[Anaxilus]

Quote:

 
  Isn't that drawing a pretty long bow there comparing the Beats line-up to the MS-Pro?
 
  Sure both may be heavily coloured by HD800 standards but in terms of overall clarity and detail retrieval - that's hardly a fair comparison.

 
No I don't think so.  If the better phone is the phone people enjoy most w/ their music then it seems to me the same thing to say one might prefer the MS Pro or Beats to the HD800.  If we want to get technical and actually define what better is in actual terms then one might actually get closer to producing an answer to the question.  Frankly I'm rather tired of "I think X is better just because it sounds good to me."  That's nice for you, but what value does that add to the discussion for anybody else.  You'd be better to tell people to just buy a bunch of phones and keep the one you like.  What more needs to be said than that?  If someone wants more then it makes sense to talk about aspects and metrics other than 'I like'.  However, saying you like the MS Pro because it's more 'musical' to your ears but still has excellent clarity and detail retrieval is a much better argument to make.  I imagine Denz figured that was already implied but it wasn't mentioned.  Just a trend I seem to be noticing, nothing particular to Denz.
 
I'd also caution people about the fit and feel of Grado phones.  I do love my HP1000 but they're aren't the most user friendly design.

 

[e19650826]

Quote:

 This hypothesis for the HD800 being the 'be and end all' for Hi-Fi reproduction against all others will never cease on Head-Fi 

 
 

 
you forgot the so far part.. and that is the reason I put 007 in there... there are cans that are technically better than HD800.. and I did not put many cans that are on-par with HD800 like T1, LCD-3, HE-6 and etc or the legends like R10, HE90 because it would be very crowded... and the graph excluds personal preference.. they are solely my understanding of the technologies and designs of the cans.
 
please don't assume certain things just because they weren't stated.

 

[Anaxilus]

The hypothesis for the T1 belonging in that crowd will never cease on Head-fi 

 

[Grado77]

------------------

 

[davidgotsa]

I haven't heard the other two but I thought that the HD800 was clearly better than the T1 too. It probably comes down to personal preferences though. 
Quote:

The hypothesis for the T1 belonging in that crowd will never cease on Head-fi 

 

[Coupe]

Quote:

 As you state - it is all about preferences, and whilst I have to hear the SR-009 - I cannot for the life of me imagine the LCD-3
 passing over the HD800 in a pro Hi-Fi mag shoot-out - the LCD3 has it's niche with the warm sounding crowd however
 a professional assessment between the two reveals that the LCD-3 is more or less absent in the treble area, that's a
 third of the frequency spectrum and then there is the issue of soundstage - there is none.
 
 The HD800 is renowned for it's soundstage, imaging and treble extension - LCD-3 cannot compete in that sense.
 
 HD800 gets my vote, ultimately I still prefer my esoteric and finicky PS1000 even if it does not have
 the versatility of the HD800 overall.

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-57437164-47/the-best-headphones-in-the-world/?tag=mncol;1n
 
on the contrary.

 

[Coupe]

Quote:

The hypothesis for the T1 belonging in that crowd will never cease on Head-fi 

 

[Magick Man]

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-57437164-47/the-best-headphones-in-the-world/?tag=mncol;1n

on the contrary.

Eh. Steve's been wrong before, he's wrong now, and he'll undoubtedly be wrong again at some point in the future.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

Eh. Steve's been wrong before, he's wrong now, and he'll undoubtedly be wrong again at some point in the future.

 
Disclaimer, I have not yet heard the SR009, but with all the other flagships that I've owned/heard, I agree with Steve on this one.

 

[Magick Man]

The highs are too recessed for them to be truly neutral cans, plus their QC is rather spotty and at times there's a great deal of variance in the LCD-3s they ship.

Overall, I'd say that properly driven HE-6s trump LCD-3s in almost every way, and STAX SR-007 and 009s just smash them to bits. I'll go even further and say Fostex TH900s are superior in many ways as well, and possibly the Koss ESP/950s too. Okay, maybe not the last one, but darn it's a close race, and the Koss' are only $700. Geez!

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

The highs are too recessed for them to be truly neutral cans, plus their QC is rather spotty and at times there's a great deal of variance in the LCD-3s they ship.
Overall, I'd say that properly driven HE-6s trump LCD-3s in almost every way, and STAX SR-007 and 009s just smash them to bits. I'll go even further and say Fostex TH900s are superior in many ways as well, and possibly the Koss ESP/950s too. Okay, maybe not the last one, but darn it's a close race, and the Koss' are only $700. Geez!

 
In your opinion. 

IMO, their highs are fully extended to 20kHz, just pushed back...so they are not bright, but "real". I've owned the HE-6s for over a year and had them side by side with the LCD-3s (for several months), but IMO the LCD-3s bested the HE-6s in every way; even comfort. I kept my HE-6s around when I had a pair of LCD-2s, but after the LCD-3s arrived, I sold off my HE-6s in a few months (and have never looked back). I have never liked the SR007 (mk 1 or mkii) enough to spend my $ on a pair. Just never sound real/right to my ears...no tonal weight to them to sound right to my ears. And talk about pushed back treble...they were similar to the LCD-2/3s that way.
 
Based on DavidMahler's description of the TH900s being a slightly improved D7000 (which are far from resolving headphones), I would hardly put them in that class.

 

[grokit]

In your opinion.  IMO, their highs are fully extended to 20kHz, just pushed back...so they are not bright, but "real". I've owned the HE-6s for over a year and had them side by side with the LCD-3s (for several months), but IMO the LCD-3s bested the HE-6s in every way; even comfort. I kept my HE-6s around when I had a pair of LCD-2s, but after the LCD-3s arrived, I sold off my HE-6s in a few months (and have never looked back). I have never liked the SR007 (mk 1 or mkii) enough to spend my $ on a pair. Just never sound real/right to my ears...no tonal weight to them to sound right to my ears. And talk about pushed back treble...they were similar to the LCD-2/3s that way.

Based on DavidMahler's description of the TH900s being a slightly improved D7000 (which are far from resolving headphones), I would hardly put them in that class.

I have to chime in on the HE-6
If you had them side by side with the LCD-3, they shouldn't have been! The HE-6 needs at least 5 watts per channel into 50 ohms to sound right, like a K1000. If you don't feed them that you won't like them; did you ever drive them out of speaker taps? I love my WA22 and would really like to hear a Liquid Fire, but neither have the power to make the HE-6 sound right. The Lyr was certainly not the answer for the HE-6 either.

The HE-6 has definitely re-asserted itself with me as I have been getting some quality time with it lately, but I don't plug it into my WA22 like my HD800/LCD-2 because they will exhibit the lack of tonal weight that you described. Another common complaint with them is that they have veiled treble or piercing treble if they are not run from the right (speaker, Darkstar kind of power) type of amp. As much as I love my WA22, I plugged my HE-6 into it exactly once.

I love my HD800's as well, but the HE-6 are right there with them when amplified properly and they are more versatile. Neither are perfect, but while both are the best headphones that I have had the privilege of listening to, the HE-6 comes closer for me (atm). I am listening to them out of the same rig now, my WA22 has been converted to a balanced preamp and will be directly driving the HD800, while feeding line voltage to my RA150 as the (speaker) amp for my HE-6/K1000 (7.2 wpc > 50 ohms).

 

[Magick Man]

In your opinion.  IMO, their highs are fully extended to 20kHz, just pushed back...so they are not bright, but "real". I've owned the HE-6s for over a year and had them side by side with the LCD-3s (for several months), but IMO the LCD-3s bested the HE-6s in every way; even comfort. I kept my HE-6s around when I had a pair of LCD-2s, but after the LCD-3s arrived, I sold off my HE-6s in a few months (and have never looked back). I have never liked the SR007 (mk 1 or mkii) enough to spend my $ on a pair. Just never sound real/right to my ears...no tonal weight to them to sound right to my ears. And talk about pushed back treble...they were similar to the LCD-2/3s that way.

Based on DavidMahler's description of the TH900s being a slightly improved D7000 (which are far from resolving headphones), I would hardly put them in that class.

Well, the TH900s aren't "slightly improved D7000s", that's a bit ridiculous. Although they have certain similarities, their overall tonal quality and mid-range presence is much more natural, as is their better balance between 4-8kHz. I really want to see Tyll measure these, and am tempted to send him my set when they come in just to see how they fair on his dummy. For their timbre alone they deserve to be mentioned with the best, there are no other closed cans that can match them.

As for the LCD-3s, sorry, but they sound like I'm listening through 5-7 layers of cheese cloth, there was nothing real about their treble, at all. Of course, it may be that same QC issue that I was talking about earlier, and maybe the ones I sampled were just defective. HE-6s, with the right amplification, are simply stunning. Sure, you can get by with dedicated headphone amps, but they aren't ideal. You really need to treat them like speakers, otherwise you're holding them back a little. Running off the speaker taps of my SLI-80 they're in a class all their own, with the right musical genres. That also goes for the "big STAX", there are just certain types of music where they're untouchable. And I suppose that's what it all comes down to, no headphone is "best" at everything, but there are a handful that are at the peak in specific areas.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

I have to chime in on the HE-6

If you had them side by side with the LCD-3, they shouldn't have been! The HE-6 needs at least 5 watts per channel into 50 ohms to sound right, like a K1000. If you don't feed them that you won't like them; did you ever drive them out of speaker taps? I love my WA22 and would really like to hear a Liquid Fire, but neither have the power to make the HE-6 sound right. The Lyr was certainly not the answer for the HE-6 either.
The HE-6 has definitely re-asserted itself with me as I have been getting some quality time with it lately, but I don't plug it into my WA22 like my HD800/LCD-2 because they will exhibit the lack of tonal weight that you described. Another common complaint with them is that they have veiled treble or piercing treble if they are not run from the right (speaker, Darkstar kind of power) type of amp. As much as I love my WA22, I plugged my HE-6 to it exactly once.
I love my HD800's as well, but the HE-6 are right there with them when amplified properly and they are more versatile. Neither are perfect, but while both are the best headphones that I have had the privilege of listening to, the HE-6 comes closer for me (atm). I am listening to them out of the same rig now, my WA22 has been converted to a balanced preamp and will be directly driving the HD800, while feeding line voltage to my RA150 as the (speaker) amp for my HE-6/K1000 (7.2 wpc > 50 ohms).

 
I had them on many different amps, some that put more than 5W into them (like my buddy's Pioneer SX1980 and through the speaker taps of my 120W Pioneer Elite receiver). I didn't say that the HE-6s were bad (quite the opposite, they're fantastic headphones and one of the very best), just that no matter what amp I used, the LCD-3s (especially on my LF) were just better to my ears. But next to the LCD-2s, yes, I agree that the HE-6s are quite competitive and that's why I kept them around for so long (until the LCD-3s arrived).
 
Edit: I must say though that I still preferred the HD800s over the HE-6s as well. YMMV.

 
Quote:

Well, the TH900s aren't "slightly improved D7000s", that's a bit ridiculous. Although they have certain similarities, their overall tonal quality and mid-range presence is much more natural, as is their better balance between 4-8kHz. I really want to see Tyll measure these, and am tempted to send him my set when they come in just to see how they fair on his dummy. For their timbre alone they deserve to be mentioned with the best, there are no other closed cans that can match them.
As for the LCD-3s, sorry, but they sound like I'm listening through 5-7 layers of cheese cloth, there was nothing real about their treble, at all. Of course, it may be that same QC issue that I was talking about earlier, and maybe the ones I sampled were just defective. HE-6s, with the right amplification, are simply stunning. Sure, you can get by with dedicated headphone amps, but they aren't ideal. You really need to treat them like speakers, otherwise you're holding them back a little. Running off the speaker taps of my SLI-80 they're in a class all their own, with the right musical genres. That also goes for the "big STAX", there are just certain types of music where they're untouchable. And I suppose that's what it all comes down to, no headphone is "best" at everything, but there are a handful that are at the peak in specific areas.

 
I'm not sure if you were listening to one of the veiled pairs from earlier this year, but my pair (from 11-11-11) was never veiled (similar to Jude's and Skylab's non-veiled pairs). Feel free to read any of our posted reviews. I did send mine back last month to be updated to the latest and greatest and as fabulous as they were, they got even better. Agreed the QC issues from Dec-Feb were unfortunate, but since April, it does look like this issue is behind Audeze (fingers crossed) and I strongly suggest you hear them again (and from my LF with E88CC platinum Siemens tubes...all I can say is wow).
 
 
On the TH900s:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/595683/fostex-th900-impressions-discussion-thread/765#post_8414884
 
David is a good friend (recording engineer) and has access to some of the most stellar gear out there. I trust his ears and I will get to hear them soon enough as a vendor in mid-town Toronto has them for trial.

 

[Magick Man]

I'm not sure if you were listening to one of the veiled pairs from earlier this year, but my pair (from 11-11-11) was never veiled (like Jude's and Skylab's). But I did send mine back last month to be updated to the latest and greatest and as fabulous as they were, they got even better. Agreed the QC issues from Dec-Feb were unfortunate, but since April, it does look like this issue is behind Audeze (fingers crossed) and I strongly suggest you hear them again (and from my LF with E88CC platinum Siemens tubes...all I can say is wow).

Perhaps you're right, but the ones I heard were at least 6 months old back in January, so they're older than that. Frankly, it's similar to my experience with older HD650s, dark to the point of being drab. I just can't call that natural, "real life" certainly doesn't sound like that when I walk around every day.

On the TH900s:
http://www.head-fi.org/t/595683/fostex-th900-impressions-discussion-thread/765#post_8414884

David is a good friend (recording engineer) and has access to some of the most stellar gear out there. I trust his ears and I will get to hear them soon enough as a vendor in mid-town Toronto has them for trial.

I heard them for an extended test on an all Cary setup; CD 303T, Xciter DAC, and HH-1. Not the best chain, not even for Cary, but the TH900s were quite impressive. MuppetFace, the person who started the thread you linked, has owned them for some time now and she agrees, they're quite special and hold a unique place in the top tier.