AdamZuf
Headphoneus Supremus
- Joined
- Dec 4, 2002
- Posts
- 2,661
- Likes
- 11
i've owned the RS-1 for 3 months now. i'm listening to all sorts of music.
in the last week i've been listening to the RS-1 (bowls) through Winamp 5 with MAD plugin, Speaker Simulator plugin (crossfeed plugin) and Shibatch Super Equalizer, set only with the parametric values of:
A. 20Hz to 50Hz, 4dB (no, it doesn't distort until now)
B. 18,500Hz to 20,000Hz, -5dB
both plugins works under MuchFX plugin, which enables plugin stacking in winamp. directsound output on windows 2000. my ASIO plugin doesn't work.
my grados play directly out of the stock soundcard of my IBM T23 laptop.
this sounds better to my ears then Mensa DI/O and PPA/Porta Corda.
the sound is a bit less natural, but i already know very well when it's related to crossfeed, and what to expect with it or without it.
infact, i want to make a statement in here. i suspect that many times people prefer more natural systems without crossfeed, and forget that listening with complete channel seperation is not natural. if they would know how a system sounds both ways, they would have chosen the system that is the more flexible system.
i used to be a crossfeed addict, then i hated crossfeed.. a wonderful love/hate relationship. today i know that as a headphones listener, both modes are very essential when the time is right for each.
for example, you can't listen to "coltrane jazz" without it, but you can't listen to "tutu" with it
anyway, i prefer the edge definition of my soundcard.
all matter of synergy.
Foobar2000 have just a bit more high end then winamp, even with no plugins enabled on winamp. the behaviour of winamp suits the RS-1 better; there's some depth in there that i like. it is beautiful how different products respond synergeticly, beyond just the "match"; with my previous CD3000 system, winamp's sound was percieved to me really as less good, but now it's only different. the match itself affects what we percieve as "quality". probably many of you knows this from switching headphones and saying with one of them "hey, this album is recorded quite alright, it's not as bad as i thought".
the most important thing is that the RS-1 doesn't sound bright at all now.as you can see, i made very small adjustments, just at the extreme ends of the spectrum.
the bass adjustment affects the flesh of sound more then the treble cut. this, together with winamp (instead of foobar, which won't give you that low boost with its EQ), make the RS-1 not bright headphones. almost perfect balance. the RS-1 respond to EQ in its own way, i must say, if this is the result of such low bass boost on my perception of brightness.
the people who knows the RS-1 in a system that does them justice, knows how they make so many recording enjoyable, and this quality doesn't fall here on bit.
the treble adjustment is meant to fix the "broken cymbal" syndrom (that's my name for it.. of the way cymals sound cheap and low quality sometimes) of the RS-1, not the brightness; it doesn't have much effect on it. i can't remember spotting the syndrom with the RA-1 in my short audition, and no one is yet to make that point clear to me.
the problem is not solved, but reduced to a satisfying level. however, that top end adjustment is not final.
i spent hours on trying to EQ the RS-1, and it turns out that the simplest way is the best with these cans. forget the headroom graphs, if you were thinking of using them as reference.
the Speaker Simulator plugin is a great crossfeed plugin, with two controls; crossfeed level and delay depth. using them with such a balanced, yet upfront system is so fun, especially on acoustic music. the RS-1 respond wonderfully to this plugin, and with an easy adjustment you can flush the "syrup" of the pianos or the unnatural edge of acoustic guitars down the loo. the pianos will no longer sound electrical (god i hate that, this is not a problem of the RS-1 only). the delay depth control affects what i percieve as dry/wet, to a small degree.
both control assure satisfactory out of any recording. the crossfeed level can be set to the exact level that you desire, so you will have to compromise less. a wide range of presentation/frequency relationship is available.
so, what's the trouble with the RS-1? (things that bother me, not imprefections, which are a part of everything in this world)
1.still a bit of that broken cymbal syndrom, which could irritate sometimes.
2.the treble doesn’t seem to have edginess in the sound that allows an excellent sounds seperation. there’s a lot of detail, but hard to spot and “isolate” in my mind sometimes.
this is relatively to the ER-4 or CD3000, which has less detail then the RS-1, yet manage to do this better in their own level, and to express that side of "musicality" maybe better.. for example, if you're listening to an electronic tune that you got 3 lines composed in the treble region, the ER-4/CD3000 might make a nicer balance that will "sit" in your head better then the RS-1.
however, the treble of the RS-1 "speaks" better then both. they will still make the pitch of treble sound more clear to percieve, and deliver excellent detail that tells the "story and origin" of the sounds at a higher level.
just to make clear, i love my RS-1 much more then any other cans i've owned/heard. that includes the R10 out of upgraded philips 963SA and twinhead.
oh, and my source is a wonderful laptop too
the only thing i am interested in is the MS-Pros.... (oh dear it never ends)
in the last week i've been listening to the RS-1 (bowls) through Winamp 5 with MAD plugin, Speaker Simulator plugin (crossfeed plugin) and Shibatch Super Equalizer, set only with the parametric values of:
A. 20Hz to 50Hz, 4dB (no, it doesn't distort until now)
B. 18,500Hz to 20,000Hz, -5dB
both plugins works under MuchFX plugin, which enables plugin stacking in winamp. directsound output on windows 2000. my ASIO plugin doesn't work.
my grados play directly out of the stock soundcard of my IBM T23 laptop.
this sounds better to my ears then Mensa DI/O and PPA/Porta Corda.
the sound is a bit less natural, but i already know very well when it's related to crossfeed, and what to expect with it or without it.
infact, i want to make a statement in here. i suspect that many times people prefer more natural systems without crossfeed, and forget that listening with complete channel seperation is not natural. if they would know how a system sounds both ways, they would have chosen the system that is the more flexible system.
i used to be a crossfeed addict, then i hated crossfeed.. a wonderful love/hate relationship. today i know that as a headphones listener, both modes are very essential when the time is right for each.
for example, you can't listen to "coltrane jazz" without it, but you can't listen to "tutu" with it
anyway, i prefer the edge definition of my soundcard.
all matter of synergy.
Foobar2000 have just a bit more high end then winamp, even with no plugins enabled on winamp. the behaviour of winamp suits the RS-1 better; there's some depth in there that i like. it is beautiful how different products respond synergeticly, beyond just the "match"; with my previous CD3000 system, winamp's sound was percieved to me really as less good, but now it's only different. the match itself affects what we percieve as "quality". probably many of you knows this from switching headphones and saying with one of them "hey, this album is recorded quite alright, it's not as bad as i thought".
the most important thing is that the RS-1 doesn't sound bright at all now.as you can see, i made very small adjustments, just at the extreme ends of the spectrum.
the bass adjustment affects the flesh of sound more then the treble cut. this, together with winamp (instead of foobar, which won't give you that low boost with its EQ), make the RS-1 not bright headphones. almost perfect balance. the RS-1 respond to EQ in its own way, i must say, if this is the result of such low bass boost on my perception of brightness.
the people who knows the RS-1 in a system that does them justice, knows how they make so many recording enjoyable, and this quality doesn't fall here on bit.
the treble adjustment is meant to fix the "broken cymbal" syndrom (that's my name for it.. of the way cymals sound cheap and low quality sometimes) of the RS-1, not the brightness; it doesn't have much effect on it. i can't remember spotting the syndrom with the RA-1 in my short audition, and no one is yet to make that point clear to me.
the problem is not solved, but reduced to a satisfying level. however, that top end adjustment is not final.
i spent hours on trying to EQ the RS-1, and it turns out that the simplest way is the best with these cans. forget the headroom graphs, if you were thinking of using them as reference.
the Speaker Simulator plugin is a great crossfeed plugin, with two controls; crossfeed level and delay depth. using them with such a balanced, yet upfront system is so fun, especially on acoustic music. the RS-1 respond wonderfully to this plugin, and with an easy adjustment you can flush the "syrup" of the pianos or the unnatural edge of acoustic guitars down the loo. the pianos will no longer sound electrical (god i hate that, this is not a problem of the RS-1 only). the delay depth control affects what i percieve as dry/wet, to a small degree.
both control assure satisfactory out of any recording. the crossfeed level can be set to the exact level that you desire, so you will have to compromise less. a wide range of presentation/frequency relationship is available.
so, what's the trouble with the RS-1? (things that bother me, not imprefections, which are a part of everything in this world)
1.still a bit of that broken cymbal syndrom, which could irritate sometimes.
2.the treble doesn’t seem to have edginess in the sound that allows an excellent sounds seperation. there’s a lot of detail, but hard to spot and “isolate” in my mind sometimes.
this is relatively to the ER-4 or CD3000, which has less detail then the RS-1, yet manage to do this better in their own level, and to express that side of "musicality" maybe better.. for example, if you're listening to an electronic tune that you got 3 lines composed in the treble region, the ER-4/CD3000 might make a nicer balance that will "sit" in your head better then the RS-1.
however, the treble of the RS-1 "speaks" better then both. they will still make the pitch of treble sound more clear to percieve, and deliver excellent detail that tells the "story and origin" of the sounds at a higher level.
just to make clear, i love my RS-1 much more then any other cans i've owned/heard. that includes the R10 out of upgraded philips 963SA and twinhead.
oh, and my source is a wonderful laptop too
the only thing i am interested in is the MS-Pros.... (oh dear it never ends)
