Funny enough, I have heard it on the EC and it was fantastic. I prefer it on the BC with SB though I think they have this magical pairing that gives vocals this magical sense of depth and it sounds like the singer is seducing you. There's obviously more technical amps that are about 10x the cost of the Crack but I prefer the tonality of the Crack with the 650. I used to have the LCD-3 and LCD-2 as the vocal king until the BH met my HD650.
Funny enough, I have heard it on the EC and it was fantastic. I prefer it on the BC with SB though I think they have this magical pairing that gives vocals this magical sense of depth and it sounds like the singer is seducing you. There's obviously more technical amps that are about 10x the cost of the Crack but I prefer the tonality of the Crack with the 650. I used to have the LCD-3 and LCD-2 as the vocal king until the BH met my HD650.
True, though how good really does depend on the rest of the system and tubes. I know that feeling as I've gotten it on many headphone including the HD 650, I currently get it on the NH on my system. Know that I do really like the HD 650, but I have a few issues with it, mainly comfort issues and some aural fatigue. Probably some hearing differences(ear shapes and different sensitivities), fit differences from the head shape and size, system differences, etc.
People just don't hear all headphones the same, fit and clamp alone can cause a lot of variation. Bigger deal for closed usually, but there are some very finicky open headphones about fit, I find the various AKGs I have owned particularly sensitive to fit. Headphones are a more personal experience due to the circumvention of body/room acoustics, sound directly going into the ear, the different ear shapes, head shapes, etc. are going to cause more drastic differences in perception than speakers will. FR measurements give a general idea of the sound of the headphone, but it doesn't mean it will be perceived the same from person to person and then there is definite preferences to take into factor. This is why it's important for people to listen to headphones themselves and decide what they want.
Yeah fit on different ears/head is a difference. That's why I referred to the graphs that have surfaced, The only thing that seems inconsistent in the graphs is the bass while the mids have been pretty much the same in every graph. I want to see if Audioquest get these new pads out to see if they bring the mids in line. If they had a fully open design, I think things could be interesting! but the bass would drop off sooner so it's a trade off.
From the time I started reading headphone discussion threads, they all seem to start evolving into a "I'm hearing this, from this or that freq. range . & that works because all music is recorded in the same manner ? Not on this Planet ! That's another one of those goofy things called a "W*%* A** Assumption (You'd think by this Century we'd have abandoned this training to be the village simpleton practice; but at some point we all make a few of
these)!.
Giving specific examples of what you've listened to , to come to your conclusions, tells me way more about
any headphone . I'm not ready to blame freq. difficiencies on any piece of equipment if I'm not even sure
If that isn't just how the recording presents them. Vocals don't get a pass on this either. In terms of capturing
the Timbral accuracy there are many colors on that pallete that can be slightly off depending on the sensitivity
of the Recording Engineer for the Genre of music being recorded . Don't even get me started on how different
equipment (& whether it's a portable or home playback chain) will effect how the "headphones" present
the sound.
John is absolutely right that it's only logical to say the shortened version of "There's no way we can all
agree on just about anything particularly due to the all the variables, unless we resort to "Group Thinking"
(Which probably led to "Lynch Mobs" some.time ago) . So it's also a big "Nope" here !
Howcome whathifi gave it 3 stars for being "too restrained" as well...
Also why do people say it's a "different" headphone than you've experienced.. how can headphone be different than what we previously had by this wide margin as people make it out to be. It's not like NH is made up of materials outside of our planet, brought to earth from planet Neptune or Pluto.
Well, a reason for that may be because Skylar didn't use Mylar and instead used bio-cellulose for their drivers, which is a lot tougher than Mylar and it makes sense that frequencies are going to sound differently using that than normal materials.
Now I don't know if Audioquest is the only headphone company in the world using that material but I do know that Audeze also uses a different material for their drivers than anyone else (I was told by an Audeze rep that it was material NASA used) with the same reasoning: Mylar was basically flimsy and sucked.
Well, a reason for that may be because Skylar didn't use Mylar and instead used bio-cellulose for their drivers, which is a lot tougher than Mylar and it makes sense that frequencies are going to sound differently using that than normal materials.
Now I don't know if Audioquest is the only headphone company in the world using that material but I do know that Audeze also uses a different material for their drivers than anyone else (I was told by an Audeze rep that it was material NASA used) with the same reasoning: Mylar was basically flimsy and sucked.
Fostex has been making biocellulose for a while and various other companies such as Denon and Creative have used their drivers, the Audioquest drivers strike a resemblance with those drivers. Beyerdynamic also uses a different material, from what I gather some sort of plant-based material which does explain why Beyers do sound different than most other dynamics, if only Beyer would fix their tendency towards treble spikes.
Yeah fit on different ears/head is a difference. That's why I referred to the graphs that have surfaced, The only thing that seems inconsistent in the graphs is the bass while the mids have been pretty much the same in every graph. I want to see if Audioquest get these new pads out to see if they bring the mids in line. If they had a fully open design, I think things could be interesting! but the bass would drop off sooner so it's a trade off.
The goldenear graphs show even inonsistency in the mids of the graphs of the headphone, it shows a dip in the 3-5khz region while only a small notch in the 1khz region differing from those that show the large 1khz dip. If the nighthawk does get new pads I will get them, would be nice changing things up.
I took the liberty of making a gif comparing their measurements to AudioQuest's. I stretched their plot to match: http://gph.is/1iuJp4V
Hint: The Golden Ears graph is correct. If you stretch it to match the same plot, it's perfectly within measurement tolerances for different wearing positions.
I took the liberty of making a gif comparing their measurements to AudioQuest's. I stretched their plot to match: http://gph.is/1iuJp4V
Hint: The Golden Ears graph is correct. If you stretch it to match the same plot, it's perfectly within measurement tolerances for different wearing positions.
True, the graph definitely correlates with Audioquests own graphs when the scale is similar. The difference comes down to how the graphs are scaled and they view the target response as something different.
won't work. The DV is made for high impedance. If you want something good for a NH grab yourself a neutral amp like the Vali or a dac like the Dragonfly.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
