[fuzzybaffy]

Also... people mention the recessed mids on the TH-900 a lot. I definitely agree it's there, but I feel like it was a necessary sacrifice, to keep the headphones sounding exciting and punchy, without getting overly warm or thick-sounding, which is what tends to happen with "exciting" or "musical" headphones (think Grado, the Audeze LCD's, or Sony's MDR-Z7). 
 
This isn't to say that everyone should like the recessed mids. I can absolutely see how the sound just isn't for everybody, especially for people who listen to a lot of vocal-focussed music. And that's where the K812 comes in, I feel, because I think the K812 are fantastic for vocals. But for music that has a mix of both vocals and instrumentals (modern pop, rock, hip-hop), I think the the TH-900 is a better fit. I can absolutely foresee myself buying a K812 in the future, but for now, I need the TH-900 for the kind of music I listen to. 
 
So, yea... it all just comes down to subjective preference, and which headphones fill that preference, really. 

 

[up late]

wouldn't describe grados mids as thick personally and they actually measure pretty flat. but yeah, u-shaped sound signatures do tend to sound clearer and more spacious.

i've not compared the k812 directly to the th900 but i have auditioned it a couple of times. i think the th900 has a cleaner presentation and the thd measurements reflect this. so the th900 is technically superior in that area at least

glad the th900 worked out for you.

 

[fuzzybaffy]

 wouldn't describe grados mids as thick personally and they actually measure pretty flat.

 
Really? Which Grados were you using? I'm assuming the SR-XXX series, cause I had the RS-1's before (the original, not the i's or the e's), and it was a pretty warm, thick-sounding headphone. Then again, this was over 10 years ago, so my memory might be failing me. They are definitely warm-sounding, though. 
 
And that's right, you did mention the THD over at the K812 thread. Yea... again, my audition wasn't in the best of environments, and I couldn't do a side-by-side. And even though the TH-900 might be better in terms of THD, it still seemed to me the K812 is technically superior overall. But, of course, all personal opinion. The mids on the K812 are just unbelievablly clean and clear. 

 

[Fegefeuer]

That would be one bad future.

K812 is technically inferior and competes with the T1. If you want an open headphone then it's the HD 800. Why not go straight to the technical marvel?

 

[up late]

sr60, sr80, rs1i and ps1000.

the k812 has a more balanced fr so you could call it technically better in that sense. but the th900 exhibits more controlled driver behaviour and consequently produces sound with less distortion, so you could call it technically better in that sense.

 

[fuzzybaffy]

That would be one bad future.

K812 is technically inferior and competes with the T1. If you want an open headphone then it's the HD 800. Why not go straight to the technical marvel?

 
Eh... is THD the only measure of "technical ability"? I doubt it. And from what I've read, the K812 measures worse in THD than even mid-fi headphones, like the HD-600/K702. If so, would the K812 really be "technically inferior" to the HD-600/K702? I highly, highly doubt it. 
 
I'm assuming "technical ability" of a headphone can't be completely and absolutely measured, so it really is a bit of a guessing game, and therefore left to subjective opinions. 
 
And what's wrong with getting BOTH the HD-800 and K812 (in the far distant future)? Because that's what I plan on doing. 

 

 

[Fegefeuer]

the bass part of the K812 is mid-fi, yes. It has been measured several times, Why do you doubt it? Do not let the marketing and pricing affect you, else the Ultrasone Edition 10 would be one of the best headphones in the world. 
 
Fact is the bass impact is rather soft and lacks detail. That's the contribution of high distortion and lesser driver control.
 
And yes, the HD 600 measures better mostly. That's how great that headphone is.

 

[fuzzybaffy]

I agree the bass is lacking on the K812. But come on... the HD-600 being, overall, technically superior to the K812? That's nonsense. I have a pair of HD-650's with me right now. 

 

[fuzzybaffy]

Also... calm down guys. I did say I'm keeping the TH-900, so it's not like I'm dissing them in favor of the K812 or anything. 

 

 

[up late]

who needs to calm down here?

 

[fuzzybaffy]

I'm perfectly calm. I'm not angry. 

 

[up late]

good, coz we're just talking cans here - nothing to get excitable or angry about.

and yes, there are other measurements to judge a can's technical capabilities apart from thd. square wave response is another measure. i'm not near a computer at the moment but i'll take a look at how the k812 and th900 compare in that area when i am.

edit: ok then. the th900 has more linear 30hz and 300hz square wave responses than the k812. here is an excellent explanation of square wave response measurements from the innerfidelity site, which includes an interpretation of the th900's measurements if you're interested:
www.innerfidelity.com/content/headphone-measurements-explained-square-wave-response-page-2#OKabHQekMlgKK64r.97

 

[Mortalcoil]

  Also... calm down guys. I did say I'm keeping the TH-900, so it's not like I'm dissing them in favor of the K812 or anything. 

 

LOL ..........its all good.
 
I agree with you FB. If I can use the HD-800 as an example while technically "superior" (supposedly by most accounts, not that I totally agree with that) I still find the 900 a more enjoyable listen.
 
Although having said that the 900 "aint no slouch either" on the technical front.
 
Good to see you are enjoying them

 

[Mortalcoil]

who needs to calm down here?

 
 

  I'm perfectly calm. I'm not angry. 

 
 

good coz we're just talking cans here. nothing to get excitable or angry about.
 

 
 
Gents its pretty late lol.
 
We all agree the 900 is one hell of a headphone.

 
 
 

 

[up late]

good intentions mortalcoil but there's really no need for this from my perspective anyways.

the other point i'd like to make is that while i don't think that technical performance should necessarily coincide with personal enjoyment, i do think that we should try to distinguish between the two. objective measurements and subjective impressions both have valid roles to play in this hobby imo.