[ImNegan]

I'm a long time lurker and a post caught my attention so decided to share.

I have the Nighthawk. Ether Flow C and Ether Flow open.

Along with many others. I run all from a Schiit Gumby into various amps like the Jot, Black Widow, Lyr 2, Vali 2, and many others at various price points. One thing in this hobby is price means nothing in terms of how good a headphone is.

The Nighthawk on every system ive tried is superior to both Ether Flows. The Flows have a weird mid dip that gives them a weird colouration. The treble is lean, rough and while improved over the old Ether it still sounds weird. The bass isn't anywhere close to as textured, extended and impactful as the Nighthawk. The Nighthawk is cleaner sounding, Planars suffer from having a bit of a dirty background and the Ether Flow isn't free from this. The Nighthawk resolves low level detail better even on lower end systems and it has a much more pleasing tone.

I think way too many people get influenced by price on this site, just my opinion. I find the Nighthawk, HD650 and HD800 to have the most capable drivers I've heard that don't cost silly money and even then they are all great.


The Ether Flow is wayyyyy too expensive for what it is I can't get through a sign without finding issues where as the Nighthawk I'm just immersed. The Nighthawk isn't to everyone's taste, it does have a mid bass boost but it's tastefully done and the rest of the response is accurate.

 

[MattTCG]

I'm a long time lurker and a post caught my attention so decided to share.

I have the Nighthawk. Ether Flow C and Ether Flow open.

Along with many others. I run all from a Schiit Gumby into various amps like the Jot, Black Widow, Lyr 2, Vali 2, and many others at various price points. One thing in this hobby is price means nothing in terms of how good a headphone is.

The Nighthawk on every system ive tried is superior to both Ether Flows. The Flows have a weird mid dip that gives them a weird colouration. The treble is lean, rough and while improved over the old Ether it still sounds weird. The bass isn't anywhere close to as textured, extended and impactful as the Nighthawk. The Nighthawk is cleaner sounding, Planars suffer from having a bit of a dirty background and the Ether Flow isn't free from this. The Nighthawk resolves low level detail better even on lower end systems and it has a much more pleasing tone.

I think way too many people get influenced by price on this site, just my opinion. I find the Nighthawk, HD650 and HD800 to have the most capable drivers I've heard that don't cost silly money and even then they are all great.


The Ether Flow is wayyyyy too expensive for what it is I can't get through a sign without finding issues where as the Nighthawk I'm just immersed. The Nighthawk isn't to everyone's taste, it does have a mid bass boost but it's tastefully done and the rest of the response is accurate.

 
First, welcome to HF! As for your comparisons, well that's a tough one. Honestly, comparing Nighthawk (nearly closed, dynamic) to Ether Flow (very open planar) is difficult at best. 
 
I have the Flow/open and soon Ether C closed. In no way would I proclaim the NH technically better or musically in every regard to Flow. I enjoy them both depending on my mood and music preference that day. 
 
I don't see that planars in general suffer from "dirty background." I'm not sure how you apply this wholesale to all planars. If you have some measurements supporting this, please feel free to share. If you enjoy dynamics, that's great. But there are some fantastic planars out there of which the Ether Flow is one, IMO. Planars tend to have the perception of being "faster" and the flow technology even increases on this principal of quickness and decay.
 
I love the NH but I wouldn't call it "fast sounding." For some genres of music speed will make less difference in overall enjoyment, but for others it's critical to the experience and enjoyment. 

 

[ImNegan]

I'm not sure if you understand how measurements work? but it's not a frequency response issues it's a byproduct of the technology. If you can't hear the dirty background then don't worry it wouldn't matter to you but sadly to a lot of us it's an annoyance. I've met some people who can't hear it but there's many who can. The Nighthawk is a very fast headphone although ones perception may be muddled due to the mid bass boost. If a headphone has a frequency response you can compare it regardless if it's open or closed. Sure they both have their positive and negatives but a headphone like the Nighthawk that shares traits from open and closed can be compared to anything.



Sadly the Flow's have too many issues for me. The Nighthawk has

- More body to vocals
- Warmer more engaging
- Lower distortion
- Better bass extension, texture and impact
- Smoother and better integrated treble
- Resolves micro details better
- Better driver consistency(Mrspeakers headphones are notorious for having consistency issues although less documented on here for whatever reason)
- Less grain, more liquid sounding
- Closer to the original recording, I believe a few people have also mentioned that on here.

You don't have to agree but it's not really about whether you agree or not it's my experience with them.

 

[MattTCG]

I'm not sure if you understand how measurements work? but it's not a frequency response issues it's a byproduct of the technology. If you can't hear the dirty background then don't worry it wouldn't matter to you but sadly to a lot of us it's an annoyance. I've met some people who can't hear it but there's many who can. The Nighthawk is a very fast headphone although ones perception may be muddled due to the mid bass boost. If a headphone has a frequency response you can compare it regardless if it's open or closed. Sure they both have their positive and negatives but a headphone like the Nighthawk that shares traits from open and closed can be compared to anything.



Sadly the Flow's have too many issues for me. The Nighthawk has

- More body to vocals
- Warmer more engaging
- Lower distortion
- Better bass extension, texture and impact
- Smoother and better integrated treble
- Resolves micro details better
- Better driver consistency(Mrspeakers headphones are notorious for having consistency issues although less documented on here for whatever reason)
- Less grain, more liquid sounding
- Closer to the original recording, I believe a few people have also mentioned that on here.

You don't have to agree but it's not really about whether you agree or not it's my experience with them.

 
I'm not sure if you know how comparisons work. The NH is a "fun" and enjoyable headphone but doesn't have the resolving capacity of some higher end headphones such a Ether Flow. Most dynamics don't have the ability to do ruler flat, linear sub bass frequencies. If you can't hear the difference then you've saved yourself lot's of money and congrats. Listen to a classical piece that is well recorded and compare the sound of violins and strings and brass instruments between the two headphones. I've played a few of those instruments and have a good idea of how they should sound. But again, if you can't hear the difference, that's great for you. 
 
All headphones have weaknesses and strengths. The comparison between the two headphones given the price discrepancy and very different technology doesn't bear a lot of fruit, although it might make interesting conversation. 

 

[ImNegan]

it's not really rocket science. One headphone(NH) is resolving micro details while the other(Flow) is blurry in comparison. The NH is showing cleaner bass while the other is behind. One is showing better accuracy. The 650 also resolve better than the Flow on higher end systems. It's just not a good headphone IMO for the price.

I've also got the HEK, 009, 800S, in the office with me(Many more at home) So have a clear picture of where the fit in. Like I said you don't have to agree but nobody needs to hear it every 5 mins

 

[YtseJamer]

I think way too many people get influenced by price on this site, just my opinion. I find the Nighthawk, HD650 and HD800 to have the most capable drivers I've heard that don't cost silly money and even then they are all great.

The Ether Flow is wayyyyy too expensive for what it is I can't get through a sign without finding issues where as the Nighthawk I'm just immersed. The Nighthawk isn't to everyone's taste, it does have a mid bass boost but it's tastefully done and the rest of the response is accurate.

 
I agree with you about the Ether Flow, they are too expensive and overrated.

 

[Bern2]

   
I'll have to check 'em out at next year's New York spring meetup if someone brings a pair. I'll be particularly interested in hearing how they perform with my extreme EQ presets, versus my M-100s.

While I am not adverse to using EQ...you have a setting for practically every cd you own.  
 
I personally wouldn't encode at 192k mp3....hard drive space is cheap.  My two cents.  Takes a LONG time to rebuild a library.
 
Bern

 

[SomeGuyDude]

  While I am not adverse to using EQ...you have a setting for practically every cd you own.  
 

Yyyyyeah, EQ is okay and all, but you're EQ'ing your entire music collection individually methinks you've quite damn lost the forest for the trees.

 

[bavinck]

it's not really rocket science. One headphone(NH) is resolving micro details while the other(Flow) is blurry in comparison. The NH is showing cleaner bass while the other is behind. One is showing better accuracy. The 650 also resolve better than the Flow on higher end systems. It's just not a good headphone IMO for the price.

I've also got the HEK, 009, 800S, in the office with me(Many more at home) So have a clear picture of where the fit in. Like I said you don't have to agree but nobody needs to hear it every 5 mins

Hard to critique the Mr. Speakers offerings on headfi, lots of fanboys. I had the Ether C. I thought they were nice, but not nearly as good as that Innerfidelity argued. If it was $700 I would have kept it, I didn't think it was worth its price point. The Nighthawk are extremely detailed to my ears, Even more so than more expensive offerings that I have heard, that are much brighter. Seriously underrated headphone.

 

[Light - Man]

Some advice/opinion would be very useful. I have been eyeing up Audioquest NightHawk (which seem to divide opinions) but have just ordered Beyer T1 Gen 2 (for £600 new).
 
It is a bit of an impulse buy but I can cancel order today or return it to Amazon UK if I am not happy with it.
 
Has anyone tried or heard much about the Beyer T1 Gen 2 compared to NightHawks, etc?
 

 

[bavinck]

  Some advice/opinion would be very useful. I have been eyeing up Audioquest NightHawk (which seem to divide opinions) but have just ordered Beyer T1 Gen 2 (for £600 new).
 
It is a bit of an impulse buy but I can cancel order today or return it to Amazon UK if I am not happy with it.
 
Has anyone tried or heard much about the Beyer T1 Gen 2 compared to NightHawks, etc?
 

Very different headphones. T1.2 is open, expensive and much brighter. Very nice sounding headphone (I loved it for metal), with a basically neutralish sound. Nighthawk is much more focused and closed sounding, much warmer. I love it even more.

 

[inthere]

  I'm not sure if you know how comparisons work. The NH is a "fun" and enjoyable headphone but doesn't have the resolving capacity of some higher end headphones such a Ether Flow. Most dynamics don't have the ability to do ruler flat, linear sub bass frequencies. If you can't hear the difference then you've saved yourself lot's of money and congrats. Listen to a classical piece that is well recorded and compare the sound of violins and strings and brass instruments between the two headphones. I've played a few of those instruments and have a good idea of how they should sound. But again, if you can't hear the difference, that's great for you. 
 
All headphones have weaknesses and strengths. The comparison between the two headphones given the price discrepancy and very different technology doesn't bear a lot of fruit, although it might make interesting conversation. 

 
  Comparing how two headphones sound against each other is not the way to go if you want to see how accurate each headphone is-the best way is to compare each headphone with the original recording. One way of doing that is by recording each headphone through a binaural microphone, like Tyll Herstens does, and comparing the recording with the original .wav or .mp3. This will reveal which frequencies are lacking/boosted. I don't know if Tyll actually listens to the recordings or if they're immediately converted into graphs without listening, but I listen to mine.
 
High end headphones commonly  focus on the mid/treble frequencies of classical music and roll off bass frequencies; listening to other forms of music with more prominent bass reveals the roll off a lot easier because you can actually hear the missing weight that was present in the original recording. Most high end headphones sound even clearer than the original recording in the treble/mid regions. However, clearer does not=accurate. If a high end headphone removes bass bloat from recording to get extra clarity, it's actually missing data, because bass bloat was present in the original recording. I posted some files in the sound science forum of three anonymous headphones that clearly showed the difference between the original recording and the headphone recordings. One was bass heavy with rolled off treble, oh hell it was Beats, I'll say that because nobody cares. Another had "high end tuning" that was even more unbalanced than Beats, but with boosted treble and rolled off bass. I won't reveal that headphone because I have friends in the company. The third matched the original recording almost exactly. 

 

[ericp10]

  Some advice/opinion would be very useful. I have been eyeing up Audioquest NightHawk (which seem to divide opinions) but have just ordered Beyer T1 Gen 2 (for £600 new).
 
It is a bit of an impulse buy but I can cancel order today or return it to Amazon UK if I am not happy with it.
 
Has anyone tried or heard much about the Beyer T1 Gen 2 compared to NightHawks, etc?
 

 
 
I own the T1 gen 2 now. I LOVE it. Detailed audiophile sound without the harshness or thinness I've heard the HD800/HD800s has. Now, I haven't heard those HD800 phones, but I did own the HD700 briefly. Decent sounding but harsh highs and thin sounding. So, I will have the NH probably tomorrow and give you an update. I spent $1,099 USD for the T1. I see it is now selling new for for like $879 USD new on amazon. Although I would have loved to have gotten it cheaper, I don't regret the extra $220 I spent on it. I won't send it back (missed the 30-day return by days). My point, I would still get the T1 if you can for under $1K USD. It will be worth it. I hear the T1 gen 1 was closer to the HD800s with the highs and less bass. You will get more than enough bass (not overdown) and non-harsh (but detailed) hight with the gen 2 T1. The best headphone I've ever heard next to my HE-560. Yet, I'm still looking forward to the NH. 

 

[Light - Man]

  Very different headphones. T1.2 is open, expensive and much brighter. Very nice sounding headphone (I loved it for metal), with a basically neutralish sound. Nighthawk is much more focused and closed sounding, much warmer. I love it even more.

Thanks man, I assume you mean expansive (in sound)? but you are right either way 

 
The problem I have is that I have Yamaha MT220 closed cans that some people find too bright but I don't hear it that way.
 
I am pairing with a Mojo and other DAPs and I find the Mojo a little rolled off on both ends, the NH's seem to have a tame top end, so combined with the Mojo - the pairing might be a little lacking for people who like plenty of sparkle (that you can get in the treble).
 
p.s. I like a touch of warmth but overall favor a neutral sound and love the sub bass of the Yam 220 - I don't like mid bass emphasis.  

 

[ImNegan]

Hard to critique the Mr. Speakers offerings on headfi, lots of fanboys. I had the Ether C. I thought they were nice, but not nearly as good as that Innerfidelity argued. If it was $700 I would have kept it, I didn't think it was worth its price point. The Nighthawk are extremely detailed to my ears, Even more so than more expensive offerings that I have heard, that are much brighter. Seriously underrated headphone.

Yeah I see this a lot. I've seen that guy Matt jump on people a lot for people people critiquing Mrspeakers gear makes me wonder if he's a paid reviewer or endorser(Not saying he is but his behaviour is bizarre sometimes)


I really liked the Mad Dog it wasn't that resolving and obviously suffered from the T50RP inherent driver issues but I really enjoyed the tone and musicality of the Dogs. Sadly all of the Ethers have been disappointing although the Ether C(Non Flow) is better IMO than the C Flow in tonal balance. The Ether drivers just don't resolve to well IMO and the tonal balance is wonky. The Nighthawk isn't perfect but it does so much right with few issues. The Nighthawk and 650 are my two fav headphones but it wasn't always that way. I was ignorant and judged the Nighthawk for it's bass hump without appreciating all its other pros. The Nighthawk is so recording and source dependant that I would say it's more revealing of gear and recordings than any headphone I've tried.