[Rednamalas1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by olblueyez /img/forum/go_quote.gif Whats wrong with warm headphones having details, do the 650s not have any detail? Do they have to sound bright to have detail?

not quite. In well-amped HD650, they do show great amount of detail - in diffused kind of way. It doesn't scream out "TAPE HISSSSS!!!!THERE!!!!!" in recordings (i.e. DT880)- but you can hear it. Brighter cans tend to have greater perceived detail compared to darker ones (generally speaking of course). For example, my AD2000 does have as much detail as Dt880s have, but it's not as analytical as DT880s can be, so you tend to notice it less.

correct me if I'm wrong, because it's just my opinion.

 

[Zuerst]

Quote:

Originally Posted by olblueyez /img/forum/go_quote.gif Whats wrong with warm headphones having details, do the 650s not have any detail? Do they have to sound bright to have detail?

I don't think anyone said there is anything wrong with warm headphones having details. L3000 are relatively warm yet present a great amount of detail. From my experience, bright headphones usually have shorter decay, and with shorter decay, it is just a little bit easier to pickup on tiny details. But of course it is just one of many variables.

 

[olblueyez]

I was just curious, just seems like brighter cans for me anyways seem to have a harder time resolving detail in the highs. Probably my ear not being able to resolve details,

 

[Rednamalas1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by olblueyez /img/forum/go_quote.gif I was just curious, just seems like brighter cans for me anyways seem to have a harder time resolving detail in the highs. Probably my ear not being able to resolve details,

probably.

It might be interesting to note that detail in bass is often overlooked - many headphones lack detail (or texture) in bass region, sounding like a vague bass cloud.

 

[olblueyez]

I always have a hard time hearing when there is a lot of background noise, like a crowded restaurant. Bright cans are the same for me, too much noise and things start to run together, hard to explain. Lack of an accurate bass has always been my biggest gripe with any piece of stereo equipment.

 

[Seamless Sounds]

Transcribing the bass is the most difficult for me out of the entire spectrum. The bass and sub-bass in trance/techno is by far the most difficult to transcribe since the bass synth sounds extremely muddy on my crappy cans. I hope these detailed cans can accomplish this feat.

 

[Rednamalas1]

@ olblue: are you talking about sibilance distracting you? because airy treble shouldn't bother you too much if properly controlled - think of higher notes of harp and violin.

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadFi Fanatic /img/forum/go_quote.gif Transcribing the bass is the most difficult for me out of the entire spectrum. The bass and sub-bass in trance/techno is by far the most difficult to transcribe since the bass synth sounds extremely muddy on my crappy cans. I hope these detailed cans can accomplish this feat.

that might be a problem with lots of recordings on techno etc and not always headphone's fault. I personally love the bass rumble of massive attack etc - take a listen at their mezzanine album, one of few exception of nicely recorded techno-downbeat genre.

If you listen to classical, Bass (strings), harp, cello, timpani drums, contrabasson, organ, basson all have very detailed texture - if you find good recording, that is. Big difference from synthesized bass responses.

 

[olblueyez]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Rednamalas1 /img/forum/go_quote.gif are you talking about sibilance distracting you? because airy treble shouldn't bother you too much if properly controlled - think of higher notes of harp and violin.

Yes the sibilance does distract me. I had some 701s and I tried like hell to like them but it just wasn't working. Im hooked on the 650 now and all is good.

 

[Rednamalas1]

Quote:

Originally Posted by olblueyez /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes the sibilance does distract me. I had some 701s and I tried like hell to like them but it just wasn't working. Im hooked on the 650 now and all is good.

I believe K701 is not sibilient after massive amount of burn-in (like 400 hours). Also, good amp prevents that as well.

You better have good amp for those HD650s.....They're completely different beasts when properly amped and sourced

 

[panda]

my vote overall goes to ety er4s

bass detail - stax sr007
mids detail - sony sa5000 (havent heard qualia)
treble detail - akg k501

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadFi Fanatic /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm a college student living with my parents. How would I break it out to them if I told them I wanted to buy [hi-fi stuff] that costs $$$$? They'll think I'm insane or something. I've been "canless" for days now

Erik found his 48's for 60 bucks.

 

[Seamless Sounds]

Would that be the "a" version or the "e" version? ohms?

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadFi Fanatic /img/forum/go_quote.gif Would that be the "a" version or the "e" version? ohms?

E. He has the 200 ohm version. Mine is the a version. 5 ohm.

 

[Seamless Sounds]

$60!? so lucky...

 

[Beagle]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT /img/forum/go_quote.gif You must be kidding by putting SR60 on the top of W5000, I used to own MS2i and even 2005 DT770 has more details than those, when W5000 and SA5000 are just head and shoulders above. DT880 is not far if not on par with SA5000, why did you put some "twenty five" no name phones in between is beyond me. Sorry, just totally befuddled by your post.

It was meant to be a joke of sorts, a bit of a ribbing towards the upper-end Beyers, whom I'm not a big fan of.

But what exactly do you mean by "has more details than those"? Or more precisely, IYO what details are missing in the SR60 compared to the others? I find the SR60 has as many "details" as any headphone, if that means showing up what's on the recording. If you mean detail as in more accurate timbre, the higher end cans do go further.