[FullBright1]

Thank you.

Oops, forgot, I really like the way the 500 does recording space, stage noise (page turning, bow drops), and overtones. About as good as my old Verity Parsifals and ML CLS IIz's used to do it. Quads give the same sort of thing? Promise - last question.

Yes.
The Quads sound different then the HE500s.
More of a rich tonality, and more resolution, but that does not necessarily mean "better sound"., as this is always subjective to each set of ears.
The Quads sound very good.
I like both....

 

[FullBright1]

I went in wanting to like the Quad, but at the end of the listening session, to my surprise I ended up liking the lcd2c (slightly equalized) the most, taking into consideration the sound and comfort and the fact that they eq well. These will be the headphones i will buy.

OPrwtos said........."Quads dont sound natural"..

I wonder what that actually means?
No headphone sounds natural... all headphones sound like hollow cups on your ears......and this is never going to sound like Real LIFE stereo sounds to your ears, in reality, in a room, or outdoors.
Not possible.
So, i guess you are saying that you dont like the specific tonality that the Quads represent as their sig sound, and you prefer the tonality the Audeze cans represent as their particular sound.
And you are absolutely right on point to realize that the Quads dont sound like normal headphones..... They sound like speakers, which is not a typical headphone sound....
"not natural", = not like every other headphone is designed to sound. = absolutely correct.
Its interesting that you didn't enjoy the Quads, as regarding your list, the Quads sound the most similar to the Audeze you mentioned.
And you are certainly correct when you list the Shure and the AKG as being "thin sounding".
The Quad and the Audeze are polar opposites in sound regarding those 2.
-
-

 

[OPrwtos]

OPrwtos said........."Quads dont sound natural"..

I wonder what that actually means?
No headphone sounds natural... all headphones sound like hollow cups on your ears......and this is never going to sound like Real LIFE stereo sounds to your ears, in reality, in a room, or outdoors.
Not possible.
So, i guess you are saying that you dont like the specific tonality that the Quads represent as their sig sound, and you prefer the tonality the Audeze cans represent as their particular sound.
And you are absolutely right on point to realize that the Quads dont sound like normal headphones..... They sound like speakers, which is not a typical headphone sound....
"not natural", = not like every other headphone is designed to sound. = absolutely correct.
Its interesting that you didn't enjoy the Quads, as regarding your list, the Quads sound the most similar to the Audeze you mentioned.
And you are certainly correct when you list the Shure and the AKG as being "thin sounding".
The Quad and the Audeze are polar opposites in sound regarding those 2.
-
-

I just think the audeze sounded closer to the real life instruments. The quad also had a weird soundstage.

 

[FullBright1]

I just think the audeze sounded closer to the real life instruments. The quad also had a weird soundstage.

The Quad is not designed to sound like any headphones you have ever used, heard, or wanted.
So, what you are saying, is proof they created a product, that is unto itself, exactly what they designed it to sound like...
Its like, if a banana tasted like an orange, and you are expecting it to taste like "one more banana....more or less".
The Quad is a banana, but, its not designed to taste like one, and you found this out, QPrwtos......
I own them, so, i understand why you think what you are saying has anything to do with any of the other headphones you are use to hearing, or heard, that you are describing.
Where you didnt go into the Quad experience informed, is that you didn't know they are not supposed to sound like headphones...
So, plz don't come now and say...."oh yes, i read all about the Quads on their WEBSITE, and the specific SPEAKERS they are designed to SOUND JUST LIKE".
As that is not the case.....ok?
So, lets keep it real., as this works best for us all.

And, the way you have reacted to them, ......
Is exactly how you should have, because you were thinking......"ok, let me compare them to A. B. C.".... = and thats a fail.
The Quads dont sound like headphones "should sound", and so, if you are expecting to be able to compare them to other headphones, (which you tried) you are not going to succeed in liking them....

I hope you enjoy your Audeze.
I love mine....they are great.
Comfy and sound so GOOD.
They sound like headphones..... however.
Quads, dont sound like headphones......They are sound-designed to sound like World Famous Quad Audiophile speakers that are trying to sound like themselves, through the Quads ear cups.
It works, but, not for you.
Isn't it great?
I think its great that some people are not going to be able to love the Quads.
"Differences make the world go round".
I personally hate most AKG, Beyer, and Hifiman Headphones., yet i own the HE500s, and if you check my bio here, you'll note the collection includes......many that i can't stand to even think about listening to.....as that is the way it goes.
I dont like everything, and neither do you.
Thats perfect.

 

[donlin]

I would just add that a lot of quick switching between a bunch of different headphones in a store is hardly the way to make a good decision. As you said, the order they are listened to has a big effect and colors your perception. In the end they all start to sound bad without enough time to adjust to each one over time.

 

[RatFarm]

I have both the Quad and LCD2C. As impressive as the Quad is, the midrange is a bit forward at times so on poorly recorded music it brings on a cringe. The LCD2C cruises thru such recordings due to its more laid back midrange. I think both headphones compliment each other. I am surprised how much bass the Quad can produce. Almost overwhelming at times but fun to listen to.

 

[FullBright1]

I would just add that a lot of quick switching between a bunch of different headphones in a store is hardly the way to make a good decision. As you said, the order they are listened to has a big effect and colors your perception. In the end they all start to sound bad without enough time to adjust to each one over time.

Choosing a headphone in a store..... im not certain this gives you the privacy or allows for the careful attention it takes (over time) to accurately access a headphone's sound.
I can't do it. I need a quiet room, a relaxed atmosphere, access to the music i use to test for sound...... and certainly not a "live" environment where im putting on and taking off, putting on and taking off, trying to decide how to spend MONEY.
Maybe that can work for some, but i would not agree that it will work very well for any.......

And then there is the issue .....if your ears are conditioned to a headphone's sound.......your favorite......that you just used the last 10 days in a row..........= your ears/brain remember this, and they put this sound memory context AGAINST any new headphone you strap on.
You actually have to let your brain/ears "reload" and sort of recalibrate itself and adjust and accept a new headphone.
This can't be done in a store, as it can't really be done perfectly the first few hours of listening to a new set at home.
You have to just put everything else away and just listen to the new set, for hours, days.....and then it becomes normalized within your perception.
If you hate it after the 4th day, then you'll hate it after the 40th as well.

And then there is the burn in situation.....and other obtuse little issues like....what if the headphone amp you are using is making your headphones SUCK?
I was just reading RatFarm's critique of the Quad's midrange, and he is suffering from "mismatch meltdown" as the dac amps he is using to power both of his headphones, are only allowing one to shine.
The Quad's do not have a "forward" midrange.....They have the Midrange as their signature sound and the treble and bass are added to the mids, in a balanced way.
Icing on a cake.
The Quad's designer crated the headphone's sound to accurately present a certainly legendary Quad set of Speakers, which also offer as their sonic sig this very same wide wide wide midrange.
Its not "forward", its wide....and it allows for excellent and balanced bass and treble.
There are going to be only 2 types of reviews for the Quad.

1. Midrange is glorious.

2. All the others.

 

[bagwell359]

Descriptions that put the Quad into some level of comparison to the HE-500, HE-6, HD-600 modded - is good for me

Also descriptions of the Quad mids and treble as forward compared to the LCD2 is good too.

 

[bagwell359]

I would just add that a lot of quick switching between a bunch of different headphones in a store is hardly the way to make a good decision. As you said, the order they are listened to has a big effect and colors your perception. In the end they all start to sound bad without enough time to adjust to each one over time.

I think it's OK when there are a lot of units you haven't heard. But OK to isolate on the ones you like for longer term testing - not OK to spend big money.

 

[starence]

Do you guys think the ERA-1 would be a good choice for someone with a big head and big ears? Thanks

 

[fericske]

Hi everyone,
One week long I own an Era1.
I have heard almost all branded headphone, earphone they are on the market (Audeze range, Hifiman range, Beyers, Akg range, Denons, Jps labs, Meze range, Stax range, 64 audio, Jerry Harvey, Final Audio, Focals, ZMF, Grados, B&W, Sennheisers, MrSpeakers, Fostex, Kennerton etc.) and own some of them.
This is my hobby.
I always try to find something "not average" but of course good sounding stuff, something unique.
On this way I found the Questyle QP1r, Acoustune 1551CU, Periodic BE, InEar Prophile 8, Final Pandora Hope 6, Kennerton Vali-Odin, TMP Audio Ant and now the Quad Era1.
In my opinion (based on my experience) the Era1 one is not an "average sounding" headphone.
It's planar, but not a typical planar sound.
It has more.
It can brings the silky highs and bass, sweet mids those are mainly the dynamic drivers attributes, but on the same way brings the robustness, tightness, speed those are the planars main attributes.
Its' tuning it's just right.
Very reference close.
Never too much, never too less, even on low volume or high volume (with good source gears and music).
Its' sound quality, clarity, technicality far above on its' price range.
Well it has note a large soundstage but accurate. (I'll do earpad research in this case. I prefer the not necessarily wide but deep soundstage. Momently from my collection the "ultimate" ZMF ORI lambskin pad is not good with it, because of its' full closed design. The Era1 claims something like fenestrated that is mitigate, like its' original pads.)
I found the stock cable is a really good quality cable. I have one compatible upgrade cable, the Forza Claire mk2, worth £150, but didn't give any plus compared for the stock cable. (I use the Forza cable for the Pandora 6, that is massive upgrade over on the stock cable.)
The next step over on this headphone to me is the LCD4, Meze Empyrean, Abyss "biggun". The rest around them is just money wasting, in my opinion.
If someone want to find its' twin at IEMs, need to give an audition to the Periodic BE.
That is also brings a very reference close tuning with much higher audio quality than its' price range.

Okay, so I'm not afraid to doing some modding on these stuffs if I see the point.
Sometimes it's just a little thing, like now with the Quad.
When I changed the earpads I was wondering how is seal. Not good.
If you turn to the light the headphone you will see a little gap between the earpad and the speaker unit.
I eliminated this gap with a thin "all purpose cleaning cloth".
Used two layers, the earpad lifted roughly 0,5 mm, and I got fuller bass, no any other changed.
The difference is minor, but noticeable.

 

[negura]

I have both the Quad and LCD2C. As impressive as the Quad is, the midrange is a bit forward at times so on poorly recorded music it brings on a cringe. The LCD2C cruises thru such recordings due to its more laid back midrange. I think both headphones compliment each other. I am surprised how much bass the Quad can produce. Almost overwhelming at times but fun to listen to.

I also have both. The Quads are more resolving, more focused and more dynamic, so they shine with great recordings, and hide poor ones a bit less than the Audeze. This is amazing and not only for the price. Yeah the bass can sometimes be a bit much (very recording/content range dependent), particularly with the velour pads. With other recordings I am surprised how good the bass is. This thing with the bass is the same with the Focal Clear - they also exhibit a bit too much bass quantity sometimes. I wish people would mention which pads they use / heard the Quads with.

 

[FullBright1]

Descriptions that put the Quad into some level of comparison to the HE-500, HE-6, HD-600 modded - is good for me

Also descriptions of the Quad mids and treble as forward compared to the LCD2 is good too.

Audeze headphones, seemingly, with the exception of the "X" and the "Sine", tend towards warm, warm, warm .....sort of a round-smooth tone.
The Quads are different.... They possess warmth, but they don't present music as warm and bassy, as do most of the Audeze headphones.
The do what they do very well, and some will love what they do, and others will not......
I can tell you that you can pleasurably spend hours re-listening to your favorite music using the Quads and the Neumanns.
Its what ive been doing....
Headphones are "new eyes" for your ears to see thru, and for me, that is what i enjoy.
Im more interested in hearing how a new set of headphones presents the music i love, vs, having one set that i use all the time to enjoy.
"Gear nut".
Both of these situations are a valid reason to obsess on headphones....
There are not a lot of things in life you can spend money on that are a reasonably healthy pleasure/obsession.
Headphones/Music are one.

 

[FullBright1]

. Yeah the bass can sometimes be a bit much (very recording/content range dependent), particularly with the velour pads. With other recordings I am surprised how good the bass is. - they also exhibit a bit too much bass quantity sometimes.

You're bass issue is not the headphones.
Its your amp or dac, or the way you are using an EQ to shape the sound.
The Quads have no issue with "too much" bass.
Your amp-dac, is the problem.
I use the angled pads.
Are you "bass sensitive"?
I am, i hate too much bass, or low mid dominant phones, or sizzly treble.
This is why i can't deal with AKG or Beyer or something like the Audeze EL-8s.
The eq'ing of the Quads, is adjusted towards the midrange, and is absolutely not bass extended, but rather extremely clear and balanced.

 

[RatFarm]

FullBright1, you need to respect others opinions on what they are hearing and quit blaming our equipment. I too have heard many headphones, amps and DACs. With the exception of some tube amps there isn’t much sonic variation between solid state amps with the exception of underpowered amps. My Beyer T1s are a bit bright, my LCD2C is a bit muted in the treble and the Quad is a bit forward. That’s ok. If I want to listen to Led Zeppelin I reach for the LCD2C. If I want classical or electronic music I reach for the Quad or T1. There is no such thing as a perfect headphone. Blaming an amp or dac is misguided at best.