[betula]

   
I would like to emphasize that I respect the fact that others enjoy this headphone. I didn't mean to put people down; only the headphone. I enjoy it too; just only a small percentage of the time. I'm not going to lie about my negative experiences. Much of the time it sounded like the complete opposite of how instruments actually sound. (Not all the time, of course. There were moments when it sounded just fine; usually when the recording was less complex.) I'm not going to be able to express that in a way that doesn't offend anyone. So I apologize for upsetting you, but don't apologize for not liking a headphone as much as others do.
 
 
My primary reference is the sound of real instruments. I have been a musician my entire life. Vocals. Piano. Guitar. Trombone. Orchestras. Wind ensembles. Marching bands. Jazz band. Metal band. You get the picture.
 
Just look at the measurements to see how far away the NightHawk is from neutral.
http://goldenears.net/board/GR_Headphones/5772639
 
Now contrast that against the STAX SR-207, which follows the diffuse field curve almost perfectly. (Oh, and these measurements are with upgraded pads. With the stock pads, that upper frequency peak isn't there.)
http://cdn.head-fi.org/6/6d/6de6f4f3_STAX_SR-207_EP-507_SB2217.png
 
Normally this wouldn't have been an issue, because that can be tweaked with EQ...but even after I equalized it every which way, the NightHawk still sounded totally artificial to me most of the time. It has other problems besides frequency response. And I'm not going to deny that it does have good technical performance in most respects, like low distortion, good detail, transients, imaging, etc.
 
I instantly adapt to headphones. Switching between two headphones within moments or living with a headphone for months: same difference; that is, no difference. (But when I say adapt, I don't mean altering my perception, because it is never altered in my case; I just mean being able to assess sound in general.)
 
Price is not quality. As I mentioned, despite being technically inferior in just about every way, the KTXPRO1 is still more balanced overall. I am used to the sound signature of real life, and it just so happens that the KTXPRO1 is closer to that overall than the HD 800 and NightHawk, but only when we're talking about the stock tuning, not other technical aspects in which it is easily outperformed. Again, that's just without EQ. You can make nearly any headphone sound much closer to neutral if you spend enough time equalizing it.
 
 
I usually want as much accuracy as possible and prefer neutral headphones like the STAX I mentioned above. I hate bright headphones. The brightness of the HD 800 bothers me too. Notice how I frequently talk about EQ. It's because the frequency response issues of headphones can be fixed with EQ, for the most part. And the HD 800 is on a completely different level of technical performance, which is why I said it annihilates the NightHawk. The NightHawk still sounded mostly mediocre to me even after extensive EQ.
 
Also, I theorize that the brightness of the HD 800 is due to dipped mids more than treble peaks.
 
http://cdn.head-fi.org/a/a9/a9650bb7_Sennheiser_HD800_Frequency_Response_HRTF.png
(This graph is mislabeled. Just compare the raw measurements to the green line.)

I also play instruments, but our hearing is obviously very different. (Nothing wrong with that.)
I was never aiming for a neutral headphone. I wanted a musical headphone, that can engage me to the music and I can have fun and relax while listening. For me NH fits that bill perfectly.

Instant adaption to new sound signatures is a rare gift I have not heard about yet. Good for you.
I also know, price does not indicate the real value of a headphone. (Or anything.) It was just a bit surprising, that a $30 headphone comes out as a winner compared to a $1000 one.
You did make me curious though about that Koss, so I might buy one just to hear how it sounds.
Differences make this world beautiful. But at least one thing is common here on Head-Fi in everyone, the love of music!

 

[nwavesailor]

Differences make this world beautiful. But at least one thing is common here on Head-Fi in everyone, the love of music!

 
 Very well said, betula!

 

[Madmollusk]

   
I instantly adapt to headphones. Switching between two headphones within moments or living with a headphone for months: same difference; that is, no difference. (But when I say adapt, I don't mean altering my perception, because it is never altered in my case; I just mean being able to assess sound in general.)
 
 

Music Alchemist, do you still own the Nighthawk? If so, I want to ask you a big favor. Since we all know that you don't like the Nighthawk, I was wondering (for the sake of posterity and science), if you might be willing to put all other headphones aside for three or four days. Why? I'm wondering if deep cerebral acclimation might move your opinion in one direction or another? Now, I have no illusions, you'll probably never like the Nighthawk, but if brain burn-in has any merit, you might acclimate to its sound, at least a little bit. Or, who knows, you might grow to unequivocally hate it. I'm curious. Are you game?

 

[knowhatimean]

 

 
I would like to emphasize that I respect the fact that others enjoy this headphone. I didn't mean to put people down; only the headphone. I enjoy it too; just only a small percentage of the time. I'm not going to lie about my negative experiences. Much of the time it sounded like the complete opposite of how instruments actually sound. (Not all the time, of course. There were moments when it sounded just fine; usually when the recording was less complex.) I'm not going to be able to express that in a way that doesn't offend anyone. So I apologize for upsetting you, but don't apologize for not liking a headphone as much as others

 

 
My primary reference is the sound of real instruments. I have been a musician my entire life. Vocals. Piano. Guitar. Trombone. Orchestras. Wind ensembles. Marching bands. Jazz band. Metal band. You get the picture.
 
Just look at the measurements to see how far away the NightHawk is from neutral.
http://goldenears.net/board/GR_Headphones/5772639
 
Now contrast that against the STAX SR-207, which follows the diffuse field curve almost perfectly. (Oh, and these measurements are with upgraded pads. With the stock pads, that upper frequency peak isn't there.)
http://cdn.head-fi.org/6/6d/6de6f4f3_STAX_SR-207_EP-507_SB2217.png
 
Normally this wouldn't have been an issue, because that can be tweaked with EQ...but even after I equalized it every which way, the NightHawk still sounded totally artificial to me most of the time. It has other problems besides frequency response. And I'm not going to deny that it does have good technical performance in most respects, like low distortion, good detail, transients, imaging, etc.
 
I instantly adapt to headphones. Switching between two headphones within moments or living with a headphone for months: same difference; that is, no difference. (But when I say adapt, I don't mean altering my perception, because it is never altered in my case; I just mean being able to assess sound in general.)
 
Price is not quality. As I mentioned, despite being technically inferior in just about every way, the KTXPRO1 is still more balanced overall. I am used to the sound signature of real life, and it just so happens that the KTXPRO1 is closer to that overall than the HD 800 and NightHawk, but only when we're talking about the stock tuning, not other technical aspects in which it is easily outperformed. Again, that's just without EQ. You can make nearly any headphone sound much closer to neutral if you spend enough time equalizing it.
 

.

 
I usually want as much accuracy as possible and prefer neutral headphones like the STAX I mentioned above. I hate bright headphones. The brightness of the HD 800 bothers me too. Notice how I frequently talk about EQ. It's because the frequency response issues of headphones can be fixed with EQ, for the most part. And the HD 800 is on a completely different level of technical performance, which is why I said it annihilates the NightHawk. The NightHawk still sounded mostly mediocre to me even after extensive EQ.
 
Also, I theorize that the brightness of the HD 800 is due to dipped mids more than treble peaks.
 
http://cdn.head-fi.org/a/a9/a9650bb7_Sennheiser_HD800_Frequency_Response_HRTF.png
(This graph is mislabeled. Just compare the raw measurements to the green line.)
 
Hmmm... I had a feeling I'd probably blocked your postings due to some of the feelings about the HD800 you might have had ! (The NH are vastly better balanced sounding when listening to them through a pair of Audeze Microsuede earpads than through they are through the leather earpads)
 
He,he,he, I don't care how the stock HD800 "measures" it simply lacks enough sense of "Humanity" to be considered a "Reference Headphone" for Acoustical Music listening.. I like to call the HD800 "The Headphone for people who think they understand what Soundstage sounds like. If you're really interested in finding out what's missing, try listening to what an Orchestral Soundstage sounds like in a " Nearfield " listening position between a pair of Magneplanar loudspeakers. I bring this up due to the fact that other Headphones aren't as willing to give up as much Depth & Height info as the Senn, discards as "not important" . They have it backwards, the inner detail is "miles" more attention grabbing than the "Width Card" the HD800 "hangs it's hat" on. (& you can spend less on some headphones that will give you this type of "honest" playback) ("But the Soundstage isn't as wide as it is through the HD800; Well you know what? it may not sound as wide through the Magneplanar loudspeakers; I'll give you 2 guesses as to which of these listening setups I can spend hour after hour listening to)
 
Ok, I'll put you back on my "Blocked List". This way we can both pretend we know what it is we're talking about ! (I do suggest to anyone to spend some time listening to their music through the best music system they can find. It's very easy to lose a true perspective of how things sound (or can sound) if you're only listening through "Cans")
 
Almost forgot to mention : The NightOwls look very interesting to me ! (Though I'm having too good of a time "rediscovering" all the wonderful "Orchestrations" of the various Composer's in my Music Library through my "Maggies" (& my home rig; which is all I'm interested in listening through anymore . Life is too short to trivialize in any way how I want to listen to my music.)

 

[inthere]

  I usually want as much accuracy as possible and prefer neutral headphones like the STAX I mentioned above. I hate bright headphones. The brightness of the HD 800 bothers me too. Notice how I frequently talk about EQ. It's because the frequency response issues of headphones can be fixed with EQ, for the most part. And the HD 800 is on a completely different level of technical performance, which is why I said it annihilates the NightHawk. The NightHawk still sounded mostly mediocre to me even after extensive EQ.
 
Also, I theorize that the brightness of the HD 800 is due to dipped mids more than treble peaks.
 
http://cdn.head-fi.org/a/a9/a9650bb7_Sennheiser_HD800_Frequency_Response_HRTF.png
(This graph is mislabeled. Just compare the raw measurements to the green line.)

 
 I use the Nighthawk professionally. At ADE convention in Amsterdam I've used it 2 years now to demo music with spectacular results; they usually destroy everything else people are listening to. There is of course very little competition at these music conventions as far as headphones go; usually people either have Beats or HD25's, which the Nighthawk has a clear edge. 
 
in 2015 I demoed the Nighthawk and 6 other headphones for the main headphone for a binaural album, and me and 3 other engineers all chose the Nighthawk. The HD800 was one of the headphones that lost out to the Nighthawk. For that binaural album we recorded at 3 different studios and wound up buying 10 Nighthawks.
 
Recently I bought a Focal Utopia and every single person that I let hear both headphones preferred the Nighthawk. I'm talking minimum 11 people, mostly audio engineers as I'm a professional myself. 
 
Just from perspective which is completely different from yours.

 

[YtseJamer]

 
I was never aiming for a neutral headphone. I wanted a musical headphone, that can engage me to the music and I can have fun and relax while listening. For me NH fits that bill perfectly.

 
+1
 
Neutral headphones = boring
Musical headphones = fun

 

[Anatidae]

   
 I use the Nighthawk professionally. At ADE convention in Amsterdam I've used it 2 years now to demo music with spectacular results; they usually destroy everything else people are listening to. There is of course very little competition at these music conventions as far as headphones go; usually people either have Beats or HD25's, which the Nighthawk has a clear edge. 
 
in 2015 I demoed the Nighthawk and 6 other headphones for the main headphone for a binaural album, and me and 3 other engineers all chose the Nighthawk. The HD800 was one of the headphones that lost out to the Nighthawk. For that binaural album we recorded at 3 different studios and wound up buying 10 Nighthawks.
 
Recently I bought a Focal Utopia and every single person that I let hear both headphones preferred the Nighthawk. I'm talking minimum 11 people, mostly audio engineers as I'm a professional myself. 
 
Just from perspective which is completely different from yours.

 
Your posts about using the Nighthawk professionally were actually a big factor in me buying these.
 
As much as I love them for music enjoyment, I'm finding producing / mixing on these a big struggle. Is it just a case of putting the listening hours into them to completely understand their sound signature?

 

[Venture Guy]

I am with you @Anatidae . I was completely unimpressed by the Utopias. I came to the NHs from the PMx2, which is arguably a reference level planar, and I think the NHs are far more musical. The statistics you gathered by running the experiment with your friends are impressive!

 

[inthere]

  Your posts about using the Nighthawk professionally were actually a big factor in me buying these.
 
As much as I love them for music enjoyment, I'm finding producing / mixing on these a big struggle. Is it just a case of putting the listening hours into them to completely understand their sound signature?

 
  Well that would be with any headphone i guess, but I just "got" these immediately, as did a lot of my pro friends.

 

[bugeyed]

  My theory is that Head-Fi has missed a distinction that is well understood in loudspeakers: nearfield vs. farfield. It seems to me that the norm in Head-Fi is to recreate the sound of nearfield monitors -- more or less flat at the ear. I think @SkylarGray wanted to create the experience of listening to speakers in a living room, which means there is a gentle negative slope in FR starting in the Mids. And, I think once you get your brain wrapped around that POV, everything makes sense. The trick is to set your volume level based on the bass amplitude, NOT the vocals or mids. Before I figured this out, I was setting the volume way to high and overdriving my eardrums. Comments?

The AQ rep describes the NH as being more like listening to speakers, so this must be a common thread at AQ.
 
kev

 

[SearchOfSub]

Well, I finished giving the NightHawk a final chance. (This time with the Mojo.)

It basically sounds like the mutant offspring of the HD 800 and V-MODA Crossfade LP. Quite good technical performance, but the frequency response is unbelievably bad...one of the worst I've ever heard.

I know exactly what instruments and voices sound like, and this is so far away from accurate sound I can't stand it. It's beyond my comprehension how anyone could possibly perceive this as anything remotely resembling neutral.

I actually bought the NightHawk because I was hoping it would be something I could comfortably listen to with everything, including bad recordings...but it's not even that.

I enjoy it with some songs, and on occasion it sounds fine by pure luck...but it sounds totally lo-fi far too much of the time.

EQ didn't fix it. (I tracked down settings others used, and spent hours doing it myself.)

The Mojo didn't fix it. (Though I must say, it's an amazing DAC.)

The nasty reflections/resonances are worse than most fully closed-back headphones.

And the softness of certain aspects has become annoying to me.

I was going to write up an in-depth post with all of my impressions, and spent hours taking notes...but it's not even worth bothering with.

About the comparison to the STAX SR-207...there is no comparison. STAX simply sounds like real instruments. (Relatively, not literally.)

And the HD 800 annihilates the NightHawk in every way I can think of. (It has issues too, but not nearly as many. With EQ I wouldn't be too surprised if it became my favorite headphone.)

By the way...the Koss KTXPRO1 is technically inferior to the NightHawk and HD 800, and considerably so...but tonally (without EQ) it's much more balanced and true to life than either of them (though not nearly as balanced as the STAX)...and it only costs $10! I noticed far more of the improvements of the Mojo with the KTXPRO1 than with the NightHawk.

Bye bye, NightHawk. I hope I never have to listen to you again!

lol

 

[SearchOfSub]

Yeah, made me want to go buy some HD800. Oh, wait. Nope. Not at all. Sticking with Nighthawks FTW!!!

lol

 

[EdwardPL]

 I use the Nighthawk professionally. At ADE convention in Amsterdam I've used it 2 years now to demo music with spectacular results; they usually destroy everything else people are listening to. There is of course very little competition at these music conventions as far as headphones go; usually people either have Beats or HD25's, which the Nighthawk has a clear edge. 

in 2015 I demoed the Nighthawk and 6 other headphones for the main headphone for a binaural album, and me and 3 other engineers all chose the Nighthawk. The HD800 was one of the headphones that lost out to the Nighthawk. For that binaural album we recorded at 3 different studios and wound up buying 10 Nighthawks.

Recently I bought a Focal Utopia and every single person that I let hear both headphones preferred the Nighthawk. I'm talking minimum 11 people, mostly audio engineers as I'm a professional myself. 

Just from perspective which is completely different from yours.

Interesting. So the NH is the most neutral headphone you've heard? Since you use that and not any others?

 

[socks mk2]

[redacted]

 

[knowhatimean]

 

 I use the Nighthawk professionally. At ADE convention in Amsterdam I've used it 2 years now to demo music with spectacular results; they usually destroy everything else people are listening to. There is of course very little competition at these music conventions as far as headphones go; usually people either have Beats or HD25's, which the Nighthawk has a clear edge. 

in 2015 I demoed the Nighthawk and 6 other headphones for the main headphone for a binaural album, and me and 3 other engineers all chose the Nighthawk. The HD800 was one of the headphones that lost out to the Nighthawk. For that binaural album we recorded at 3 different studios and wound up buying 10 Nighthawks.

Recently I bought a Focal Utopia and every single person that I let hear both headphones preferred the Nighthawk. I'm talking minimum 11 people, mostly audio engineers as I'm a professional myself. 

Just from perspective which is completely different from yours.

Interesting. So the NH is the most neutral headphone you've heard? Since you use that and not any others?
 
So "Eddie", Did you use "Logic" to pose your question ? Or was it a wild "stab in the dark" at something that wasn't clearly suggested (I would imagine REs in general usually have several different "cans" they will use . I don't recall any talk about his "using" the NH for "all" situations.) How did you add 1 + 1 together & come up with 3 ?
 
Spend a little more time previewing what you plan on posting before hitting that "submit" button ! It will help you immensely ! (It was entertaining though !)