[TobaccoRoad]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oqvist /img/forum/go_quote.gif so electrostats is both fastest and slowest?

seriously, this thread is becoming more confusing as you read through.

 

[Brighten]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LingLing1337 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Fastest: AKG K702 (NOT the K701 model), Sansui Quadraphonic, HD600, Hippo VB Medium: iBuds, Grado SR125i, Sony models Slowest: Most Stax, pencil, and Planars.

Seriously?

I've been listening to a lot of death metal and other recordings with plenty of complex passages with the the O2s and they are anything but slow. Their ability to resolve so much detail and create space around so many different instruments at the same time is astounding.

I can't say that they're laid back, either (giving the illusion of a slow headphone). I think most other headphones are treble tilted and when people listen to Stax get this impression that they are laid back and slow rather than neutral and fast.

 

[kool bubba ice]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nocturnal310 /img/forum/go_quote.gif u want speed..try IEMs or electrostats. the dynamic driver based headphones cannot compete with that. even in IEMs... the IE7 & IE8 aint as fast as some balanced armature based iems such as Westone 3 & UM3X. also...amp makes a big difference.

Someone posted graphs that would differ with your opinion.. Was a HD800/SA5000/High end Stax.. I don't think we can automatically say that all electrostats are faster just because.. I'm sure all Electro's speed varies like dynamics.. One would have you believe the worst electro ever could topple the Q10 in terms of speed & resolution.. I don't by that argument.. I know a headfier who feel their dynamic headphone is faster then his 303 stax.. Maybe he's just confused or somthing?

 

[Zombie_X]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amarphael /img/forum/go_quote.gif Are you Kidding? You pick THE darkest, Longest decaying headphone around as one of the fastest? And you admit you never heared them.... LOL that's as plain misinformation as you can find.

I disagree with your opinion. The HD650/HD600 are very 'phones, but they need a bunch of power to get the transients pumpin'.

When mine are amped out of the Cowon S9, they do sound very slow and veiled, but out of my Roc they are fast and clear.

For my opinion the fastest I have heard IMO are the K702's, DT880's, HD800's, and K1000's.

The slowest goes to my HD555 IMO. The bass sounds slowwwwww.......

 

[beamthegreat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by TobaccoRoad /img/forum/go_quote.gif seriously, this thread is becoming more confusing as you read through.

LOL!
Quote:

Originally Posted by Poetik Compare a pair of re0's to a pair of hd600's or 650's and you'll understand. I'm pretty sure he's talking about the "attack" of the instruments if that makes any sense.

Exactly what I'm talking about. The "speed" of the headphones doesn't have anything to do with the sound quality of that headphones. If you compare the PXC 350 to an Apple earbuds, the apple earbuds will sound faster than the PXC 350s, but wont sound as good as the PXC 350.

 

[beamthegreat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zombie_X /img/forum/go_quote.gif The slowest goes to my HD555 IMO. The bass sounds slowwwwww.......

The PXC 350 sounds 5 times slower than the HD 555.

 

[smeggy]

see, this is why I wrote in my original response that speed to most is perceptual and most here are talking through their backsides as if they know as fact. I doubt anyone here (me included) has any real way to determine the speed of their phones. Speed, attack and decay are all measurable but I doubt anyone spouting off actually knows or has any way to measure it.

I have stats, orthos, dynamics and I've heard many of the supposed fast and slow cans.

 

[beamthegreat]

Quote:

Originally Posted by AtomikPi /img/forum/go_quote.gif Assuming you weren't being sarcastic...

Why do people think I'm always joking or being sarcastic???

:confused_face (1):

 

[hentai]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Brighten /img/forum/go_quote.gif Seriously? I've been listening to a lot of death metal and other recordings with plenty of complex passages with the the O2s and they are anything but slow. Their ability to resolve so much detail and create space around so many different instruments at the same time is astounding. I can't say that they're laid back, either (giving the illusion of a slow headphone). I think most other headphones are treble tilted and when people listen to Stax get this impression that they are laid back and slow rather than neutral and fast.

O2 sounds awesome with metallica and I agree that they are more of neutral and fast.

 

[Catharsis]

Quote:

Originally Posted by oqvist /img/forum/go_quote.gif so electrostats is both fastest and slowest?

No I think the poster above is totally being funny.

He's simply demonstrating the inconsistency of recommendations from the misinformed.

 

[Chrome Pumpkin]

I'd just like to toss out my thoughts of the HD650's speed. When I first got them I considered them to be slow because of their laid-back character, but this is nonsense. To test the speed I listened to some fast Slayer (War Ensemble) and could clearly hear each and every note. The 650s do not blur notes together whatsoever, and so, as far as detail rendering is concerned they are just as fast as my RS2.

 

[dw1narso]

Quote:

Originally Posted by smeggy /img/forum/go_quote.gif Speed, attack and decay are all measurable but I doubt anyone spouting off actually knows or has any way to measure it.

Smeggy, aren't those CSD and impulse response that at least could tell us about the speed and decay? (And maybe attack as well?)

 

[baka1969]

The D2000 faster than the 701? And the 650 in the fastest category? If we're talking about the leading edge of a note and how notes transition from one to the other throughout the frequency spectrum then the 701 is a faster headphone then the 650 to my ear. The notes are better defined with the AKG then with the Senn. Grados seem to fall between the two but closer to the 701 then the 650. The slightly bloated bass of the Senn helps slightly smear the other notes resulting in a slower sound to me. I don't find the Denon to be faster then the AKG. The REO has decent speed and is certainly faster than the Shure 530 and the TF.10.

 

[baka1969]

To my ear the Koss PortaPro seems to be the slowest.

 

[AtomikPi]

I'm amazed by the amount of misinformation in this thread. FYI, as measured objectively by square wave response and so forth, electrostats are the fastest phones available, even if the dark (depending on the mk) of the O2's can make them seem "slow" if you're not paying attention. Generally, balanced armatures are pretty fast - I don't know of any non-electrostatic headphones any faster than my JH13's.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zombie_X /img/forum/go_quote.gif I disagree with your opinion. The HD650/HD600 are very 'phones, but they need a bunch of power to get the transients pumpin'. When mine are amped out of the Cowon S9, they do sound very slow and veiled, but out of my Roc they are fast and clear. For my opinion the fastest I have heard IMO are the K702's, DT880's, HD800's, and K1000's. The slowest goes to my HD555 IMO. The bass sounds slowwwwww.......

Agree with you on the HD800 and K702 being fast, but the HD650s, even amped out of my balanced b22, were quite slow to my ears.

Quote:

Originally Posted by beamthegreat /img/forum/go_quote.gif Why do people think I'm always joking or being sarcastic??? :confused_face (1):

Don't worry, I just suspect since I tend toward it myself. The reason being that actual transient response is often confused with aggressive/bright upper mids/highs. For a counterexample, try an O2 Mk1.