[Daroid]

Quote:

Originally Posted by PeterR If it's not too much trouble, just the gist of what they had to say about the SA5000 would be great... They seem to differentiate between "hifi sound" and "music sound"? What are they listening to if not music ?

The fact that Sony had tons of bang-for-the-buck headphones is no secret, therefore no other manufacturer that is so determined move the bar for the techincal limits for dynamic headphones. The new SA5000 is just such a cutting edge headphone. Here, only the best has been good enough. Therefore they did choose leather for the ear cushions and magnesium for the body. A frqeuncy range up to 110 kHz (!) has requirered extreme membrane teqhnique which is made of nano compositions, neodymium magnets and Litz cable from 99.9999% copper.



Freaking good 3D sound
The headhpone sounds more like a lab instrument than a hifi headphone. Don't missunderstand us: It plays music the way that few does but the clarity and the amount of information in the details comes as a surprise we never before have heard. The Sony tatoos/forces everything that is on the recording on the listener, it's a completely non-forgiving headphone! But it's real plus is in another aspect - Like no other headphone it portraits a realistically deep and three-dimensional stereo scene. It makes every other headphone sound closed-in, covered and "un-inspiring". It is just as exceptional as it is demanding.

 

[bigears]

Daroid, thanks for the translation.

Was nice to hear a swedish point of view of the Beyer Dt880

I heard that language from Finland is even harder to understand
than the one from Sweden, wich is harder than the Germany.

thanks

 

[Eagle_Driver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by crazyfrenchman27 At least we now know that the Bose Triport is every bit the equal of the HD600... Tonight I can sleep soundly with this knowledge...

The problem for much of the TriPork's bad sound stems from the craptacular source which the superstores used for demoing.

Also, note that the Sony MDR-CD2000 equals or surpasses the HD600 in that review. I have both 'phones, and the HD600 has been getting a bit more use right now.

 

[Andrea]

HD595: based on the 9 ('hifi') - 9 ('music') ratings of the HD650, my own ratings would be 8 - 8.

Also, I don't understand the 5 on comfort at all (for the 9 of the 650, the 595 is 10 for me), nor the minimal difference of ratings with the HD555. Bad synergy (with their system and/or with their ears) ?

 

[3lusiv3]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Richard Martin Thanks for the Pioneer translation, fellas! I ordered a pair from AudioCubes. Does anyone think it's very strange no one has posted about headphones as highly rated as the Pioneer SE A1000? If they're as good as this mag suggests, then they're a steal at $139 US.

I find those interesting too. Let us know if you like them.

 

[JaZZ]

bigears...

...somehow I doubt that the criterion «Sound, music» in your table has any relation to «portable/MP3/computer/no amp». As I see it, it's just a valuation of the sonic characteristic from a more subjective perspective, with emphasis on the emotional aspect, as opposed to «Sound, hi-fi». The original criteria are named «Ljud, hifi» and «Ljud, musik». Where do you have the portable/non-amped aspect from? (Also note that there's no correlation between «Sound, music...» and «Sensitivity» as would be expectable if your interpretation is right.)

 

[RMgX]

They do state that the "musik" part is how enjoyable they find the phones and that it also takes into consideration listening to portable sources like mp3 players.

 

[pbirkett]

That review is not very trustworthy IMO.

Without even commenting on the sound rating, which is probably questionable, I cant see how they think the HD650 is more comfortable than a DT531... because it aint. Even allowing for subjectiveness, the DT531 should be more comfortable to 99% of people. It doesnt have excessive clamping force like the HD650, its lighter, its pads feel nicer, and the headband places no pressure at all on the scalp, again unlike the HD650.

This alone is enough to make me question this review.

Not only that, but wasnt it the same magazine that lavished praise on the DT531 last time round? Its a fickle world in the hifi business, thats for sure....

 

[halcyon]

Hifi & Musik is an interesting rag, but hardly the pinnacle of hifi journalism.

Granted, it doesn't sink as low as What Hifi, which is best used as overly expensive toilet paper.

However, it is a far cry from the headphone reviews done by Hifi (FIN), Audio (GER), Stereoplay (GER) or Stereophile (US). Those are about the only trusted or semi-trusted sources as far as print hifi publication go (in terms of headphone knowledge). How do I know? Because I've actually read each magazines headphone reviews for some years now and actually heard the phones they've tested myself

Generally magazines they tend to follow the "the more expensive, the better" school of thought, with absolutely no measurements, no understanding of output impedance issues, no break down of points from individual reviewers (I wouldn't trust a single reviewers conclusions), dismal headphone amp selection (if they even use an amp) and very limited headphone listening/reviewing experience.

Hifi & Musik is above the average in their reviews, but that's not saying much. The sad fact is that magazines have to talk enthusiastically about everything new and not give too damaging evaluations of products. Otherwise they lose their readers and their advertisers.

That's just imho and not wanting to step on anybody's toes.

Still, I hope this serves as a good reminder that most magzine tests have more entertainment than information value...

regards,
halcyon

PS In a recent review of a hifi magazine I know very well, a certain audio component got lambasted for absolutely horrific measurements and bad listening results (two reviewers confirmed this by ear, one of them under blind conditions).

This resulted in insults and threats of legal action from the manufacturer (a smallish, but known high end manufacturer). They sent in a new unit (under the "the first one was broken" excuse) for a re-evaluation. The second unit measured/sounded almost equally bad (it had been tweaked to mask design flaws, but the flaws were still equally evident in measurements and listening).

After all this, it's not too hard to understand why magazines are afraid and even reluctant to say how things are: either you get sued/lose advertisers or lose your disappointed readers, because the latest greatest thing isn't so great after all. The most honest information (even with all the noise and misleading hype) can still be gotten off forums like this one (if you ignore the 'flavor of the month' and 'manufacturer X is the best' type posts).

Just IMHO, of course.

 

[3lusiv3]

I used to subscribe to Australian Hi-Fi magazine but it seemed like a front for advertising after a while, and not "real" journalism, so I don't read it anymore. It's a pity that so many mags can't be trusted or have to be read with scepticism. It's very hard to pick the good from the crap a lot of the time because they can sound so convincing.

 

[PeterR]

Thank you, Daroid!

 

[Daroid]

EDIT: PeterR and Bigears, no problem....

I'm not fond of their SA-5000 review either. It has SEVERAL IMPORTANT flaws.

1) They start out saying that Sony has many good cheap headphones. Yet they haven't reviewed many (I have only seen CD780 and CD580 so far in their magazine, and now XD-400). Three is far from many. And only one of these is "inexpensive" or cheap.

2) Biased: Only the best was good enough. They estimate from the material that it must be the best (=expensive) but might not be the most suitable. Example: Designing a keyboard from maple might look good and be the best, but it's heavy, doesn't take cleaning acids (don't spill coke), uncomfortable and cold to type on.

3) "A frequency range up to 110 kHz (!) has requirered extreme membrane teqhniques". Like Joe Average they trust what the manufacturer wrote state - every headphone responds to even 200 kHz - but it might be at -150 dB. It surprises me that they didn't finish off their outright dumbness by telling that it therefore is designed for SACD technology

4) "It plays music the way that few does but the clarity and the amount of information in the details comes as a surprise we never before have heard."
It surprises me that they didn't mention anything about brightness or not and that they are so easy to surprise. It's a review - be critical!

5) It makes every other headphone sound closed-in, covered and "un-inspiring". "
Tough statements in a single-column review. In which part did they find that the other phones sounded closed in ? In which of the other reviews did they think it sounded closed-in ? It really bugs me with all their lab measuremtn instrument theory they didn't point at that it sounds outright unnatural for "music".

6) NEVER give the highest rating to any headphone for anything - you never know what will be better - i.e. the Qualia, Sennheiser Orpheus, MDR-R10 and vice versa.


This SA-5000 review hereby recieves the official "dumb" award. It could just as well be a copy and paste of Sony's own description in most regards.

 

[bigears]

Jazz and lini, hi

I took in consideration your comments
and edited the heads of the ratings, to play by the safe&sensible side

I dont want to induce people in mistake.

Also made a new pic ordering the phones by [size=medium]Sensitivity[/size].

As Jazz pointed the "Sound: Music" did not correlated well with
Sensitivity (easy to drive with no amp).

Sensitivity correlates with SPL (sound pressure level) & Impedance, hehehe

So of result is a improvement

 

[lini]

bigears: Nice job! But a much as I'd be intrigued by a sensibility rating, I'd still suggest you to use the term efficiency (or maybe sensitivity) instead.

Greetings from Hannover!

Manfred / lini

P.S.: Just btw, I was really thinking hard about your - somewhat cheeky

- request to rate at least the top 25 of my headphone collection in that other thread. But I found that I can't - there are just too many variables and limitations, so I don't think a simple ordered list would make much sense...

 

[JaZZ]

Thanks, bigears -- great job!