Quote:
Originally Posted by purrin /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Personal Opinions and Subjective Impressions
My personal opinion is that the Senn is the worst of the three. Too much low bass, mid bass, and high bass. While not very much in energy storage in the treble, there are sharp peaks, and these hurt me. The flatness of the midrange is commendable, but the bass and treble are showstopper issues for me. It does sound clean, but out of my main rig, I don't hear the little nuances and micro-detail, what I call plankton, which involve me in the music. In other words, it's clinical sounding. Many others will however appreciate the Senn for what it is, and that's OK.
The V-Moda and Beyer are a toss-up for me. Although the DT1350 has better transient response and is cleaner and snappier than the M80, it has an obvious ridge at 14kHz. The good thing is that this resonance is quite high up and thus not too noticeable. The other thing I found troubling is the upper-mids: the double peaks at 2k and 4.5k followed by a depression up to the peak. This is a little bit too uneven and "odd" sounding for my tastes. While the M80 isn't much better with its significant 1.5-2k bump. The bump is broad, and what follows after it is a little more linear than the Beyer. I found both headphones able to reproduce the plankton I am so fond of. Ultimately, I give the M80s the nod because of it's more laid back treble.
I own an have listened extensively to all three of these headphones, in fact I have several of each, so I thought I'd share some of my general thoughts on them:
For the record, my 1350's are the ones that Purrin measured and have been labeled "defective". (there goes my re-sale) I can tell you that hearing the effects of the imbalance is not at first easily apparent. Musical selection makes things even more complicated. It took a lot of critical listening and comparisons for me to be able to pick out what I was hearing. I also measured my headphones carefully using a SPL meter throughout the audible frequency range and found only a 1-2db imbalance on certain tones. At first it made me question his measurements, but after spending a significant amount of time I am able to hear the effect, so I wouldn't count on this method to declare your pair is "defect" free. On a side note, this has been a good learning experience for me and gives me more confidence interpreting what I am hearing in my other headphones.
After spending week listening to the 1350's at work and not comparing to other headphones I did find that my brain would start to compensate and the imbalance became more or less imperceptible, or at least I was compensating to think of the sound as "normal" and enjoyable. The upside to this is that it does let me enjoy some of what is really good about the 1350's, and even with a "defective" pair I do think they are quite good. As always I'd say trust your ears and listen to what you enjoy listening to!
I agree with Purrin, one thing that make the 1350 good for me is the ability to reproduce the "plankton". Of the three I think they do it the best, and it's why I think of the three they respond the best to improving your source and amp. Sound wise they get little complaints from me, imbalance aside, enough so that if I didn't already have a few on-ears to choose from I'd probably buy another pair to see if I can get a better matched pair of drivers. The big let down for me is still comfort and seal. To combat this I've been using the HD-25 pads over the stock pads and this makes them much easier to live with. I'm not sure if it's the double peak that does it, but I do find that same "odd" thing going on in the upper mids, but I only really notice it when I first listen to these after not hearing them for a while. I've said before in my early impressions that somehow it seems that while the lows, mids, and highs are admirable when taken individually, somehow they don't seem to get integrated quite right, and this results in this "odd" sound.
I find the M-80's fall a little shorter on giving me my plankton than Purrin reports... Much closer to the HD-25, which don't offer much at all. They come across as a little slower in general, but I find them just super easy to listen to and enjoy. They rock with electronic, dubstep, hip-hop, etc... and they don't fall short with other genre's either. The construction is fabulous, and comfort is a step up from the 1350. They are super easy to make adjustments to so you can it just right. I love the low end they punch out without killing everything else. Technically these are not the best of the three headphones; the individual lows, mids, and highs all fall a little short of natural and can be a bit compressed, but they manage to put it all together for a great overall sound. I'm tempted to throw out a "euphonic" here! When I audition the three headphones for friends who are not "enthusiast" they all seem to gravitate towards the M-80.
The HD-25's are still one of my favorites. For me the comfort is tops of the three, by a long shot. The slightly larger ear pads are probably the key here. My ears are not as easily offended by the treble peaks. The upper end is forward, but I love the general energy of these headphones. I generally listen with an amp, even when on the go, so perhaps my choice of amps is helping here? They do somehow fail to deliver the plankton, but generally this isn't as big an issue for me when selecting a portable headphone. They are so good I can't help wonder if the Amperiors would add some micro-details to really step up the HD-25's game?
I'm glad I don't have to pick only one of these headphones as they are all pretty good in their own way. I find that I always want to throw a pair in my check in luggage so I have them when I get to where I'm going, I always appreciate the break from IEM's after long flights. For travel it seems like the HD-25's and the M-80's get the 'nod most of the time and the 1350 seems to get more office time.
As for comparing them to full sized headphones... I always appreciate the ability of a portable to approach what a full sized headphone can do and all of these do an admirable job, but of course fall short. I would only make comparisons to try and let a listener understand what characteristics they might share, but trying to put one against the other is not a fair fight.
