[txa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fewtch Tyll, it isn't. It was there for the old DT880s, I'm sure of it (because I researched the DT880 heavily before buying it, and the statement was definitely there long before the new 880 came out). I'm surprised at your attitude toward the old DT880, but even more surprised that you weren't aware it's the same ad copy. I can only guess you weren't the person who wrote it, and that you just didn't take notice. P.S. I see JayGee is up to his same old tricks that got him on my ignore list. He's so offensive that maybe it's time to start ignoring people who quote him as well. Hey, I admit it... I'm just a foofy guy.

Hey guys,

I don't want to split hairs either - but now I'm confused. I definitely agree with Fewtch that the text written "maybe the best there is" about the 880 was there for quite a while, - well before I bought my 880s. This text was alongside the great write-up of the 650's. At that time, there were several renditions of the 880 on the headroom site, with and without cardas cable, balanced, etc.

How many sets of 880s has Beyer introduced and what is the distinction between old and new.

My pair have the flat enclosure, not rounded, and were the most recent phones listed piror to the rounded enclosure. Are these the OLD ones? Or is there something earlier that is OLD.

Thanks!

 

[fewtch]

Quote:

Originally Posted by txa My pair have the flat enclosure, not rounded, and were the most recent phones listed piror to the rounded enclosure. Are these the OLD ones?

Yes.
Quote:

Or is there something earlier that is OLD.

There was apparently an even older DT880 design that was around in the 80s/early 90s. Someone picked up a pair on eBay recently and there's a thread around somewhere. To my knowledge, the flat metal grille design was around until a month or two ago, and the only difference was that the coiled cord was switched to a straight one (oh yeah, and briefly a leather case rather than the aluminum box).

I for one wish Beyer would quit futzing around with these redesigns, just release a newer model number and leave the classics alone. It's confusing, and makes it difficult to talk about without saying "which DT770/880/990" you own.

 

[txa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fewtch Yes. There was apparently an even older DT880 design that was around in the 80s/early 90s. Someone picked up a pair on eBay recently and there's a thread around somewhere. To my knowledge, the flat metal grille design was around until a month or two ago, and the only difference was that the coiled cord was switched to a straight one. I for one wish Beyer would quit futzing around with these redesigns, just release a newer model number and leave the classics alone. It's confusing, and makes it difficult to talk about without saying "which DT770/880/990" you own.

Thanks Fewtch - that clears it up. I thought there was something older from a decade or so ago, but didn't think that was the one that was referenced as OLD in the recent threads.

I agree - naming the latest one an 881 or something would have been helpful.

 

[cosmopragma]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fewtch Yes. There was apparently an even older DT880 design that was around in the 80s/early 90s..

I have one of those age old DT 880s lying around here somewhere.
Total crap by today's terms.The sole use I have for it is as a load for amp burn in.

 

[robm321]

I think headroom is great and does a lot for headphone lover, but I was just wondering does anyone else seem to notice that all their favorite headphones are the ones that their amps are geared towards. Senn's will always be the best of the best of the best sir, with honors according to them. And they say it as if it's truth. The Grado's will always be faulty in their eyes.

Just a thought - They have a business to run, so I have nothing against them at all - love their products. I just don't see their reviews as something that I can completely count on ya know?

 

[txa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 I think headroom is great and does a lot for headphone lover, but I was just wondering does anyone else seem to notice that all their favorite headphones are the ones that their amps are geared towards. Senn's will always be the best of the best of the best sir, with honors according to them. And they say it as if it's truth. The Grado's will always be faulty in their eyes. Just a thought - They have a business to run, so I have nothing against them at all - love their products. I just don't see their reviews as something that I can completely count on ya know?

I'd normally agree with you - I've dealt with enough vendors to know that objectiveness isn't always a high priority.

However, with or without a business to run, I've concluded that Headroom is as objective as it gets and one of the most helpful companies around. After gaining experience with quite a few phones over the past year or so, I've gone back and re-read their reviews and have concurred almost completely. Also - I've noticed that they give GREAT reviews to other competing products - most notably the Grace amps. I think they may have even done themselves an injustice by describing the 901 and 902 that well!

Reading Headroom's take on the Grace, and then Stereophile's recent take on the new Desktop amps makes me really want a HeadRoom Desktop!

Enough rambling though... I think they're a great company you can trust.

 

[TheSloth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by txa I'd normally agree with you - I've dealt with enough vendors to know that objectiveness isn't always a high priority. However, with or without a business to run, I've concluded that Headroom is as objective as it gets and one of the most helpful companies around. After gaining experience with quite a few phones over the past year or so, I've gone back and re-read their reviews and have concurred almost completely. Also - I've noticed that they give GREAT reviews to other competing products - most notably the Grace amps. I think they may have even done themselves an injustice by describing the 901 and 902 that well! Reading Headroom's take on the Grace, and then Stereophile's recent take on the new Desktop amps makes me really want a HeadRoom Desktop! Enough rambling though... I think they're a great company you can trust.

Off topic, but I think the write up for the Grace is stock advertising text from Grace themselves, and isn't a review per se.

 

[txa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSloth Off topic, but I think the write up for the Grace is stock advertising text from Grace themselves, and isn't a review per se.

Perhaps for the 902, but not 901. I'll have to revisit their site to see if it is still available. But I remember some very positive comments from Headroom.

I could be losing it too though...

Will see if I can dig it up...

 

[txa]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheSloth Off topic, but I think the write up for the Grace is stock advertising text from Grace themselves, and isn't a review per se.

This isn't the one I remembered, but good enough to illustrate:

http://www.headphone.com/guide/by-ma...akg-k-1000.php

 

[jagorev]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fewtch P.S. if he were just giving his opinion I wouldn't have a problem, but he always states things as if they were holy truth, and there's a good chance people will be mislead (especially newcomers).

Stating personal opinion as objective truth has to be my biggest peeve about the audio world. The SA5000 and K701 developed some similar fanboys.

 

[granodemostasa]

On headroom: the problem here is that grados, outside of the SR60-MS-1, are terrible as a price/performance category. i've heard the 225: it's not the best 200 dollar headphone; the 580 kills it. now, i like the HF-1 and the RS-1, they are among the top; worthy of being part of a great rig; but the RS-1 costs twice as much as the competition; it's a serious investment and only good if one already know what they want. Grado offers a very specific sound, a particular presentation that isn't found on other headphones...that's why they are great; but that's also why they cost so much. Beyer, AKG and even Senn don't have that option: people compare them all the time and, depending on amps and cables, they sound somewhat alike; or at least much closer to each other than to a grado.

 

[Clutz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jagorev Stating personal opinion as objective truth has to be my biggest peeve about the audio world. The SA5000 and K701 developed some similar fanboys.

I'm going to sound a bit like a sociologist here, but the problem as I see it when it comes to headphones is that there is no objective truth. Part of the problem with these arguments is that we haven't defined what is "better". Does better mean a more accurate representation of the original recording? Some people would say it does! Other people would say that it they want their headphones to make the music seem more "alive" at the expense of accuracy. Does better mean that the headphones has a "flatter" frequency response curve, and lower THD performance? I think that it's impossible to come with a completely natural way of defining "better" in this context.

This is something that the Arts and Social Sciences have recognized for a while, that on a great many topics there really isn't "better" and "worse". It's all art, it's what you prefer. Listening to music with headphones is art. It's about what you prefer. Now, that doesn't mean we can't have a useful definition of "better" that completely ignores these issues of frequency response, THD performance and price. We can, and this is how I would propose to do it, if I were going to do it (but I'm not, I just don't care enough).

Another question we need to ask, is why do we care about better? When does the issue of "better" come up? Typically it comes up when people are asking for recommendations for headphones. Given this, I would argue that one way of defining "better" would be to ask a random sample (in the statistical sense) of self described headphone audiophiles which headphone they prefer out of a sample of headphones. The reason for this is purely statistical. If you have a random sample of 'audiophiles', and 65% of them prefer headphone X over headphone Y, then it would mean that if you picked someone at random from the same population that the random sample was drawn from, that any given individual would have a 65% chance of prefering headphone X.

This is actually a useful way of framing the question. It tells us something useful. It tells you, that if you don't know anything about headphones and your preferences and you want to know which headphones to buy, go with the most popular one. Are you going to love it too? Not necessarily, but of all the possibilities it has the best chance of pleasing you. It doesn't exclude the possibility that an individual may still prefer their KSC-75s over a pair of AKG K1000s or a Baby Orpheus, because it's not trying to do that. It doesn't make any objetive statement about which is better- it just makes a statement about what most people prefer.

If we're going to discuss "better", then we need to know what "better" means, why we care about "better", and how we're planning on using this information.

 

[jagorev]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Clutz This is something that the Arts and Social Sciences have recognized for a while, that on a great many topics there really isn't "better" and "worse". It's all art, it's what you prefer. Listening to music with headphones is art. It's about what you prefer. Now, that doesn't mean we can't have a useful definition of "better" that completely ignores these issues of frequency response, THD performance and price. We can, and this is how I would propose to do it, if I were going to do it (but I'm not, I just don't care enough).

Well said. I completely agree. Science and objectivity are great things, but it's just the wrong paradigm to apply here.

I used to feel that the flattest frequency response curve was the "best". But I've realized since then that a flat FR means unrealistically low bass. In order for headphones to recreate the bass impact of speakers or real life in a convincing way, they have to have a bass hump. Similarly, a flat treble might sound harsh to many because the drivers are so close to your ears - realism demands treble attenuation. Others might say that, since we lose hearing sensitivity in the treble region, realistic reproduction of guitars and cymbals demands a treble peak.

Since everyone's ears are shaped differently, which curve sounds realistic to you is pretty subjective. It's also a matter of what you're used to. Someone who's listened to Sennheisers for years may find Grados or Beyers unlistenable, and vice versa.

(FWIW, the DT880 actually has a flatter FR than the HD650, with less deviation from neutrality...OTOH, the only major deviation it has makes it sound too bright for some people.)

 

[JayGee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by fewtch Yep. To JayGee though, "objective" means "because I say so" or "my opinions are objectively true." That's why I find him and his posts to be highly offensive. He's an HD650 fanboy as well, and a hater/basher (who for some reason has singled out the DT880). Bad combination.

Not really. The sound parameters we are discussing in this case are objective. Would anyone disagree that the 880, or a Grado is brighter than a 650?? No, because even tiny ears (Fewtch?) can hear the difference. Going one step further I think the majority of persons comparing the 650 and the 880 would admit that the 650 resolves more info. As long as your source and amp is putting the info out, that is. It is not a matter of opinion, and if you do not hear this in your system it probably means that you are using a system that does not have enough resolution.

This 650 "Fanboy" listens tp AKG 501's most of the time, not the 650. Even though I know the 650 is a better headphone. That is the difference between being able to appreciate what is better, and what you personally like.

The Senn 650 is often used to monitor high end classical recordings when they are being made. Do some research on the internet on this subject. You will never see the Beyer 880 used for this purpose. And the reasons are not hard to understand...it just does not resolve the recording as well.

Jay

 

[JayGee]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jagorev Your statement is akin to saying "a Mercedes is objectively superior to a BMW," or "a Monet painting is objectively superior to a Renoir painting." Utter nonsense. Statements like that are useless when it comes to evaluating audio. If you think the 880 somehow resolves less data, if you think this is an objective measure, you'll have to show some kind of proof. To me, objectivity means something that can be recorded and shown independently, outside of personal experience. I cannot imagine what kind of objective test could show that one high-end headphone is "objectively" superior to another. The differences at this level are subtle, and largely a matter of different presentations that appeal to different listening preferences.

Why do you not address my statement directly rather than what it is "akin" to? I'm making a specific statement about the resolution of two headphones, which is an important parameter in judging overall quality.

If we were discussing the speed of two cars would the results be so hard to determine the results?

There is no mystery to this for most listeners. Why do you think the Senn 650 is used by so many recording engineers, especially for classical recordings? Please address this point if you respond to this post

.

Jay