[purrin]

Neutral simply means flat frequency response. Neutrality is only one of the factors that contribute to how a headphone sounds. Some people are willing to sacrifice neutrality for other factors such as detail or speed (transient response, agility, etc.) This is why there are many Grado proponents. Grados sound snappy, alive, articulate, clear, and have good resolution. It's hard for most Grados to sound like mud. Others are not willing to make such sacrifices, so they rather have more neutral response, even if it's at the expense of detail extraction.
 
Analytical, smooth, etc. do not totally relate to frequency response, but also to impulse response, i.e. the amount of overshoot and how this overshoot is dampened or behaves over time. The term "forward" often implies more energy in the upper-range area. This effect upon the FR does tend to bring the listener closer to the music, whereas laid-back (if used in opposition to "forward", i.e. less upper midrange) tends to bring the listener farther back. But as far as headstage, it's not really possible to measure. Headphones like the HD800 have a huge headstage because the drivers are pretty much suspended in the air slightly in front of your ears. Also open-backed headphones tend to have larger headstages, but there are many exceptions to this.
 
The K701 is not neutral. The K701 makes Chris Cornell sound like a girl. There are people who think neutral = thin, so maybe that's why people say it is neutral. The HD650 is not what I could call neutral, but dark or warm, or very laid-back (there are different versions of the HD650.) The HD598s shouldn't sound like the HD650s at all. The HD600 is fairly neutral though, but it doesn't get talked about much.
 
One of the problems with headphones is that very few headphones are neutral. The most neutral dynamic headphone (outside of orthos or stats) is probably the Joe Grado HP1000i - the "i" indicating the Joe improved version. The neutral standard for me is still the UE-IERM or UERM. People may argue with his, but go tell the audio engineers at Capitol Studios that they messed up when they assisted in the development of the UERM and don't know what neutral sounds like. But the context of this last statement is that neutral is more important to studio engineers than the end-user.

 

[DNZGamer]

 
Well that cleared a lot of questions I had about neutrality 

. 

So basically the energy that I feel compared to HD650s when listening to my Grados is mostly other factors outside of frequency balance or does the treble focus still come into play? I always here people use the term "Grado sound" without actually knowing what elements they are talking about.

As for Grados, what stops people from EQing something like an RS1 into a neutral balance while keeping all the other qualities of Grado? Or does EQ beyond subtle changes drastically destroy sound quality even with some decent software? I'm thinking whatever "issues" Grados has could at least be partly mitigated by EQ.
 
I have to ask the question as well of why people recommend headphones with strong frequency energy geared TOWARDS the type of music they listen to rather than neutral. 
 
Am reading into the UERM. Sounds very promising and I really like how everyone praises it for an outstanding soundstage (something I find extremely lacking in my current IEMs). Perhaps I will save up for these instead and sell my Senns and UM3x (don't really like HD598 and UM3x is just for isolation, exercise and travel). I like the idea that neutral headphones can be EQed better into different signatures and I have decent hardware EQ settings on my portable amp anyways. 
 
Off topic but does the $1000 price tag for these earphones cover the impressions and customization process?

 

[purrin]

 
 

So basically the energy that I feel compared to HD650s when listening to my Grados is mostly other factors outside of frequency balance or does the treble focus still come into play? I always here people use the term "Grado sound" without actually knowing what elements they are talking about.

 
The Grado sound has forward midrange and some excess lower treble energy. Grados typically have a small peak at 2k, a taller one at 5k, and yet another small one at 8k. The 8k is what makes Grados silbant with some recordings. The 5k peak is what brings a lot of energy to the sound of Grados. In addition, it's not simply a frequency response peak, but also that this area tend to resonant or "ring" for a period or time even after the electrical signal has ceased. Some find this problematic, but personally I don't mind "ringing" too much near the 4-5kHz area.
 
I should add that many of these ringing behaviors on the RS1 tend to activate the resonances of the wood cup, which can be rather pleasing. Grado has really mastered how these effects interact, and to be honest with you, I cringe at seeing (and hearing) the design and materials of some of the the more fancy custom cups. John Grado knows at least a little bit on what he's doing.
 
Also the RS1 has a slightly uneven jaggy treble response, but this leads it to have a raw sound that many of its owners like.
 
 

As for Grados, what stops people from EQing something like an RS1 into a neutral balance while keeping all the other qualities of Grado? Or does EQ beyond subtle changes drastically destroy sound quality even with some decent software? I'm thinking whatever "issues" Grados has could at least be partly mitigated by EQ.

 
I've tried surgical EQ with a parametric and while it yields some results, it just doesn't work quite right, at least not with Grados. EQ cannot control ringing or resonances. Also the nature of the RS1 peaks are very sharp or triangle shaped, whereas parametric EQ curves are well, curved. Even if you can you get the compensating curves narrow, they are not going to match up well with the RS-1s natural characteristics.
 
As for EQ suggestions, you could try upping the low bass (below 50Hz) since the RS1 rolls off the in the bass like crazy after a certain point, but the design of the Grado only lets you go so far before you start pushing that little driver past its limits. Some of the higher-end GS1000/PS1000 Grados with super boosted bass had some failures early on when they were just released.
 
I suppose you could also probably try cuting 2k 5k and 8k in very narrow bands; but at the point where I'm at in the hobby, I don't even bother trying anymore and just let the transducers be. Get a fairly neutral source and amp of highest quality and sufficient juice, maybe add tubes into the chain to take the edge off, and just take the bad with the good. It sort of defeats the vision of John Grado to turn the RS1 into something else if you know what I mean. Yes, John Grado did have a vision! (Some say he *ucked up his uncle Joe's headphones, but then again, he saved the company!)
 
 

Off topic but does the $1000 price tag for these earphones cover the impressions and customization process?

 
It covers customization. Impressions shouldn't cost that much. Other IEMs to consider are the ES5 and JH13 which are lusher and brighter than the UERM respectively. Still, these three IEMs are all quite neutral, and totally lack the ringing and resonances of the Grados, but yet they have that amazing articulation, detail, and speed, even close to that of electrostats. The lack of ringing and resonances certainly lets them sound very relaxed too. The great them about them is that simple EQ application works wonders to tailor them to your own personal preferences.
 
There are other IEMs which are good, but I consider these the "three kings" to be safe bets from people whose ears I trust. They don't have any of the coherency issues related with multi-drivers/crossovers that I've heard with other IEMs, and which don't exist with single driver dynamic headphones.
 
P.S.Since I own the UERMs, two friends of mine have suggested that I try the DBA2/B2 which is dirt cheap at $200. I haven't heard it yet.
 
 

 

[Photogeo180]

 
Quote:

.....The HD650 is not what I could call neutral, but dark or warm, or very laid-back (there are different versions of the HD650.).....

 
This is the first time I read about different versions of the HD650. Could you give some more info about it?

 

[DNZGamer]

JH13 seems to be quite popular and by reviews, seems to have quite a bit more power to work with. Have always been tempted but these IEMs are all at a pretty lofty price range.
 
As for Grado, I guess it is quite a unique EQ signature. I don't know exactly what it is I like or don't like about them down to the details yet. I have been listening to Eric Clapton Unplugged with both the HD598 and RS1 plugged into the same amp. I think I am still biased towards the RS1, especially on a few particular tracks where I just love the guitar and piano presentation(No one knows you when your down, Layla and Old Love).

Edit: adding Lonely Stranger to that list.  
 
Could be the price difference though. 
 
You talk about Grados and resonance. Does that mean a sound that lingers? One of the things I "thought" I liked about Grado compared to Senns (which is especially obvious in this album) is what I perceived as a faster decay but perhaps is a separate audio phenomenon. The Senns have more sound between notes and the attack does not seem to be as pronounced because of this. I like the greater separation between notes in Grados where notes aren't drowning each other, especially when it comes to guitars where each note is presented like a Star. Maybe this is attributed to something else though. 
 
@LFF
 
This is a great album! I have quite a few Cream albums but I never really became familiar with Eric Clapton as a soloist. He is one hell of a live performer. 

 

[Lunatique]

 
Quote:

Well that is interesting to know that neutral sounds tops out at pretty much the LCD-2, which is affordable. 

 
Quote:

Well, my experience with the LCD-2 was that it was kinda dark sounding in stock form. The way I read Lunatique's words is that it gives him the sub-bass extension/quality he wants in a headphone, and then he raises the upper-mid/treble quantity to be neutral, as you can see on his graphs. Frankly, the HD600/650 are more neutral, provided that you are willing to give up some extension.
 

 
Yes, the LCD-2 is not neutral from 2KHz to 16KHz. In the EQ thread, you can see exactly how I EQ'd the LCD-2 to counter its frequency response irregularities (according to the graph Audez'e included for my LCD-2): http://www.head-fi.org/t/551426/my-eq-curves-for-lcd-2-hd650-m50-and-007mk2
 
Its response in the rest of the frequency range is one of the best on the market though, and its full-bodied sound is also unique and unmatched (although I haven't heard the LCD-3, and from what I've read, it's an overall improved LCD-2 in terms of sound).
 
Quote:

You highlight some of my issues though with this topic. I came in here to learn about neutrality and what I found instead was someone telling that everyone who doesn't strive for it is as inferior. This was never about what is being forced upon people (so people can stop attaching this fallacious accusation onto my posts), it is how often people like to believe they have figured out everyones listening taste out (which is basically just their listening taste), using extremely inaccurate (but fanciful) generalizations.
 
This isn't exclusive to the TC of course. Even just now, Purrin, whether directly or indirectly, insults my taste in headphones by saying that he laughs at the time when he thought the RS1 was good. I don't mind because I am still fairly new. But when I had to make the decision between the HD650 and the RS1, my decision was extremely clear. I would just take it that Purrin has a different taste in music and probably picks up different things in music than I do. Right now, I still get pumped by lots of bass or get high off energetically bright vocals, however "crass" such preferences might be. I don't like the dark sound of Sennheisers (my HD598 is at the bottom of the list of headphones I listen to, can't even remember the last time I picked them up). Telling me that you scoff at my musical preferences isn't gonna change them (well it might mentally some day).
 
 
 
I never remotely said anything like this. What I have been saying is that the original character of the production may not be what people want and it seems that people are having an issue dealing with this FACT. This is why I find some of these generalizations non-sensical.
 
Did someone go out and do a study that says people who like bass heavy headphones hate to listen to bass heavy music because of the compounding effects? No and in fact, it is the opposite of what is observed on these boards... what do people recommend for bass heavy music/electronica, dubsteb, etc? Ultrasone Pro 900. I have an album by BoA in which she has quite a few good dance tracks with a great bass emphasis. After I got my amp with Bass Boost, I turned it up all the way and I enjoyed those songs much more with my m-80 compared to my Grado RS1 even though Grado is much more bass light and the song is bass heavy. The TC should not accuse people of being ignorant while not being free of ignorance himself. 
 
If I seem like I am drilling Lunatique, it is mostly because of these generalizations and the fact that he is basically setting himself up as some kind of audio Moses that will lead the uninformed and ignorant from the other audiophiles on this board who disagree with him. Would have preferred to see much more discussion about neutrality rather than an attempt to discuss why someones doctrine is superior to everyone else's. I can understand calling people out on things like buying $10,000 cables but this "neutrality is for real audiophiles" just makes it look like a superficial attention grab. Can people recommend things and educate members minus the pretentiousness that is so rampant in this hobby? 

Quotes like
 
"Let the music itself be the bias, not your sound reproduction system. "
 
are really just empty rhetorics with little value. What does this even mean? That I should ask for a production to be re-recorded to my EQ specifications when I want a different sound? Or should I just skip the music entirely because I don't like it as is? Does this mean that I should never EQ at all once I've reached neutrality just so I hear something that is closest to the original production regardless of my personal preferences? I certainly don't think that this is the message we should be sending to all audiophile entrants.
 
Again, I know no one is forcing anything on anyone else. I just always feel disappointed when people are fighting over who is right rather than just giving us a more "unbiased" and easily digestible version of all their knowledge.

 
I think it's a matter or perspective and priorities. If we were in a pro audio forum, where many members go there to learn about neutrality, fidelity, and how to achieve a reliable, accurate, playback system so they can make critical judgments about the music they are working on or listening to, then there would be no vehement reactions like yours. Those members in pro audio forums already accepted the fact that there is such a thing as an acceptable range of neutrality, and understand (or willing to accept) why it is the industry standard for all audio engineers, music producers, musicians, and audio equipment manufacturers. They aspire to reach that acceptable level of neutrality, so they can hear the way authoritative and trusted professionals do. 
 
At head-fi, I get about 4/5 of members thanking me for my helpful contributions to this community, and about 1/5 of those who react in an offended, indignant manner, and essentially color me as some kind of overbearing, pretentious elitist. And those 1/5 are always hobbyist who don't know much about and don't give a damn about pro audio standards, fidelity, accuracy, neutrality, and they see my presence on head-fi as some kind of a threat to their sonic bliss.
 
This strong negative reaction sort of mirrors the first struggle that aspiring musicians/composers/audio engineers face when they start to learn about what fidelity really means. Many of them have been conditioned by decades of biased and colored consumer audio, and they carry with them all that bias, to the point that when they hear what true neutrality sounds like for the first time, they just can't accept it; it actually sounds foreign and uncomfortably exotic to them. They want to run back to their giant bass that rattles windows a block away, or their piercing treble that makes the ear bleed, or ungodly volume levels that likely have already caused them permanent hearing damage, except they don't even know it because they have never had their hearing checked by an audiologist. Some probably have lost hearing in all the higher frequencies but isn't aware of it. 
 
But because they have aspirations to excel in the audio world, so they clench their jaws and continue to learn about true fidelity and why accuracy and neutrality is so critically important for everyone whose responsibility is to create music that's listened to by all the people around the world. And once they allow themselves to get used to what neutrality sounds like, something magical happens--their ears start to become accustomed to the neutral and accurate sound, and they start to hear all kinds of details and nuances and dynamics that they never heard before with biased consumer systems. In other words, they learn to "unlearn" the bias that's been brainwashing them all those years. It's sort of like how many ex-smokers say that once they quit smoking, they can actually taste food and smell things much more strongly, and can detect nuances they couldn't when their taste and smell was numbed by smoking.
 
What happens next, is one of the most important turning point for many who are involved in pro audio--they return to their biased consumer audio systems one day, after having become familiar with neutrality, accuracy, and fidelity, and then BAM! Holy cow. They couldn't believe their ears! What used to sound awesome to their ears--their hyped up car systems with jumbo subwoofer that pounds out ridiculous amount of bass, their Beats headphones, their multimedia speaker systems--all of a sudden, sound so skewed and extreme that they have no idea how they could've enjoyed listening to such skewed sonic signatures. All the nuances, details, and dynamics they heard during the time they became familiarized with neutral and accurate sound reproduction was gone--completely obliterated by the overwhelming coloration and distortion of the hyped and biased consumer systems; systems that were designed to "shock and awe" the unsuspecting consuming public, instead of letting them hear the truth. 
 
They also learn one very big lessons while working in professional studios as interns or just being there as guests--a lesson that will make them see all these "celebrity" audio products in a whole new light. What they learn is this: These celebrity producers and musicians all use high-end, neutral sounding audio systems--the same kind that is used by all pro audio engineers and producers. You see those video footage of Dr. Dre and whoever where they're in the studio bobbing their heads to some dope phat beat they just recorded? What do you think they're listening on? Consumer hi-fi with severe coloration? No. They're bobbing their heads to high-end mastering monitors that are fine-tuned to be as accurate and neutral as possible, and guess what, it's got PLENTY of bass anyway. This is one huge misconception people have about neutrality and accuracy. Some people seem to think that neutrality lacks this or that, when in fact, it's got plenty of everything. What it doesn't have, is severe coloration and distortion that destroys all the dynamics and detail and nuances. And then you look at the kind of products the celebrities are selling to consumers--such as the Beats headphones. Can you say "hypocrites"? If they were honest, they'd be selling headphones that sound as neutral as possible, just like the kind of mastering monitors they themselves rely on and use everyday in their professional studios. Why don't they? It's because they know how biased the consumers are--how they have been brainwashed by a lifetime of consumer hi-fi trends, and that's what the consumers expect. Dr. Dre is not interested in educating the public, because he knows he's going to get slammed for doing it, just like how I've been slammed for doing it here on head-fi. He simply wants to make money, selling to people what they are conditioned to prefer. It's the path of the least resistance, and yields the most profit. It's a damn smart business strategy, but unfortunately, it creates more severely biased and colored products, and a whole new generation of consumers who are far removed from any kind of true fidelity in their music enjoyment.
 
My tendency to come off as some kind of educator comes from the fact that I am, in fact, a teacher. I'm an instructor for professional artists who work in (or aspire to work in) video game, movie special effects, comic books, animation, and illustration: http://workshops.cgsociety.org/courseinfo.php?id=250 
I have also written instructional books and articles, and I'll continue to teach, for education will only become even more vital as we advance as a civilization accelerating in the age of information.
 
It's hard for me to not be in my teacher mode, because I truly believe in helping others through education. My goal is to help as many people as I can. I don't get paid writing long posts and answering questions at head-fi, and in fact, all it does it take away hours of my time that I could be spending on writing my novels and screenplays, working on paintings, composing music, or shooting photography. I spend my free time here trying to help people because it's my way of giving back to the community. There will be those who want to slam me and resist everything I've said, but at the same time, I get emails, forum posts, and private messages all the time thanking me for my help and contribution. To know that I have been of service to others and helped them in something that matters to them, is what makes my efforts worthwhile. 
 
If my tendency to want to help others through educating them rubs you the wrong way, then maybe instead of being indignant, you can try to simply see it as free advice--one which you can choose to ignore. Teachers don't go around calling students "inferior." Teachers reach out their hand and pull up those who want to learn, to a higher level of understanding. 

 

[DNZGamer]

Well I'm sorry if I offended you. I think you are also interpreting me in the wrong way. I have no issues with people educating others. I had an issue with sweeping generalizations. 

It is also odd that on one hand, you are basically making your post for advanced audiophiles (the ones who agree with you) while attempting to educate the lowbie audiophiles (people like me). I am all for education, thats why I spend dozens of hours on headfi reading stuff each week. 

Here are my particular questions towards this topic:

1) Why should newbies strive for Neutrality? The answer so far is that professionals strive for neutrality. The question is, how does that relate to us and will it provide a better listening experience or does this imply that we need to train our ears to enjoy neutrality?
 
2) You say that colored Headphones will provide too much for songs heavy on such characteristics. But in reality, we find plenty of low to mid level audiophiles who immensely enjoy those colored qualities when their genre of music is also already skewed towards those qualities (people who like dark songs like dark headphones, people who like bass songs like bass headphones, etc). How do we explain this? 
 
3) Should lowbies and mid level audiophiles be striving for what constitutes as the best sounding headphones for professionals irregardless of their own tastes? Is it better to not enjoy certain music because of someone elses ideals?
 
These are my main questions. I think you believe I am challenging your authority on technical matters. That is not what is happening. I am questioning the logic of determining enjoyment by neutrality (do I really need to prefer the HD600 over similarly priced Grados, Ultrasones or AKGs?). This question is very relevant because in all likely hood, most people (including audiophiles) may never reach the stage that you are talking about as evident by people having been fans of non-neutral gear for decades. Maybe I am misinterpreting your message but if there is any group of people that you should elaborate to, it would be the people questioning you, not the ones who agree and are already "there". 

 

[Lunatique]

Well I'm sorry if I offended you. I think you are also interpreting me in the wrong way. I have no issues with people educating others. I had an issue with sweeping generalizations. 

It is also odd that on one hand, you are basically making your post for advanced audiophiles (the ones who agree with you) while attempting to educate the lowbie audiophiles (people like me). I am all for education, thats why I spend dozens of hours on headfi reading stuff each week. 

Here are my particular questions towards this topic:

1) Why should newbies strive for Neutrality? The answer so far is that professionals strive for neutrality. The question is, how does that relate to us and will it provide a better listening experience or does this imply that we need to train our ears to enjoy neutrality?
 
2) You say that colored Headphones will provide too much for songs heavy on such characteristics. But in reality, we find plenty of low to mid level audiophiles who immensely enjoy those colored qualities when their genre of music is also already skewed towards those qualities (people who like dark songs like dark headphones, people who like bass songs like bass headphones, etc). How do we explain this? 
 
3) Should lowbies and mid level audiophiles be striving for what constitutes as the best sounding headphones for professionals irregardless of their own tastes? Is it better to not enjoy certain music because of someone elses ideals?
 
These are my main questions. I think you believe I am challenging your authority on technical matters. That is not what is happening. I am questioning the logic of determining enjoyment by neutrality (do I really need to prefer the HD600 over similarly priced Grados, Ultrasones or AKGs?). This question is very relevant because in all likely hood, most people (including audiophiles) may never reach the stage that you are talking about as evident by people having been fans of non-neutral gear for decades. Maybe I am misinterpreting your message but if there is any group of people that you should elaborate to, it would be the people questioning you, not the ones who agree and are already "there". 

I'm not offended at all. I'm just trying to explain my reasons for trying to educate others. I'm not doing this to try to feel "superior" or trample on those who are "inferior." I really don't have a need for that. I teach hundreds of students already, and if I felt so insecure in myself to have such unhealthy cravings, I would've satisfied that craving in the classroom already. I'm simply passionate about music and audio, and I want to see the communities I'm a part of rise up and be the best it can be, regardless of their budget or musical taste--to be informed and educated. That's it really--pure and simple.

Now, your questions:

1) Why should newbies strive for Neutrality? The answer so far is that professionals strive for neutrality. The question is, how does that relate to us and will it provide a better listening experience or does this imply that we need to train our ears to enjoy neutrality?

It's simply a matter of "you don't know what you're missing until you experience it." Those who have never truly experience the acceptable range of neutrality and accuracy simply are blissful in their ignorance. They can't miss what they can't hear, such as detailed and textured bass notes where you can actually hear the pluck of the string, the attack, the overtones, the effect the acoustics of the recording space has on the instrument, such as the clear separation of early reflections and the main body of the reverb, how it decays, and even the model/brand of bass guitar, synthesizer, double-bass, etc being played, and how they sound different from each other. To them, most bass notes are mushy, rounded on-note affairs that sound similar, with no nuances, differences, dynamics, or detail. The only times they can hear some differences is perhaps when the instrument part is naked and playing solo. Even then, the level of fidelity is not there at all--the realism, the expressiveness, dimensionality, and presence.

And that's just one simple example. There are many more--from vocals, guitars, drums, orchestral strings, synthesizers, drum machines, ethnic percussion, sound effects, spoken dialogue, and so on. On skewed systems, there's just so much information missing in the audio, or severely skewed, and people who aren't aware of these issues simply don't know it.

But the truth is, if they don't know they're missing it, then it has no effect on how happy they are. For many people, they can live a whole life that way and be perfectly happy.

What tends to happen, is that one of them will one day accidentally hear a more neutral system--maybe at a friend's house, maybe tagging along with a friend to a pro audio studio, or maybe at a respectable audio store. They would hear a song that they know well, but hear for the first time all those details, nuances, and dynamics they never knew were there. That is when they wake up from The Matrix the way Neo did, and that is also when they are given the choice of the red or blue pill. One pill allows them to remain blissfully happy in their ignorance, and the other pill will show them the truth--but they will have to make an effort to fight for it--to learn, to grow, and to excel as listeners, actively listening, as opposed to passive listening. They will also need to scrutinize their audio gear, read reviews, do comparison tests, do double-blind tests, ask questions, as well as buy and sell gear until they find what they deem as satisfactory. The path to true fidelity becomes a passion, and the reward is that they'll hear things they've never heard before--music becomes much more dimensional, alive, detailed, textured, dynamic, expressive, emotional--all of those things--that is the payoff (and a vastly better fate than what the "real world" was like in The Matrix. You don't get killed by machines or have to live in weird tribes).

2) You say that colored Headphones will provide too much for songs heavy on such characteristics. But in reality, we find plenty of low to mid level audiophiles who immensely enjoy those colored qualities when their genre of music is also already skewed towards those qualities (people who like dark songs like dark headphones, people who like bass songs like bass headphones, etc). How do we explain this?

I think my answer to the previous question already answered this. They simply have no idea what they're missing.

The fact is, I'm often barking up the wrong tree around here, such as at that digiZoid ZO thread--a thread I should have never posted in, because the type of consumers who buy such products are not interested in anything I have to say.

3) Should lowbies and mid level audiophiles be striving for what constitutes as the best sounding headphones for professionals irregardless of their own tastes? Is it better to not enjoy certain music because of someone elses ideals?

You have to separate musical taste/genres from the playback system. This is the very first step you must take if you want to become serious about listening to music.

The playback system should be transparent--totally neutral, without bias. It will reproduce any kind of audio, exactly as the musician, singer, producer, engineer, and director intended. The music itself is the bias--the production style, the sonic signature, what instruments were used, how the vocals were recorded and processed, how the sound effects were mixed. Different bands, musical artists, producers, engineers, movie directors--they all have their own creative preferences, and they will imbue their work with those preferences. If your playback system is transparent, then you will hear their creative preferences clearly, as they intended you to. If your system is skewed, then you're not hearing exactly what they worked so hard for you to hear.

When musicians, singers, producers, and engineers are in the studio, painstakingly crafting a specific a sonic signature, they want you to be able to hear it as closely to how they made it as possible. If they're spending hours and weeks and months tweaking their guitar sounds, making tiny adjustments to get the sound just so, picking specific mic pre's to get vocals to have that magical tone they were after, compressing and EQ'ing exactly so to get that drum track pumping just right, placing their mic arrays with painstaking precision around the concert hall to capture the orchestra exactly so--wouldn't it be nice if you can actually hear the results of all the painstaking work, as closely to what they intended as possible? They are all monitoring on neutral and accurate systems, and to hear what they were hearing in the studio, you need to be using a playback system that is within that range of acceptable neutrality/accuracy. Otherwise, so much of their hard work goes down the drain. You wouldn't wear a pair of glasses with a color tint when you go to an art gallery to look at beautiful paintings, or watch a movie, would you? Then why would you want your audio playback system to have a colored bias?

I know you dislike the analogy with television, but it really is similar. Your television is not biased towards police dramas, or chick flicks, or horror movies, or action thrillers, or comedies. All movies simply play the same on your television, and you want your television to be as neutral and accurate as possible. So with music, it's the same--your system should be neutral, and whatever style of music you play on it, will simply sound as it should be. It's a totally flawed concept to have a system that only plays back jazz well, but can't play hip-hop or electronica well, or vice versa, or any other combination where any genre/style of music is excluded from its capabilities. A transparent, neutral, and accurate system will be able to play anything and everything, and do an equally good job at all of them.

If you are listening to a song on a neutral system, and you wished that the song had more bass, then it simply means the musical artist who made that song didn't agree with your idea of how much bass should be in that song. It is not the fault of the playback system. You can use EQ to give that song more bass, but realize that you are now inserting your own preference into the equation, and it is not what the musical artist intended. Another song with plenty of bass will sound just right on that system, but it's not as if the system is now all of a sudden correct, whereas with the previous song it was wrong. If you feel the need to put extra bass on everything you listen to, then you basically have a skewed sense of how music ought to sound, and the culprit is the decades of brainwashing by consumer audio trends. And then we go full circle back to questions #1--why should someone try to unlearn their bias and embrace neutral, accurate, true fidelity.

 

[DNZGamer]

Ok, it seems that you are assuming I've never listened to neutral headphones. This could be true since I don't know what neutral is. I thought the K701's were neutral. 

According to this topic, the headphones in my price range that are neutral are the HD600 followed by the HD650. It was still within my range of considerations when I thought the HD650 was the neutral headphone since I did enjoy those cans. The HD600 on the other hand, I have never considered except briefly when I thought it was a slightly inferior version of the HD650 and tried it just to find out that it is completely not what I want. If anything, it seems like I dislike cans more and more the closer they align with neutrality. Maybe I will try it out again sometime as I did use the HD650 for quite a bit (30 day exchange from my shop, tried RS1, HD650 and then RS1 again) while only having listened to the HD600 in the shop but I did not remember finding anything special about those cans.They certainly did give me the sense that "they only played the songs I put in" without adding any extra ounce of excitement to my 5 test tracks.
 
Also, you say that many people never tried neutral cans so they can't appreciate them. What are a list of neutral cans in each price bracket? I am pretty sure I could find many board members who have passed on or changed to colored cans or who own both neutral and non-neutral cans and did not become overwhelmed by the astonishing power of neutrality. I think saying that all these people who preferred colored cans have NEVER enjoyed neutral cans is quite an exaggeration.
 
Now is my problem that I still haven't really tried neutral cans or that I don't know how to appreciate them? Because I have tried the two cans that are supposedly much more neutral and I also very clearly chose a colored can over them without hesitation. Obviously you are describing a lot of minute details that perhaps my mind has not been trained to focus on yet so perhaps understanding will change preference (the whole basis of psycho acoustics, perception). 
 
The other thing is that you are really drilling in the fact that I need to appreciate music only in the form that the artist intended. But is this some kind of moral principle? I don't see how it really relates to enjoyment. There are honestly certain genres of music that I wouldn't even like if it wasn't for coloration. You describe almost everyone who doesn't like completely neutral sound as lacking understanding. But are we really to confirm that every audiophile who picks up on those details will not enjoy EQing or colored sounds? 

The main point about neutrality that you are making to me is that neutrality makes everything good. Problem for me is that it makes very few things great (or even good). You are kind of making it sound evil to enjoy music with some coloration. I do not feel guilty that I am destroying a song every time I use EQ to add bass or treble. I guess I am just not a purist because I honestly don't care enough about what the songs originally sounded like, only what settings will excite me. This is probably because I've never played any instruments and so I feel a disconnect compared to those who create music.
 
The only other explanation for my lack of appreciation for neutral cans is that I have not hit the price bracket where cans are good enough to present a great neutral articulation. Maybe I just need to drop serious bucks on something like what Purrin suggested and maybe at such a level of fidelity, neutrality will become king for me too. 

 

[purrin]

 
Quote:

The only other explanation for my lack of appreciation for neutral cans is that I have not hit the price bracket where cans are good enough to present a great neutral articulation. Maybe I just need to drop serious bucks on something like what Purrin suggested and maybe at such a level of fidelity, neutrality will become king for me too. 

 
That's exactly it!.
 
The big problem as of today seems to be limited to technology (or implementation of it) and the fact that a driver that needs to reproduce the full audio spectrum. To be put things in rather simplistic terms, dynamic (excluding orthos for now) drivers have a diaphragm which are not too much different from drums. There is a compromise that needs to be made from a design and engineering point of view. Develop a transducer that is articulate, detailed, and resolving but suffers from inherent resonances in the frequency response; or develop a transducer which sounds smoother and more neutral, but has a slower less detailed sound throughout the audio band. It's really a matter of energy distribution. Something is going to vibrate no matter what - it's how that energy is going to be released.
 
More advanced design and engineering can mitigate some of these issues, but never totally. Take for example the HD800. It one of the best dynamic headphones in terms of resolution and transient response, and while Sennheiser has done a very good job in controlling resonances, the HD800 is still on the bright side with a hard sounding peak in the lower treble. Not to mention that the HD800's more advanced motor design is inefficient and needs more power than what many portable or computer headphone jacks can provide. Yet another trade-off!
 
This is why there are many people who like orthodynamic headphones, i.e. T50RP, LCD2, etc. They tend to have a smoother frequency response with good detail and articulation. Then again, there are still trade-offs: lack of treble extension, dynamic compression, and inefficiency (although Audeze has made some amazing strides in addressing the inefficiency issue.)
 
And then there are electrostatics. And those have their own issues as well...
 
The top IEMs get around these driver energy storage issues by using multiple drivers (each optimized to reproduce dedicated areas of the audio spectrum) and crossovers. Of course multiple drivers and crossovers also present other issues: coherence throughout the audio-band (having a seamless integration among the drivers) and deleterious effects of the crossover circuitry itself (phase shifts, veil, added inefficiencies.)
 
You will find that the top IEMs are much more neutral than headphones (more like shades of neutral), and the frequency response aberrations on the scale of something like Grados completely absent. I think you would really like some of the balanced armature IEMs for their speed and articulation - maybe even some of the more bassy ones if you are a bass-head. (I don't mind a little bit of extra bass myself, but it's just a matter of turning the bass EQ if I'm using a neutral sounding IEM.)
 
I don't post much in the IEM section, but I really like the IEM guys because smoothness of frequency response and neutrality are rarely a major issue. They focus on more subtle aspects of how their IEMs reproduce audio.

 

[Lunatique]

Ok, it seems that you are assuming I've never listened to neutral headphones. This could be true since I don't know what neutral is. I thought the K701's were neutral. 

According to this topic, the headphones in my price range that are neutral are the HD600 followed by the HD650. It was still within my range of considerations when I thought the HD650 was the neutral headphone since I did enjoy those cans. The HD600 on the other hand, I have never considered except briefly when I thought it was a slightly inferior version of the HD650 and tried it just to find out that it is completely not what I want. If anything, it seems like I dislike cans more and more the closer they align with neutrality. Maybe I will try it out again sometime as I did use the HD650 for quite a bit (30 day exchange from my shop, tried RS1, HD650 and then RS1 again) while only having listened to the HD600 in the shop but I did not remember finding anything special about those cans.They certainly did give me the sense that "they only played the songs I put in" without adding any extra ounce of excitement to my 5 test tracks.
 
Also, you say that many people never tried neutral cans so they can't appreciate them. What are a list of neutral cans in each price bracket? I am pretty sure I could find many board members who have passed on or changed to colored cans or who own both neutral and non-neutral cans and did not become overwhelmed by the astonishing power of neutrality. I think saying that all these people who preferred colored cans have NEVER enjoyed neutral cans is quite an exaggeration.
 
Now is my problem that I still haven't really tried neutral cans or that I don't know how to appreciate them? Because I have tried the two cans that are supposedly much more neutral and I also very clearly chose a colored can over them without hesitation. Obviously you are describing a lot of minute details that perhaps my mind has not been trained to focus on yet so perhaps understanding will change preference (the whole basis of psycho acoustics, perception). 
 
The other thing is that you are really drilling in the fact that I need to appreciate music only in the form that the artist intended. But is this some kind of moral principle? I don't see how it really relates to enjoyment. There are honestly certain genres of music that I wouldn't even like if it wasn't for coloration. You describe almost everyone who doesn't like completely neutral sound as lacking understanding. But are we really to confirm that every audiophile who picks up on those details will not enjoy EQing or colored sounds? 

The main point about neutrality that you are making to me is that neutrality makes everything good. Problem for me is that it makes very few things great (or even good). You are kind of making it sound evil to enjoy music with some coloration. I do not feel guilty that I am destroying a song every time I use EQ to add bass or treble. I guess I am just not a purist because I honestly don't care enough about what the songs originally sounded like, only what settings will excite me. This is probably because I've never played any instruments and so I feel a disconnect compared to those who create music.
 
The only other explanation for my lack of appreciation for neutral cans is that I have not hit the price bracket where cans are good enough to present a great neutral articulation. Maybe I just need to drop serious bucks on something like what Purrin suggested and maybe at such a level of fidelity, neutrality will become king for me too. 

When I say "you," I'm also addressing the entire head-fi community, since there are other people reading this thread who can benefit from the discussion.

I didn't characterize personal bias as evil--I simply said it's a bias and it's not what the musical artist wanted you to hear. You can add bass and treble and whatever all you want, twist the music however you want, compress the hell out of it, add tons of reverb--you are not breaking any laws. I'm not in your bedroom breathing down your neck. The moment we stop addressing each other on the forums I will cease to exist in your life. Your feelings about what I'm telling you is just that--your own feelings. Plenty of other people who have read this thread don't have the reaction you do--in fact, for many of them, it's been a very positive experience.

I did say that plenty of people choose colored gear and are happy, and will remain happy for all their lives. I also said that many people, upon hearing neutral gear for the first time, find it disagreeable because they haven't unlearned their bias for colored gear yet. Some don't bother trying to unlearn their biases and go on enjoying colored gear, never giving neutral gear another thought for the rest of their lives. You can totally do that--no one will stop you or report you to the police. Seriously, just be happy. If you want to learn about audio and move on to the next level in musical enjoyment, then that's another path. You don't have to take that path. Stay where you are if you are perfectly happy.

See, the way we look at personal bias is different. You want to bend all the music you listen to into your idea of what music should sound like, and you couldn't care less about the creative work that the musical artists have made--to you, they are just servants who made something for you to enjoy, and you don't have to respect their artistic efforts. But for me, I want to experience all the diversity, all the different genres, production styles, and personal preferences of the different musical artists, just like the way I want to enjoy different types of cuisines for the fact that they are different from each other. I'm not going to pour ketchup on everything I eat, because then everything will taste the same. For the same reason, I'm not going to blow up the bass or treble on everything I listen to. If I'm listening to a song with mellow bass, I'm not going to turn up the bass just to make it kick, because I know that the song is supposed to sound that way. If I wanted big bass, I'll put on songs that do have big bass, where the musical artist wanted their songs to have big bass.

With that said though, I'm not against some level of personal bias, because we all have it. Some food really do taste better with ketchup--at least to me, and I'll simply enjoy the food more with ketchup than without, even if it'll make all the cultured people at the dinner table raise their eyebrows at me. But I also know when to back off and let the flavors speak for themselves. Some foods you never put ketchup in because they would just taste ridiculous. Some music you don't mess with either, and the key is to know when to leave something alone and let it sing in its true voice. But you can't hear its true voice unless you have neutral gear. That is the main point--that when and if you want to hear the truth, colored gear can't give it to you.

The problem with debating about subjective issues such as enjoyment, is that it's totally subjective. Let's say for example, you suddenly decide you want to become a mastering engineer, and even after you went to audio engineering school and became a full-fledged mastering engineer, you'll master all the music that comes through your studio to be totally colored and exaggerated to your own liking, just like how you are adding bass and treble to everything you listen to now (I don't know if you really do that--I'm just guessing based on your replies), and that will be your signature style as a mastering engineer. And maybe there will be a legion of fans who really enjoy your preference. Who knows? It's not like it hasn't happened before.

BUT GUESS WHAT? Even those maverick and rebellious mastering engineers are still using neutral, accurate gear to base all their critical decisions on. Again, the gear is neutral, and it's the personal preferences that's the bias--be it the genre of music, style of production, personal preferences, and so on.

So now imagine this--you're now a mastering engineer, and you still have a preference for big bass and hot treble, and you are mastering all the music you are hired to engineer to have big bass and hot treble. In fact, you push the bass and treble so much that they are just below clipping, and damn! It sounds exciting as hell. Then, some kid buys the CD you mastered, takes it home, and proceeds to play it on his skewed playback system, where the bass and treble are already exaggerated. Let's say you happen to be friends with his parents and go to their house, then hear the music you mastered being played back, sounding all distorted and messed up. What are you going to think and feel? You'd be thinking, What? I already put an ungodly amount of bass and treble in my mastering, to make sure that it is totally dope and will blow people's heads off, and this kid isn't making it better by using totally colored gear (or simply turning up the bass and treble knobs on his stereo)--he's actually destroying the very effect I tried to create, because now instead of big, satisfying bass, he's hearing distorted, messed up bass, and instead of crisp, detailed treble, he's hearing ear-bleeding noise that will make the cats want to commit suicide. You would essentially be faced with your younger self, and then the irony of it all will hit you full force.

As for what headphones you personally enjoyed, I'm not you, and I can't decide for you. I'm only here to help people understand why neutrality and accuracy is a good thing, and it's up to them to embrace it or not. If you simply cannot stand how neutral, accurate audio sounds, then that's fine (BTW, I exchanged my HD600 for the HD650, but I also wouldn't use the HD650 when I have the LCD-2 around--even without EQ). No one guaranteed that you're going to like it right away, and no one said you'll automatically feel the urge to want to explore it further until you unlearned your biases. Hell, you could go through audio engineering school and still hate neutral, accurate gear. I really don't know--you just might be that unique. But that's fine--there's plenty of colored audio gear on the market to make you very happy for the rest of your life.

I would highly recommend you attend some head-fi gatherings, such as the Can Jams or private ones held by members around here. It would be a great chance for you to listen to a wide variety of high-end gear, and it'll broaden your point of reference, as well as put the headphones you currently know into proper context. You can also start EQ'ing headphones like I instructed in that EQ thread. It won't cost you a dime, since you'd just be using a freeware EQ. All you have to do is to follow the steps I mentioned in that thread, and you'll see for yourself how much of a difference it makes. That is one really great way to educate yourself about audio, and it'll likely alter the way you think about audio and music in general.

Maybe one day in the future, after you've become more educated and experienced in audio, you'll look back on your younger self and chuckle, and you'll then remember those forum conversations you had with that guy on the head-fi forums about the benefits of neutral, accurate audio playback systems. Maybe you'll feel the urge to drop me a line and tell me how you've grown and changed in the last few years, and now you understand everything I talked about. Who knows? It could happen.

 

[Lunatique]

 
Quote:

You will find that the top IEMs are much more neutral than headphones (more like shades of neutral), and the frequency response aberrations on the scale of something like Grados completely absent. I think you would really like some of the balanced armature IEMs for their speed and articulation - maybe even some of the more bassy ones if you are a bass-head. (I don't mind a little bit of extra bass myself, but it's just a matter of turning the bass EQ if I'm using a neutral sounding IEM.)
 
I don't post much in the IEM section, but I really like the IEM guys because smoothness of frequency response and neutrality are rarely a major issue. They focus on more subtle aspects of how their IEMs reproduce audio.

 
For me, it's been the opposite, where IEM's tend to exhibit the same type of problems consistently.
 
I find the fact that IEM's introduce peak resonances from the ear canal quite problematic, and would often require a sharp, steep cut in the sibilance range (roughly 7KHz or so) to get rid of the resonance peak. Some tips can help, but not always, and not on every model. For example, the triple-flange silicon tip on the Westone 4 alleviates the problem, but not on the SE535, Westone 3, or the E4C.
 
I also find that most IEM's have rolled off treble, and need to be boosted in the highest frequencies to restore the air. 
 
I haven't tried the really expensive custom IEM's though. I don't use IEM's enough to justify the hefty price tag. I'm happy enough with the Westone 4 for now (though with surgical, parametric EQ'ing). 
 

 

[purrin]

I'm referring to the expensive custom IEMs ~1000 USD or the few exceptional value ones that friends have referred me to. Really surprised what a value they are compared to headphones which are rapidly escalating in price. I guess my point is that you can actually find four to five (maybe even more) IEMs which are neutral and don't require EQ (or just very little.) This cannot be said of expensive headphones. T1, HD800, LCD2, LCD3, PS1000, ED10 are all way off the mark, especially the latter two.
 
$1000 IEM + cheap portable source exceeds most $3000-5000 headphone rigs.

 

[Mauricio]

All I know is that whenever I listen to headphones and something sounds interesting, I say to myself, "I can't wait to hear this for real via speaker [active monitors]".  The reverse never happens.  No matter how neutral a heaphone, it still doesn't sound as true as a pair of monitors.
 

 

[donunus]

 
Quote:

I am pretty sure I could find many board members who have passed on or changed to colored cans or who own both neutral and non-neutral cans and did not become overwhelmed by the astonishing power of neutrality. I think saying that all these people who preferred colored cans have NEVER enjoyed neutral cans is quite an exaggeration.

 
uhmm are there any neutral cans out there? That is the question. The most neutral cans Ive tried under $500 is the dt250-250 which is slightly more neutral than the hd600 but totally neutral? It simply doesn't exist. Sometimes is is hard to like almost neutral headphones with one sharp peak or something like that because that major peak becomes even more annoying on a neutralish can than it does on a headphone that has peaks and dips all over the place LOL