourself further.

Hmmm... where do I start? You're obviously not getting the point I'm trying to make.

First of all, this is not a contest or a pissing match and I am not looking for you to admit defeat, so you can start breathing easier now.

Now, to clarify things to the Nth degree:

a) There is a risk with any decision or purchase.

b) Whereas manufacturers other than than headroom don't offer return policies, they're available at retail locations where you can sample them.

c) There ARE greater risks with DIY amps for reasons mentioned above. They're manageable, but they're there none the less

d) Another risk that I forgot to mention is that the DIY guys may become victims of their own success. They may simply get overwhelmed by the sheer number of orders and support calls to the point where their turn around time is very, very long.

e) I never said commercially available amps were better than custom built meta. Therefore, your violin analogy is misplaced.

I'm very happy to have become a minor celebrity in Dallas. Alas, I don't cross the Mason-Dixon line. Therefore, all autographs will have to be in electronic form.

I certainly hope that I've made my position abundantly clear. If you're still purplexed with regard to what I'm saying, I'm afraid I will not be able to clarify it any further than I already have.

 

[elnero]

bkelly,

I must apologize, after reading scrypts post the word cohesion really kinda stuck in my head. I went back and re-read your last post and the light came on. I didn't clue in the first time but I see now what you were getting at. By compressing the whole thing you achieve a "dynamic cohesion" to the tracks. I was taking you too literally and thinking you meant that somehow the compressor was miraculously changing the sound of the instruments to match each others acoustical space. I kept thinking well what would you need reverb for then.

Sorry for the confusion,

Phil

 

[bkelly]

Elnero,

No need to apologize. I thought you must have misunderstood something I said and I was baffled by it because it is obvious that you know what you are talking about. I am thrilled you are involved in this thread becasue I need all the support I can get from professionals who are familiar with pro-level recording.
I think other people were thrown off for the same reason as you and thought I was strickly talking about studio compressors which I was but probably just as often I was referring to mechanical compression like in speaker drivers that cannot replicate the entire signal.

Anyhow, please stay involved because your comments are appreciated and I welcome scrutiny by anyone who may be familiar the recording process.



Best
Brian

 

[bkelly]

Duncan,

Where have you been for the last several days? I could have used a few days ago.

Your comments about the 580's describe my feelings for its big brother nearly to a tee, although I wouldn't call them "lifeless", just a tad dull and wimpy.

Keep in touch.





Best
Brian