[robm321]

The spike in the highs exaggerates sibilance. Top speakers present the sibilance as it is in the recording but without exaggerating it (smooth not spiky). So, you get all the sibilance you want. You just don't get it accentuated.

Most sibilance I've heard comes from compressed recordings. And lacking any dynamics (volume range) in those records proves that they don't have sibilance at a higher volume, so it's the headphones if they jump out at you.

 

[rhythmdevils]

^ yes. Truly accurate or "revealing" equipment, IMO, show you the faults in the recording but since they are not adding their own peaks on top of that, there is no harshness.

I just find it amazing how many people on head-fi seem to say that if equipment is not harsh, it is "forgiving", innacurate, or warm. IMO, the case is more that people like the colorations of their headphones, the exaggerated or in your face detail it offers, but it doesn't always wind up sounding right...

very interesting debate nonetheless!

 

[powertoold]

A horribly sibilant recording that may be exacerbated by your audio equipment:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FebFtkQd8OI

* Well it's not that bad, worse in high quality!

Anyway, why are so many people putting up with the HD800 "hurting their ears"? If it hurts your ears with most of your music, why keep it or even try to like it?

 

[milkweg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by robm321 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Most sibilance I've heard comes from compressed recordings.

Yea, listening to the radio you hear a lot of sibilance due to compression.

 

[Blackmore]

Bad recordings are not just sibliance, but how they been putted all together. If the record been made in great balance you simply enjoy it with any headphones, cos headphones have their own sound sig which one find great where another hate it. I do hear lots of differences in recordings, where some have great energy without you have to push the volume knob, but others are just not, thiny mids and not accurately mixed high and low end make them terrible, cos there is no balance there. All things are important, used equipment to play the music, usde equipment to record one and the last, but not least engeneer work there after. This all cost lots of USD to make it right, cos of the time spend in the studio plus folks who have to do the job. If thats not the quality of the record at final then what is it then? Otherwise why poeple spend usd 1000 on well made recordings? I tell you why, cos their high quality systems arent allow them to enjoy the ****y CD's. Its been discussed all over the place that the source is the most important thing. Well, record is the source, isnt? I am not saying all CD's are bad, but that lots of them ****y, is the fact to me...

 

[Bengt77]

Sorry for not reading the thread at all and just posting, but I'd say... blame it on the boogie.

 

[Tiemen]

I agree 100% with Blackmore.
It helps a lot to get rid of bad sounding CD's, instead of looking for forgiving/ warm equipment

 

[greggf]

But . . . but . . . if I got rid of my bad-sounding CDs, I'd only have about 4 CDs!

This purist narcissistic perfectionistic OCD audiophile stuff is horses***. Better to get warm and forgiving equipment and enjoy music!

 

[chinesekiwi]

Quote:

Originally Posted by greggf /img/forum/go_quote.gif This purist narcissistic perfectionistic OCD audiophile stuff is horses***.

Oh really.....

 

[Blackmore]

Well, in such situation I may do the same, but on the other hand you can do differntely. From lots of CD's I do own, which sounds not to my liking in my home rig, I simply made FLAC files and listen through my portable rig, which is way more forgiving.




Quote:

Originally Posted by greggf /img/forum/go_quote.gif But . . . but . . . if I got rid of my bad-sounding CDs, I'd only have about 4 CDs! This purist narcissistic perfectionistic OCD audiophile stuff is horses***. Better to get warm and forgiving equipment and enjoy music!

 

[greggf]

Blackmore,

I'm just having a little bit of fun.

CDs/recordings are definitely the limiter most of the time. It frustrates me, so I tend to err on the warm & fuzzy side of the equipment equation. I can see how others would aim for neutral instead.

 

[number1sixerfan]

It is the recordings, and more revealing gear will make it more apparent unfortunately. I just got done listening to the K1000 and HD800 all day yesterday and on the same tracks they are both not listenable to my ears. The L3000 was 'listenable' on all of these tracks, as were the HD600 and Denon D5000.

Use a brighter headphone and it will be more apparent. Use a darker headphone(with rolled off highs) and it will be less apparent or bothersome.

 

[john53]

Quote:

Originally Posted by number1sixerfan /img/forum/go_quote.gif It is the recordings, and more revealing gear will make it more apparent unfortunately. I just got done listening to the K1000 and HD800 all day yesterday and on the same tracks they are both not listenable to my ears. The L3000 was 'listenable' on all of these tracks, as were the HD600 and Denon D5000. Use a brighter headphone and it will be more apparent. Use a darker headphone(with rolled off highs) and it will be less apparent or bothersome.

More revealing or lesser gear i would also say.For example,when i listen to my portable rig(sony discman-koss ksc 75)sometimes the sibilance is a bit annoying.
Strangely i didn't find the hd 800 to be sibilant(with x can v8)even with some recording which are a bit sibilant in other setups i've heard them.
My hd 600 was more sibilant on my sony Av receiver,and when my x can was still new(not burnt in)
The hd 800 was just a bit "metalic"sounding in the treble(compared to the somewhat warmer/smoother hd 600)
But there was not any moment i felt the 800's were sibilant/unlistenable.

 

[milkweg]

So, HD800 sounds like DT990pro? DT990pro only cost $225.00 CAD. HD800 cost $1500.00 CAD.

 

[Uncle Erik]

Quote:

Originally Posted by milkweg /img/forum/go_quote.gif So, HD800 sounds like DT990pro?

No.