Not sure I would say it is a polar opposite, but a DT880 for example, or really any signature that has an emphasis on the upper frequencies which is generally associated with "detail" and "clarity", but that is for certain an oversimplification. I would say that something that is well balanced, but perhaps tuned towards a Harman like curve might be a good alternative that if done well won't sound etched or strident.
I have no arguments that these can be a great chill out presentation, really the only presentation they could be characterized as exhibiting. I just can't help but think for people who use these exclusively they are really, really programming their brain to a very coloured signature, albeit pleasant. That major suck out all around the presence region (if I remember the measurements correctly and the sound) significantly shifts the sonic spectrum. I am surprised that you can go between these and the TH900, but that is probably more of a testament to the TH900 than to the Nightowl. I did own a TH900 and TH610 as well so I have a frame of reference there as well, but sadly from quite some time back now. Miss the TH900.
I switch between headphones as well. I haven't played with the NightOwls for over months. Currently I have mainly listened with the Sony MDR-Z7s and Philips Fidelio X3s.
Since I am addicted again to Baroque music it won't take long before I will move to the NightOws for the rescue. The MDR-Z7s are generally smooth and unfatiguing sounding, but definitely not with Baroque concertos. This peak around 3-4 K is the exact spot where the body of high-pitched violins rest in many recordings. It doesn't take long before the sound gets hard and 'glary'. It's such a shame, because the sense of sound staging with the Z7s is excellent and overall the tone is rich and full-bodied, but those high mids, man! The Fidelio X3 has a dip around that 3-4 k area and is way less fatiguing with those recordings, but it's an open back and there are times I want to keep outside noises out. Looking forward using the Owls again, zero fatigue. I am very careful with them, I want to keep them alive and well for a long time, that's another reason why I haven't used them for a while.
I have no arguments that these can be a great chill out presentation, really the only presentation they could be characterized as exhibiting. I just can't help but think for people who use these exclusively they are really, really programming their brain to a very coloured signature, albeit pleasant.
I am not sure I agree. I had used these quite a bit on business trips. Their more forgiving nature could occasionally be a plus, though I knew I was missing out on a lot of the music based on what I was hearing on my speaker system.
For workouts and doing stuff outdoors I would use bluetooth earbuds. Enjoyable for sure but no way I could ever imagine these programming my brain.
I recently got a set of Aeon 2 Noire headphones and these are better than the NightOwl across the board. The Noire I consider to be solidly in the audiophile camp, but the NightOwls are more upper mid-fi or maybe entry-level audiophile. They were way overpriced at their original retail price, but they seem worthy enough of their closeout price.
I think a factor for many is that the NightOwls can balance out the harm a poor source can do. They are often credited with being “never bright” which tells me they are forgiving of a poor source. I think one will have a better shot of getting great sound by improving their source instead of using forgiving headphones, but that’s not always possible.
I am not sure I agree. I had used these quite a bit on business trips. Their more forgiving nature could occasionally be a plus, though I knew I was missing out on a lot of the music based on what I was hearing on my speaker system.
For workouts and doing stuff outdoors I would use bluetooth earbuds. Enjoyable for sure but no way I could ever imagine these programming my brain.
I recently got a set of Aeon 2 Noire headphones and these are better than the NightOwl across the board. The Noire I consider to be solidly in the audiophile camp, but the NightOwls are more upper mid-fi or maybe entry-level audiophile. They were way overpriced at their original retail price, but they seem worthy enough of their closeout price.
I think a factor for many is that the NightOwls can balance out the harm a poor source can do. They are often credited with being “never bright” which tells me they are forgiving of a poor source. I think one will have a better shot of getting great sound by improving their source instead of using forgiving headphones, but that’s not always possible.
That is good for you for sure, from my perspective anyway. I have encountered some posts here where people think these are the most wonderful sounding, full-on audiophile worthy headphones and that they find themselves only reaching for the Owl. Those are the posters I was referencing, people who may be getting in very deep like that.
It's only on once side of the headband where it connects to the frame that I'm starting to get the decay, all the fake leather bit is starting to peel up. I use them every day though so they've done well I suppose. I hang mine up by the wire too, which is ever so slightly bent out of shape lmao.
That is good for you for sure, from my perspective anyway. I have encountered some posts here where people think these are the most wonderful sounding, full-on audiophile worthy headphones and that they find themselves only reaching for the Owl. Those are the posters I was referencing, people who may be getting in very deep like that.
I know what you mean and you have convinced me that there is some truth to what you are saying, but it is not limited to the Owl. I have attended a few Head-Fi meets where I got the chance to listen to a bunch of different headphone rigs. Very few worked for me.
Ironically it was hearing the original Aeon driven by a Hugo 2 that got me thinking a good headphone rig would be worth pursuing. Each of us hears differently and I’m more sensitive to what happens in the time domain so that’s why that combo worked for me. It probably explains as well why the Owl wasn’t the best match for me. My ears have always had this bias so my choices have typically aligned with that. It’s probably the same for Owl fans that their ears have a particular bias that draws them to what they hear from the Owl. I’m thinking that it will not so much be that the Owl will program their ears to but that their ears are already programmed that way.
I think the state of technology is such that it can only serve up a small slice of the magic of live music. Listeners are thus left with finding which slice they prefer. What’s wonderful is that we are given so many fine options to choose from.
It'll be quite the departure in sound, though, seeing that the NightOwl Carbon and the TH900 Mk2 are almost polar opposites on the signature spectrum. It's almost night and day.
But, yeah, I agree with you - both of these headphones serve a specific purpose. In this case, the NightOwl is perfect for a chill-out session, where you're not there to pick apart the music/track; you're just there to enjoy the grooves.
I don't know if I am in "deep" with the Nightowls, but I am sure I like them. Earlier, I've used Stax electrostats, Sennheiser 600, and AKG 450 and 701. I like the NO better. I selected them, in a shop, among 8-10 pairs of headphones, most of which I did not like, too analytical, hard and harsh for me. I agree, of course, they are a bit dark and forgiving. If I want early morning music, I can use my Fiio EX1 in-ear monitors, bright and airy.
Two things make me hesitate, regarding general statements of what the NO can or cannot do.
1 They sound much better, from a good tube headphone amp - like my Audiotailor Jade OTL amp. Great synnergy.
2 They sound better, the better the source. I don't find them "forgiving" with my best sources, including DSD recordings from my analog rig. Instead, they open up, and I have no problem with the "presence region", e g voices. I would rather say, they make even low level formats and poor recordings listenable, which is a bonus, but not their main point.
I am a happy situation - I can bring the Nightowls along on a three week holiday. Allowing me to get to know them better. I will report here, if I discover something new.
After owning much more expensive headphones like Empyrean and Susvara, I still enjoy Nighthawk and sold the others. Cost just does not justify owning those expensive headphones over over-archiver headphones like the hawks. By the way, the hawks sound beautiful with McIntosh MHA200
Some more testing - 24 - 96 format Yes The Steven Wilson Remixes (download from Qobuz). Quite controversial, has attracted a lot of heat.
1 This sounds good, clearer, than the original LPs I have, in my main listening room. Although I like the LPs better on some accounts (e g atmosphere).
(I am not so keen on digital remixes)
2 In my new Arche home office system - FR2 single driver speakers, Opus DA50a amp - differences between digital version of these Yes albums are super-clear in this rather bright analytical pinpoint system. The Wilson remasters sound a bit too "hyper" and "bright", but often excellent.
3 With the Nightowl, this sense of "hyper", too much scramble, noise, etc - is mainly gone. A great disappearing act!
4 So if it was me, mixing for a studio, I would certainly include this headphone, even if I would use something better, probably more costly, also.
The very good match between the Nightowls and Wilsons "modern" mix of Yes - has made me think.
Could it be, that the owls are better at this - while the hawks will sound better, or at least as good, with the original mix of the Yes albums?
I dont have the hawks here. But this could deserve a test.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
