[thecansmancan]

just out of curiosity, with the dt 880 is there a big sq difference between the different models (32, 250, 600 ohm)? The 50 flagship guy said the 600 ohm was the best, but nothing more than that. is it? why? how so?

 

[fuzzybaffy]

 ^ Good question!

 

[Catharsis]

Quote:

just out of curiosity, with the dt 880 is there a big sq difference between the different models (32, 250, 600 ohm)? The 50 flagship guy said the 600 ohm was the best, but nothing more than that. is it? why? how so?

This of course is a giant mystery and the topic of many debates, but from what I've seen (objective measurements), and from what little I know of electrical engineering, it would appear as though the differences between the models are subtle.  Having said that, a higher impedance headphone is ALWAYS less likely to be affected by different amps of varying output impedances and retains its normal frequency response.  Higher ohm headphones (like the 250 and 600ohm) models are also more robust and less prone to being fried.  Lastly, high impedance headphones technically draw less current from their source, and measurements I've seen would concur that when loaded up to different amps, they result in a lower noise floor (higher SNR) which is a good thing.
 
I would get the highest impedance can if I had an amp/source capable of delivering enough voltage to prevent clipping or distortion.  Having said that, I wouldn't hesitate to get the 32ohm version if it was my intention to use it unamped, or from a portable source.  Frankly, as I currently own the 250ohm DT880, I haven't had any issues getting it to adequate volumes with my modest gear. 
 
If you're into graphs, check these out:

 
The above were tested on a HeadRoom amp which I believe have a very low output impedance.  Lastly, this web-link (goldenears.net) has a great comparison of all 3 as well. 
 
http://en.goldenears.net/11302

 

[thecansmancan]

Okay, thanks. That's very interesting. The graphs are, for all intensive purposes, nearly identical. And besides that point, I know sometime the graphs can be misleading. But even throwing that aside, the user rating by golden ears still placed them incredibly close to each other. So in my mind, what this comes down to is that (amp allowing) the 600 ohm ought be the first choice. Followed by the other two (as long as it's not going portable, which doesn't make a whole lot of sense, just considering the size and semi openness). However, for me, I feel like price would ultimately be the deciding factor. It seems though, at least on amazon, they are all hovering right around the same price. Thanks so much. I officially have the dt 880 as a strong contender for my next headphone purchase. 
 
and just out of curiosity, how do the HD600 and the DT880 stack up? Would they make a nice compliment, or would they be too similar?

 

[cheapheadphones]

Quote:

Just remember use a low output impedance source otherwise you may be disappointed with the results. I would love to know how many people wind up being disappointed with a headphone because they plugged their low-ohm headphone into a high-ohm amp and had some severely altered FR.

Is their any special benefit of using low output impedance?

 

[Xaborus]

Quote:

Is their any special benefit of using low output impedance?

High output impedance = Loss in damping factor = Sloppy bass, Distortion, Massacred Frequency Response.
 
Ideally, Output Impedance should be Zero.
 
To sum it up in the easiest way i know, There are three ways to control a speaker diaphragm
1. Acoustic suspension enclosure ((sealed) we will not be getting into this)
2. Mechanical damping or Qms. 
3. Electrical damping or Qes.
 
Basically, Qms is inferior to Qes. Therefore driver designers usually try to use a more Qes dependent driver. So if you're using a high output impedance amplifier, your losing Qes.
 
Simplified. 
Example of a driver showing specs so that a proper box can be made to match the driver using a program such as WinISD (specs tab)
Benchmarks .01 Ohm Output Impedance Amplifier
 

 

[Catharsis]

Quote:

Is their any special benefit of using low output impedance?

As Xaborus has said, there really isn't any audible benefit to using a high output impedance amp unless you prefer boomy bass (in most cases).  The only advantages (apparently) to high output impedance amps are that they can be cheaper, provide more electrical resistance which can protect your headphones form being fried at high volumes, and in the case of distribution amplifiers used in studios, allows various headphone to be plugged in without having wild variations in volume levels. 
 
Always try to shoot for a low output impedance amp if you're looking to preserve the sound of the headphone.  As soon as you increase the output impedance to a certain degree, the electrical changes will affect the frequency response; basically the sound of the amp will start to affect the sound of the music.  Whether you want that is a personal choice, but from a technical / neturality perspective lower output impedances are almost always preferred. 

 

[machoboy]

Way underbudget but..
The most neutral headphones i know of are the Sony V6's. Never listened to a  pair,

This is why you should not recommend headphones without hearing them..
 
I like the V6s because they're a good value and have been around forever, but they are the least neutral headphones I currently own and less neutral than everything in my sig other than the Ultrasones, Grados, and Maudios. "Balanced" perhaps since they have both boomy bass and bright treble and a few mid peaks, but neutral or flat? Not even slightly

 

[fuzzybaffy]

Man... too much good info in this thread. Keeping this bookmarked so I can refer to it in the future. 

 Thanks everyone. 

 

[Catharsis]

Quote:

This is why you should not recommend headphones without hearing them..
 
I like the V6s because they're a good value and have been around forever, but they are the least neutral headphones I currently own and less neutral than everything in my sig other than the Ultrasones, Grados, and Maudios. "Balanced" perhaps since they have both boomy bass and bright treble and a few mid peaks, but neutral or flat? Not even slightly

 
The V6s are routinely argued as being "not-neutral" vs "neutral". Whatever our basis for comparison may be, or whatever we expect neutral to sound like, the bottom line is that both the MDR-V6 and the MDR-7506 consistently MEASURE neutral similar to how the HD600 and DT880 always measure relatively neutral.  They certainly measure more neutral than the vast majority of headphones.  The only criticism I can level at the Sony's may relate to their loss of extension in the extreme lows and highs.  For the price, only the Shure SRH440 is as neutral I would say. 

 

[machoboy]

First a disclaimer: The V6 and its variants are variants, and they've been manufactured for a long time in multiple countries with known quality control issues.
It could be that different people hear different things from them because they're very nearly listening to different headphones. I'm not sure.
 
That said, for recommendation purposes I really recommend you listen to the current production V6 / 7506 rather than just go by charts.
They're quite the opposite of what you're saying.
Extension into sub-bass and high frequencies is a strength of their's, not a weakness, and they are not neutral by any stretch.
 
If you want to go by charts then Golden Ears tends to much more closely reflect the headphones I've owned than HeadRoom/InnerFidelity.
 
This isn't my idea of a neutral measurement http://en.goldenears.net/index.php?mid=GR_Headphones&category=275&page=6&document_srl=4726 and closely reflects what I hear; a sudden onset of excessive sub-bass when certain recordings trigger it and jagged spikes in the high frequencies. The mid range is actually quite good, but one only gets to enjoy it when a recording is mostly confined to that region and doesn't drown itself out with deep bass/high treble.
 

 
 
I do think they're great for the price but I would never rely on them for 'neutrality'.
 
My own comparison is listening to very flat studio monitors all day. The HD600s, DT 880s, K 702s, HM5s and other "flattish" headphones all of their flaws here and there but still sound "reliable" versus my real monitors.
 
The V6s are balanced in the sense that they're cost efficient headphones which can pull tracking duty in a studio then be taken home and used for music (they have enough peaks in each rough area that you aren't missing anything and nothing sounds clearly recessed), but as far as "neutral" in the context of a flat, reference FR goes, they are extremely peaky at the transition between mid- and sub-bass and the treble is quite bright.

 

[Catharsis]

I've owned the MDR-7506 for nearly a year, and in that time I had plenty of opportunities to AB them against the Shure SRH440, and the DT880.  I personally wouldn't call their bass "boomy" as even the FR graphs you've posted don't indicate any type of boomy bass.  However, I would agree that they are peaky in the treble, but certainly not to any significantly greater extent than the DT880 (and DT series) which also have very peaky treble around the 10khz mark.  The Sony's are peaky around 5khz which may be why some people find them brittle, but personally it didn't phase me.
 
If I were mixing / mastering perhaps I wouldn't trust the MDR, but for casual listening, the V6 / 7506 come off as neutral enough - given the price.  Certainly more neutral than the HD280pro, and comprable to the SRH440. 
 

 

[fuzzybaffy]

Well... I just got the Sennheiser HD-650's, and they're amazing. They are indeed, just a tiny bit warm, but it's a "darker" warmth, which makes it a bit more appealing, than the more usual "forward" warmth, that gets tiring and obnoxious after a while (like it is with the RS-1's). But the treble and bass, are exactly how it was with the studio monitors I had back in college; crisp and clear, and not too overbearing. They are just how I'd imagined them to be, from what I've read. 
 
Thanks for the advice guys!