heliosphann
Headphoneus Supremus
Getting ready to fly to a wedding for several days an I'm going to take my HP50's with me. I've got some K545's that I like a little better than the HP50's, but they don't isolate as well.
Do they use the HD800 to hear the real thing, or to be able to hear every detail and just compensate/adjust for the added treble to come out with the real thing (or close to it)?
The HD800 has pretty close to a linear response with a narrow small peak ( in most but not all HD800) in the treble a particular narrow frequency range. That is not the same things as "added treble". That is quite similar to how near-field monitors reproduce sound.
My understanding from both personal interaction as well as reading, is that to the sound engineer's and musicians, the HD800 sounds very close to what the natural sound and timbre of the instrument is. If you take the time to understand the HP50 room feel concept, you would be able to comprehend why that approach is detrimental to accurate reproduction of unamplified music. This is because room feel compensates for the highly directional quality of a tweeter, which as there is no tweeter in this case, is meaningless for unamplified music reproduction. Hope this helps clarify things!
Any of you have the chance to own/hear and compare side by side the NAD HP50 and the PSB M4U1? Which one is the later model issued/released, the M4U1?
The m4u2 was the first one they released, the m4u1 was released a year later and the hp50 is their most recent headphone.
Tyll never really liked the PSB cans, but never said much about them. He preferred the NAD enough to review it fully and rate it highly. The PSB doesn't get the "respect" it deserves.
The release order was M4U-2, M4U-1, then HP50. I had the M4U-1 and then the HP50. Very similar sound, of course. The HP50 had a bit more sparkle at the top, but for me the M4U-1 had a better bottom end (but not by much). The midrange was just about identical. Both are neutral with a cohesive response and have typical closed-can soundstaging. The HP50 wasn't as comfortable for me as the M4U-1, because of the shape of the headband and the size/angle of the ear pads. Neither is what you'd call attractive; they're kind of clunky headphones, with a precarious-feeling fit, and the PSB is rather large and bulky mostly because of that plastic headband. Both tended to make my ears hot. Sold them, and much prefer the Oppo PM-3. But the PSB and NAD are excellent, as so many have noted.
I hate to say this, given Paul Barton's incredible audio design credentials, but IMHO the next generation of his headphones would benefit from better ergonomic design, a more svelte appearance, and more adjustability. Closer fit, loss of bulk and more attention to the way headphones feel when they're worn (not just how they sound).
Tyll never really liked the PSB cans, but never said much about them. He preferred the NAD enough to review it fully and rate it highly. The PSB doesn't get the "respect" it deserves.
The release order was M4U-2, M4U-1, then HP50. I had the M4U-1 and then the HP50. Very similar sound, of course. The HP50 had a bit more sparkle at the top, but for me the M4U-1 had a better bottom end (but not by much). The midrange was just about identical. Both are neutral with a cohesive response and have typical closed-can soundstaging. The HP50 wasn't as comfortable for me as the M4U-1, because of the shape of the headband and the size/angle of the ear pads. Neither is what you'd call attractive; they're kind of clunky headphones, with a precarious-feeling fit, and the PSB is rather large and bulky mostly because of that plastic headband. Both tended to make my ears hot. Sold them, and much prefer the Oppo PM-3. But the PSB and NAD are excellent, as so many have noted.
I hate to say this, given Paul Barton's incredible audio design credentials, but IMHO the next generation of his headphones would benefit from better ergonomic design, a more svelte appearance, and more adjustability. Closer fit, loss of bulk, and more attention to the way headphones feel when they're worn (not just how they sound).
Thanks. I read somewhere the M4U1 came later than the HP50, that's why I'm wondering. So the HP50 may be the slightly "improved" version.
Have you had the chance to compare the two?
Its been a while since i listened to both side by side, the biggest difference i remember is the m4u1 sounded more energetic and up-front sounding where as the hp50 is more laid back. The m4u1 had the same issue as the hp50 where the earcups did not reach down far enough to cover my ears properly but the headband is more curved than the hp50 so i didn't get a hotspot on the top of my head.
... I'm sure he's working mainly on the comfort/ergonomics.