[jonathan c]

They look great jonathon, obviously bitter sweet for me but I'm a hard nut to crack and all the accolades thrown at them had possible given maybe unreasonable expectations, c'est la vie!... but ignore** this old fogey and enjoy. : )
I actually currently have my eye on a Violectric DHA-V266, don't need the DAC though.

​

** hell no, not ignore … a thoughtful opinion is worth noting … besides, if twenty people around a table agree on an issue, eighteen of them are unneeded …

 

[Mike F]

It is curious how people can have such different impressions about a headphone. I can only conclude that 1. We hear differently, 2. Listen for different things, 3. In the case of the NDH 30 are affected by physiological. I’m sure that the offset and angled drivers in combination with the large ear cups which allow differing positioning must be a factor.
And I can totally agree that the NDH 30 are lacking. They are lacking the excitement and super wide soundstage of the HD 800 for example, but for me it’s the very fact that they lack those properties which make them superior. I find the HD 800 totally unnatural in those respects. What I can’t agree with is that they are in any way inferior to the 6 series. I very much agree with @FullBright1

My thought is that, if Sennheiser created an HD 680 Studio Monitor set of headphones...., then the Neumann NDH 30 Open-back is sort of like that...

Imagine if you will, a HD600, newly created with a very linear FR, ...( vs its 30 yr old midrange focused- centered sound signature.) And add in very good soundstage, good bass, and up the overall resolution by 10%

= Neumann NDH 30 Open-back, has arrived.

But then, I’m into studio monitor like honesty - give me what’s there, no more, no less - not esoteric ear candy. Nothing wrong with that if that’s what you enjoy.

But, FWIW, I personally find the NDH 30 to have a very natural and neutral sound, both in terms of FR and timbre, while at the same time being very revealing of detail and layering, excellent instrument separation and placing, all with, for a dynamic, exceptional bass extension and detail. The other thing I can’t personally agree with is that they lack engagement. I find them extremely musical and engaging - unusually so for a studio monitor. My only criticism might be that they lack a little soundstage depth, although soundstage, width, and height, seems perfect to me.

 

[chesebert]

Next to Utopia 2022, NDH30 is not as refined, sound not as dense or solid, soundstage is not as deep, lack of height, not as dynamic, not as natural sounding. Think of NDH30 as a sister phone to Clear OG - similar class of sound but with a different target curve.

Edit: for persons with nominal ears.

 

[Rob80b]

I very much agree with @FullBright1

Hi Mike and to some degree so do I.

Audiophile headphones "master" the sound for you, and present it as their sound sig. The N30 do not. They just provide the sound, and then you take it to the Mastering level.
I'd suggest, can't prove it, but i can suggest that if you can enjoy the HD600, then you can enjoy the N30s

As I've mentioned a few time the Neumann make a good monitor and if that is all one wishes great, no issues there, but as FullBright mentioned and I agree they shouldn't be touted as an audiophile phone.

The N30's soundstage, is much closer, more in the head, then the HE1000 series, which is needful for a mixing and mastering headphone.

they are not trying to over-produce anything, they are just trying to sound realistic, non fatiguing, and $700 accurate.

In hindsight the NDH30 sound exactly as you have portrayed them, you like neutral and even handed, no unnecessary embellishments and in that light the Neumann are exactly that, no argument there.

But, FWIW, I personally find the NDH 30 to have a very natural and neutral sound, both in terms of FR and timbre,

Here we have different expectations..again that's fine.

I can’t personally agree with is that they lack engagement. I find them extremely musical and engaging -

 

[martel80]

In hindsight the NDH30 sound exactly as you have portrayed them, you like neutral and even handed, no unnecessary embellishments and in that light the Neumann are exactly that, no argument there.

The question I pose is what is embellishments? (in which situation?)

If depth, details and definition is concerned, Mike's SCM100 ASL, if placed correctly in a room and with proper room acoustic treatment are far more proficient than the NDH30.

Now keep in mind that the SCM100 are VERY room dependant as their cabinet reflection are immense compared to other offering so it could be possible that Mike don't witness that behaviour but when well integrated, the difference is night and day.

On my Lipinski's L-707, the transient difference is the first thing that jump out as a big difference. (and so it is on the Ananda Nano's). The difference is HUGE.

The depth is the second biggest difference. Again, depending on his Monitors placement and integration in his room and his positioning when listening. On my side it is obvious.

With the correct amount of sound absorption and dispersion in a room across the frequency range, the details and definition will also pop out by quite a margin on Mastering grade monitors.

So I'm not sure I would vouch for the ''unnecessary embellishment'' nor the ''neutral'' part as the bass is off by quite a margin here. It seems to me that it is actually quite the opposite (in a mastering grade device rendering point of view)

That's obviously in the quest of finding the best tool to make a critical analytic Mastering job and not on a pure enjoyment perspective.

Sorry for repeating the precise reason for me to say this to those that can read correctly in the first place, I just want to make sure that I don't get mistaken again for someone I am not or something I didn't say.

 

[Rob80b]

The question I pose is what is embellishments? (in which situation?)

I may be wrong but I believe Mike is making reference in regard to something like the HD800 which is a completely different animal and full of embellishments, "la raison d'être" if I may say so. The HD800 have been designed to bring something new to headphone listening, through the the baffle design, driver etc...basically a far departure from the accepted historical headphone norm, the HD600 series for example.
As a predominately stereo speaker Hi-Fi guy the HD800 are an acceptable compromise. (somewhat)

 

[martel80]

I may be wrong but I believe Mike is making reference in regard to something like the HD800 which is a completely different animal and full of embellishments, "la raison d'être" if I may say so. The HD800 have been designed to bring something new to headphone listening, through the the baffle design, driver etc...basically a far departure from the accepted historical headphone norm, the HD600 series for example.
As a predominately stereo speaker Hi-Fi guy the HD800 are an acceptable compromise. (somewhat)

Gotcha !

 

[Mike F]

The question I pose is what is embellishments? (in which situation?)

If depth, details and definition is concerned, Mike's SCM100 ASL, if placed correctly in a room and with proper room acoustic treatment are far more proficient than the NDH30.

Now keep in mind that the SCM100 are VERY room dependant as their cabinet reflection are immense compared to other offering so it could be possible that Mike don't witness that behaviour but when well integrated, the difference is night and day.

On my Lipinski's L-707, the transient difference is the first thing that jump out as a big difference. (and so it is on the Ananda Nano's). The difference is HUGE.

The depth is the second biggest difference. Again, depending on his Monitors placement and integration in his room and his positioning when listening. On my side it is obvious.

With the correct amount of sound absorption and dispersion in a room across the frequency range, the details and definition will also pop out by quite a margin on Mastering grade monitors.

So I'm not sure I would vouch for the ''unnecessary embellishment'' nor the ''neutral'' part as the bass is off by quite a margin here. It seems to me that it is actually quite the opposite (in a mastering grade device rendering point of view)

That's obviously in the quest of finding the best tool to make a critical analytic Mastering job and not on a pure enjoyment perspective.

Sorry for repeating the precise reason for me to say this to those that can read correctly in the first place, I just want to make sure that I don't get mistaken again for someone I am not or something I didn't say.

I think we’re straying somewhat off topic here, but as I have mentioned my ATC speakers as a reference to my sound impressions of the NDH 30 I think I should respond to you post.

First, Rob is correct in saying that I was comparing the NDH 30 to the HD 800 in post #3,767. None of my comments were about the sound of my ATC’s.

Second, I just knew that someone (and probably you ) would say something about my room and the speaker placement after I posted the picture of the RH speaker. That photo makes it look as though they are right back in the corner, very close to the side wall and back wall, and as there are obviously no bass traps in the corner it looks like a recipe for disaster! I would almost certainly also question the speaker placement if someone else had posted that photo! However, all is not (as bad) as it seems!

To repeat myself, (and apologies for doing so to those who already know) I am a professional musician and life-long Hi-Fi enthusiast who enjoys headphones for fun, but for serious listening I sit down in front of the Hi-Fi. I do have a small 'studio' in an adjacent room, but that is really only (these days anyway) for the purpose of recording myself for other peoples productions. As such I use headphones for tracking (closed backs) and I occasionally do a bit of mixing, but not mastering. I leave those problems for someone else! The room were the ATCs are was built to be a music listening room - not a studio, so I allow it to be more 'live' than would be ideal or necessary if I were using them to master in a serious studio. And yes they are, as you know, certainly mastering grade monitors! The room dimensions are 7.2 x 4.3 x 3.0 meters (23.6 x 14.1 x 9.8 feet) - dimensions which were on the B&W website at one time as suggested ideal listening room dimensions. The floor is real wood parquet over solid concrete, but the walls are the traditional Finnish construction of wood frame and plasterboard with very thick insulation, so there is a considerable amount of bass loss through the walls. There is a large thick curtain on the front wall (behind the speakers) and also two thick 2 x 3 meter rugs on the floor as well as two large sofas, chair, various pieces of furniture etc and a large CD rack on the back wall, so it's a large but quite well damped room.

I have spent a considerable amount of time positioning the speakers and getting my listening position in the right place. I could have gone for the ideal situation of having the speakers placed far enough way from the front wall to avoid the problem of phase cancelation altogether, but this would have placed them so far into the room (I can't remember exactly what the placement would have been, or even the maths to do the calculation!) that I would have made the room impractical to use for any other purpose, and as I use it partly as a practice and relaxing room as well I decided to put the speakers closer to the front wall. However, they are not nearly as close as the picture makes them look! I can't remember the exact distances now, but the front axis of the speaker is carefully placed at a distance from the front and side walls that avoids any nasty phase cancellations or reflections. They are also toed in quite aggressively which all but eliminates troublesome side reflections - at least from my listening position. All problems which simply disappear with headphones - it's no wonder they have become so popular for serious listening! The speaker are 3.2 meters apart (measured from the central axis) and my head (ears) is 2.8 meters from the baffle, so I'm sitting slightly within the equilateral triangle. In this position the speakers can literally disappear and I 'see' the performers directly in front of me in the space between the speakers, or sounds can come from beyond the speakers left to right, and in any position up and down and front to back. Details and definition are off the scale.... It's quite an experience.

What doe this have to do with the NDH 30? I am not saying that the NDH 30s are as good as the ATCs - that would be a ridiculous suggestion. What I am saying is that of the headphones I have (and I mean the best ones which are the NDH 30, HD 650, HD 660S and HD 800), that the NDH 30 have the closest sound to the ATCs. By that I mean overall clarity and resolution (better than anything except the HD 800), naturalness of timbre and soundstage, bass response (although they go deeper than the ATCs) dynamics, punch, instrumental separation (again, the HD 800 is better still, but unnaturally so) and midrange presentation. I still think that they are quite a way ahead of the 6 series but manage that without losing any of the engagement, naturalness and correct instrumental timbre of, say, the HD 650. For what they cost I'm extremely happy with that.

 

[martel80]

I think we’re straying somewhat off topic here, but as I have mentioned my ATC speakers as a reference to my sound impressions of the NDH 30 I think I should respond to you post.

First, Rob is correct in saying that I was comparing the NDH 30 to the HD 800 in post #3,767. None of my comments were about the sound of my ATC’s.

Second, I just knew that someone (and probably you ) would say something about my room and the speaker placement after I posted the picture of the RH speaker. That photo makes it look as though they are right back in the corner, very close to the side wall and back wall, and as there are obviously no bass traps in the corner it looks like a recipe for disaster! I would almost certainly also question the speaker placement if someone else had posted that photo! However, all is not (as bad) as it seems!

To repeat myself, (and apologies for doing so to those who already know) I am a professional musician and life-long Hi-Fi enthusiast who enjoys headphones for fun, but for serious listening I sit down in front of the Hi-Fi. I do have a small 'studio' in an adjacent room, but that is really only (these days anyway) for the purpose of recording myself for other peoples productions. As such I use headphones for tracking (closed backs) and I occasionally do a bit of mixing, but not mastering. I leave those problems for someone else! The room were the ATCs are was built to be a music listening room - not a studio, so I allow it to be more 'live' than would be ideal or necessary if I were using them to master in a serious studio. And yes they are, as you know, certainly mastering grade monitors! The room dimensions are 7.2 x 4.3 x 3.0 meters (23.6 x 14.1 x 9.8 feet) - dimensions which were on the B&W website at one time as suggested ideal listening room dimensions. The floor is real wood parquet over solid concrete, but the walls are the traditional Finnish construction of wood frame and plasterboard with very thick insulation, so there is a considerable amount of bass loss through the walls. There is a large thick curtain on the front wall (behind the speakers) and also two thick 2 x 3 meter rugs on the floor as well as two large sofas, chair, various pieces of furniture etc and a large CD rack on the back wall, so it's a large but quite well damped room.

I have spent a considerable amount of time positioning the speakers and getting my listening position in the right place. I could have gone for the ideal situation of having the speakers placed far enough way from the front wall to avoid the problem of phase cancelation altogether, but this would have placed them so far into the room (I can't remember exactly what the placement would have been, or even the maths to do the calculation!) that I would have made the room impractical to use for any other purpose, and as I use it partly as a practice and relaxing room as well I decided to put the speakers closer to the front wall. However, they are not nearly as close as the picture makes them look! I can't remember the exact distances now, but the front axis of the speaker is carefully placed at a distance from the front and side walls that avoids any nasty phase cancellations or reflections. They are also toed in quite aggressively which all but eliminates troublesome side reflections - at least from my listening position. All problems which simply disappear with headphones - it's no wonder they have become so popular for serious listening! The speaker are 3.2 meters apart (measured from the central axis) and my head (ears) is 2.8 meters from the baffle, so I'm sitting slightly within the equilateral triangle. In this position the speakers can literally disappear and I 'see' the performers directly in front of me in the space between the speakers, or sounds can come from beyond the speakers left to right, and in any position up and down and front to back. Details and definition are off the scale.... It's quite an experience.

What doe this have to do with the NDH 30? I am not saying that the NDH 30s are as good as the ATCs - that would be a ridiculous suggestion. What I am saying is that of the headphones I have (and I mean the best ones which are the NDH 30, HD 650, HD 660S and HD 800), that the NDH 30 have the closest sound to the ATCs. By that I mean overall clarity and resolution (better than anything except the HD 800), naturalness of timbre and soundstage, bass response (although they go deeper than the ATCs) dynamics, punch, instrumental separation (again, the HD 800 is better still, but unnaturally so) and midrange presentation. I still think that they are quite a way ahead of the 6 series but manage that without losing any of the engagement, naturalness and correct instrumental timbre of, say, the HD 650. For what they cost I'm extremely happy with that.

Yeah it was a misunderstanding. I thought you were saying that your ATC were less detailed then your NDH 30. That was me misreading so good catch from you and Rob.

I'm also inside the equilateral triangle on my Lipinski's and they are ratter toe'd out. Unusual behaviour but that's as expected apparently.

As I said previously, you saying that you like the timber of the NDH30 and you being on ATC's make perfect sense.

(you should have flush-mounted them)

All right, enough talking about your beautiful babies, back on topic.

Thanks for clarifying.

 

[Mike F]

@martel80, I just had a thought about the level of clarity which you find somewhat lacking on the NDH 30 (IIRC?). Have you tried moving them back on you head slightly (so that your ears are nearer the drivers)? They are quite position sensitive....

 

[457139]

NDH-30 (black!) is breaking in with Violectric HPA V200 … … a few sneak listens … amazingly balanced, clear, sculpted, spacious … augurs well! … … curious to match ‘120 ohm’ NDH-30 with ‘100 ohm’ Beyer A20 … …

Looking good man! I may have to purchase another one of these headphones in black. It's a darned good headphone and probably deserves a place in the stable.

 

[martel80]

@martel80, I just had a thought about the level of clarity which you find somewhat lacking on the NDH 30 (IIRC?). Have you tried moving them back on you head slightly (so that your ears are nearer the drivers)? They are quite position sensitive....

Yes and I did the up and down as well. The Hifiman are even worst on that part because the pads are so immense that if you don't position them properly , you lose the seal and frequency flatness.

 

[Rob80b]

Looking good man!

They do and and the silver are not too shabby either, I feel somewhat like a jilted lover, just the wrong match.

 

[Mike F]

They do and and the silver are not too shabby either, I feel somewhat like a jilted lover, just the wrong match.

Perhaps you should try a black one.... sample variation and all that! Good as a neutral reference at the very least.

 

[Rob80b]

Good as a neutral reference at the very least.

I have to promise myself to never listen to this if I ever get a chance.