[DavidA]

   
 
 
AKG for the World!

Good call, I was going to suggest K7XX / K712 but both are a little to amp dependent IMO.  Maybe K550/553 might be a better suggestion.

 

[castleofargh]

suggestions for monitoring headphones are always the same 3 or 4 stuff, usually closed headphones for practical reasons. but yeah, speakers should be the weapon of choice whenever possible. price isn't really an issue for some powered near field nice stuff, so the only reason I could see not to use that would be sensitive neighbors.
and yeah, as others said, the hd650 isn't a monitoring device. maybe with sonawork in the loop it would already be a little more convincing? IDK.

 

[DavidA]

  suggestions for monitoring headphones are always the same 3 or 4 stuff, usually closed headphones for practical reasons. but yeah, speakers should be the weapon of choice whenever possible. price isn't really an issue for some powered near field nice stuff, so the only reason I could see not to use that would be sensitive neighbors.
and yeah, as others said, the hd650 isn't a monitoring device. maybe with sonawork in the loop it would already be a little more convincing? IDK.

What are the 3-4 headphones that are normally recommend for monitoring work?  Just curious at this point.

 

[Solrighal]

  What are the 3-4 headphones that are normally recommend for monitoring work?  Just curious at this point.

 
Beyerdynamic DT150 for one. I think Sennheiser HD 280's are meant to be pretty decent too. Maybe add the AKG K240? Not sure which AKG is the most neutral but I had far more success mastering with my AKG Q701 than with my Sennheiser HD 650. I mention mastering because that's the part of music production I think is the trickiest. Mixing is pretty much down to artistic sensibilities and open to interpretation but there's only really one way to master, i.e. the correct way.

 

[castleofargh]

well it's really not my world, but I have a few friends more or less related to recording and mastering, and they can't say enough great things about the shure 1540 in a studio, and they all have some cheap stuff to carry around without care like sony mdr7506 and the athm50.
now they all know each others and some even work together on occasions, so it could be an isolated fan club. IDK
personally at a totally subjective and not relevant level, I feel like a few of the beyer could probably be revealing enough to work with, but I guess price rapidly becomes as relevant as the signature.
 
the 650 is like making most things nicer, it's probably not what a monitor should do.

 

[DavidA]

@Solrighal @castleofargh thanks for the info.  I didn't really think about the difference between mastering and mixing, learned something today.
 
I've seen the MDR-7506, M50, DT-150, HD-280, AKG's and others being used in videos of musicians in the studio, didn't see any open headphones when I think about it, maybe only used in the control room?
 
Sorry for going a little of topic

 

[ubs28]

  What are the 3-4 headphones that are normally recommend for monitoring work?  Just curious at this point.

​There is no top 4 headphones (or studio monitors for that matter) because in the end it's all about knowing your equipment.

 

[LazyListener]

When you guys say M50 are one of top headphones to use for mixing/mastering, are you referring to the Audio-Technica M50?  If so, I thought that model was way too peaky for that purpose.
 
From few cans I've heard, I'd say the AKG Q701 would probably be pretty good for that purpose.  Of course, I would imagine closed backs are preferred for the ambient noise isolation.  With open backs, you have the potential of room noises seeping in and also the slight chance them sounding different based on room acoustics.

 

[DivineCurrent]

When you guys say M50 are one of top headphones to use for mixing/mastering, are you referring to the Audio-Technica M50?  If so, I thought that model was way too peaky for that purpose.

From few cans I've heard, I'd say the AKG Q701 would probably be pretty good for that purpose.  Of course, I would imagine closed backs are preferred for the ambient noise isolation.  With open backs, you have the potential of room noises seeping in and also the slight chance them sounding different based on room acoustics.

You're correct, for good mixing/mastering you need a headphone that has the flattest frequency response possible. The M-50 is a little too peaky for that. I would say that open backs are better for mixing and mastering because they are intended to achieve the open sound you get from near-field studio monitors. If you compare good studio monitors to the HD 650/600, you would be very surprised how similar they sound frequency response wise. Soundstage not so much, but they are very close. But, that doesn't mean you can't mix with closed back, it just won't sound as open. And keep in mind, with headphones you are only hearing one channel in each ear, not both in front of you like monitors. Crossfeed can help with that.

 

[penmarker]

You're correct, for good mixing/mastering you need a headphone that has the flattest frequency response possible. The M-50 is a little too peaky for that. I would say that open backs are better for mixing and mastering because they are intended to achieve the open sound you get from near-field studio monitors. If you compare good studio monitors to the HD 650/600, you would be very surprised how similar they sound frequency response wise. Soundstage not so much, but they are very close. But, that doesn't mean you can't mix with closed back, it just won't sound as open. And keep in mind, with headphones you are only hearing one channel in each ear, not both in front of you like monitors. Crossfeed can help with that.

Tonally, studio monitors and HD650 doesn't sound similar. Monitors are usually brighter and have punchier bass - they're not actually brighter or punchier compared to normal speakers, the flat frequency response make them sound like that. 
 
IMHO Audio Technica M50/40/30, Beyer DT770, DT150, DT100 are more for monitoring during recording and not for mixing/mastering because they are not ruler flat. HD650/HD600 might be too dark and source dependent and the DT150 is tonally similar to the HD650. AKG lineup (especially the Sextett) might sound bass light for mixing/mastering, but the result will be punchier on normal speakers. I have no experience with Shure stuff, but they're mostly used for monitoring during recording like the M50.
 
Out of most headphones for mixing/mastering I would recommend Audio Technica R70, AKG K550, Sony MDR EX100 (IEM), Sony MDR CD900ST. There are others that might be better so others could chime in too.
 
But as mentioned previously, proper speaker studio monitors are the best for mixing and mastering. They convey proper 3D soundstage due to natural crossfeeding, and they're already built for the purpose of actually monitoring audio tracks.
 
There is also the SPL Phonitor that helps with headphone monitoring by simulating speakers, and a lot of people gave good feedback from it.

 

[Solrighal]

I don't understand why so few headphone enthusiasts use Crossfeed. Without it the music just isn't working properly.

 

[Psalmanazar]

Mixing and mastering on headphones is a no no as you'll have to check everything with speakers later on. The HD 600/650 are some of the flattest but there's no point as you'll have to check it again and redo stuff when you could have just done the job on speakers in the first place. A pair of JBL LSR 305s is better and cheaper for the job.

  I don't understand why so few headphone enthusiasts use Crossfeed. Without it the music just isn't working properly.

Never sounds right.

 

[Solrighal]

  Mixing and mastering on headphones is a no no as you'll have to check everything with speakers later on. The HD 600/650 are some of the flattest but there's no point as you'll have to check it again and redo stuff when you could have just done the job on speakers in the first place. A pair of JBL LSR 305s is better and cheaper for the job.
Never sounds right.

 
That's illogical, Captain.

 

[penmarker]

Do you have any reliable crossfeed plugin?

 

[castleofargh]

it's the same as EQ, you first need to understand what it is you're trying to do, then spend some time getting settings that are right just for you and usually it's a lot less than you think.
crossfeed will send the signal of one side to the other side at an attenuated volume, with a delay, and with an EQ because some frequencies will be stopped by the head before reaching the other ear.  the size and shape of one's very own head is what determines how this happens with sounds in every day's life, so to feel like a crossfeed is natural, it needs to replicate those changes the way your head did it.  not that simple.
that's why IMO asking for people which crossfeed they prefer is useless. I'm not them, and my body isn't of average size either.  the good old and free crossfeed made by xnor has a good deal of settings and if you remember some math from school you can even try to measure your head and calculate delays. but IMO the logical method is to sit in front of actual speakers with the headphone on your head, and try to get at least the sounds coming from about the same direction as it would with the speakers.
 
now even when that is done to almost to perfection(unlikely to happen), there are still other factors, like seeing the speakers in front of me improve the feeling that the crossfeed works, but if I don't have them in my field of vision, then the effect drops a little. and when I move my head, it kills most of the effect and sends the center image back inside my head (well on top of it for most sound in my case).
 
another significant variable, with enough time the brain will adapt, so just tuning a crossfeed ON and OFF while telling you exactly what's different, it doesn't tell you how you'll feel after a few days.
 
if you want to have fun and you have a good webcam and good light in your room, I suggest to try the demo of http://www.waves.com/nx/mac-windows-app  why this? well you have to measure your head(2 measures and not hard ones) for the software to use a model from those dimension(again not perfect but close). it can make the all process of searching for the right setting shorter if by chance it works well for you. and then there is head tracking with the webcam(again you need a lot of light to get enough fps). so you can feel how much of a difference fooling one more sense can make. might work great for you, might be disturbing, might make you whine because it doesn't refresh fast enough on your webcam( <-me). but overall it's a fairly simple way to experience a few things for free. it's the simplified version so the effect is closer to surround than just crossfeed and you can't move the virtual speakers around as you can do with the studio VST version. but then you need a DAW or a VST host to use that and I'm guessing not everybody will get how to do that or will be willing to make the effort.
of course if you're rich, you can purchase a Smyth Realiser, but even then there is some personal work to be done. nothing comes ready to use when it's based on individuals and those stuff are objectively very subjective^_^.
 
 
and I'm so far off topic that Santa might come to take my gifts back from me.