[Music Alchemist]

Which headphones sound the most accurate and realistic to you? Rank them here!

 

[metal571]

So far, HD 600 is the most tonally accurate headphone that I've heard yet. The only deviations from neutrality I can detect is a slightly forward upper mid at 3.5k, a slightly recessed low treble (seriously, we're talking 1-2 dB max here), a slightly recessed upper octave (good extension though), and some sub-bass roll off. The HD 800 sounds truly synthetic by comparison and is way too dry.
 
The K550 is very close too, though suffers from some ringing at 5k. The M40x gets an honorable mention here as well as it is very uncolored, but has no soundstage to speak of. Not too bad for $100 though.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  So far, HD 600 is the most tonally accurate headphone that I've heard yet. The only deviations from neutrality I can detect is a slightly forward upper mid at 3.5k, a slightly recessed low treble (seriously, we're talking 1-2 dB max here), a slightly recessed upper octave (good extension though), and some sub-bass roll off. The HD 800 sounds truly synthetic by comparison and is way too dry.
 
The K550 is very close too, though suffers from some ringing at 5k. The M40x gets an honorable mention here as well as it is very uncolored, but has no soundstage to speak of. Not too bad for $100 though.

 
Cool post. The M40x would not rank anywhere near the top for me. When I owned it, the tonality sounded very off to me -- too bland and colored to my ears. (I even went so far as to send it in to be examined, but nothing was wrong with it.) Guess I'm too picky for my own good, hehe...

 

[metal571]

   
Cool post. The M40x would not rank anywhere near the top for me. When I owned it, the tonality sounded very off to me -- too bland and colored to my ears. (I even went so far as to send it in to be examined, but nothing was wrong with it.) Guess I'm too picky for my own good, hehe...

That's pretty strange. Other than the artificial boost above 10k and maybe a slight midbass hump, it was pretty flat. I've heard the ER4 series from Ety is super flat as well.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  That's pretty strange. Other than the artificial boost above 10k and maybe a slight midbass hump, it was pretty flat. I've heard the ER4 series from Ety is super flat as well.

 
I kind of wish I still had it, to see if I still feel the same way about it. In case you didn't gather from my custom title, I've heard a good deal of headphones, so when something does not sound realistic, it's pretty noticeable to me. I've been sorely disappointed with even high-end stuff, so I'm hoping the best ultra-high-end headphones (like the STAX SR-009) solve that little problem. (And at that price, it better!) Another thing I have deduced from my experience is that frequency response is only the beginning of a headphone's sound. I am inclined to believe that the design of the drivers and so on plays an even more crucial role. I wouldn't be too surprised if two headphone models with the same frequency response sounded very different due to factors involving other aspects of their design.

 

[metal571]

   
I kind of wish I still had it, to see if I still feel the same way about it. In case you didn't gather from my custom title, I've heard a good deal of headphones, so when something does not sound realistic, it's pretty noticeable to me. I've been sorely disappointed with even high-end stuff, so I'm hoping the best ultra-high-end headphones (like the STAX SR-009) solve that little problem. (And at that price, it better!) Another thing I have deduced from my experience is that frequency response is only the beginning of a headphone's sound. I am inclined to believe that the design of the drivers and so on plays an even more crucial role. I wouldn't be too surprised if two headphone models with the same frequency response sounded very different due to factors involving other aspects of their design.

It's a combination of the time domain response and the frequency response that give headphones their sound. Better time domain responses also can make positional cues easier on the ear and give a better sense of soundstage, and better time domain responses are easier to achieve on planar magnetic and electrostatic drivers. I haven't heard the super high end stuff, except the HD 800, but I don't like its tonal balance at all.

 

[kman1211]

In terms of the most natural and organic sounding headphones I've ever heard, this is how I would rank them going by memory
 
Top five of the ultra high-end I've heard.
 
1.) Sony MDR-R10 bass-heavy
2.) Sennheiser Orpheus
3.) Sennheiser HE-60
4.) Sony MDR-R10 bass-light
5.) Audeze LCD-3(pre-fazor)
 
 
Top five of the mid-tier headphones that I've heard
 
1.) Sennheiser HD 600
2.) AKG K712
3.) Sennheiser HD 650
4.) Sennheiser HD 580
5.) Beyerdynanic DT 150

 

[Music Alchemist]

  In terms of the most natural and organic sounding headphones I've ever heard, this is how I would rank them going by memory
 
Top five of the ultra high-end I've heard.
 
1.) Sony MDR-R10 bass-heavy
2.) Sennheiser Orpheus

 
Interesting how the R10 beat the Orpheus for you. Care to elaborate? When you say organic, are you referring to realistically organic as opposed to overly dark and gooey? Please note that first and foremost, I want the most accurate headphones available, with the least amount of coloration. When some people say natural and organic, they are referring to dark, colored headphones, so semantics is important. Have you heard the SR-009? I noticed it was not on your list despite you hearing some rare high-end stuff.

 

[kman1211]

Interesting how the R10 beat the Orpheus for you. Care to elaborate? When you say organic, are you referring to realistically organic as opposed to overly dark and gooey? Please note that first and foremost, I want the most accurate headphones available, with the least amount of coloration. When some people say natural and organic, they are referring to dark, colored headphones, so semantics is important. Have you heard the SR-009? I noticed it was not on your list despite you hearing some rare high-end stuff.

I'm referring to naturally organic as in it sounds true to life, I think part of it it was the system, the owner essentially built a system around the bass-heavy R10. To put simply the bass-heavy R10 simply sounded more real and true to life to my ears. Nothing stood out as wrong to my ears, it was completely void of grain, breathtakingly transparent, and was exceptionally balanced. I didn't find the R10 colored like some claimed, brings out the most euphoric music I've ever heard in a headphone but not what I call colored. The Orpheus also sounded extremely real, wasn't quite as euphoric but had slightly better layering of the soundscape, I just thought the R10s balance was slightly better, decay more natural, was slightly clearer, and was more true to life to my ears.

My problem with the SR-009 was similar to the HD 800, the tonality had too much of a treble focus which made the headphone less warm than neutral and the bass of the SR-009 while exceptionally detailed, articulate, and detailed just didn't have the presence to make it truly true to life to me. The SR-009 was a bit of a disappointment to me like the HD 800, near perfect but too much treble tilt and not enough warmth to make it truly organic sounding. Slight tweaking of the SR-009 will probably make it pretty much near perfect, say a possible MKII version, but as I heard it, it needed just a little more tuning. A similar problem to the bass-light R10 but I found the particular bass-light I heard to have more natural warmth, fullness, and presence in the bass and the mids and treble were simply amazing on the bass-light.

Other headphones such as the K812 and T1 have a different problem, they did very well in terms of balance and natural tonality but need some extra smoothing out in the sound and a bit more refinement as I find them a bit rough around the edges, particularly in the treble. The K812 is the better of the two.

The LCD-3 pre-fazor was just a tad too dark and wasn't quite as good as some others in terms of soundstaging/imaging, but it was the closest to a true organic sound of the modern flagships I've heard at least on the system I heard it on.

The problem with headphones, colored isn't as straightforward as with speakers. I always found neutral a bit darker and warmer than many people consider neutral.

 

[Music Alchemist]

I'm referring to naturally organic as in it sounds true to life, I think part of it it was the system, the owner essentially built a system around the bass-heavy R10. To put simply the bass-heavy R10 simply sounded more real and true to life to my ears. Nothing stood out as wrong to my ears, it was completely void of grain, breathtakingly transparent, and was exceptionally balanced. I didn't find the R10 colored like some claimed, brings out the most euphoric music I've ever heard in a headphone but not what I call colored. The Orpheus also sounded extremely real, wasn't quite as euphoric but had slightly better layering of the soundscape, I just thought the R10s balance was slightly better, decay more natural, was slightly clearer, and was more true to life to my ears.

My problem with the SR-009 was similar to the HD 800, the tonality had too much of a treble focus which made the headphone less warm than neutral and the bass of the SR-009 while exceptionally detailed, articulate, and detailed just didn't have the presence to make it truly true to life to me. The SR-009 was a bit of a disappointment to me like the HD 800, near perfect but too much treble tilt and not enough warmth to make it truly organic sounding. Slight tweaking of the SR-009 will probably make it pretty much near perfect, say a possible MKII version, but as I heard it, it needed just a little more tuning. A similar problem to the bass-light R10 but I found the particular bass-light I heard to have more natural warmth, fullness, and presence in the bass and the mids and treble were simply amazing on the bass-light.

Other headphones such as the K812 and T1 have a different problem, they did very well in terms of balance and natural tonality but need some extra smoothing out in the sound and a bit more refinement as I find them a bit rough around the edges, particularly in the treble. The K812 is the better of the two.

The LCD-3 pre-fazor was just a tad too dark and wasn't quite as good as some others in terms of soundstaging/imaging, but it was the closest to a true organic sound of the modern flagships I've heard at least on the system I heard it on.

The problem with headphones, colored isn't as straightforward as with speakers. I always found neutral a bit darker and warmer than many people consider neutral.

 
Very cool. The R10 has been on my wish list since I heard about it, but I'll have to wait awhile before I can afford it. But knowing that it sounds more realistic to you than the HE 90 and SR-009 is very interesting. Guess I'll pursue the bass-heavy version. Does the bass-light version sound better to the bass-heavy one in any way to you?
 
Which amp (and tubes, if applicable) did you hear the SR-009 on? It is known to change significantly depending on those.

 

[goropeza]

Its tough for me, the HD 800 has the detail right as far as live performances go, but tonally I think the HE 500's have the most correct timbre out of all headphones I have tried. From what I have read, the HE 500's sound pretty similar to the HD 600's so I can perfectly understand that recommendation.

 

[Music Alchemist]

  Its tough for me, the HD 800 has the detail right as far as live performances go, but tonally I think the HE 500's have the most correct timbre out of all headphones I have tried. From what I have read, the HE 500's sound pretty similar to the HD 600's so I can perfectly understand that recommendation.

 
I had the chance to get an HE-500 at an awesome price, but ended up getting an HD 700, then an HE400i. (I like the latter much more.)

 

[kman1211]

Very cool. The R10 has been on my wish list since I heard about it, but I'll have to wait awhile before I can afford it. But knowing that it sounds more realistic to you than the HE 90 and SR-009 is very interesting. Guess I'll pursue the bass-heavy version. Does the bass-light version sound better to the bass-heavy one in any way to you?

Which amp (and tubes, if applicable) did you hear the SR-009 on? It is known to change significantly depending on those.

The R10 does seem to vary a bit from unit to unit based on its condition and when it was made, so impressions do vary, it's also an extremely sensitive and revealing headphone of the system. Usually the Orpheus would sound better. But there was just something magical about the R10 system I heard. The bass-light does sound more spacious and airy with more precise imaging than the bass heavy and female vocals were simply to die for on the bass-light. The treble was so clean, delicate, and beautiful on the bass-light I didn't even care it was somewhat brighter than what I consider neutral.

I heard it on a Blue Hawaii amp, can't say the particular tubes, didn't really ask. The thing is I may find neutral a bit darker and warmer than you may as I'm oddly sensitive to treble. It's something you have to find out yourself. But there is a general range of sound signatures considered neutral.

 

[Music Alchemist]

I heard it on a Blue Hawaii amp, can't say the particular tubes, didn't really ask. The thing is I may find neutral a bit darker and warmer than you may as I'm oddly sensitive to treble. It's something you have to find out yourself. But there is a general range of sound signatures considered neutral.

 
Ah, yes. Well, to give you something of a reference, the HD 650 sounded good, but too dark to me, and even the Focal Spirit Professional and Yamaha HPH-MT220 (studio monitor headphones) were a little too dark to sound accurate. On the other hand, the Sony MDR-7506 is too bright and nasty, though it occasionally has excellent vocal reproduction.

 

[kman1211]

Ah, yes. Well, to give you something of a reference, the HD 650 sounded good, but too dark to me, and even the Focal Spirit Professional and Yamaha HPH-MT220 (studio monitor headphones) were a little too dark to sound accurate. On the other hand, the Sony MDR-7506 is too bright and nasty, though it occasionally has excellent vocal reproduction.

I don't really find the HD 650 too dark personally, but rather it's a bit too warm with some slight extra energy in the 9-10k that shouldn't really be there, it is a bit more refined than the HD 600 though. Honestly some sort of mixture of the HD 600 and HD 650 would be about perfect tonality wise, I'm honestly likely not going to get anything more expensive than an LCD-2 personally. I'm about to stop spending anymore in this hobby for a long period of time honestly.