[SomeGuyDude]

Nope I don't like boosted anything too be honest. I like linearity which the Nighthawk isn't. The Nighthawk isn't correct. It doesn't sound like how a human voice sounds, it's not spacious, it's not cohesive. Upper mid recession is not natural. Look at the LCD-2 it's linear for most of its response the Nighthawk isn't. It sounds natural, smooth and realistic the Nighthawk doesn't, it sounds too coloured, too much reverb in the cups which makes them sound congested.

I like em, but come on, they are far from natural!

If people want to think this is what natural. I honestly think Audioquests pitch on the website is actually influencing you if you think this is s realistic sounding headphone IMO

 
A lot of this is pure opinion. I believe it sounds EXACTLY as a human voice does, and of course it's not as spacious as open backs, it's not fully open. 
 
Linear doesn't mean natural. If any headphone had a perfectly straight ruler response from top to bottom you wouldn't be able to listen to them. That's why there are various theories about the ideal curve and why ALL headphones have various jagged responses in the upper treble. 

 

[ChookJones1987]

A linear response without elevation is a more natural response. The thing that doesn't seem to go right is the treble, very few headphones do treble in a non problematic way. I think some of the Hifimans like the HE1000 produce a nice treble balance but you can always big pick at it.

The voices all have that Nighthawk colouration and it ruins it for me. If it works for you then great. Just because a headphone isn't open doesn't mean it can give off a sense of space. I feel the pads do them no favours here either. Theres a congestion to the sound that is a combination of things that prevents these from sounding natural and quite suffocating.

Anyhow I suppose we can all put that down to the recording and the headphones are all natural and sweep all that under the carpet....I joke but honestly I was concerned that a lot of major reviewers gave these poor reviews/thoughts but I just bought them anyway and see where they are coming from. I think their strengths are very good but they fall so hard in other areas.

 

[Loquah]

A linear response without elevation is a more natural response. The thing that doesn't seem to go right is the treble, very few headphones do treble in a non problematic way. I think some of the Hifimans like the HE1000 produce a nice treble balance but you can always big pick at it.

The voices all have that Nighthawk colouration and it ruins it for me. If it works for you then great. Just because a headphone isn't open doesn't mean it can give off a sense of space. I feel the pads do them no favours here either. Theres a congestion to the sound that is a combination of things that prevents these from sounding natural and quite suffocating.

Anyhow I suppose we can all put that down to the recording and the headphones are all natural and sweep all that under the carpet....I joke but honestly I was concerned that a lot of major reviewers gave these poor reviews/thoughts but I just bought them anyway and see where they are coming from. I think their strengths are very good but they fall so hard in other areas.

The problem with a linear response is that it doesn't account for the room and head acoustics that occur with live music and speakers. For me, the sound from headphones needs to account for natural acoustic factors that occur in "normal" listening situations. Of course, some people want a headphone to deliberately bypass room acoustics (perhaps not head acoustics though) so a truly linear headphone might be closer to the mark here.

As for unnatural voices, who can say what us the headphone, what is the DAC, what is the amp and what is the recording in what you're hearing? Personally, the Hawks sound very natural to me, unless I've come straight from a very different headphone, but that's true regardless of brands / models - HD800s sound weird after LCD-2s or Beyer T1s.

Finally, I think something is amiss if you're preferring the Vali to the Bottlehead range. There us no contest between the Vali and SEX / Mainline and if you're comparing it to the Crack, the tube choice makes a huge difference. The Vali is great for the price, but the top end is flat and harsh and the image severely limited.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

Arguments aside: you got a link to the bad reviews? I've seen mostly glowing ones.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

As for unnatural voices, who can say what us the headphone, what is the DAC, what is the amp and what is the recording in what you're hearing?

 
This needs more attention. When we talk about recordings sounding "right", this always seems to assume that the recording was perfectly mastered and that it was mixed not only ON 100% linear monitors but that the person doing it didn't have any biases in their own ear.
 
It's one of the problems with ever declaring a headphone "perfect", because it just assumes that whatever's being pumped into them is a perfectly neutral recording and the headphone is the only spot in the chain that imparts any coloration. More than that, it assumes that the studio style of "flat and neutral" is optimal for LISTENING.

 

[ChookJones1987]

The problem with a linear response is that it doesn't account for the room and head acoustics that occur with live music and speakers. For me, the sound from headphones needs to account for natural acoustic factors that occur in "normal" listening situations. Of course, some people want a headphone to deliberately bypass room acoustics (perhaps not head acoustics though) so a truly linear headphone might be closer to the mark here.

As for unnatural voices, who can say what us the headphone, what is the DAC, what is the amp and what is the recording in what you're hearing? Personally, the Hawks sound very natural to me, unless I've come straight from a very different headphone, but that's true regardless of brands / models - HD800s sound weird after LCD-2s or Beyer T1s.

Finally, I think something is amiss if you're preferring the Vali to the Bottlehead range. There us no contest between the Vali and SEX / Mainline and if you're comparing it to the Crack, the tube choice makes a huge difference. The Vali is great for the price, but the top end is flat and harsh and the image severely limited.

When you've owned some of the best amps in the world you tend to not fall for the BS of A is way better than B.
The SEX is decent, just because it is more expensive doesn't mean anything. The Vali competes with a lot of amps, the upper end is a bit smoothed over if anything. I like the Vali because it has something natural sounding about it, it's never harsh, doesn't feel like it's lacking and also doesn't cost silly money!

 

[ChookJones1987]

Arguments aside: you got a link to the bad reviews? I've seen mostly glowing ones.

PM sent.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

PM sent.

 
I read the one thread man, and... to be honest, any time I see someone pulling out charts and going "see these numbers prove what's better" my instinct is to go "okay I'm out."

 

[ChookJones1987]

The charts are not there to prove anything. It's mainly there for people who like that sort of thing. The spider charts are interesting and somethings you should take into account even if you don't like that sort of thing. I personally value the listening impressions more also.

 

[kman1211]

The charts are not there to prove anything. It's mainly there for people who like that sort of thing. The spider charts are interesting and somethings you should take into account even if you don't like that sort of thing. I personally value the listening impressions more also.

Go to innerfidelity and compare the raw measurements, it's in the raw measurements that the Nighthawks are more linear than the LCD-2 Fazor(the older LCD-2's are more linear imo and had better square waves than the fazor ones) and HD 650.

 

[ChookJones1987]

I've seen Tylls graph. They show upper mid recession and also the boost in the mid bass. Tyll doesn't like the Nighthawk much which actually surprised me as he usually loves that type of signature.

 

[kman1211]

  I've seen Tylls graph. They show upper mid recession and also the boost in the mid bass. Tyll doesn't like the Nighthawk much which actually surprised me as he usually loves that type of signature.

I'm talking about the raw measurements(gray ones, which correlate with what Audioquest shows and explains on their website) not the compensated measurements. 

 

[ChookJones1987]

I'll check em out, If that was the case surely they would've gotten a review at least wouldn't they?

 

[kman1211]

  I'll check em out, If that was the case surely they would've gotten a review at least wouldn't they?

Possibly, but I never really agreed with Tyll all that much, I like a lot of headphones he doesn't and was never a big fan of many of the headphones he likes. I do respect his opinion though. This link explains why the Nighthawks are tuned the way they are, whether you agree with it or not is up to you, but Skylar choose it's tuning for a reason. It gives you an idea where he is coming from in designing the headphone, compare the raw measurements here to innerfidelity and they basically are the same.
 
http://personal.audioquest.com/nighthawk-measurements/

 

[ChookJones1987]

When I read it I see a lot of snake oil but I also see his point. Firstly when he mentions flagship headphone, he doesn't go into detail but shows a graph of a something that is exaggerated  and just calls it a flagship headpohne and uses that as a reference to prove how balanced the NH is..
 
No top headphone measures like that so it's not a good reference at all. Yes compared to the graph of that headphone "flagship headphone" the NH measures better. I feel the comparison is poor but his point is valid. I also don't think the Nighthawk as a product performs like he personally say and that his goal is not reached and the Nighthawk is an experiment. 
 
We shall see!