Best Studio Headphones

[Beagle]

   
All headphones that try to sound neutral have elevated mids due to how we perceive sound.

 
Our ears are most sensitive to midrange sounds. If a headphone elevates that part of the spectrum, it will make things less "neutral".

 

[TMRaven]

   
All headphones that try to sound neutral have elevated mids due to how we perceive sound. The graph I posted is how we perceive the sound so it should not have a lowered mid. The flatter the line, the more neutral the headphone is. 
 
edit: According to innerfidelity (the top graph), the mids of the Shure SRH 1840 are also much flatter. 
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/ShureSRH1840.pdf
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SennheiserHD800.pdf

 
 
While it is true that our ears are more sensitive to the midrange-- particularly upper midrange around 2-3khz, that only applies for the uncompensated graphs of the headphones (shown as the gray lines below the compensated ones on innerfidelity.)  Tyll has made a note of it several times, that due to the compensation he uses he considers a little dip in the upper midrange on the compensated versions of his graphs as closer to neutral.  The flatter the line the more neutral it is is only true for a pair of speakers measured at x distance in an anechoic chamber.  Measuring headphones is different, and a lot of different measurements have different methodologies and compensations.  Hell we don't even know a particular correct target response to give headphones yet-- hence the research at harman. 

 

[Claritas]

For a closed model, I'm impressed with KRK KNS8400 so long as one replaces the hard, noise-bearing plastic they call a cable. Besides that, it's a little bright which you can mod with foam under the earpads (I didn't need to). The headroom chart seems quite inaccurate to me in this case.

 

[Sinocelt]

  I, and I think a good many others, would love you to do a review of the Sony MDR-7520.  Measurements, (AFAIK nobody has done any independent measurements yet) review, and your personal comparisons to the above mentioned headphones please, Sir!
 
Please....... pretty please?!

 
You can also vote on InnerFidelity's forum. 

 
 
 

  I see...it will one day probably. Especially with how mobile everyone is.

 
Oh yes indeed.
 
 

  All headphones that try to sound neutral have elevated mids due to how we perceive sound. The graph I posted is how we perceive the sound so it should not have a lowered mid. The flatter the line, the more neutral the headphone is. 
 
edit: According to innerfidelity (the top graph), the mids of the Shure SRH 1840 are also much flatter. 
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/ShureSRH1840.pdf
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SennheiserHD800.pdf

 
The bass seems to roll off a little early, but yes, the mids are impressively flat.
 
 

For a closed model, I'm impressed with KRK KNS8400 so long as one replaces the hard, noise-bearing plastic they call a cable. Besides that, it's a little bright which you can mod with foam under the earpads (I didn't need to). The headroom chart seems quite inaccurate to me in this case.

 
Could you compare it to other studio headphones?

 

  Your wait is now over:
 


 
(wallet slayed 

)

 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/FocalSpiritProfessional.pdf

 

[Claritas]

 
Could you compare it to other studio headphones?

 
I wouldn't compare closed and open models. Every few months some new closed model is released, and people say "finally, a closed model that sounds open." That should tell you all you need to know. I don't think it's physically possible, except by using semi-open, which is cheating. KNS8400 sounds like what it is: closed, and yes, it "sounds open for a closed model."
 
As much as I enjoy planars, I wouldn't use one for studio work on a classical record because the sound doesn't come right at you the way it does in dynamic models. The KRKs surpass the resolution of all of the very good open mid-priced models such as HD600, K70x, &c. Because of vague resemblances to K70x, I suspect it's most like K550 (which I'm not buying because it's huge).

 

[Sinocelt]

  I wouldn't compare closed and open models. 

 
All the models I listed in the opening post -- except for the four last, filed under "Mixing/mastering only (open headphones):" -- are closed.

 

[grizzlybeast]

   
You can also vote on InnerFidelity's forum. 

 
 
 
 
Oh yes indeed.
 
 
 
The bass seems to roll off a little early, but yes, the mids are impressively flat.
 
 
 
Could you compare it to other studio headphones?

 
 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/FocalSpiritProfessional.pdf

fwiw he liked the shure 1540 as well.

 

[TMRaven]

In case anybody hasn't already read it, here's the latest IF article about the research at Harman for a new headphone target response curve: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/headphone-target-response-curve-research-update
 
I examined the target curve closely and interpolated its data to innerfidelity measurements, and this is what a headphone measuring very closely to that target curve would look like as per an innerfidelity frequency response measurement (photoshopped depiction-- not 100% accurate)  Yes, I rolled off the response after 10khz and made the channels imbalanced just for realism purposes.
 

 
 
The Harman curve basically calls for a gentle 5db boost from 200hz down to 20hz, a rise in 12-13db to 3khz and then back down 12-13db again at 10khz.
 
The Focal Spirit Professional is very mcuh like this in the bass to middle-mids, but could do without the lower treble null, otherwise is very close.

 

[Sinocelt]

  fwiw he liked the shure 1540 as well.

 
I listed it, but all reports up to now point to clearly emphasized bass.
 
 

  In case anybody hasn't already read it, here's the latest IF article about the research at Harman for a new headphone target response curve: http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/headphone-target-response-curve-research-update
 
I examined the target curve closely and interpolated its data to innerfidelity measurements, and this is what a headphone measuring very closely to that target curve would look like as per an innerfidelity frequency response measurement (photoshopped depiction-- not 100% accurate)
 

 
 
The Harman curve basically calls for a gentle 5db boost from 200hz down to 20hz, a rise in 12-13db to 3khz and then back down 12-13db again at 10khz.
 
The Focal Spirit Professional is very mcuh like this in the bass to middle-mids, but could do without the lower treble null, otherwise is very close.

 

 
Good catch!
 
The NAD HP50 looks close too.

 

[TMRaven]

The HD580 and 600 are very close from mids to treble too (minus the same lower treble null), but they both roll off in the bass.  Based on the Harman curve and speculation, I'd say the NAD, Focal and the two Senns are top choices.  I can personally vouch for the HD600, I think it's the best Sennhesier headphone as far as balance goes.

 

[Claritas]

   
All the models I listed in the opening post -- except for the four last, filed under "Mixing/mastering only (open headphones):" -- are closed.

 
Yes, I know. I've either heard them, heard something very similar (e.g., an earlier model), or haven't heard anything I can expect to be like it (German Maestro, Yamaha). I provided my reasoning in order to explain why I wouldn't use a planar. It's not obvious to me what principle informed the list. I don't see what they have in common except for being closed and being called "studio."
 
After I found something I trust for technical work, I stopped looking, so my main interest is open models. I'm not surprised that KNS8400 is an accurate monitor: KRK makes monitors. But you got me interested again, so I ordered CD900ST which been on my wish list for ages. Thanks.

 

[wahsmoh]

I think the DT880 measures pretty flat with a mild treble peak. Anyone else who can vouch for this? I've heard the HD600 and they sound relatively similar with more polite treble and more mid presence.

 

[grizzlybeast]

do you guys think that flat measurements are the most important?
would the shure 1840 be just as worthy of being scratched off because it has absolutely no bass? where as the 1540 has too much?
^rhetorical

 

[Kierkes]

I've seen certain instances where the 7506 measures flat. And I know from a few frustrating years that I would NEVER trust them for anything but tracking. Assuming the methods of those measurements aren't terrible, it should show that flatness isn't everything.

 

[Sinocelt]

  It's not obvious to me what principle informed the list. I don't see what they have in common except for being closed and being called "studio."

 
Gotta start somewhere. They're all supposed to be neutral enough for recording purposes.
 
 

  After I found something I trust for technical work, I stopped looking, so my main interest is open models. I'm not surprised that KNS8400 is an accurate monitor: KRK makes monitors. 

 
I added it to the list. (Here's a thread on it, too.)
 
 

  But you got me interested again, so I ordered CD900ST which been on my wish list for ages. Thanks.

 
My pleasure. But why the CD900ST? I know it's the standard in Japan, but the MDR-Z1000 is supposed to be Sony's top studio headphones there, much as the MDR-7520 is Sony's top studio headphones in the States (even though the cheaper MDR-7506 is more commonly seen in studios).
 
 

  I've seen certain instances where the 7506 measures flat. And I know from a few frustrating years that I would NEVER trust them for anything but tracking. Assuming the methods of those measurements aren't terrible, it should show that flatness isn't everything.

 
I've seen instances where the 7506 measured flat too. Those measurements, though, show a strong treble spike.
 
 

  The HD580 and 600 are very close from mids to treble too (minus the same lower treble null), but they both roll off in the bass.  Based on the Harman curve and speculation, I'd say the NAD, Focal and the two Senns are top choices.  I can personally vouch for the HD600, I think it's the best Sennhesier headphone as far as balance goes.

 
From everything I read on Gearslutz, though, the HD800 (in spite of its being hot in the treble) is still the best Sennheiser can for mixing/mastering. Do you disagree?
 
 

  I think the DT880 measures pretty flat with a mild treble peak. Anyone else who can vouch for this? I've heard the HD600 and they sound relatively similar with more polite treble and more mid presence.

 
Innerfidelity's measurements: 32 / 250 / 600 ohm
Golden Ear's measurements.
 
 

  do you guys think that flat measurements are the most important?
would the shure 1840 be just as worthy of being scratched off because it has absolutely no bass? where as the 1540 has too much?
^rhetorical

 
I don't have personal experience with either, so I'm obliged to rely on outside sources of information. According to this graph, the SRH 1840 is only -5 dB at 20 Hz. Is your experience different?