[fiendz]

I have open-back sineDX and, while I do listen to them even in a quiet environment I prefer the isolation of my closed backs (currently my main one is the focal elegia).

 

[kman1211]

Closed-backs can often sound worse but honestly some of the best headphones I’ve heard are closed-backs. I prefer open-back for comfort, breathability, and being able to hear around me. Closed I like at times so I can listen with less external distractions.

 

[Kammerat Rebekka]

Easy. Some folks dig a bit of belly to their well-extended bass and I honestly can’t think of a genuine open-back headphone that has that outside of maybe the K7XX.
Every supposed open headphone with the above mentioned traits that I can think of is semi-open, because in order to get the belly and ‘slam’ you (most oftenly) need to close something off in the cups. That’s why Ollo and ZMF still have to produce a true open-back headphone regardless of what they label them as

 

[ADUHF]

The best sounding closed cans I ever heard were the MrSpeakers E1.1 w/ mods, it has a lot going for it, but when stacked up against my HFM cans - no, plus used prices are steep. Not interested in a small soundstage unless the fidelity is very high, and piles of very short waves bouncing around a closed can pretty much ends the chance of fidelity.

Well that's what damping is for, isn't it?

Some HP mfrs, like the folks at Focal for instance, approach headphone design like a speaker in a tiny room. I believe the acoustic mechanisms are somewhat different in a pair of headphones though, because the latter employs a method of acoustic coupling, while loudspeakers use wave propogation to transmit the sound to our ears. The net result may be essentially the same at the eardrum, but the methods of displacement are somewhat different.

So in a sense, I suppose all frequencies (not just the bass) are a bit "phony" in a pair of headphones vs. a pair of loudspeakers.

 

[bagwell359]

Well that's what damping is for, isn't it?

Damping usually means absorption. Straight absorption makes everything sound dead.

You need: in order: a mix of diffusion; some absorbtion, and a small amount of reflection - if you want to get close to mimicing a room acoustic. You also have to have those 3 factors acting not uniformly at a few frequencies but mixed across a number of frequency ranges. It is fiendishly difficult to imagine it being done in the size of a cup.

That's why open ears are assuming: firm frames, cups, drivers better instantly because there is a little reflection - but most vents, absorption - not much, but a lot of sound is dumping out, same for diffusion - a bit happens, the rest is vented. Also its very easy to get a open headphone to have natural sounding bass. Most closed can designers seem to love to throw an unnatural bass rise in there as a desirable feature. OK, but it doesn't attract me.

Some HP mfrs, like the folks at Focal for instance, approach headphone design like a speaker in a tiny room. I believe the acoustic mechanisms are somewhat different in a pair of headphones though, because the latter employs a method of acoustic coupling, while loudspeakers use wave propogation to transmit the sound to our ears. The net result may be essentially the same at the eardrum, but the methods of displacement are somewhat different.

So in a sense, I suppose all frequencies (not just the bass) are a bit "phony" in a pair of headphones vs. a pair of loudspeakers.

The biggest problem with headphones IMO is early reflections. That kills imaging, specificity. Much worse with closed cans, even when they are designed to solve as much of these problems as possible - and they sure sound that way to me. Speaking of Focal by far the most natural cans they make are open - Clears. Better than Utopias IMO. Haven't heard the Stellia and Elegia yet.

 

[kman1211]

Damping usually means absorption. Straight absorption makes everything sound dead.

You need: in order: a mix of diffusion; some absorbtion, and a small amount of reflection - if you want to get close to mimicing a room acoustic. You also have to have those 3 factors acting not uniformly at a few frequencies but mixed across a number of frequency ranges. It is fiendishly difficult to imagine it being done in the size of a cup.

That's why open ears are assuming: firm frames, cups, drivers better instantly because there is a little reflection - but most vents, absorption - not much, but a lot of sound is dumping out, same for diffusion - a bit happens, the rest is vented. Also its very easy to get a open headphone to have natural sounding bass. Most closed can designers seem to love to throw an unnatural bass rise in there as a desirable feature. OK, but it doesn't attract me.



The biggest problem with headphones IMO is early reflections. That kills imaging, specificity. Much worse with closed cans, even when they are designed to solve as much of these problems as possible - and they sure sound that way to me. Speaking of Focal by far the most natural cans they make are open - Clears. Better than Utopias IMO. Haven't heard the Stellia and Elegia yet.

True you really have to find the right balance with damping, too much and it does sound dead. Though it makes me wonder why my DT 480 has such freakishly good imaging which is a fully closed headphone, it puts most open backs to shame in that aspect, only really find truly comparable imaging in estats of what I've owned. I'm thinking it's because it's a bit different than other dynamics in terms of it's fundamental driver design (very little to no venting on the magnet and the driver membrane is like backwards, dome is inverted and it's attached in inverse). Open almost always has better imaging on most headphones but this is an oddity so trying to figure out why exactly.

 

[ruinedx]

For home use in private is there any reason to use closed back headphones?.

Let's assume ideal open back headphone conditions. What SQ advantages do closed back headphones have. I can't imagine any and yet people buy high end closed back headphones for home use, even when they own other high end open back headphones.

Really I'm just trying to figure out if I need to drop a bit of dough on some closed back headphones.

It really depends WHICH closed back headphones you are talking about

I've heard some really good affordable closed back headphones like the HD25, and the best headphone I've heard to date period is closed back - HD820 - which I like better than similar open backed HD800/HD800S. The HD820 provides a bit of noise isolation and the bass the HD800/HD800S were lacking.

BUT, *most* closed back do sound worse than open back IMO; it seems open back are much easier to design with good sound. So you definitely need to do listening tests with whatever you plan to buy.

I use HD820 in private and the bit of isolation they provide reduces the noise floor by filtering out a bit of the subtle background noise you might hear in an open back, whether its a computer fan, refrigerator compressor, furnace fan, person talking, TV, etc. Its rare that one is able to listen to headphone in a complete 100% noise void. Basically closed back can increase the SNR by filtering out background noise that leaks into open back. The problem is a lot of closed backs do this with great sonic expense, but this is not the case for all of them. The closed back designs also can increase the bass presence that allows music to sound more natural than some open backs that fall off rapidly in the low frequencies, but they must be very carefully designed to avoid sounding muddy/boomy.

 

[bagwell359]

True you really have to find the right balance with damping, too much and it does sound dead. Though it makes me wonder why my DT 480 has such freakishly good imaging which is a fully closed headphone, it puts most open backs to shame in that aspect, only really find truly comparable imaging in estats of what I've owned. I'm thinking it's because it's a bit different than other dynamics in terms of it's fundamental driver design (very little to no venting on the magnet and the driver membrane is like backwards, dome is inverted and it's attached in inverse). Open almost always has better imaging on most headphones but this is an oddity so trying to figure out why exactly.

Heard a lot about the DT-480, never heard one. I know the later models 770 and 990 which are supposed to be different.

What open backs are you talking about. HD-800, HE-500, E2, Ananda...?

 

[kman1211]

Heard a lot about the DT-480, never heard one. I know the later models 770 and 990 which are supposed to be different.

What open backs are you talking about. HD-800, HE-500, E2, Ananda...?

The DT 48 and DT 480 are weird, especially stock, but they sound so good once you do a bit of modding and get a good system behind them, they're very old so some work is needed to bring the most out of them, they're n-shaped and very intimate stock and present sound in this weird way where while you hear everything the background noises in the recording are extremely noticeable and audible. You're basically assaulted with detail on the stock DT 48/480 and you hear details on each sound easier than other headphones. They take a bit of listening to fully grasp their distinct presentation, especially stock. Each image of sound is distinctly separate and defined without other images blending in and the placement is exceptional. They can be modded to present music in a more traditional way with pad rolling but still retain that excellent imaging, detail, and clarity.

Basically any new Beyer, AKG's, Focals, and Senns. When listening to them I get this weird sensation where their sound is very open; more open than most open-backs yet it's physically closed, throws me off quite frequently especially if my ears get stuffy with extended use or if someone is trying to talk to me when I have them on. The DT 770 and DT 990 have good drivers but I don't like their stock tuning, I'll personally only get a DT 770 or DT 990 if I was planning on modding them. Never compared the HD 800/S directly so can't say on that. It's been too long since I heard a HE-500 and haven't heard the Ananda or most new planars.

 

[bagwell359]

The DT 48 and DT 480 are weird, especially stock, but they sound so good once you do a bit of modding and get a good system behind them, they're very old so some work is needed to bring the most out of them, they're n-shaped and very intimate stock and present sound in this weird way where while you hear everything the background noises in the recording are extremely noticeable and audible. You're basically assaulted with detail on the stock DT 48/480 and you hear details on each sound easier than other headphones. They take a bit of listening to fully grasp their distinct presentation, especially stock. Each image of sound is distinctly separate and defined without other images blending in and the placement is exceptional. They can be modded to present music in a more traditional way with pad rolling but still retain that excellent imaging, detail, and clarity. Basically any new Beyer, AKG's, Focals, and Senns.

When listening to them I get this weird sensation where their sound is very open; more open than most open-backs yet it's physically closed, throws me off quite frequently especially if my ears get sweaty or if someone is trying to talk to me when I have them on. The DT 770 and DT 990 have good drivers but I don't like their stock tuning, I'll personally only get a DT 770 or DT 990 if I was planning on modding them. Never compared the HD 800/S directly so can't say on that. It's been too long since I heard a HE-500 and haven't heard the Ananda or most new planars.

So, I know one of those is like 15-20 yrs old and the other one like 25 years old. So with some work you are saying these are basically the best things going - unless the price is up there - way up. I'm a sucker for old stuff that needs careful modding? Sounds like fun, but I'm backed up, maybe mod-late Fall I can try one out.

 

[kman1211]

So, I know one of those is like 15-20 yrs old and the other one like 25 years old. So with some work you are saying these are basically the best things going - unless the price is up there - way up. I'm a sucker for old stuff that needs careful modding? Sounds like fun, but I'm backed up, maybe mod-late Fall I can try one out.

More like 30-40+ years old on the DT 480 as it was made in the 1970's-1980's, maybe some in the 1960's too. The DT 48 can be even older but also newer. The DT 48 is basically the first dynamic driver and high fidelity headphone ever made, basically the headphone that started it all. I honestly got the DT 480 as a curiosity item as I wanted to hear what the first dynamic driver sounded like, it honestly took me by surprised once I spent time with it. They can be had for around $100-200 in my experience. I got both of mine for around $100-130 each in good condition, since it uses the DT 100/150 housing, parts can still be bought for them. It's been a very fun headphone to mod, I can shape it's sound so much. I do find it's easier to get more bass out of the 200 Ohm models, they tend to be bass lean stock. Also feel free to be liberal with sorbothane on them. Also adjusting the magnet can adjust the sound a lot added another level of sound adjustment to them; the magnet is screw on and removable which I haven't seen in any other headphone, if there is a channel imbalance, the magnets may not be tightened equally and need to be adjusted again. if you get one, hope you enjoy the modding experience with them. Of course be a little careful with the internal wires, they may be a little fragile.

 

[zazex]

The main reason I use closed backs is for isolating myself from external
sounds.
Mostly, though, I prefer the sound of open (and semi-open) backs overall.

A couple of closed backs which I think sound very good are the
Shure 1540, and Sony MDR Z7M2. I've heard many others, going
back a few years also, and they generally just sound too closed-in
with weak imaging and soundstage properties.

 

[bagwell359]

Easy. Some folks dig a bit of belly to their well-extended bass and I honestly can’t think of a genuine open-back headphone that has that outside of maybe the K7XX.
Every supposed open headphone with the above mentioned traits that I can think of is semi-open, because in order to get the belly and ‘slam’ you (most oftenly) need to close something off in the cups. That’s why Ollo and ZMF still have to produce a true open-back headphone regardless of what they label them as

How about HFM HE-6, open back and is a legend in the bass. How about the Phi? LCD-4? Many planars go down to 10 hz and below, most people in the middle/high end (extreme bass heads out) of this hobby would tell you open back planars have the best bass - for going deep and fitting into the rest of the sound, and not being being over hyped in the bass.

 

[Kammerat Rebekka]

^All great cans but missing my point. Some folks prefer a bit of belly to their bass aka a hump. No genuine open-back I know of does this.
I was not talking about my preference..merely pointing out why some genuinely would prefer closedback headphones over the open variant

 

[zenstrata]

I use closed, but I live in a building with many other people in rooms around me, closed helps close out the sound from other rooms. engine noise from outside my window, etc. Often I will put on my headphones and go to sleep wearing them for the extra layer of audio isolation they provide. There are closed headphones that offer good sound stage as well. But they can be expensive, such as the Ether C Flow (from Mr Speakers) which is about $1,800. There are also Argon Mk3's (from Mod House Audio) for $250, those are technically semi-open, but are basically closed as they have almost no sound leakage but maintains a very wide sound stage.