AutumnCrown
100+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Sep 24, 2015
- Posts
- 262
- Likes
- 71
I think I would say it was too bright and analytical at least for the first few minutes...
I have a lot of experience performing live music (much more than merely listening) in orchestras, wind ensembles, marching bands, a jazz band, and so on...and I gotta tell ya...real instruments (especially cymbals, trumpets, piano, and the like) can be bright and even painful...though that's more so when you're right next to them; less so when you're out in the audience.
Still, many headphones are brighter than is accurate. Hearing a headphone that is both transparent and neutral will be less fatiguing compared to that. My current transparent + neutral reference is the STAX SR-207.
And of course, the recording techniques are crucial. I remember one concert I performed in that sounded amazing when I was there, but the recording of it sounded awful! Also remember that if everything is close-miked, it's not going to sound like it would if you were in the audience. It's difficult to replicate that experience in a recording.
Thanks for your contribution to music
I just had my first live classical experience this evening, Britten's War Requiem. I loved it, and I felt a milld euphoria for a while afterward. I was thinking about how it sounded compared to different headphones.It started off sounding bright and a bit dryand then once i got used to it, it reminded m e a bit of the time I demoed the LCD3, but with more detail andimaging.
Funny thing is, although I've been exposed to classical since a young age and have performed more pieces than I can remember back in the day, I never took the time to familiarize myself with much of the background info. I could hear something and recognize it, but then have no clue about the composer or title.
Can't wait to properly record my own music someday! I have thousands of incomplete songs in my head in all sorts of styles, and some recorded in demo form just so I don't forget them.
It's interesting how there are so many sounds out there, both in real life and in headphone signatures. Live acoustic performances span the gamut from dark to bright.
And good point about how live music can be either bright or dark. I guess so many things can affect that: room acoustics, amplification, instruments, styles of play and the style of music itself. I don't know if I've ever heard a live show that sounded dark but I am not very experienced.
I recently read someone comparing HD800s to an audeze can say that the planar magnetic one sounds like an instrument, whereas the HD800 merely sounds like a very good headphone. Which would the perfect headphone sound like? An instrument, or just a very clear window?
That's a pretty vague question. The perfect headphone would reproduce the recording accurately. How that would sound would depend on the recording. But no headphone is perfectly accurate. All have colorations and compromises. We all have our preferences. Having heard a little bit of everything, I prefer electrostats the most, because they sound the closest to real instruments to me, while other headphone types sound like they are influencing the sound more—again, to me. Others' experiences may differ. You'll have to come to your own conclusion on what sounds best to you.
By the way! How did I miss that you own the iFi micro iDSD and HD 800?! That's one combo I'd like to get in the coming months. (But I would extensively equalize it.)
I also owned the HE400i. (Mentioning it since you do too.) Mine was modified. Even driven from the Schiit Fulla, I thought it sounded nearly as good as the HE1000 driven by the 430 HA and HDVD 800! That's impressive considering the drastic difference in price.
I haven't heard electrostatic headphones. Out of my price range for the time being so I'm trying not to think about what a blue hawaii and sr 009 would sound like. From what I hear, the HD800 can rival the many of the cheaper electrostatics in transparency anyway.
I just got the HD800 and I'm still in the break-in phase. It's what prompted me to ask this question, because I find it very transparent, and I'm wondering if the euphonics of the 400i is more of a crutch than a blessing. I'm still not sure about that. I've heard that the HE-K has a somewhat similar signature to the 400i, though I know some don't agree with that. I found that the schiit fulla added a pleasant softness and airiness to the 400i compared to the more reference idsd. I think I will keep both because they are so totally different to each other in their approach to what recordings should sound like. I haven't heard anything do Steely Dan's more raucous tracks as well as my 400i, but there is a whole layer of detail on both ends of the FR that it tries to gloss over.
That's a pretty vague question. The perfect headphone would reproduce the recording accurately. How that would sound would depend on the recording. But no headphone is perfectly accurate. All have colorations and compromises.
I like the question because I suspect there is something of an uncanny valley in sound reproduction. Would a given person experience a perfect headphone as an instrument, as something essentially human and comfortable, like an LCD3, or would they experience it as some kind of sound teleportation VR device, as a totally convincing auditory illusion? And if it was the latter, could they get used to it eventually?
I recently read someone comparing HD800s to an audeze can say that the planar magnetic one sounds like an instrument, whereas the HD800 merely sounds like a very good headphone. Which would the perfect headphone sound like? An instrument, or just a very clear window?
i love live music for the experience, enjoyment and energy not the sound (which can actually be pretty crappy sometimes lol)
i like to keep them both as a separate experience.