[SomeGuyDude]

Perhaps radically different sized pinnae/ear canals are playing a part in this because I don't hear recessed mids and vocals or anything remotely resembling it.

 
You're not expecting the kind of artificially boosted "details" that other headphones sport. It's possible if someone has dulled hearing though, I guess.

 

[Krutsch]

   
The Nighthawk is a semi-closed headphone with boosted bass and recessed mids -> so it's the opposite of spacious (without equalization/crossfeed processing). It severely lacks detail in vocals due to the recessed mids in the presence range. The high freq parts are pretty solid though - some would call this spacious, i personally find the recessed mids suffocate the sound to much. In my opinion these characterics are beyond what can be explained through taste -> maybe this is the reason they now come out with new pads that may reduce the bass boost and bring out the mids a little bit more. I can only recommend these headphones for use with equalization/processing, then they are really good!
 
In a nutshell they are the opposite that sennheiser thrives for with the HD700.

 
I am afraid I agree with much of what you say, here, but "severely lacks detail in vocals..." is stretching it.
 
Your HD-700 comment I agree completely with - very different horses for different courses. I can't listen to classical strings with the NHs, which I think the 700s excel with; conversely, I can't really enjoy classic rock or metal with the 700s, for which the NightHawks are extremely well suited.
 

Perhaps radically different sized pinnae/ear canals are playing a part in this because I don't hear recessed mids and vocals or anything remotely resembling it.

 
You should listen to a set of properly amped HD-650s to hear the sound of exceptional mids and vocals.
 
I love my NightHawks, and I've been favoring them over my other cans, but they are not all-purpose 'phones, IMO.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

Originally Posted by Krutsch /img/forum/go_quote.gif
 
You should listen to a set of properly amped HD-650s to hear the sound of exceptional mids and vocals.
 
I love my NightHawks, and I've been favoring them over my other cans, but they are not all-purpose 'phones, IMO.

 
Sounds like the HD650s, by your claim, would be unbalanced mid-centric if "properly amped" in that case. But I do feel it's worth saying that "properly amped" here really only means "with an amp that has a coloration of the sound I like" because, not to repeat myself, an amplifier doesn't radically change the sound of a headphone as long as it's receiving enough power.

 

[Krutsch]

   
Sounds like the HD650s, by your claim, would be unbalanced mid-centric if "properly amped" in that case. But I do feel it's worth saying that "properly amped" here really only means "with an amp that has a coloration of the sound I like" because, not to repeat myself, an amplifier doesn't radically change the sound of a headphone as long as it's receiving enough power.

 
My experience with the 650s is that they scale non-linearly with more power applied (read: sound better at higher volume); especially with an OTL tube amp with 

a more even power characteristic (read: flatter frequency response) driving cans with a wild impedance curve.
 
That's what I mean by properly amped.
 

NightHawks scale well with volume (read: they sound similar at all volume ranges) and I am impressed that I can turn it up to 11 and still not hear any distortion. Only Grado does low-level listening better, in my experience, with respect to a consistent sound signature, but Grado cannot match the high volume scale (they distort horribly with too much power).

 

[GU1DO]

   
The Nighthawk is a semi-closed headphone with boosted bass and recessed mids -> so it's the opposite of spacious (without equalization/crossfeed processing). It severely lacks detail in vocals due to the recessed mids in the presence range. The high freq parts are pretty solid though - some would call this spacious, i personally find the recessed mids suffocate the sound to much. In my opinion these characterics are beyond what can be explained through taste -> maybe this is the reason they now come out with new pads that may reduce the bass boost and bring out the mids a little bit more. I can only recommend these headphones for use with equalization/processing, then they are really good!
 
In a nutshell they are the opposite that sennheiser thrives for with the HD700.

+1

 

[inthere]

 

Sounds like the HD650s, by your claim, would be unbalanced mid-centric if "properly amped" in that case. But I do feel it's worth saying that "properly amped" here really only means "with an amp that has a coloration of the sound I like" because, not to repeat myself, an amplifier doesn't radically change the sound of a headphone as long as it's receiving enough power.

My experience with the 650s is that they scale non-linearly with more power applied (read: sound better at higher volume); especially with an OTL tube amp with a more even power characteristic (read: flatter frequency response) driving cans with a wild impedance curve.

That's what I mean by properly amped.

NightHawks scale well with volume (read: they sound similar at all volume ranges) and I am impressed that I can turn it up to 11 and still not hear any distortion. Only Grado does low-level listening better, in my experience, with respect to a consistent sound signature, but Grado cannot match the high volume scale (they distort horribly with too much power).

I have the HD650 and I also have over 20 amps and I refuse to believe not a single one of them has enough power for the HD650's. Running them back and forth the Nighthawk to me clearly has more detail than the HD650.

Now if you're saying Ether C or EL-8 or even Alpha Dog I'd say ok but something is going on (maybe with listening level? Mine is quite high) causing a huge disparity in our listening interpretations.

 

[Krutsch]

I have the HD650 and I also have over 20 amps and I refuse to believe not a single one of them has enough power for the HD650's. Running them back and forth the Nighthawk to me clearly has more detail than the HD650.

Now if you're saying Ether C or EL-8 or even Alpha Dog I'd say ok but something is going on (maybe with listening level? Mine is quite high) causing a huge disparity in our listening interpretations.

 
I didn't say either of those things. We were commenting on the mids, not comparing detail, and I simply said "properly amped", not "only my amp works right."
 
The NightHawk thread is so defensive and angry whenever anyone provides a listening impression that is even slightly critical... 

 

[inthere]

I have the HD650 and I also have over 20 amps and I refuse to believe not a single one of them has enough power for the HD650's. Running them back and forth the Nighthawk to me clearly has more detail than the HD650.


Now if you're saying Ether C or EL-8 or even Alpha Dog I'd say ok but something is going on (maybe with listening level? Mine is quite high) causing a huge disparity in our listening interpretations.

I didn't say either of those things. We were commenting on the mids, not comparing detail, and I simply said "properly amped", not "only my amp works right."

The NightHawk thread is so defensive and angry whenever anyone provides a listening impression that is even slightly critical... 

Sorry if I came across that way but I have HD 650s. i keep getting told I should listen to them properly amped, but I'm on my 5th pair of HD 650s with multiple amp options. So my reaction had nothing to do with Nighthawks but the assumption that I've never heard them with a good amp because I've spent tens of thousands on amplification

 

[Greggo]

I think all impression threads stay in defense mode when criticisms are presented, that is fairly normal human behavior. I am a big fan of the Nighthawks and it is frustrating when other folks don't hear and/or appreciate their virtues as much as I do.
 
There are a number of things at play here, the first being the range of subtleties that may or may not be intended in our descriptions. One person might say something sounds a bit on the warm side of neutral, others might say something like bloated bass or rolled off treble, they might be hearing close to the same thing, but after their choice of words and the readers choice to interpret, the range of perception can be dramatically bigger than anything measurable or generally accepted as true.
 
I find some comments to be over the top, beyond the generally acceptable range of accounting for how we all hear things a little different, so I think it is fair to push back.
 
I try to be open and respect every opinion, and I try to be honest about my own bias. While headphones are a relatively new hobby for me, music is not, and after many many years of seeking out music performance, home and pro studios, music appreciation, musicianship (I mostly suck) and home audiophile pursuits, I do have confidence in my grounding on the basics.
 
As open as I try to be, I do have strong suspicions about the general population and even the specialized population here on Head-fi.org. First of all there is the clear difference in playback chain, music genre, and particular music preferences that we use to judge any single component, and that puts a very different, very narrow focus on our criteria and judgement. There is also the notion of presence and detail. This has been an issue in the home speaker audiophile world for a very long time. Things that impress upon first listen tend to not be accurate and "first listen" can last a fairly long time. I am convinced the industry is mostly cheating us with boosted presence regions, saturated/overloaded distortion artifacts and an engineering practice of sacrificing bass (and sometimes treble) to achieve the preferred "first listening preference" that they think will sell headphones the most.
 
The Nighthawk is not a bass-head headphone, so let's make that clear to everyone reading here that has not had a chance to hear a properly broken in example. Depending on any number of source/chain variables, it is almost as fair to say that they are not neutral in the bass either, but by how much over how broad a spectrum of the bass range (25-250 Hertz is my own definition here) is up for debate and how much is dependent on fit, seal, ear shape and angle, air volume, etc... is anyone's guess. My guess is that they are plus 3-4 dB at best in the 60-150 Hz range and that means "just barely noticeable" in my book. They are not anywhere close to the boosted bass I hear in an M100, MDR-1a, or even an ATH-M50x. So for those of us who are sensitive to boosted presence and distorted treble (even pleasant distortions) and just tired of music sounding thin instead of full bodied, the Nighthawk is a most welcome relief. So are things recessed or rolled off or missing or wonky as I move up in frequency to mids and treble? Not for me and not at all... Just because it is not longer boosted, or unusually present or highlighted in some way does not mean it is still not there in much the same way I would expect it in a live performance, in a studio or coming through a set of speakers in a room. It is all still there, I can hear it quite clearly. I can hear the layers of sound and microphone types and techniques in vocal performances, I can hear the room and the instrumental tone and decay, I can hear reverb trails and a sense of space. I have and love the sound of the HD600, but they are not comfortable for me beyond 20-30 minutes of use so I am selling them. They have a nice midrange, but in some cases it can sound a bit veiled, in other cases a bit euphonic, and in most cases I find them lacking at the frequency extremes and some harshness across the band at louder volumes. They don't always have the degree of punch I expect with certain recordings but on the plus side they can be rather polite with recordings that have questionable sonics IMHO. The Nighthawks are most definitely in the same class as far as I am concerned in that they, more so than the vast majority of products in this industry, have attempted to be truthful to the source and intersect the values of a musician, recording professional, music fan and audiophile without selling out to the potential "first impression" weakness of any one of them. To accomplish this, or perhaps just come somewhat close to this, at such a light physical weight and with such a comfortable design, for a first effort from a new brand in this vertical... let's just say I would not want to be a designer/engineer/product manager at any other headphone company walking around knowing that the Nighthawk could get put up in my face if my employer wanted an honest, natural sounding headphone regardless of how many sheeple would throw down their dollars and walk out of the store with them.

 

[MusicalElement]

As much as I love the sound of the Biocellulose drivers, I agree a well driven HD650 has way better mids to the point it's not even close. The 650 also has better detail retirval. Nighthawks have great bass though, some of the best I've heard. Theres a weird mid colouration that makes them sound a bit lean, recessed and not natural when it comes to vocals.

 

[inthere]

Comparing the two again right now and Nighthawk clearly has more detail retrieval to me. 

 
The NightHawk thread is so defensive and angry whenever anyone provides a listening impression that is even slightly critical... 

 
 I know it seems that way, and i got a bit of flak at 1st when I complained about the stock cables, but there's been one guy that's gotten banned at few times in this thread alone and he keeps coming back under different names. So 40+ posts from that guy under multiple names...........I'd like to say that Bracko wasn't the person in question but there IS a guy that keeps posting in this thread after he gets banned. Before he used to troll a lot of different threads but something got to him in the Nighthawk thread and now he jumps right here in on the NH with his 1st forum thread 
 
 You have an honest opinion and nothing wrong with that at all, but my response to you had nothing to do with Nighthawks, it was the horrifying idea that every one of my 20+ amps might possibly be crap! 

 

[Krutsch]

^^ No worries ... it's all good in the Head-Fi-Hood 

 

[SomeGuyDude]

I think this thread definitely has more defensiveness to it than others, and I'm absolutely a guilty party. :/
 
If I had to guess why, it's probably because the NH is kind of a radical departure for headphones, a big difference in philosophy and they do not sound at all like what "audiophile grade" products usually do. As a result, the wide majority of first impressions people pop in with aren't just "these aren't for me" but rather people come in saying they're horribly muddy and flabby, veiled, recessed, etc etc etc. I remember a thread on Reddit was called "a mudslide covered in snake oil". So I know I can be kinda defensive because I think the NH are ******* amazing, but the pushback isn't just that they aren't others' preferences, but rather people saying that they're garbage.
 
At least that's my spitball estimate. I'll try to keep a button on it in the future.

 

[gikigill]

3-4db boost is double the bass. Not the best example of barely noticeable.

 

[SomeGuyDude]

3-4db boost is double the bass. Not the best example of barely noticeable.

 
ehhHhhh, it's a little more complex than that. It's double the intensity, but it's not "twice as loud" to the ear.