[dakanao]

Hey, do you guys hear distortion in the bass on the left side of the headphones on this track? It's at the end of the 1:18 mark. A bass-distorted slam hitting in the left earcup. I don't know if it's the particular recording, or that my pair broke?
 

 

[joe]

I'm not hearing it in that track. Do you have another headphone to use to compare with? Can you hear it with another headphone?

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Hey, do you guys hear distortion in the bass on the left side of the headphones on this track? It's at the end of the 1:18 mark. A bass-distorted slam hitting in the left earcup. I don't know if it's the particular recording, or that my pair broke?

 
Sounds fine on my 7506. Sold my second FSP already, so I can't listen with it now. Don't think I mentioned it in this thread yet (though you saw in another thread), but I bought a Yamaha HPH-MT220 and will receive it on Wednesday. Hoping it's brighter / more neutral than the FSP.

 

[dakanao]

  I'm not hearing it in that track. Do you have another headphone to use to compare with? Can you hear it with another headphone?

 
I hear it on my bass distorded Creative Aurvana Live as well. But that doesn't count, since I know those drivers are distorted in the bass.
 
BUT, I also hear it on my perfectly fine Ostry KC06a IEM as well, but it's a lot less evident sounding on the Ostrys than the CAL and the Spirit Pros.
 
So I guess that distortion sound is in the recording, but the Spirit Pros reveal it more than the IEMs.

   
Sounds fine on my 7506. Sold my second FSP already, so I can't listen with it now. Don't think I mentioned it in this thread yet (though you saw in another thread), but I bought a Yamaha HPH-MT220 and will receive it on Wednesday. Hoping it's brighter / more neutral than the FSP.

Yeah, I replied to that post on the ''Yamaha MT 220 vs Yamaha Pro 500'' topic. I said that I was looking forward to your impressions of the MT 220.

 

[Music Alchemist]

@dakanao
 
Got the Yamaha HPH-MT220 today. Working on a full-length review, though I may give up and never publish it. lol
 
In my opinion, the 220 has less problems than the FSP and 7506. Far superior build quality and comfort. Unlike the FSP and 7506, I don't feel the need to push the ear pads closer to my ears to enhance the sound. In fact, when I do that, the sound doesn't change at all. The trade-off is that my ears press up against the drivers at all times, which is the only minor comfort issue. Bass sounds less boosted than the FSP, but still substantial -- perhaps still boosted a little above neutral. No major problems with the treble. But the mids are too recessed. This review says that after burn-in, it becomes much more transparent. Here's hoping. Despite the issue with the mids, the 220 sounds the most neutral to me overall, since the 7506 is too bright and harsh in the treble and the FSP has too much bass and not enough mids and treble. 7506 has better vocal reproduction. FSP still has better physicality. Tons more info I could share, but I'll save it for later.
 
If mid-range shoutiness is your pet peeve, this won't be the solution for you. Not as bad as the FSP, but it's still there.

 

[dakanao]

  @dakanao
 
Got the Yamaha HPH-MT220 today. Working on a full-length review, though I may give up and never publish it. lol
 
In my opinion, the 220 has less problems than the FSP and 7506. Far superior build quality and comfort. Unlike the FSP and 7506, I don't feel the need to push the ear pads closer to my ears to enhance the sound. In fact, when I do that, the sound doesn't change at all. The trade-off is that my ears press up against the drivers at all times, which is the only minor comfort issue. Bass sounds less boosted than the FSP, but still substantial -- perhaps still boosted a little above neutral. No major problems with the treble. But the mids are too recessed. This review says that after burn-in, it becomes much more transparent. Here's hoping. Despite the issue with the mids, the 220 sounds the most neutral to me overall, since the 7506 is too bright and harsh in the treble and the FSP has too much bass and not enough mids and treble. 7506 has better vocal reproduction. FSP still has better physicality. Tons more info I could share, but I'll save it for later.
 
If mid-range shoutiness is your pet peeve, this won't be the solution for you. Not as bad as the FSP, but it's still there.

So the earcups are more shallow than the FSP earcups? 
 
So if I understand you correctly, the Yamaha still has more mids and highs even before burn in than the FSP?
 
And what do you mean by ''better physicality''?
 
But the MT 220 is smoother in the uppermids, right? And is the treble just as smooth as the FSP or harsher? (I'm asking this since the MT 220 has more treble, and the FSP NEVER gets sibilant to me, only harsh in the uppermids)

 

[chailee80]

  So the earcups are more shallow than the FSP earcups? 
 
So if I understand you correctly, the Yamaha still has more mids and highs even before burn in than the FSP?
 
And what do you mean by ''better physicality''?
 
But the MT 220 is smoother in the uppermids, right? And is the treble just as smooth as the FSP or harsher? (I'm asking this since the MT 220 has more treble, and the FSP NEVER gets sibilant to me, only harsh in the uppermids)

The mt220 pads are shallower but larger, they will cover most ears but a lot of ears will touch the driver cover. That issue is easily fixed with a bit of cotton wool or similar placed on the inside edges of the pads. To me the mt220 is not as smooth sounding through the mids and into the treble region, i never found either one to be overly sibilant either.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  So the earcups are more shallow than the FSP earcups? 
 
So if I understand you correctly, the Yamaha still has more mids and highs even before burn in than the FSP?
 
And what do you mean by ''better physicality''?
 
But the MT 220 is smoother in the uppermids, right? And is the treble just as smooth as the FSP or harsher? (I'm asking this since the MT 220 has more treble, and the FSP NEVER gets sibilant to me, only harsh in the uppermids)

 
Yes, a bit more shallow, like the 7506 is as well, but everything else about the pads is much larger. The drivers of the 7506 don't stick out, so even though your ears press up against them, you don't notice it. The 220 feels even more comfortable to me; it's just that you can slightly tell the driver is touching up against your ear. It's not uncomfortable, thankfully.
 
Yes, the 220 sounds much less dark than the FSP to me. Its main weakness is lacking some mids, at least at this point.
 
Remember that Behemoth song you heard? Didn't the snare drums sound like they were physically being bashed right next to you? That's what I mean -- a sense of realistic-sounding physical instruments instead of just hearing them in the background.
 
It has less of that mid-range resonance, if that's what you are referring to. (If not, please be more specific.) The treble is thankfully more realistic, but doesn't sound harsh or sibilant to me at all, unlike the 7506's treble.
 

  The mt220 pads are shallower but larger, they will cover most ears but a lot of ears will touch the driver cover. That issue is easily fixed with a bit of cotton wool or similar placed on the inside edges of the pads. To me the mt220 is not as smooth sounding through the mids and into the treble region, i never found either one to be overly sibilant either.

 
Yeah, you could say it's not as smooth, but the 220 sounds more accurate to me in nearly every area. I believe you mentioned that the FSP sounds more neutral to you than the 220, but that has not been my experience, and I've owned two FSPs.

 

[Stuff Jones]

The FSP are very highly regarded among sound engineers except for the their build and comfort (see the gearslutz thread on them as well as amazon reviews from studio professionals). Much more so than the MT220s for example. 
 
That suggests to me that they are very accurate and neutral even if there are other headphones viewed as more hifi. I'm not actually sure why hifi and reference aren't the same but that's a topic for another thread. 

 

[Music Alchemist]

  The FSP are very highly regarded among sound engineers except for the their build and comfort (see the gearslutz thread on them as well as amazon reviews from studio professionals). Much more so than the MT220s for example. 
 
That suggests to me that they are very accurate and neutral even if there are other headphones viewed as more hifi. I'm not actually sure why hifi and reference aren't the same but that's a topic for another thread. 

 
Being popular does not equate to being accurate. The Sony MDR-7506 is one of the most popular studio monitor headphones and its treble is downright nasty sometimes.
 
Again, to me, the FSP sounds like its bass is even more boosted from neutral than the 220 is, and the mids and treble are too recessed. To me, the 220 sounds like its bass is only slightly boosted, its treble is very accurate, and its mids are only somewhat recessed, instead of having a huge dip like the FSP does. The FSP sounds darker to me than the 220, and the 220 is still slightly too dark to be neutral, in my opinion, due to somewhat recessed mids.
 
I know I'm always linking to this, but here are the measurements for the FSP. Not something I would trust for professional use. (But serious studio pros rely on speakers anyway.) Wish I had InnerFidelity measurements for the Yamaha, so my friend could superimpose the HRTF curves on it.

 

[Stuff Jones]

   
Being popular does not equate to being accurate. The Sony MDR-7506 is one of the most popular studio monitor headphones and its treble is downright nasty sometimes.
 
Again, to me, the FSP sounds like its bass is even more boosted from neutral than the 220 is, and the mids and treble are too recessed. To me, the 220 sounds like its bass is only slightly boosted, its treble is very accurate, and its mids are only somewhat recessed, instead of having a huge dip like the FSP does. The FSP sounds darker to me than the 220, and the 220 is still slightly too dark to be neutral, in my opinion, due to somewhat recessed mids.
 
I know I'm always linking to this, but here are the measurements for the FSP. Not something I would trust for professional use. (But serious studio pros rely on speakers anyway.) Wish I had InnerFidelity measurements for the Yamaha, so my friend could superimpose the HRTF curves on it.

 
I'm talking about popularity with professionals whose livelihoods depend on the accuracy of their equipment. That to me says more than the opinion of hobbyists like ourselves. Not that we don't have a right to have different preferences, but in terms of accuracy to the source, the FSP appears to be very highly regarded by professionals.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  I'm talking about popularity with professionals whose livelihoods depend on the accuracy of their equipment. That to me says more than the opinion of hobbyists like ourselves. Not that we don't have a right to have different preferences, but in terms of accuracy to the source, the FSP appears to be very highly regarded by professionals.

 
Not sure why. But you need to keep in mind that strict accuracy is not something many studio monitor headphones even pursue. Many of them sound downright awful, because they are often used to detect defects in the mix -- not to hear the recording accurately, which studio monitor speakers (and room treatments, etc.) are used for. No serious studio professional relies on headphones exclusively, so this isn't something to give so much weight.
 
Not trying to bad-mouth the FSP, since it's one of my favorites, but just look at the measurements. (Comparing the raw grey measurements to the flat speaker HRTF green line.) The bass is too boosted and the entire (What?!) mids and treble are far too recessed.
 
Now compare those measurements to a headphone that actually is very neutral, the STAX SR-009. (Click here. Ignore the mislabeling.)

 

[rixlbg]

Hello, everyone
 
1. Has someone here compared the sound of the Focal Classic and Pro (apart from Tyll)? Any findings you could share?
 
2. Does someone here (with a good feedback) have a nice priced FSPro in mint/near-mint condition to sell?
 
Thanks.

 

[joe]

Hi @rixlbg! I know @jude talked about both headphones in this entry in the Head-Fi Gift Guide. It's definitely worth looking at for another data point when comparing the Spirit Classic and the Spirit Professional.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Hello, everyone
 
1. Has someone here compared the sound of the Focal Classic and Pro (apart from Tyll)? Any findings you could share?
 
2. Does someone here (with a good feedback) have a nice priced FSPro in mint/near-mint condition to sell?
 
Thanks.

 
http://www.innerfidelity.com/content/two-strike-zone-focal-spirit-professional-and-spirit-classic
http://headmania.org/2013/12/17/focal-spirit-classic-and-spirit-professional-review/
 
I sold my second FSP for $200 already, but here's one for $250.
 

  Hi @rixlbg! I know @jude talked about both headphones in this entry in the Head-Fi Gift Guide. It's definitely worth looking at for another data point when comparing the Spirit Classic and the Spirit Professional.

 
I like how this thread is awesome enough to attract at least one admin.