[The Quality Guru]

I know that the RS-1 and many other Grados are not wonderful at extracting low-level detail. This is a problem considering the RS-1 is a headphone I soon plan to buy and I also do not care to listen at medium-loud volumes to achieve transparency . . . or am I misinformed about low-level listening with Grados, namely the RS-1?

I know electrostats are known to be good at this . . . but they're not portable . . . though could still be an option. The 3030 System is supposed to be quite good, right? Is it near the performance of the 4040?

What about the HP-1000 Series 'phones? How are they at low-level detail?

Any other headphones I should know about that are good at this?

Also, I'm not a huge fan of the HD600 (well, not yet, at least) so I'd prefer not to use this headphone.

BTW, my price range for the headphone is about $700 tops.

Thanks for any help whatsoever!

Regards, Luke

 

[recephasan]

Funny, I own the RS-1, RS-2 and the SR-125. They're all wonderful at low levels with as much detail as they have at higher levels. That's where I do most of my listening.

FYI: I use them with an RA-1. Even at low levels, it gives a better punch and a little more speed. Although I have used them straight out of my pdcp with no noticable drop in detail.

 

[The Quality Guru]

NEWBIE ALERT!

I just realized how much of a newbie question I just asked. I truly apologize.

 

[j-curve]

Fletcher-Munson tells you what you'll want - plenty of oomph and a dash of shish.

I know this doesn't answer your question but...

 

[The Quality Guru]

Quote:

Originally posted by recephasan Funny, I own the RS-1, RS-2 and the SR-125. They're all wonderful at low levels with as much detail as they have at higher levels. That's where I do most of my listening. FYI: I use them with an RA-1. Even at low levels, it gives a better punch and a little more speed. Although I have used them straight out of my pdcp with no noticable drop in detail.

Thanks for the input, recephasan. Appreciate it.

 

[elnero]

Hey Guru,

Your 1 away from 500!

 

[NotoriousBIG_PJ]

Why don't you spend the money on a good source?

Biggie.

 

[Hirsch]

Of the dynamic phones I've heard, the second best at retrieving low level detail is the RS-1, which is better IMO than the HP-1 at detail.

The best dynamic headphone for low level detail is rather expensive

 

[M Rael]

Quote:

Originally posted by The Quality Guru I know electrostats are known to be good at this . . . but they're not portable . . . though could still be an option. The 3030 System is supposed to be quite good, right? What about the HP-1000 Series 'phones? How are they at low-level detail?

I have the Stax 303 -w- the Stax T1 tube amp and also the HP1000(HP2), and I can say a few things about how they compare in detail. On paper it would seem that the Stax has it all over the Grado in detail resolution since the Stax diaphram is so incredibly thin (2 gnat pubic hairs.) Anything that thin would promise to respond to the slightest inputs. But even with lower quality electronics the HP2 does amazingly well in that department. Really, really well. Probably people who listen to classical or other acoustic music might notice more resolution out of the Stax, since there is more natural 'air' in the recordings. On heavily mixed and panned studio rock there is less to choose between the two, and thats the kind of music I listen to most.

Also remember that any humps in the frequency response of a headphone are going to highlight instruments or sounds that fall into that range, making them more audible.

But if you owned the HP2 you could feel confident that you werent missing much of anything in terms of detail compared to the Stax 303. Its the presentation thats different! The Stax is fine for rock by the way. Do you want to try an old Stax headphone I have lying around? I might be needing it as part of a trade I *may* be doing, but if it falls through you could borrow it for a week. Lemme know.. its a SRX MkIII, and its a damn decent sounding older Stax.

 

[Vertigo-1]

The best dynamic headphone with low, and I do mean low, level detail IMO is the Etymotics. If you're talking about hearing every single last whisper, Etymotics simply can't be beat, even by electrostats.

 

[a1leyez0nm3]

I second the Etys, nothing that I have heard can beat them at low level detail.

 

[Blighty]

How do the Etys compare against the Sony R-10 in terms of regular detail and low level ambient detail retrieval? Also, anyone that has experience with Etys and the Audio-Technica W2002 please chime in as well regarding the same topic of discussion.

 

[shivohum]

Quote:

If you're talking about hearing every single last whisper, Etymotics simply can't be beat, even by electrostats.

I disagree. When it comes to low-level detail, I think good electrostatics are basically unbeatable. Etymotics are very detailed -- more so than any other dynamic. But in the detail department they just don't stand up to good electrostats. Of course you have to compare the two in pretty quiet conditions; otherwise the Ety's noise blocking will give it an advantage.

 

[Tomcat]

Quote:

Originally posted by The Quality Guru How are they at low-level detail? Any other headphones I should know about that are good at this?

Hmm? W100s?

 

[Vertigo-1]

Quote:

Originally posted by shivohum I disagree. When it comes to low-level detail, I think good electrostatics are basically unbeatable. Etymotics are very detailed -- more so than any other dynamic. But in the detail department they just don't stand up to good electrostats. Of course you have to compare the two in pretty quiet conditions; otherwise the Ety's noise blocking will give it an advantage.

I guess we will agree to disagree here then.

I honestly think the Ety's 28db of isolation that seals in the sound gives them an advantage in the low level stuff regardless of how quiet you can make the room when compared back to an open backed electrostatic.

Quote:

How do the Etys compare against the Sony R-10 in terms of regular detail and low level ambient detail retrieval?

The Etys beat the R10s at extremely quiet detail retrieval IMO. It's why I decided to sell the R10s to finance a source that's known for sheer detail retrieval...to exploit that strength the Etys have over the R10s, and to play to the strength of future things. I'm sure others may disagree, but that's just the conclusions I came to myself over a period of several months. It's also about what I'm looking for personally in my own chase.

But, low level ambient detail? I think the Etys don't have much ambience retrieval at all...they have one of the driest soundstages I've ever heard. Likewise the "air" surrounding instruments doesn't seem to materialize with the Etys.

At regular details, assuming your room is quiet enough, they're at a pretty even level. The R10's coherent soundstage may make their instrument spacing seem more clumped compared to the Ety's dry instrument seperation. With the Etys you can plainly hear each instrument seperated out, but it sounds very "flat" in feel. I guess the R10's make instruments sound "wetter" in a way, if you catch. More emotional impact, more lushness, but less distinct seperation because of the way the R10's soundstage pulls everything together.

Sorry, I'm still rather new at describing soundstage, because of how much it has to do with psychoacoustics. If the above makes no sense, pardon my lack of proper words to express what I'm trying to say. I'm at a learning stage myself right now...