plakat
Headphoneus Supremus
OK, it might not be the most robust pair of headphones, but that does not look like an epidemic to me. I hope it does not become one
So. long story short, how would the sound signature of the FSP compare to that of the HP50?
Oh, serwas plakat! Ois kloa im osten?
Many thanks for the link! I did know, that Tyll has reviewed these cans, but apparently I overlooked that he mentioned the HP50 in it...shame on me^^
Liebe Grüße von Innsbruck nach Wien!
Very very close but IMO the NAD is closer to the Focal Classic that's warmer & more relaxed (by a small margin) compared to FSP.
I have the three headphones on my my desk right now for testing purpose
Danke & gleichfalls Liebe Grüße zurück in den fernen Westen!
Very nice... looking forward to your impressions. Maybe you can include your Sig Pro in that comparison?
This headphone (Sig pro) remains my favorite closed headphone and my favorite complement for my HD800. That been said, the focal headphones and the Nad represents IMO a tremendous value and they're maybe "better/cleaner" headphones. If you already own a sig pro, I don't think that purchasing a Focal Spirit pro is really useful. the FSP has a more balanced sound with definetely more mids but overally the SIg pro stays a more impressive headphone that brings something really special to the table. The choice can depend of what you usually listen to. Focal Spirit pro & Classic and the NAD Viso HP50 are really impressive and my preferred is the FSP by a slight but real margin because of its perfect balance and its overally crisp and clear sound while the NAD & the Spirit Classic offer a more relaxed (Focal Classic) or slightgly colored ( NAD) warmer sound. THe Sig pro is less neutral than the FSP but sound so real to my ears with more detail, more depth, more textured sound , thicker bass, crispier treble. it's sooo engaging to my ears. Focals sound a bit too polite and the NAD is slightly too mellow compared to the Ultrasone.
My Focals will arrive tomorrow. I have owned the Sig Pros before and thought they were nowhere near worth the asking price. I found them to be a better ATH-M50 in terms of detail and resolution. Frequency balance was very nice however.
the Sig pro scales impressively and becomes a better headphone than its contenders. We can Nevertheless agree that the Focal and the NAD has a far better value for the money, but I could say the same thing for all Hi end cans I owned or experienced.
I recently bought the FSP. Before reading this thread I had never heard of them but I am extremely happy with the sound so thanks for all the advice. I also find them comfortable for extended use so i must have the right size nogging...
Before parting with my cash I went to a reputable store and spent a few hours trying a number of headsets over two different days: hd 650, hd8, hd6, hd25 II, hd 280, hd380, beyer t90, beyer t70p, yamaha 220, srh1540, srh 1840, b&o h6, a few sony, etc... My ears are mostly used to monitoring speakers (even if i dont mind cranking up warmer speakers from time to time) so i was seeking a "flat" response and a well defined sound. Bassy or dull/thin headsets give me pimples. I was hopeful that the FSP would suit me based on reviews I had read, and indeed Focal delivered the goods and at a lower price point than the closest competitors, plus in a closed pair. Hooray!
The tunes i was playing when down selecting among my favorites were covering a variety of styles (blues, jazz, acid jazz, folk, pop, psytrance, d&b, techno, etc.). All were well engineered, and with a res of 320 if compressed.
I realise that there is no hard data and telling graphs in this post so I will acknowledge that it would be of limited value as a review. But it isn't, and i didn't call out any specific comparison either between cans. The only take away should be: i tried a few pairs of reputable HPs and I enjoyed the FSPs the most. Enough to purchase them. Hopefully it helps someone else.