[Music Alchemist]

  Sick. I sold my FSP btw and ordered a NAD Viso HP50. I hope they will be better than my Creative Aurvana Live.

 
Oh, cool. Be sure to share your impressions! I want to try that one someday. Not sure whether I should get black or red.

 
Is there anything that stopped you from getting the MT220 instead? I know you were curious about it.

 

[dakanao]

   
Oh, cool. Be sure to share your impressions! I want to try that one someday. Not sure whether I should get black or red.

 
Is there anything that stopped you from getting the MT220 instead? I know you were curious about it.

I sure will man! Imo, color or aesthetics don't matter much to me (except if they're pink or purple, you know those girl like colors). I only care about atleast a decent build quality, good comfort and most importantly: excellent sound quality.
 
Because many people say that they're unforgiving with below average quality recordings, like when the treble is a bit strident on the recording for example, they will show that. And I've read that the HP50 is way better for poorer recordings, while still being very resolving with high quality recordings (something I love about my CAL, and the reason I sold my FSP, cus the FSP were just too revealing for me)

 

[Music Alchemist]

  I sure will man! Imo, color or aesthetics don't matter much to me (except if they're pink or purple, you know those girl like colors). I only care about atleast a decent build quality, good comfort and most importantly: excellent sound quality.
 
Because many people say that they're unforgiving with below average quality recordings, like when the treble is a bit strident on the recording for example, they will show that. And I've read that the HP50 is way better for poorer recordings, while still being very resolving with high quality recordings (something I love about my CAL, and the reason I sold my FSP, cus the FSP were just too revealing for me)

 

Spoiler: y u no lyke dis? =P

(This is the $1,800 Ultrasone Edition 8 Julia. I would probably buy this as a gift for a girlfriend or something. lol)

 
Ah yes, I forgot you were worried about that. I, on the other hand, want as much resolution as possible! I want to hear every last detail in the music. Problem is, many headphones that seem detailed are really just producing distortion that isn't in the recording. That's why I like STAX so much: there's so much less distortion, so it sounds more pure and raw, without being harsh, though this particular STAX is still slightly warm/dark.

 

[dakanao]

   

Spoiler: y u no lyke dis? =P

(This is the $1,800 Ultrasone Edition 8 Julia. I would probably buy this as a gift for a girlfriend or something. lol)

 
Ah yes, I forgot you were worried about that. I, on the other hand, want as much resolution as possible! I want to hear every last detail in the music. Problem is, many headphones that seem detailed are really just producing distortion that isn't in the recording. That's why I like STAX so much: there's so much less distortion, so it sounds more pure and raw, without being harsh, though this particular STAX is still slightly warm/dark.

Yeah, I want as much clarity as possible + as realistic/natural sound as possible without being harsh in the slightest. Plus a balanced sound signature with tight bass.
 
Imo, the CAL do almost all of this, except tight bass, which is why I'm upgrading. The CALs bass is a bit boomy, otherwise they would've been some master headphones (they still are killer headphones, don't get me wrong). If I don't like the NADs, I will sell them and get the Momentum 2. If I end up not liking the Momentum 2, I will get the MT220. And lastly, if I end up not liking the MT220, I will get the CAL again and call it endgame.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Yeah, I want as much clarity as possible + as realistic/natural sound as possible without being harsh in the slightest. Plus a balanced sound signature with tight bass.
 
Imo, the CAL do almost all of this, except tight bass, which is why I'm upgrading. The CALs bass is a bit boomy, otherwise they would've been some master headphones (they still are killer headphones, don't get me wrong). If I don't like the NADs, I will sell them and get the Momentum 2. If I end up not liking the Momentum 2, I will get the MT220. And lastly, if I end up not liking the MT220, I will get the CAL again and call it endgame.

 
If you want accuracy, then the MT220 shouldn't be problematic. Its treble is only slightly bright/cold. If the recording is harsh, then an accurate headphone should sound harsh, though. The MOMENTUM is a warm headphone without much treble. Not accurate at all, though the new version may be better.

 

[dakanao]

   
If you want accuracy, then the MT220 shouldn't be problematic. Its treble is only slightly bright/cold. If the recording is harsh, then an accurate headphone should sound harsh, though. The MOMENTUM is a warm headphone without much treble. Not accurate at all, though the new version may be better.

The CAL has a good amount of treble, but it's literally never harsh. The treble quality is simply fantastic imo. Those bio-cellulose drivers really produce some clear, realistic treble.
 
The FSP seems harsh and dark in comparison.

 

[jsblack]

 
By the way, where did you get those graphs from? They look like Sonarworks compensation curves.
 
Here are the InnerFidelty measurements, which are fairly similar:
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/FocalSpiritProfessional.pdf
http://www.innerfidelity.com/images/SennheiserHD650.pdf

Sonarworks indeed

 

[ohotonge]

Well, interesting, this thread becomes about 'what headphones are destroying/slaying/more trasparent/more more than focal'. And becomes more boring.

 

[jsblack]

Well, interesting, this thread becomes about 'what headphones are destroying/slaying/more trasparent/more more than focal'. And becomes more boring.

Haha

 

[Stuff Jones]

Other than lacking a little bit of air, I don't hear anything sonically off about the FSPs. And there's a hell of a lot right, including amazing transients that give the music a physicality I've yet to hear before. 

 

[dakanao]

  Other than lacking a little bit of air, I don't hear anything sonically off about the FSPs. And there's a hell of a lot right, including amazing transients that give the music a physicality I've yet to hear before. 

The FSP has slightly better physicality than the Creative Aurvana Live with certain instruments (but it's definitely not a big difference), but the CAL is clearer, has a bigger soundstage and has more forward vocals, and even more realistic treble/better treble quality than the FSP and more air. Oh, and at the same time, they're smoother in the uppermids and treble.
 
The FSP has better instrument separation, detail, imaging and layering of the music. But those are the only things they do better than the CAL imo.

 

[ohotonge]

The FSP has slightly better physicality than the Creative Aurvana Live with certain instruments (but it's definitely not a big difference), but the CAL is clearer, has a bigger soundstage and has more forward vocals, and even more realistic treble/better treble quality than the FSP and more air. Oh, and at the same time, they're smoother in the uppermids and treble.

The FSP has better instrument separation, detail, imaging and layering of the music. But those are the only things they do better than the CAL imo.

CAL more closely follows df target with slightly attenuated bass than focal, so they should have more energy in treble. And also some more air beause CAL is actually semi closed phones.
focal follows different target and so it has less energy in treble, and it is more linear fr without less dips and peaks, and focal has a sinificantly less distortion in bass area comparing to CAL's big ass distortion which gives warm or loose feeling depending on your point of view.
finally focal is closed phones with outstanding isolation. More isolation = more difficulty in tuninng the sound.
So please guys, stop comparing focal with wide open stax or semi closed with different target response and say 'this destroy focal!' They are all good phones with different uses.

 

[dakanao]

CAL more closely follows df target with slightly attenuated bass than focal, so they should have more energy in treble. And also some more air beause CAL is actually semi closed phones.
focal follows different target and so it has less energy in treble, and it is more linear fr without less dips and peaks, and focal has a sinificantly less distortion in bass area comparing to CAL's big ass distortion which gives warm or loose feeling depending on your point of view.
finally focal is closed phones with outstanding isolation. More isolation = more difficulty in tuninng the sound.
So please guys, stop comparing focal with wide open stax or semi closed with different target response and say 'this destroy focal!' They are all good phones with different uses.

The CAL maybe have semi-open isolation, but they're definitely closed headphones (which don't sound closed).

 

[ohotonge]

The CAL maybe have semi-open isolation, but they're definitely closed headphones (which don't sound closed).

well, you just contradicted yourself, 'maybe semi open...definitely closed'.

 

[dakanao]

well, you just contradicted yourself, 'maybe semi open...definitely closed'.

With semi-open isolation I mean that they don't isolate that well. But the cups are definitely 100% closed.