Does anyone prefer a bright presentation?

[mysticaldodo]

I think its all subjective. I just got the HD 650, and I don't think it was brighter then the HD 595. The only sound I found to be dark comes from speakers, never headphones. My Grados SR-60 were slightly brighter then the above 2 mentioned and the AKG 501 were significantly brighter.

 

[paradio]

Besides the personal perception, it also depends on the material you played.


I don't like warm if it only stand for less highs, and I don't like bright if it means no enough bass.


IMO, Brightness ( highs), Transparence (mid-high) and Power/energy (mid-low) are all important for my ears. I prefer the flat response.

 

[mysticaldodo]

What do you mean by transparency - mid high?

My understanding is transparency is like a window (or row of windows??)...it allows you to hears the layers...maybe the singer in front, the flute behind, the brass ensemble and the strings behind. I'm not talking interms of sound stage (as in placement) but rather you can hear all of them (how prominent depends on the recording). Thats my understanding so far

 

[paradio]

Yes, mid-high response has more contribution to "transparency" feeling. But this is very rough, even not accurate description. The same question can also be what is warm and what is bright.

For high level, besides the amplitude response, phase, dynamic range, reaction time (in speaker, use Q factor) and pure-sound-level ( in sound reproduce device, like speaker, there is an important paratemeter which is called <can have different term in some cases> pure sound level ( doesn't equal to rated power), which is judged by subjective measurement, and mainly to detect the harmonic distortion.

 

[setmenu]

It can be very informative playing with an eq and listening to how specific
frequencies effect perception of space air tonality etc.
Even seemingly minor peaks and troughs can have a surprisingly
large effect on the overall perceived sonic signature.

Setmenu

 

[wakked1]

Well, I'm obviously a fan of 'bright', if by bright you mean a relatively flat and natural freq response rather than the usual upper left to lower right slide freq response. And from what I've heard in some of the local jazz and blues clubs, yes I think real life is 'bright', too.

What I don't like though is harsh top end that adds sibliance or jangly-ness (for lack of a better term) where there should be none. So long as that's not present I have no problems listening to those kinda of cans for hours at a time, no pain. Then again, I find that not having a rolled-off treble helps me get the detail out of the music w/o having to unnecessarily crank up the volume.

Its kinda geeky to get hung up on freq response graphs, but after listening to a few differet types of cans and comparing them to the graphs, I do think there is a strong correlation there.

 

[Ferbose]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jon L Not including amplified live concerts, which can sound great but often WAYY too loud, live unamplified music would definitely be classified as "Bright" by most people's frequency response perception compared to home systems. The trick with live music is that while it's bright, there's absolutely no hash, ringing, grit, grain, or unnatural odd-order harmonics, which are what our brain/ears object to, not brightness per say. Even the multi-kilo$ audio systems have a hard time reproducing both the quantity and quality of treble of live music.

Agreed.
Live classical concerts can sound bright and thin, especially if the venue has that kind of acoustic property. However, the richness of the harmonics in the overtones is still preserved. And the amibience makes the sound still pleasing. IMHO in hi-end audio it is still extremely difficult to reproduce the ambience and harmonic richness, while extremely small artifacts in the high freqeuncy actually become annoying when the system has high resolution. Sometimes the cure is to mask things away or add coloration using tubes or warmer/darker sounding equipment. Sacrifice the sparkle and transparency to hide away the HF artifacts--IMHO it is a good trade off.
My sources and speakers/headphones are generally described as detailed and bright, and that is why I recently got a tube amp to tame things down.

 

[Little J040]

Me thinks highs are the best part LOL. Not just in headphones, but every stereo application, I love when I get that tingly feeling in my neck because of sparkling highs in trance music!

 

[warubozu]

I too like a slightly bright presentation from my cans. I definitely like to hear deatails such as crisp highs and a tight bass upfront. Cans that warm and laidback makes me feel as if I'm not hear everything clearly, but on the other hand I can't stand cans that are too bright.

 

[jesse_w]

I definately prefer a brighter sound. I am also fatigued far sooner by even slightly overpowering bass than by bumped upper midrange or a cold sound. There are some systems that are so warm and/or dark that I cannot listen to them in much the same way I imagine some people cannot listen to bright systems.

jesse

 

[albau]

That's why I kept K-501 and SR-225 but sold HD-580. It certainly depends upon music type and things like soundstage and speed.

 

[Scrith]

Quote:

Originally Posted by DJGeorgeT That's what I have been saying as well. Go to any concert or live act. You may find the music too bright, but hey it is the real stuff. It doesn't get more real than that.

Yes...I left this as an exercise for NeilPeart after he complained at a meet a couple of weeks ago about the "brightness" of the Qualia headphones: go to a concert and then come home and listen to a recorded concert on your HD650 headphones. They sound completely wrong!

This is what is amazing about the Qualias and what I keep trying to tell people...yes, at a meet, if you listen to dark headphones for an hour you are going to freak out a bit when hearing Qualias for the first time (as I've said...like stepping out of a dark room into the sunlight)...but this is much closer to reality than what many headphones sound like.

Oh, and the bass on the Qualias is, hands-down, the most realistic, clear, and detailed bass I've heard on any headphone (including the Grado PS1 w/ balanced cable I have sitting in a box in the next room).

I'm sure there are other headphones with a similar sound, of course.

 

[Nak Man]

I found those 'live concerts' (mostly rock) are way too bright compared to unamped orchestra or small jazz club performance. Which in turn imo are reproduced very nicely and life-like through 650. I always wonder why 650 are called dark - since they clearly capable of more than decent high freq extension, when required by the music.

 

[Bill Ward]

What's the difference between a presentation that's bright and one that's forward?

My preferred headphones tend to be among those listed here as bright, but I would have used "forward" to describe the quality they tend to share.

BW

 

[seankonnery]

I am having a very frustrating listen with the UE 10. The sibilance is driving me to go back to the ETY. I've tried many things to get rid of it but it is always there.