[kman1211]

My finding with NH and HD650 so far. So after I've read some comments today about owners of NH saying they liked it at frst, but decided to return it after further use, I got curious again and this time decided to try tracks I've never heard before or long forgotten. Long story short my conclusion is this. First and foremost it really depends on the track. Some tracks HD650 do better and on others NH do bettdr. But, generally speakinh, if your thing is listening to instruments without much vocals involved, and like brighter tone of music, then HD650 will do.But if you are into vocals as main stage of the track, then NH will be better. And darker, and slower songs will be much better with NH. It has a bit of romance in its tone and suits late night female vocal listening nice. Hence the name "Night" Hawk I'd like to think. It's also richer and lusher sounding than HD650, but HD650 better with bringing out instruments better and sound a bit more real to me. It's also cleaner sounding.

NH will be more forgiving then HD650. Both don't hurt my ears and are smooth enough, but NH ofcourse smooth'er. Musicality wise HD650 good too, but once you start not paying attention to sound only and start doing other stuff associated with music, i.e, like watching music videos which involves visual as well, you will find NH is just very good with flow and rythem and better than HD650 in musicality. it just "flows" in the backround.

So I take it between the two it really depends on what you listen to and what you look for, but in the end my thing is with vocals mostly as taking main stage, so I prefer NH.

Compare to low budget desktop speakers, I can compare the NH to the sound of Klipsch Promedia 2.1 sound that's still one of the best of all time in budget desktop speakers. But NH ofcourse better in all departments compare to Klipsh. It's just has a bit of tube characteristic in its nature. But it's not syrupy, it's a good tube sound done right.

The HD650 more of Bose companion series 5 speakers, cleaner and brighter than klipsch. But I don't think hd650 better than companion 5.

A lot definitely comes down to the recording, the person's ears, and the system. The thing I found with the Nighthawks like what you say is that they flow and don't distract you, I almost think their best best application is actually movie watching and gaming, they completely immerse you and you completely forget about them. I do prefer them for music to the HD 650's, regardless of complexity and genre, though there are some recordings the HD 650 do sound better on. I view the Nighthawk as pretty much an ultimate all-rounder headphone. I do have headphones I like better for music overall than the Nighthawks, though they are all more expensive than the Nighthawks. I actually like an aggressive or brighter sound for music quite a bit some reason but it also has to be musical and engaging, the problem is finding a headphone with those qualities that don't irritate my ears. I do love the luscious musical smooth sound of the Nighthawks, HD 650, LCD-2, etc. The lush musical sound is what I want my main headphone to be as I can enjoy everything with it.

 

[mks100]

I understand the NightHawk's perceived flaws and can certainly empathize with the detractors on this thread.  
My only gripe is the Cable.  It's a small thing, but I would expect something more functional.  It's a challenge at best to store and unpack the Cable for listening.  It is quite a nuisance and I am very concerned from a durability perspective.
All that being said, I would encourage everyone to spend some quality time with this Headphone.  All enthusiasts are chasing their End Game Headphone.  I'm not saying this is necessarily the Headphone for that individual, but I guarantee it will at least differentiate itself from a sound perspective with anything else you've heard previously.  They are unique. 
The Headphones I own are ultimately a Delivery System for my passion of Music.  The NightHawk is very special in my mind.  I would highly recommend them.

 

[SearchOfSub]

A lot definitely comes down to the recording, the person's ears, and the system. The thing I found with the Nighthawks like what you say is that they flow and don't distract you, I almost think their best best application is actually movie watching and gaming, they completely immerse you and you completely forget about them. I do prefer them for music to the HD 650's, regardless of complexity and genre, though there are some recordings the HD 650 do sound better on. I view the Nighthawk as pretty much an ultimate all-rounder headphone. I do have headphones I like better for music overall than the Nighthawks, though they are all more expensive than the Nighthawks. I actually like an aggressive or brighter sound for music quite a bit some reason but it also has to be musical and engaging, the problem is finding a headphone with those qualities that don't irritate my ears. I do love the luscious musical smooth sound of the Nighthawks, HD 650, LCD-2, etc. The lush musical sound is what I want my main headphone to be as I can enjoy everything with it.

I also want to add that the "Night" Hawks name is somewhat of the sound signature of this headphone. Darker headphone thats smooth, relaxing. Some might get steered away at the word "dark" for some reason, but they shouldn't, it just means it's not a "bright" heasphone that can potentially cause ear fatigue and harshness.

The name "Night" hawk tells me that this headphone is exactly what the designer's wanted it to sound like since it sounds much like the name, again. This then tells me the designer could have made a hd800 or he500 or lcd2 sound sugnature, and have the engineering and knowledge to do so, but preffered this tone. When people mention there is this hump here, and this problem here according to the graphs, it makes it sound like the product is at fault for lack of engineering. If there is a proboem "here", it would be altered by a better "there", so I think it's somewhat odd for people saying it's at "error" here, when the tone is actually exactly what designer intended it to be.

Better word is I guess, "I do not like the tone and tuning of AQ and their sound" or somewhere along that line. Not make it sound like there is engineering problem to any extent.

 

[kman1211]

I also want to add that the "Night" Hawks name is somewhat of the sound signature of this headphone. Darker headphone thats smooth, relaxing. Some might get steered away at the word "dark" for some reason, but they shouldn't, it just means it's not a "bright" heasphone that can potentially cause ear fatigue and harshness.

The name "Night" hawk tells me that this headphone is exactly what the designer's wanted it to sound like since it sounds much like the name, again. This then tells me the designer could have made a hd800 or he500 or lcd2 sound sugnature, and have the engineering and knowledge to do so, but preffered this tone. When people mention there is this hump here, and this problem here according to the graphs, it makes it sound like the product is at fault for lack of engineering. If there is a proboem "here", it would be altered by a better "there", so I think it's somewhat odd for people saying it's at "error" here, when the tone is actually exactly what designer intended it to be.

Better word is I guess, "I do not like the tone and tuning of AQ and their sound" or somewhere along that line. Not make it sound like there is engineering problem to any extent.

I noticed many descriptive terms have a negative connotation, I found what matters more is how well the headphone does these aspects. Say, more of how good of a dark, bright, warm, or cold headphone is it. It really comes down to what people want, what their preferences are, etc. I would personally never keep or sell a headphone based on it's performance on a few select things, I'm looking for the overall picture the headphone presents, never really understood recommending certain headphones for certain genres personally as this can differ greatly from person to person what they feel is the best headphone for certain genres. Maybe it's due to my eclectic taste in music, but I rather like to view it as different perspective of sounds for different experiences, preferences, moods, etc. There are headphones I would like along with the Nighthawks, but honestly the Nighthawks are one of the only headphones I know I can live with exclusively. 
 
Like you said the headphone sounds the way it does because it was designed to sound the way it does. Honestly once headphones get to a certain point it becomes more a lot more about preference than people like to admit, of course there are better headphones but that doesn't necessarily mean one will like it more. I personally dislike a lot of popular headphones, doesn't necessarily mean they are bad or inferior(though I may definitely feel and think it's the case) to the ones I like, it just means I don't like how they present sound.

 

[bracko]

My finding with NH and HD650 so far. So after I've read some comments today about owners of NH saying they liked it at frst, but decided to return it after further use, I got curious again and this time decided to try tracks I've never heard before or long forgotten. Long story short my conclusion is this. First and foremost it really depends on the track. Some tracks HD650 do better and on others NH do bettdr. But, generally speakinh, if your thing is listening to instruments without much vocals involved, and like brighter tone of music, then HD650 will do.But if you are into vocals as main stage of the track, then NH will be better. And darker, and slower songs will be much better with NH. It has a bit of romance in its tone and suits late night female vocal listening nice. Hence the name "Night" Hawk I'd like to think. It's also richer and lusher sounding than HD650, but HD650 better with bringing out instruments better and sound a bit more real to me. It's also cleaner sounding.

NH will be more forgiving then HD650. Both don't hurt my ears and are smooth enough, but NH ofcourse smooth'er. Musicality wise HD650 good too, but once you start not paying attention to sound only and start doing other stuff associated with music, i.e, like watching music videos which involves visual as well, you will find NH is just very good with flow and rythem and better than HD650 in musicality. it just "flows" better in the backround.

So I take it between the two it really depends on what you listen to and what you look for, but in the end my thing is with vocals mostly as taking main stage, so I prefer NH.

Compare to low budget desktop speakers, I can compare the NH to the sound of Klipsch Promedia 2.1 sound that's still one of the best of all time in budget desktop speakers. But NH ofcourse better in all departments compare to Klipsh. It's just has a bit of tube characteristic in its nature. But it's not syrupy, it's a good tube sound done right.

The HD650 more of Bose companion series 5 speakers, cleaner and brighter than klipsch. But I don't think hd650 better than companion 5.

So in the end the name "Night " Hawk makes sense to how it sound and represents the signature. Clearly this isn't an engineering fault for those that may make it sound to be (there are few out there), but it's what the designer intended it to be. I actually enjoy the tone of AQ and their NH.

 
A comparison with HE-500 would be much nicer to read I think 

 
I believe that HD650 is "bright" only when compared cheek-to-cheek with the NH. I perceive HD650 as a headphone with neutral/dark signature. 

 

[novaspyder]

Anyone here have any thoughts on the Nighthawk vs the hifiman 400i? I

 

[Mr Rick]

Anyone here have any thoughts on the Nighthawk vs the hifiman 400i? I bought the 400i on Newegg during the black Friday special but they oversold apparently and they are offering me the nighthawk for the $299 price if I want it, but I've never demoed them and am unfamiliar with the sound. Should I go for it? I listen to a lot of EDM primarily and have fostex Th600 as my primary cans.

$299 for $600 cans?  If you don't like them I'm sure you could sell them used for more then that.

 

[JMCIII]

Anyone here have any thoughts on the Nighthawk vs the hifiman 400i? I bought the 400i on Newegg during the black Friday special but they oversold apparently and they are offering me the nighthawk for the $299 price if I want it, but I've never demoed them and am unfamiliar with the sound. Should I go for it? I listen to a lot of EDM primarily and have fostex Th600 as my primary cans.

 
I've only reviewed the HE500's, but I prefer both the comfort and sonics of the NightHawks. BUT, both are excellent headphones. And as the poster above mentioned, at that price, if you don't like them you can always sell them for what (if not a bit more) than you paid. But I'm willing to bet you'll like them.....

 

[RyanRoloYo]

Anyone here have any thoughts on the Nighthawk vs the hifiman 400i? I bought the 400i on Newegg during the black Friday special but they oversold apparently and they are offering me the nighthawk for the $299 price if I want it, but I've never demoed them and am unfamiliar with the sound. Should I go for it? I listen to a lot of EDM primarily and have fostex Th600 as my primary cans. 

.

 

[SearchOfSub]

$299 for $600 cans?  If you don't like them I'm sure you could sell them used for more then that.

For $299. 00 it is complete steal. All like the sound of NH, even the ones that complain about it because, bottom line - pricing. Even if it went down to $399.00, they would say best headphone.

 

[SearchOfSub]

A comparison with HE-500 would be much nicer to read I think :wink_face:

I believe that HD650 is "bright" only when compared cheek-to-cheek with the NH. I perceive HD650 as a headphone with neutral/dark signature. 

little more resolution and clarity on HE500, but NH still better with overall musicality and flow. Vocals also more airy on NH. Both very good headphones, both about the same class with sound in their own right. Maybe little more edge to NH because vocals done better through NH for me.

 

[bracko]

little more resolution and clarity on HE500, but NH still better with overall musicality and flow. Vocals also more airy on NH. Both very good headphones, both about the same class with sound in their own right. Maybe little more edge to NH because vocals done better through NH for me.

It's hard for me to believe what you say about vocals airiness but it's ok with me if you believe in it

 

[mrscotchguy]

Same thing happened to me.  I accepted the 'upgrade.'  I'm going to try them out for a little bit, and if I don't like them, then I'm just gonna sell them and make a little profit.  

What? Where?! ... HOW?

 

[Hachiko270296]

I really don't know where you are hearing this vocal airiness. The mids are very closed in, like a closed headphone. The HE-500 is one of the most open, speaker like headphones I've heard and it is a cut above the Nighthawk in all aspects. Selling my HE-500 was one of my biggest mistakes as that, along with the HD650 has one of the best responses, microdetail and also one of the best vocal representation.

The HE-500 is way more airy than the HE-500 it's not even a contest.

I think the HE-500, HD650 are both the best headphones outside of the HE1K and Stax and a few others.

 

[kman1211]

I really don't know where you are hearing this vocal airiness. The mids are very closed in, like a closed headphone. The HE-500 is one of the most open, speaker like headphones I've heard and it is a cut above the Nighthawk in all aspects. Selling my HE-500 was one of my biggest mistakes as that, along with the HD650 has one of the best responses, microdetail and also one of the best vocal representation.

The HE-500 is way more airy than the HE-500 it's not even a contest.

I think the HE-500, HD650 are both the best headphones outside of the HE1K and Stax and a few others.

I hear vocal airiness as well in the Nighthawks and I don't find the mids closed in at all. I wonder why you find them so closed in sounding. Do you find pretty much all closed-backs closed in sounding? I can switch around headphones without issue and still find the nighthawks among the best I've tried in terms of vocals and plenty spacious.