TrantaLocked
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Mar 30, 2011
- Posts
- 333
- Likes
- 31
These HD 438s don't sound bad, that's for sure. They are clearer and have a more expansive and accurate sound stage than my HD 201s. The only problem is I bought them for increased bass over my HD 201s, and in that regard I feel disappointed.
According to this graph: http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=473&graphID[]=1223
I should be hearing over twice the amount of bass in ratio with the treble, but I'm not. In fact, the bass increase is so small I would say there is no more than 3db increase in bass.
I know burn in is supposed to help a little, but a headphone should sound 90% like it will forever in the first few hours. They have been played for around 30 hours. What's even funnier is that my HD 201 has horrible isolation because the pleather pads have been worn thinner so my ear is touching the driver, and the pad barely holds to my skin. So with a worse seal the HD 201 STILL produces similar bass to the HD 438.
Is headroom wrong with their charts, or what?
According to this graph: http://graphs.headphone.com/graphCompare.php?graphType=0&graphID[]=473&graphID[]=1223
I should be hearing over twice the amount of bass in ratio with the treble, but I'm not. In fact, the bass increase is so small I would say there is no more than 3db increase in bass.
I know burn in is supposed to help a little, but a headphone should sound 90% like it will forever in the first few hours. They have been played for around 30 hours. What's even funnier is that my HD 201 has horrible isolation because the pleather pads have been worn thinner so my ear is touching the driver, and the pad barely holds to my skin. So with a worse seal the HD 201 STILL produces similar bass to the HD 438.
Is headroom wrong with their charts, or what?