Zanth
SHAman who knew of Head-Fi ten years prior to its existence
- Joined
- Oct 11, 2001
- Posts
- 9,570
- Likes
- 44
This is my first attempt at a review. I will try to follow in the footsteps of Kelly, who always provides a detailed review as well as an entertaining one. And in the tradition of a Kelly review, I offer my disclaimer:
These are my opinions and they are my opinions alone. I don’t pretend to be an expert at any of this; I am simply writing to offer a jumping off point for what can hopefully stem into a fine debate about three headphones that get a lot of attention every few months. I hope you will enjoy these words and perhaps even learn a few things as well.
It is often said that Joe Grado was the master builder and nephew John didn’t quite live up to the engineering talent of his uncle. Most who have heard the HP-1000's, especially the HP-2's and HP-1's, remark that they are leagues above the newer RS-1's, John’s own masterpiece. The build quality of the HP-1000's is certainly there, heavy, SOLID. You put these babies on your head and you KNOW you are feeling something special. Thus far, I have never forgotten they were wrapped around my noggin. They are made of steel, have a beautiful finish and even have small screws to fasten tightly to the pole of the enclosure. The headband is made of a strong leather, padded enough to remain comfortable after long listening sessions. Some are of the opinion that Grados are uncomfortable. I guess, if you don’t like the Grado feel, you won’t really like the HP-1000's, although I do enjoy the fit almost as much as the RS-1's.
The RS-1's are a modern day work of art. The enclosures are a cured mahogany, hand carved and very very light. I can wear them and truly forget I have a pair on my head. I use the flat pads with the RS-1's and this further increases the disappearing sensation. My RS-1's come with a very nice brown leather headband, well padded like the HP-1000's. The leather is softer, mine is a worked suede. The RS-1's come in many colours...my lettering on the clamps is gold, the newer versions are silver. Some headbands are black, some are brown, some are brown suede. Why all the differences? Not sure but it makes for some aesthetic collecting. I didn’t know that different versions existed until I had purchased mine and compared them with the ones from a local shop. Same sound, different appearance. No biggy. The size of the enclosure of the RS-1's is larger than the HP-1000's, by about half an inch. I think that the enclosure of the RS-2's equals the size of the HP-1000's. John tested the different sizes and came to the conclusion that the larger enclosure permits better sound decay, a larger soundstage as well as increases in extension at both ends of the spectrum. I can’t comment as I don’t have a lot of experience with the RS-2s; however, my short A/B did reveal much better decay and a wider soundstage with the RS-1's. The clamp that attaches the headband to the pole of the enclosures is made of a hard plastic and is perpendicular to the cups. The poles are made from a strong metal alloy and similar in strength to those of the HP-1000's. The HP-1000's clamp is parallel to the cups and is made of steel with a screw to fasten the poles. Although the RS-1's lack these screws, the coefficient of friction of the plastic to the metal must be great enough to keep the poles from sliding. I have never had any problems keeping the RS-1's perfectly adjusted to my head size. Unique to the HP-1's are phase switches, offering three positions: +, -, and +/-. I can tell a difference right away from + or - to +/-, but only on some recordings can I hear any difference from + to -. My phones came in the - position and I primarily keep them like that.
The RS-1's come with the UHPLC (ultra-high purity, long crystal) oxygen free copper connector cable which is surrounded by thick and fairly flexible rubber. The rubber surrounding the wires of the HP-1000's is more flexible. There are two flavours of cables for the HP-1000's: the regular cable (no markings) and the Joseph Grado Signature Ultrawide Bandwidth Reference Cable (actually written on the cable). The feel of both HP-1000 cables is the same to me, the only difference is the writing. Audibly there is a difference. I have the HP-1's with the Ref and to me, the bass is more subdued, lacking even, compared to my HP-2's with the regular cable. I have a Headmaster, and although it is not known for being a bass-pimping monster like the Cary or a low-blower like the RKV, it does very well. A/Bing the two HP-1000's with the Headmaster to me, reveals a more impacting bass from the regular cable carrying HP-2’s. I feel that the bass is as deep with both phones; however, it is stronger and more balanced with the regular cable. These quantitative results are slight. The advantage of the super cable over the regular is better extension in the treble, although again slight. The race to get the reference cable can be fierce. I know, I just went through the search. Knowing what I know now, I wouldn’t bother. It surely is not worth a massive mark-up in cost to my ears. Some may have other opinions. Just to make sure I heard this right, I did go through all 3 positions of the switches of the HP-1s. The bass was still stronger with the HP-2's.
In my opinion, I feel John got the cable right. The RS-1 cable is at the very least better constructed, and could actually be of higher grade than the HP-1000's, ref or not. I can’t say for sure as I am unfamiliar with the materials in the HP-1000 cables. Kelly and I have discussed the cables and we have hypothesized that the RS-1 cable may be the cause of the forward nature of John’s babies. Again, I can’t say for sure.
Enough about construction, how about the sound?
The RS-1's take the present Grado sound and perfects it. Some call Grados bright or forward. Some will remark that these signatures are qualities and are translated to accurate or detailed. Whatever one wants to call it, the Grado sound brings you close to the stage. The RS-1's refine this sound, curbing the shrills of the SR series and making the entire musical experience very pleasant to these Canadian ears. I am an amateur jazz musician. I play the alto sax and bass clarinet. One of the most exhilarating feelings for me is to be spouting out some great tunes while a double bass is on my right and a set of drums are popping behind me. With the RS-1's I can attain this listening pleasure like no other headphone I have heard to date. On Chris Potter’s Gratitude, I feel like I can get out of my chair, walk around the room and “experience” walking around Chris while he belts out some highs. This on stage presence is masterfully done. I love it, some hate it. I will never sell my RS-1's expressly for this experience.
The HP-1000's take me to the front of the stage, maybe 3 rows back at most. I have found this to be more ideal for rock, pop and orchestral music. In my minds eye, I can envision the proper room size, like a Carnegie, or the Opéra de la Bastille, which the HP-1000's sound can fill. The extension of the HP-1000's is much greater than the RS-1's, topping it in the airiness category as well. When I say much, I mean much. I would never say the RS-1's have any roll-off, but compared to the HP-1000's I wouldn’t doubt I can get close to some sounds dogs can here
As high as the HP-1000's can reach, they match that in their low frequency extension. Think of Ety bass, hearing every single bass note, right down to the pits of Hell, and now improve it by adding some power behind it. That is what you get with the HP-1000's, better still with the regular cable. The RS-1's beat home with the foot-tapping signature, overly emphasized Grado mid-bass. To a point where the lowest bass notes are lost. It takes a careful listen to find that they are there, but with the HP-1000's it is natural, effortless. This translates to a very flat response with the HP-1000's. I have owned the Etymotic 4P’s for six months and until I heard my HP-2's I would never have called the Ety’s coloured. Now I can detect small colourations. Can someone accurately reproduce a perfectly flat curve? Some say no. If that is true, the HP-1000's will get you as close as possible to the sound of the music as possible. I used the RA-1 and Headmaster to do my A/B and I feel the RA-1 has an even more neutral sound than the Headmaster. I also use Totem Sinew interconnects which I am told are very neutral, bested only by extremely neutral cables like the Cardas Neutral References. Flat as in flat is what I feel I can achieve with this. My bottleneck would be my player, the Shanling CD T-100 as I don’t know how neutral it is compared to other Digital front-ends.
There are times when this neutrality gets on my nerves, I want some warmth, some “musical colouration” if one can call it that - the RS-1's provide. I feel that the HP-1000's paired with the Headmaster in particular, can come across as overly accurate, sacrificing a full-bodied sound. It is as if the HP-1000/Headmaster combo separates the notes so much as to eliminate a coherence in the sound. I’ll try to explain what I mean. Take a glass of Stonyridge Larose ‘87, now take a sip, hold it, swish... okay take a quick and strong inhale....now swallow slowly, and exhale. MMMMmmmm, how did that taste? Did you taste only grapes? Did you taste the steel from the fermentation vats? Did you taste oak as well? Were they all separate tastes in one liquid? Or did you taste some of the best wine in the world...red, full-bodied wine...with a robust flavour, hints of oak, no steel at all. You tasted wine. This wine is greater than the sum of its ingredients. So is music. Some like to hear soundwaves, I like to hear music. I feel that the RS-1's are able to present a full-bodied musical experience like no other phone I have heard to date. I am told by some R10 owners, that I am meant for them. The HP-1000's are more neutral than the R10's but as has been previously stated on these boards, the R10's brings one closer to the music. If you can’t stand the forward sound of the RS-1's, their on-stage feeling will overpower the listener to a point where the synergy of sounds is lost. I realize “musical” and “warm” are subjective, especially the former; however, music is naturally somewhat warm (Stereophile even includes that statement in their definition of warm) and herein lies the one major strength I feel the RS-1's have over the HP-1000's. Joe was after a studio headphone. He did a wonderful job of producing such a beast. In fact, the HP-1000's were never directed at the consumer or audiophile market, instead they were marketed towards professional users. John on the other hand went after the audiophile. And he did a fantastic job. Two different beasts entirely, but both with solid strengths and for the critical listener, two very pleasing sounds.
It took 2 days of careful listening to come to this final conclusion. Many here may completely disagree. I hope we can have a good discussion here about this, but well....here it goes: the RS-1's have more low-level resolution than the HP-1000's. *Okay breathe Zanth...breathe...it’s okay no one will shoot you*
I have had the RS-1's for nearly a year and I have been loving them profusely. This past February I bought my wife a violin and well...the open nature of the RS-1's did not block out the cat-skinning shreaks I was being subjected to. So I bought the Ety 4P’s, picked up the 4S Fix-up cable and went to town listening to these miniature sonic marvels. My ears were opened to a hidden world of sounds I never knew existed on my CD’s. I raved about the Ety’s for this fact. I then got the HP-1000's and raved about their high achievement in the arena of detail. I was content to think RS-1's were not as detailed. Not a huge issue. I still loved the sound, I was never going to abandon them to the Audiogon grave site. Then...in a past thread, I read a remark by our grandiose collector, Hirsch, who stated the RS-1's had more low-level resolution. No way! I thought. And this coming from me, the RS-1 lover! I discussed this point with other Head-fiers and we always stated the same thing, Hirsch was nuts....must be too much of that new drug called R10. I went to work trying to discredit this man, and hopefully force a Head-fi coup. No psychologist, whose expertise is with addiction, should be permitted to own R10's after making such statements. No....in fact...too much of a good thing really leads down a dark path, and Hirsch must be floating hand in hand with Lucy. The R10's would soon be mine
Sadly...or rather, remarkably,
Hirsch was indeed right! At least to my ears! I whipped out some HDCD’s which I know permit a high level of detail coming from strings. I listened to a live version of Hotel California by the Eagles. This track has a 5 minute guitar intro which is mind blowing. I sat there for one hour, changing up between my RS-1's and my HP-1's, both using my pristine flat pads. Sure enough, I could actually hear more detail with the RS-1's than with the HP-1's. It was slight, but definitely there. I could hear the pick just before it hit the strings, then as it made its first strike, the sound was more clear than with the HP-1's. Maybe this could be a result of the forward sound of the treble? How about looking for something lower? I quickly fetched some Chris Potter, some Stravinsky and some Mozart. My goal was to hear the pads of a clarinet hit the wood and peel off. I have heard the fingers hit the keys, but I wanted to go one step further. I tested it with the Ety’s first, with the isolation it is often easier to hear. Sure enough I found what I was looking for on The Mind’s Eye off of Gratitude, Potter was playing the bass clarinet. I put on the HP-1's and listened, could hear it but not as clearly as with the RS-1's. The RS-1's were able to resolve better but I had to listen through the mid-bass. One may conjecture this resulted from an untrained ear, but I feel the main reason was the mid-bass colouration masks a certain amount of detail. Because the HP-1000's offer greater blackness between notes and a flat response, it is easier to pick between the sounds and find what one is looking for. I fall into the music with RS-1's and let everything merge, creating a synthesis that grabs hold of me. I don’t listen as intensly as I do with the HP-1000's or Ety’s. I will start from now on. Trying to be audiophile and music lover in one body. My conclusion still stands right now though, RS-1's offer more low-level resolution than HP-1000's or Ety’s. Ety’s have an advantage with their isolation, and the HP-1000's have an advantage with their flat response and greater blackness. But when it is all said and done, RS-1's come out on top. I now want to compare them to the W2002's and the R10's.
I mentioned I used the flat pads. I purchased my RS-1's from msjjr who I really have to applaud right now. Most flat pads that are acquired, usually from HP-1000 owners, are falling apart. It seems John designed the new pads from a more durable fibre, my flats are more comparable to the bowls than to the comfies. The flats I received with my HP-2's are falling apart. Unusable unless I want to look like I have some serious flee infestation. My flats were and still are in perfect condition and I hope they last for years and years to come. Hands down, the RS-1's NEED the flats. The comfies, even modded with the quarter sized hole cut out, muffle the sound. The flats permit greater treble extension while subduing the bass to a degree that the other two types fall apart on. The bowls are horrible on the RS-1s, the highs are shrill, and the bass is so visceral (and I mean visceral) as to hurt my ear drum after 10 or so minutes. When I first tried my RS-1's I used the bowls. I thought the cans were broken when I listened. My ears were ringing something fierce. What was happening was too much air was being pressurized and forced into my ear canal causing high levels of pressure inside my head. This does not occur with the flats. Because the present line of Grado’s do have a mid-bass colouration, the added air flow from the bass hurts me while using the bowls. This occurs with the SR-60's I own as well. Switching up the flats and bowls with the HP-1000's does not reveal a significant difference. I believe the reason to be a more controlled and flat bass response. No humps, no extra air being sent flying into my ear. The sound is brighter with the flats while using the HP-1000's, so if I want a closer presentation with certain jazz or chambre pieces, I will switch up. I don’t like moving my flats around too much, I want them to last, so for now, they will stay put on my RS-1's. The bowls completely fit around my ear, as opposed to the supra-aural positioning of the flats. This undeniably changes the sound presentation for me. Many have criticized John for getting rid of the flats. Maybe his ears are not as sensitive as mine. Perhaps the bowls would recess the treble on the RS-1's and tighten the bass to an extent that the presentation is more accurate. I can’t say, my ears bleed with the bowls+ RS-1's so to me...he should offer a choice. Since the mahogany box is no longer available, I figure plopping in some flats with the bowls and even the comfies would be a great selling feature. At least to the fellows over here.
I was not really going to comment on the SR series vs. the big boys; I don’t own the 325's and have heard them only briefly on a few occasions. To quickly compare, using the flats again, the SR 60's are rolled off on the highs, are overly bright and have quite the thumping bass which destroys any sense of low low loooooow bass notes. I still love them for a mobile system, and they do offer wonderful sounds, but they are coloured, and are bright, touching on the shrill. What does one expect from $70 cans? A good CHA47 or perhaps a Meta4 can help control those highs. The bass that one does here is excellent with electronic music, it is much tighter than headphones in its class or even high above it. They resolve rather well but really fall short of the RS-1's or the HP-1000's. The treble extension is good but again can be shrill. The build quality is much less as well, vinyl as opposed to leather, plastic as opposed to steel or metal alloy, simple cable, no UHPLC connnector (although the voice coil is), driver matching is much lower than the RS-1's or the HP-1000's and the enclosure is smaller than the HP-1000's. Overall, they are great little brothers but have a long way to go to match the greats. Will I sell my SR-60's? Nope. I like them much more than my Koss KSC 35's and my wife loves them too.
To sum up, I don’t think John is any less of a music lover or any less of a headphone designer than his esteemed uncle Joe. The phones offer equal grades of sound but completely different listening experiences. For those that want the most accurate and neutral headphones out there....get your hands on some HP-1000's. If you want something more intimate and smooth, get the RS-1's. I realize the HP-1000's are really tough to come by, so auditioning really isn’t an option like with the RS-1's; however, Head-fi meets and WOH tours offer a little bit of a demo, enough to get a feel for their signature sounds.
[size=small]Cables:[/size] Signature Reference Cable is not a major improvement over the standard HP-1000 cable, less authority in the low frequencies but does add small amounts of extension in the treble range.
[size=small]Polarity Switches:[/size] The switches do make a significant difference on some recordings, but otherwise I can’t tell the difference.
[size=small]Pads:[/size] HP-1000's are not as affected by the pads as much as the present line of Grados are. I attribute this to the bass colouration of the present line. RS-1's really need the flats to shine. The HP-1000's do very well with either the bowls or flats. Mods to the bowls are available to further tweak the sound.
[size=small]Associated Equipment:[/size]
Shanling CD T-100 with WE 396A's in Quad
Totem Sinew Interconnects
Grado RA-1
Sugden Headmaster
That’s all. Hope you didn’t mind my verbal diarrhea. Cheers!
These are my opinions and they are my opinions alone. I don’t pretend to be an expert at any of this; I am simply writing to offer a jumping off point for what can hopefully stem into a fine debate about three headphones that get a lot of attention every few months. I hope you will enjoy these words and perhaps even learn a few things as well.
It is often said that Joe Grado was the master builder and nephew John didn’t quite live up to the engineering talent of his uncle. Most who have heard the HP-1000's, especially the HP-2's and HP-1's, remark that they are leagues above the newer RS-1's, John’s own masterpiece. The build quality of the HP-1000's is certainly there, heavy, SOLID. You put these babies on your head and you KNOW you are feeling something special. Thus far, I have never forgotten they were wrapped around my noggin. They are made of steel, have a beautiful finish and even have small screws to fasten tightly to the pole of the enclosure. The headband is made of a strong leather, padded enough to remain comfortable after long listening sessions. Some are of the opinion that Grados are uncomfortable. I guess, if you don’t like the Grado feel, you won’t really like the HP-1000's, although I do enjoy the fit almost as much as the RS-1's.
The RS-1's are a modern day work of art. The enclosures are a cured mahogany, hand carved and very very light. I can wear them and truly forget I have a pair on my head. I use the flat pads with the RS-1's and this further increases the disappearing sensation. My RS-1's come with a very nice brown leather headband, well padded like the HP-1000's. The leather is softer, mine is a worked suede. The RS-1's come in many colours...my lettering on the clamps is gold, the newer versions are silver. Some headbands are black, some are brown, some are brown suede. Why all the differences? Not sure but it makes for some aesthetic collecting. I didn’t know that different versions existed until I had purchased mine and compared them with the ones from a local shop. Same sound, different appearance. No biggy. The size of the enclosure of the RS-1's is larger than the HP-1000's, by about half an inch. I think that the enclosure of the RS-2's equals the size of the HP-1000's. John tested the different sizes and came to the conclusion that the larger enclosure permits better sound decay, a larger soundstage as well as increases in extension at both ends of the spectrum. I can’t comment as I don’t have a lot of experience with the RS-2s; however, my short A/B did reveal much better decay and a wider soundstage with the RS-1's. The clamp that attaches the headband to the pole of the enclosures is made of a hard plastic and is perpendicular to the cups. The poles are made from a strong metal alloy and similar in strength to those of the HP-1000's. The HP-1000's clamp is parallel to the cups and is made of steel with a screw to fasten the poles. Although the RS-1's lack these screws, the coefficient of friction of the plastic to the metal must be great enough to keep the poles from sliding. I have never had any problems keeping the RS-1's perfectly adjusted to my head size. Unique to the HP-1's are phase switches, offering three positions: +, -, and +/-. I can tell a difference right away from + or - to +/-, but only on some recordings can I hear any difference from + to -. My phones came in the - position and I primarily keep them like that.
The RS-1's come with the UHPLC (ultra-high purity, long crystal) oxygen free copper connector cable which is surrounded by thick and fairly flexible rubber. The rubber surrounding the wires of the HP-1000's is more flexible. There are two flavours of cables for the HP-1000's: the regular cable (no markings) and the Joseph Grado Signature Ultrawide Bandwidth Reference Cable (actually written on the cable). The feel of both HP-1000 cables is the same to me, the only difference is the writing. Audibly there is a difference. I have the HP-1's with the Ref and to me, the bass is more subdued, lacking even, compared to my HP-2's with the regular cable. I have a Headmaster, and although it is not known for being a bass-pimping monster like the Cary or a low-blower like the RKV, it does very well. A/Bing the two HP-1000's with the Headmaster to me, reveals a more impacting bass from the regular cable carrying HP-2’s. I feel that the bass is as deep with both phones; however, it is stronger and more balanced with the regular cable. These quantitative results are slight. The advantage of the super cable over the regular is better extension in the treble, although again slight. The race to get the reference cable can be fierce. I know, I just went through the search. Knowing what I know now, I wouldn’t bother. It surely is not worth a massive mark-up in cost to my ears. Some may have other opinions. Just to make sure I heard this right, I did go through all 3 positions of the switches of the HP-1s. The bass was still stronger with the HP-2's.
In my opinion, I feel John got the cable right. The RS-1 cable is at the very least better constructed, and could actually be of higher grade than the HP-1000's, ref or not. I can’t say for sure as I am unfamiliar with the materials in the HP-1000 cables. Kelly and I have discussed the cables and we have hypothesized that the RS-1 cable may be the cause of the forward nature of John’s babies. Again, I can’t say for sure.
Enough about construction, how about the sound?
The RS-1's take the present Grado sound and perfects it. Some call Grados bright or forward. Some will remark that these signatures are qualities and are translated to accurate or detailed. Whatever one wants to call it, the Grado sound brings you close to the stage. The RS-1's refine this sound, curbing the shrills of the SR series and making the entire musical experience very pleasant to these Canadian ears. I am an amateur jazz musician. I play the alto sax and bass clarinet. One of the most exhilarating feelings for me is to be spouting out some great tunes while a double bass is on my right and a set of drums are popping behind me. With the RS-1's I can attain this listening pleasure like no other headphone I have heard to date. On Chris Potter’s Gratitude, I feel like I can get out of my chair, walk around the room and “experience” walking around Chris while he belts out some highs. This on stage presence is masterfully done. I love it, some hate it. I will never sell my RS-1's expressly for this experience.
The HP-1000's take me to the front of the stage, maybe 3 rows back at most. I have found this to be more ideal for rock, pop and orchestral music. In my minds eye, I can envision the proper room size, like a Carnegie, or the Opéra de la Bastille, which the HP-1000's sound can fill. The extension of the HP-1000's is much greater than the RS-1's, topping it in the airiness category as well. When I say much, I mean much. I would never say the RS-1's have any roll-off, but compared to the HP-1000's I wouldn’t doubt I can get close to some sounds dogs can here
As high as the HP-1000's can reach, they match that in their low frequency extension. Think of Ety bass, hearing every single bass note, right down to the pits of Hell, and now improve it by adding some power behind it. That is what you get with the HP-1000's, better still with the regular cable. The RS-1's beat home with the foot-tapping signature, overly emphasized Grado mid-bass. To a point where the lowest bass notes are lost. It takes a careful listen to find that they are there, but with the HP-1000's it is natural, effortless. This translates to a very flat response with the HP-1000's. I have owned the Etymotic 4P’s for six months and until I heard my HP-2's I would never have called the Ety’s coloured. Now I can detect small colourations. Can someone accurately reproduce a perfectly flat curve? Some say no. If that is true, the HP-1000's will get you as close as possible to the sound of the music as possible. I used the RA-1 and Headmaster to do my A/B and I feel the RA-1 has an even more neutral sound than the Headmaster. I also use Totem Sinew interconnects which I am told are very neutral, bested only by extremely neutral cables like the Cardas Neutral References. Flat as in flat is what I feel I can achieve with this. My bottleneck would be my player, the Shanling CD T-100 as I don’t know how neutral it is compared to other Digital front-ends.
There are times when this neutrality gets on my nerves, I want some warmth, some “musical colouration” if one can call it that - the RS-1's provide. I feel that the HP-1000's paired with the Headmaster in particular, can come across as overly accurate, sacrificing a full-bodied sound. It is as if the HP-1000/Headmaster combo separates the notes so much as to eliminate a coherence in the sound. I’ll try to explain what I mean. Take a glass of Stonyridge Larose ‘87, now take a sip, hold it, swish... okay take a quick and strong inhale....now swallow slowly, and exhale. MMMMmmmm, how did that taste? Did you taste only grapes? Did you taste the steel from the fermentation vats? Did you taste oak as well? Were they all separate tastes in one liquid? Or did you taste some of the best wine in the world...red, full-bodied wine...with a robust flavour, hints of oak, no steel at all. You tasted wine. This wine is greater than the sum of its ingredients. So is music. Some like to hear soundwaves, I like to hear music. I feel that the RS-1's are able to present a full-bodied musical experience like no other phone I have heard to date. I am told by some R10 owners, that I am meant for them. The HP-1000's are more neutral than the R10's but as has been previously stated on these boards, the R10's brings one closer to the music. If you can’t stand the forward sound of the RS-1's, their on-stage feeling will overpower the listener to a point where the synergy of sounds is lost. I realize “musical” and “warm” are subjective, especially the former; however, music is naturally somewhat warm (Stereophile even includes that statement in their definition of warm) and herein lies the one major strength I feel the RS-1's have over the HP-1000's. Joe was after a studio headphone. He did a wonderful job of producing such a beast. In fact, the HP-1000's were never directed at the consumer or audiophile market, instead they were marketed towards professional users. John on the other hand went after the audiophile. And he did a fantastic job. Two different beasts entirely, but both with solid strengths and for the critical listener, two very pleasing sounds.
It took 2 days of careful listening to come to this final conclusion. Many here may completely disagree. I hope we can have a good discussion here about this, but well....here it goes: the RS-1's have more low-level resolution than the HP-1000's. *Okay breathe Zanth...breathe...it’s okay no one will shoot you*
I have had the RS-1's for nearly a year and I have been loving them profusely. This past February I bought my wife a violin and well...the open nature of the RS-1's did not block out the cat-skinning shreaks I was being subjected to. So I bought the Ety 4P’s, picked up the 4S Fix-up cable and went to town listening to these miniature sonic marvels. My ears were opened to a hidden world of sounds I never knew existed on my CD’s. I raved about the Ety’s for this fact. I then got the HP-1000's and raved about their high achievement in the arena of detail. I was content to think RS-1's were not as detailed. Not a huge issue. I still loved the sound, I was never going to abandon them to the Audiogon grave site. Then...in a past thread, I read a remark by our grandiose collector, Hirsch, who stated the RS-1's had more low-level resolution. No way! I thought. And this coming from me, the RS-1 lover! I discussed this point with other Head-fiers and we always stated the same thing, Hirsch was nuts....must be too much of that new drug called R10. I went to work trying to discredit this man, and hopefully force a Head-fi coup. No psychologist, whose expertise is with addiction, should be permitted to own R10's after making such statements. No....in fact...too much of a good thing really leads down a dark path, and Hirsch must be floating hand in hand with Lucy. The R10's would soon be mine
Sadly...or rather, remarkably,
Hirsch was indeed right! At least to my ears! I whipped out some HDCD’s which I know permit a high level of detail coming from strings. I listened to a live version of Hotel California by the Eagles. This track has a 5 minute guitar intro which is mind blowing. I sat there for one hour, changing up between my RS-1's and my HP-1's, both using my pristine flat pads. Sure enough, I could actually hear more detail with the RS-1's than with the HP-1's. It was slight, but definitely there. I could hear the pick just before it hit the strings, then as it made its first strike, the sound was more clear than with the HP-1's. Maybe this could be a result of the forward sound of the treble? How about looking for something lower? I quickly fetched some Chris Potter, some Stravinsky and some Mozart. My goal was to hear the pads of a clarinet hit the wood and peel off. I have heard the fingers hit the keys, but I wanted to go one step further. I tested it with the Ety’s first, with the isolation it is often easier to hear. Sure enough I found what I was looking for on The Mind’s Eye off of Gratitude, Potter was playing the bass clarinet. I put on the HP-1's and listened, could hear it but not as clearly as with the RS-1's. The RS-1's were able to resolve better but I had to listen through the mid-bass. One may conjecture this resulted from an untrained ear, but I feel the main reason was the mid-bass colouration masks a certain amount of detail. Because the HP-1000's offer greater blackness between notes and a flat response, it is easier to pick between the sounds and find what one is looking for. I fall into the music with RS-1's and let everything merge, creating a synthesis that grabs hold of me. I don’t listen as intensly as I do with the HP-1000's or Ety’s. I will start from now on. Trying to be audiophile and music lover in one body. My conclusion still stands right now though, RS-1's offer more low-level resolution than HP-1000's or Ety’s. Ety’s have an advantage with their isolation, and the HP-1000's have an advantage with their flat response and greater blackness. But when it is all said and done, RS-1's come out on top. I now want to compare them to the W2002's and the R10's.
I mentioned I used the flat pads. I purchased my RS-1's from msjjr who I really have to applaud right now. Most flat pads that are acquired, usually from HP-1000 owners, are falling apart. It seems John designed the new pads from a more durable fibre, my flats are more comparable to the bowls than to the comfies. The flats I received with my HP-2's are falling apart. Unusable unless I want to look like I have some serious flee infestation. My flats were and still are in perfect condition and I hope they last for years and years to come. Hands down, the RS-1's NEED the flats. The comfies, even modded with the quarter sized hole cut out, muffle the sound. The flats permit greater treble extension while subduing the bass to a degree that the other two types fall apart on. The bowls are horrible on the RS-1s, the highs are shrill, and the bass is so visceral (and I mean visceral) as to hurt my ear drum after 10 or so minutes. When I first tried my RS-1's I used the bowls. I thought the cans were broken when I listened. My ears were ringing something fierce. What was happening was too much air was being pressurized and forced into my ear canal causing high levels of pressure inside my head. This does not occur with the flats. Because the present line of Grado’s do have a mid-bass colouration, the added air flow from the bass hurts me while using the bowls. This occurs with the SR-60's I own as well. Switching up the flats and bowls with the HP-1000's does not reveal a significant difference. I believe the reason to be a more controlled and flat bass response. No humps, no extra air being sent flying into my ear. The sound is brighter with the flats while using the HP-1000's, so if I want a closer presentation with certain jazz or chambre pieces, I will switch up. I don’t like moving my flats around too much, I want them to last, so for now, they will stay put on my RS-1's. The bowls completely fit around my ear, as opposed to the supra-aural positioning of the flats. This undeniably changes the sound presentation for me. Many have criticized John for getting rid of the flats. Maybe his ears are not as sensitive as mine. Perhaps the bowls would recess the treble on the RS-1's and tighten the bass to an extent that the presentation is more accurate. I can’t say, my ears bleed with the bowls+ RS-1's so to me...he should offer a choice. Since the mahogany box is no longer available, I figure plopping in some flats with the bowls and even the comfies would be a great selling feature. At least to the fellows over here.
I was not really going to comment on the SR series vs. the big boys; I don’t own the 325's and have heard them only briefly on a few occasions. To quickly compare, using the flats again, the SR 60's are rolled off on the highs, are overly bright and have quite the thumping bass which destroys any sense of low low loooooow bass notes. I still love them for a mobile system, and they do offer wonderful sounds, but they are coloured, and are bright, touching on the shrill. What does one expect from $70 cans? A good CHA47 or perhaps a Meta4 can help control those highs. The bass that one does here is excellent with electronic music, it is much tighter than headphones in its class or even high above it. They resolve rather well but really fall short of the RS-1's or the HP-1000's. The treble extension is good but again can be shrill. The build quality is much less as well, vinyl as opposed to leather, plastic as opposed to steel or metal alloy, simple cable, no UHPLC connnector (although the voice coil is), driver matching is much lower than the RS-1's or the HP-1000's and the enclosure is smaller than the HP-1000's. Overall, they are great little brothers but have a long way to go to match the greats. Will I sell my SR-60's? Nope. I like them much more than my Koss KSC 35's and my wife loves them too.
To sum up, I don’t think John is any less of a music lover or any less of a headphone designer than his esteemed uncle Joe. The phones offer equal grades of sound but completely different listening experiences. For those that want the most accurate and neutral headphones out there....get your hands on some HP-1000's. If you want something more intimate and smooth, get the RS-1's. I realize the HP-1000's are really tough to come by, so auditioning really isn’t an option like with the RS-1's; however, Head-fi meets and WOH tours offer a little bit of a demo, enough to get a feel for their signature sounds.
[size=small]Cables:[/size] Signature Reference Cable is not a major improvement over the standard HP-1000 cable, less authority in the low frequencies but does add small amounts of extension in the treble range.
[size=small]Polarity Switches:[/size] The switches do make a significant difference on some recordings, but otherwise I can’t tell the difference.
[size=small]Pads:[/size] HP-1000's are not as affected by the pads as much as the present line of Grados are. I attribute this to the bass colouration of the present line. RS-1's really need the flats to shine. The HP-1000's do very well with either the bowls or flats. Mods to the bowls are available to further tweak the sound.
[size=small]Associated Equipment:[/size]
Shanling CD T-100 with WE 396A's in Quad
Totem Sinew Interconnects
Grado RA-1
Sugden Headmaster
That’s all. Hope you didn’t mind my verbal diarrhea. Cheers!
