[Krutsch]

Day two observations. I wasn't expecting the low distortion to be so readily apparent, but it is. It actually makes it kind of hard to judge how loud they are for some reason. The have the best sound stage of any headphone I have ever heard.
...

That's what keeps me coming back to these... smoothest 'phones I've ever heard, regardless of volume.

 

[earChasm]

At this moment I take the hybrid pads on the Woods over any combination with the Carbon. It’s hard to say why but I really do. With the Woods I find myself doing the Stevie Wonder way more often than with the Carbons but then again, it could be a glitch in the matrix or a first love thingie*...

Nighthawk Wood was my first love
And it will be my last.
Nighthawk of the future
And Nighthawk of the past.

To live without my Nighthawk classic
Would be impossible to do.
In this world of troubles,
My Nighthawk pulls me through....

 

[jaco61]

+1 me too

 

[zachgraz]

The Nighthawk is also my favourite headphone of all times. I do correct the frequency response a bit with EQ but nonetheless there is something in the tonality of the Nighthawk that I find very appealing. I guess mostly it's smoothness + low distortion.

 

[jaco61]

+1

 

[overhaze]

Another question. I know the Nighthawks have a distinctive smell when new but is it normal for them to smell like, bacon? I was expecting something a bit more leathery!

 

[Taylor Smith]

Another question. I know the Nighthawks have a distinctive smell when new but is it normal for them to smell like, bacon? I was expecting something a bit more leathery!

I've owned the original nighthawks twice now. Both were used and my current pair still have the smell they came with, bit I don't notice it anymore when it's on my head. I still smell it when I out it on, take them off, and opening the travel case.

Everyone seems to think they smell differently. I think they smell like a permanent marker but without the harshness haha. The liquid wood cups seem to be untreated on the underside. This smell seems to rise through the driver and grill easily.

 

[frogmeat69]

Another question. I know the Nighthawks have a distinctive smell when new but is it normal for them to smell like, bacon? I was expecting something a bit more leathery!

I think they F'ing stink, but I still love them, lol.

 

[Brahmsian]

I was looking for a pair especially for classical music...I finally tried the nighhawk carbon...Huge crush for the sound with classical.

darker brother to my k702 (with some little damping)

So you don't find them too dark for classical? Along with the hd700, esp950, and he560, the Nighthawk is yet another headphone model that headphone guru Tyll Hertsens doesn't recommend but that others rave about. But I keep hearing they're "too dark." Now to me hd650 has a "dark veil." Does the Nighthawk have anything like its level of darkness but maybe without the "veil"?

Or is it even darker? I have a PX 100-II, which sounds way too dark to me (except I like it for hip-hop, rap, and some pop, which is why I keep it around). If anybody has the PX 100-II, can you say how dark the Nighthawk sounds relative to it? That would give me a point of reference. If they are as dark or darker, then I probably wouldn't like them for classical.

...the original nighthawks...the liquid wood cups seem to be untreated on the underside. This smell seems to rise through the driver and grill easily.

Now that the original Nighthawks are less than half the price of the carbons, the carbons really have to justify their price IMO. What are the main sonic differences between them (if any)? BTW are we sure it's the liquid wood that smells? I had heard it was the biocellulose diaphragm. The originals smell, the carbons don't--is that how it works?

 

[overhaze]

So you don't find them too dark for classical? Along with the hd700, esp950, and he560, the Nighthawk is yet another headphone model that headphone guru Tyll Hertsens doesn't recommend but that others rave about. But I keep hearing they're "too dark." Now to me hd650 has a "dark veil." Does the Nighthawk have anything like its level of darkness but maybe without the "veil"?

Or is it even darker? I have a PX 100-II, which sounds way too dark to me (except I like it for hip-hop, rap, and some pop, which is why I keep it around). If anybody has the PX 100-II, can you say how dark the Nighthawk sounds relative to it? That would give me a point of reference. If they are as dark or darker, then I probably wouldn't like them for classical.



Now that the original Nighthawks are less than half the price of the carbons, the carbons really have to justify their price IMO. What are the main sonic differences between them (if any)? BTW are we sure it's the liquid wood that smells? I had heard it was the biocellulose diaphragm. The originals smell, the carbons don't--is that how it works?

I have the Carbons on my head right now. Like I say to me they smell like bacon!

 

[overhaze]

Yosi Horikawa's Bubbles. One every other pair of headphones I have ever tried I have never been able to identify where the first bouncing ball is meant to be. It always sounded like it was coming from some nebulous point at the centre of my head. On the Nighthawks it clear as day, the ball is bouncing behind and moving away. Wow. Just wow.

 

[Krutsch]

So you don't find them too dark for classical? Along with the hd700, esp950, and he560, the Nighthawk is yet another headphone model that headphone guru Tyll Hertsens doesn't recommend but that others rave about. But I keep hearing they're "too dark." Now to me hd650 has a "dark veil." Does the Nighthawk have anything like its level of darkness but maybe without the "veil"?

Or is it even darker? I have a PX 100-II, which sounds way too dark to me (except I like it for hip-hop, rap, and some pop, which is why I keep it around). If anybody has the PX 100-II, can you say how dark the Nighthawk sounds relative to it? That would give me a point of reference. If they are as dark or darker, then I probably wouldn't like them for classical.

Now that the original Nighthawks are less than half the price of the carbons, the carbons really have to justify their price IMO. What are the main sonic differences between them (if any)? BTW are we sure it's the liquid wood that smells? I had heard it was the biocellulose diaphragm. The originals smell, the carbons don't--is that how it works?

Why don't you read Tyll's review of the NightHawk - he describes the difference in voicing between the two.

On the classical question: if you pad-roll to the Ultra Suede pads, you might really like the NightHawks for classical listening; I know I do.

 

[Badas]

The Nighthawk is also my favourite headphone of all times. I do correct the frequency response a bit with EQ but nonetheless there is something in the tonality of the Nighthawk that I find very appealing. I guess mostly it's smoothness + low distortion.

Yes. I find it hard to go past the Hawks. I like them more than my Ether Flow Open.
I don't care they are dark. I actually think all other HP's are bright.
They are the closet sounding HP's to my speakers or what I hear at concerts.

 

[Taylor Smith]

Now that the original Nighthawks are less than half the price of the carbons, the carbons really have to justify their price IMO. What are the main sonic differences between them (if any)? BTW are we sure it's the liquid wood that smells? I had heard it was the biocellulose diaphragm. The originals smell, the carbons don't--is that how it works?

There shouldn't be any sonic differences between the original Nighthawks and the Carbon's, only the finish, cable, and I believe the pads changed? The originals come with the hybrids as far as I know, and the carbons might come with the all pleather 'boosted' pads. I have all three, including the microsuede, and don't really hear a difference between the hybrids and all boosted. Although, I also covered the inside housing in the cloth like surgical tape, and removed the two foam rings that were used for dampening recently. Found it a lot more pleasing and fixed the reverberation people talk about.

Honestly, it could be something else that is causing the smell. I always thought it was the material. On the inside of the cup housing, there is a fine white dust that you can see on edges, kind of like dust, but of course not. Maybe this fine powder is causing it?

 

[jaco61]

So you don't find them too dark for classical? Along with the hd700, esp950, and he560, the Nighthawk is yet another headphone model that headphone guru Tyll Hertsens doesn't recommend but that others rave about. But I keep hearing they're "too dark." Now to me hd650 has a "dark veil." Does the Nighthawk have anything like its level of darkness but maybe without the "veil"?

Or is it even darker? I have a PX 100-II, which sounds way too dark to me (except I like it for hip-hop, rap, and some pop, which is why I keep it around). If anybody has the PX 100-II, can you say how dark the Nighthawk sounds relative to it? That would give me a point of reference. If they are as dark or darker, then I probably wouldn't like them for classical.

They are how they are built on the dark side. I get used to it very fast, so it doesnt sound dark to me anymore.
Classical pianoconcerts I never heard that full and realistic over the Nighthawk.
Also I heard some symphonies which I never could enjoy so much via the NHs than with others. Its a matter of taste and probably scheduled to everyones windings in the ears. Some classic recordings I dont enjoy via the AKG K702 because some things are goin on my nervs time by time. Brighter phones give a different more edgy and by time more agressive presentation of the same artwork.
So its seems a matter of taste for me and is completely individual which presentation you prefer.