[vrln]

If you someday have the extra time, I think it would be awesome if you could gather all headphone science stuff (+ links) in one thread. Something like a "introduction to headphone technology". I´m a fan of your posts, and I think a lot of people would be thankful for a thread like that. There seems to be a lot of confusion regarding the basic scientific principles etc.

 

[Skylab]

ElDoug I understood you. But the practice of measuring equency response, even of loudspeakrs, is as much alchemy as science. Look at the great lengths John Atkinson at Stereophile goes through, with fairly sophisticated equipment, and still he is contstantly saying that this or that part of the results graph is "likely an artifact of the measurement technique".

The measurement of transducer frequency response, by another transducer, and in anything short of an anechoic chamber, is not definitive. Headphone measurements are even more contested and debatable. Nothing is going to be "proven" in this thread by an endless and needless discussion of measurement techniques, and it has totally veered away from the topic of this thread.

 

[jamato8]

Quote:

Sigh. Another good thread concept, more derailed than any train wreck.

I was enjoying this thread for a while. Sometimes I am not sure what a thread is about then I look at the title. It is like getting lost while spelunking, you are where you are, but not sure how to get back home. 
 

 

[Frank I]

^^^^^^^^^^^
X2

 

[John Buchanan]

I had a crack at summarising what Diffuse Field Equalisation was about here:
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/485966/stax-srm-monitor-a-history-and-appreciation-of-diffuse-field-equalisation
My own reckoning is that the headphone driver positions should be the same as the microphones used to record.
1. If using a dummy head with microphones at the opening of the "ear canals", an IEM monitor should be used to replay the recording.
2. If a Jecklin recording system is used, then use Stax Sigmas or AKG K1000s to replay.
These should give an accurate binaural experience.

 

[MacedonianHero]

Quote:

^^^^^^^^^^^
X2

^^^
x3  [unsubscribed from this thread...and it started of so well too.]

 

[jamato8]

So any "ON topic" information or additions??

 

[Currawong]

I'm surprised nobody here has mentioned the difference in performance of any of these cans with different amps and sources.  I have no doubt my decision to stay with the LCD-2s is due to the synergy with the rest of my system. If I had owned them, say, a couple of years ago when I didn't have as good a system, I would still feel Stax were superior.  However, the best Stax amp I've used was a 717.

 

[jamato8]

Quote:

I'm surprised nobody here has mentioned the difference in performance of any of these cans with different amps and sources.  I have no doubt my decision to stay with the LCD-2s is due to the synergy with the rest of my system. If I had owned them, say, a couple of years ago when I didn't have as good a system, I would still feel Stax were superior.  However, the best Stax amp I've used was a 717.

Good point. It would be interesting to know what amp is being used and if the phones are single ended or balanced. I use mine both single ended and balanced and out of two balanced portables, the 71B and the PB2 (which has many options for op amps) and the fi.Q in single ended. The fi.Q is excellent and very dynamic with subtle contrasts to the sound. Excellent extension to the high frequencies and a bass control that amazes me. 
 
Edit: sorry, I realize now my post makes no since because I am not comparing it to the phones mentioned. 
 
Compared to my Ed. 9, that some consider high end, the LCD-2 delivers a larger sound stage with better defined bass and in general, a cleaner sound, meaning that the 2's do not smear into any frequency but clearly keep frequency response within that frequency range. The transparency of the LCD-2 is also better (the since of space are openness around instruments and voices. 
 

 

[Currawong]

I wish I could have kept the HD-800s around longer to compare, but the kind of amps that I felt were great with the HD-800s, such as the OTL Audiovalve RKV I had would have been, without the Impedenzer at least, not a good amp for the LCD-2s, which I like better with the Phoenix for its absolute clarity.  Stax are a difficult comparison. They are similar in that you have a large, flat driver, but that is as far as it goes.  Maybe it's because of this similarity that I felt the best results were with the balanced amp I have, or simply that they mate best with gear that is balanced in output at least. As I'm a detail junkie, the O2s were perfect in that regard, even out of the 717, allowing me to discern the size and nature of the place music was recorded from the detail in the echos off the walls.  Since they are supposed to perform even better with higher end gear, that makes them, to me, similar to the LCD-2s in that they are great, but really shine if you're willing to spend serious money on the source and amp.
 
Maybe a more relevant question, as the LCD-2s have the measurements to back up their perceived performance, is what does it take in comparison with the old classics to build a fantastic rig for them vs. building a rig for the others.

 

[Asr]

Quote:

For those that have some of the classic high end headphones, how do they hold up to the new planars?

Headphones mentioned in the thread title that I have not owned: R10, K1000, and L3000. I never bought those headphones not for financial reasons (I could have if I really wanted to), but for other reasons. I've heard them all at meets and didn't like how the R10 or L3000 sounded, and I could never get past the earspeaker design of the K1000 (or its amp requirements for that matter).
 
I owned the Qualia 010 up until recently for over a year and had my Stax OII MKI/HeadAmp BHSE system simultaneously throughout that time, but until very recently (December) didn't really have an amp that did justice to the Qualia, which was/is the HeadAmp GS-X. I also have the LCD-2, which I personally compared to the Qualia on the GS-X. And I was one of the people who got to listen to the HiFiMan HE-6 prototype during the loaner program - but I haven't heard the production HE-6, and I'm not interested in buying one either.
 
So the only headphones that I can really speak to are the LCD-2, Qualia, and OII MKI, and my opinion is that the people who can appreciate the Qualia for its treble won't find it matched by any other headphone. It was and is the only headphone I've ever thought had perfect treble - there was absolutely nothing for me to complain about in that aspect. Sure there are plenty of people who think the Qualia is way too "bright", but I thought it was absolutely amazing and it became the only headphone that I thought authentically conveyed music like bluegrass (as there are lots of treble-domain sounds in bluegrass, like from steel guitars, banjo, dobro, etc).
 
I'm in the process of writing a review of the LCD-2 (with comparisons to the Qualia and OII MKI) so I won't say much there for now. I'll just say that the LCD-2 is a very good headphone for $1K, but on sonic capability alone it doesn't touch the OII MKI/BHSE and I haven't found anything else that can touch the OII/BHSE either. I'm amping the LCD-2 out of the GS-X though (in balanced mode) and have no idea how it might improve with other amps. Well I did hear the LCD-2 on a B22 briefly last year but I can't really speak for that experience anymore. I hope to listen to it again on the B22 sometime soon.

 

[MrGreen]

Quote:

I had a crack at summarising what Diffuse Field Equalisation was about here:
http://www.head-fi.org/forum/thread/485966/stax-srm-monitor-a-history-and-appreciation-of-diffuse-field-equalisation
My own reckoning is that the headphone driver positions should be the same as the microphones used to record.
1. If using a dummy head with microphones at the opening of the "ear canals", an IEM monitor should be used to replay the recording.
2. If a Jecklin recording system is used, then use Stax Sigmas or AKG K1000s to replay.
These should give an accurate binaural experience.

Nice post, thanks.

 

[gomincha]

 Hi Asr,
 
I'm more than interested in your impressions about HD800 vs Qualia vs LCD-2 out of your GS-X as an all around headphone!
From your posts i understood that your SR-007 + BHSE combo is your overall favourite but i wonder which of the other three comes close to it as a complete experience?
What about JH-13s? Do the stand a chance approaching these levels of full size phones?
I'm asking because it would be helpful to know that there is a system that even compares to O2 MK1 + BHSE and costs less money..
Quote:

Quote:

For those that have some of the classic high end headphones, how do they hold up to the new planars?

Headphones mentioned in the thread title that I have not owned: R10, K1000, and L3000. I never bought those headphones not for financial reasons (I could have if I really wanted to), but for other reasons. I've heard them all at meets and didn't like how the R10 or L3000 sounded, and I could never get past the earspeaker design of the K1000 (or its amp requirements for that matter).
 
I owned the Qualia 010 up until recently for over a year and had my Stax OII MKI/HeadAmp BHSE system simultaneously throughout that time, but until very recently (December) didn't really have an amp that did justice to the Qualia, which was/is the HeadAmp GS-X. I also have the LCD-2, which I personally compared to the Qualia on the GS-X. And I was one of the people who got to listen to the HiFiMan HE-6 prototype during the loaner program - but I haven't heard the production HE-6, and I'm not interested in buying one either.
 
So the only headphones that I can really speak to are the LCD-2, Qualia, and OII MKI, and my opinion is that the people who can appreciate the Qualia for its treble won't find it matched by any other headphone. It was and is the only headphone I've ever thought had perfect treble - there was absolutely nothing for me to complain about in that aspect. Sure there are plenty of people who think the Qualia is way too "bright", but I thought it was absolutely amazing and it became the only headphone that I thought authentically conveyed music like bluegrass (as there are lots of treble-domain sounds in bluegrass, like from steel guitars, banjo, dobro, etc).
 
I'm in the process of writing a review of the LCD-2 (with comparisons to the Qualia and OII MKI) so I won't say much there for now. I'll just say that the LCD-2 is a very good headphone for $1K, but on sonic capability alone it doesn't touch the OII MKI/BHSE and I haven't found anything else that can touch the OII/BHSE either. I'm amping the LCD-2 out of the GS-X though (in balanced mode) and have no idea how it might improve with other amps. Well I did hear the LCD-2 on a B22 briefly last year but I can't really speak for that experience anymore. I hope to listen to it again on the B22 sometime soon.

 

[Currawong]

Asr: How are you finding the AD2000s compared to the LCD-2s?

 

[MrSpenkelink]

I've enjoyed the derailment but that's just me.