[zeplin]

Mike,
Why don't you try the V6's on a better source other than your modified Sony ES player. That player is not regarded as a good quality sounding player in comparison to say a Rega Planet 2000, a Rotel, or an Arcam in the same price range. More specifically, I'm sure your player does pretty well though, but I use to have a modified Sony ES player and lets just say their strong attributes weren't in the bass regions involving control, tonality, and accuracy. So try out another player before you go calling the V6's slow. They may not be entirely accurate, but super slow and muddy they are not!! This is where the widely known aspect about them, being analytical and somewhat accurate, comes into play and is agreed upon by more people than the people who dissagree. I'm not saying the majority is the only thing that matters here, but I have reason to believe that the people who have heard the accuracy and analytical nature of this headphone are driving them with a source that presents these attributes or brings them further out from the headphone's basic characteristics.

 

[CMacDaddy]

can anyone compare the sound of the V6 to shure E3Cs?

I'm considering buying some E3C's, and have V6's now. Any comparison is appreciated

 

[gloco]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Scarpitti Studio monitors do not need to be 'audiophile grade'. The bass of the V6 is thick and boomy, and the overall sound is slow. Remember the JBL L100/4310 was widely used as a studio monitor despite its rather severe shortcomings. Monitors need to handle extreme power levels and be durable, properties the V6's share with the JBL L100/4310.

For a headphone you claim to be thick and slow and slow, it sure's hell does its job for studio monitoring. Don't you think there's a bit of irony in a studio engineer using such faulty headphones then? Wouldn't they be better off with a Orpheus?

 

[Pov]

Quote:

Originally Posted by CMacDaddy can anyone compare the sound of the V6 to shure E3Cs? I'm considering buying some E3C's, and have V6's now. Any comparison is appreciated

I can! I own the V6's and just bought a pair of E3c's. I've also owned various Senns phones and buds.

Let me preface this by saying that (i) I consider myself an "audiophile," having spent some ten thousand dollars on high end audio equipment over the years (albeit very little of which was allocated to headphones, which I use primarily for portable purposes), and (ii) I REALLY like the V6s; I've had them for about 10 years and I'm one of those people who think they can't be beaten at the price.

I bought the E3's because I just got a new 4G Ipod and figured I'd splurge on something to go with it, and I was tired of schlepping the Sony's around and wanted something lighter. I also got a really good price on them ($145 from MacResQ.com with coupon code PURE3).

I've been living with the E3s and the iPod for just a few days, and so far I am a very happy camper. In a portable situation (I ride a commuter train every day), the isolation offered by the E3s is really nice to have. When music is playing and people next to me are talking I can see their lips move but not hear them at all - fantastic!.

For my tastes, the sound from the E3s is noticably superior. I'm sure part of it has to do with the isolation. (Of course, you need to make sure you have a good fit and that takes some practice.) Overall I find the bass to be tighter and the midrange sounds more natural. The E3 highs are not as bright as the V6s (keep in mind that I disagree with those who say the V6s are too bright); they are very pleasing to listen to, with lots of separation around the instruments.

I also hear a lot more detail out of the E3s than the V6s. I've read posts here stating that the E3s lack detail, or that other (significantly more expensive) cans have more detail than the E3s. Personally I have no complaints. I think people sometimes equate a bump in frequency response at the high end with more "detail," but that bump is really an artifice and I don't detect that kind of manipulation with the E3s.

On the downside, the E3s will, to an even greater extent that the Sonys, reveal the flaws in source material. Even to this day, most rock records are recorded by engineers who seem to have rocks for ears. Over time I've just learned to deal with it. But when you use good source material the E3s really shine.

BTW I listen to a wide range of music - rock, jazz, classical. Just to give you an idea the artists I've been listening to the most as of late include Wilco, Elvis Costello, The Who, Pixies, The Hives, Barenaked Ladies, Sonny Rollins and Charles Mingus.

Hope this helps.

 

[CMacDaddy]

thanks pov

any other input is always welcome

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ama What is a slow sound as aopposed to a fast sound? Wouldn't the tempo of the music you are listening to dictate the speed of the music? Adam

Transient response: how 'quick' the driver diaphragm responds.

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ppl OK mike what would you sugest for as you say Audiophile use from Sony?

V900, CD2000, CD3000.

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eagle_Driver Okay, I give up... Even on $300,000 worth of equipment, the V6/7506 sounds like sh@t, even at $20. And as sh@tty as the V6/7506 sounded, the V600 is completely unlistenable: Echoey, muddy, bass-less and slow all rolled into one. Though on the same high-end equipment, I've heard very expensive headphones that severely underperformed for such astronomically high prices: They sounded much worse to my ears than some $50 headphones did.

Korrect!

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by zeplin Mike, Why don't you try the V6's on a better source other than your modified Sony ES player. That player is not regarded as a good quality sounding player in comparison to say a Rega Planet 2000, a Rotel, or an Arcam in the same price range. More specifically, I'm sure your player does pretty well though, but I use to have a modified Sony ES player and lets just say their strong attributes weren't in the bass regions involving control, tonality, and accuracy. So try out another player before you go calling the V6's slow. They may not be entirely accurate, but super slow and muddy they are not!! This is where the widely known aspect about them, being analytical and somewhat accurate, comes into play and is agreed upon by more people than the people who dissagree. I'm not saying the majority is the only thing that matters here, but I have reason to believe that the people who have heard the accuracy and analytical nature of this headphone are driving them with a source that presents these attributes or brings them further out from the headphone's basic characteristics.

My modified 508 has fantastic sound from the variable headphone output. That's what was modified.

'Analytical' does not mean 'good'. These phones have harsh highs and muddy, boomy bass.

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gloco For a headphone you claim to be thick and slow and slow, it sure's hell does its job for studio monitoring. Don't you think there's a bit of irony in a studio engineer using such faulty headphones then? Wouldn't they be better off with a Orpheus?

Studio engineers, as I said, do not necessarily want the best headphones, for their purposes.

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Davnport r10's maybe? Wow, I have never heard the V6's. For anyone who has listened to both the v6's and perhaps the mdr-v900's or the sennheiser 212pro's... how would you compare for both the sound and the comfort? I thought about trying some v600's but I already had the 212's and figured I would hold off. For Mike, I have to agree with others as far as this term "audiophile" you're throwing around. The etymology of the word is: One that loves music. You make it sound like an exclusive club where only people who have the same opinions and the most expensive equipment can join. I sometimes like listening to music analytically, but most of the time I just like music to pump me up... meaning I like the fun and energetic sound found from a bass-booming pair of sennheiser HD212pro's. Doesn't make me any less of a lover of music. Remember a lot of lovers of the V6's are qualifying their like of those cans with "great for the money". Many people don't want to spend double or triple the money for a small improvement (numbers used in this last statement are not based on actual studies... just used to make a point; hypothetical).While in college I certainly would rather buy a decent $70 pair of cans rather than a solid $300 set (more beer money ) Others I am sure have similar yet different reasons for not wanting to splurge past these sony's.

'Audiophile' use means home listening, not monitoring. They have different criteria. A good home-use headphone is not necessarily a good monitoring headphone, and vice versa.

Not wanting to spend more does not make these better than they are. Remember, I bought these twice, and sold them twice, because the sound just doesn't cut it.

 

[Steve999]

My two cents, it should offend everyone, but if I miss someone, I apologize, I must have gotten something wrong:

The Sony V6 is an awesome bargain.

If Mike doesn't like the sound of it, he's not alone at all, and that's legit.

The V6 is found by many very knowledgeable folks to be objectively and subjectively very accurate. If nothing else, owning a V6 can be a fascinating and valuable audio learning experience.

Different audio companies have different ideas of accurate. For example, Senn produced the HD280 to be very accurate (read the materials that come with the HD280), but it sounds quite different than the V6.

WmAx and PeterR are awesome, my advice is read their posts carefully.

Major differences in equipment are really a silly red herring here and a common misconception at head-fi... what's driving the dispute is that some people don't like the way the V6 sounds.

There's no such thing as a headphone being fast or slow. That's silly audiophile people talk, IMHO.

IMHO, neutral is usually bright (though bright is not necessarily neutral). If you don't like bright, you likely won't like neutral. See Sony V6 and Senn HD280. There's nothing bad about not liking a neutral sound, but it's at least an interesting learning experience to hear it.

The idea that the V6 is a relatively inaccurate phone is a significant factual error, IMHO, and indicates that the particular individual holding this belief has some learning to do (as we all do, by the way).

As an aside, my subjective impression is that the Beyer pads reduce the accuracy of the V6. I'm not sure if this is correct though.

Have a nice day.

 

[Eagle_Driver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Scarpitti 'Audiophile' use means home listening, not monitoring. They have different criteria. A good home-use headphone is not necessarily a good monitoring headphone, and vice versa.

True enough. And I would like to add to that that I've heard some headphones at all different price points which are good for absolutely nothing - they sound horrible for home use, and at the same time are way too colored for monitoring (Sony V600, anyone?

).

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Scarpitti Not even remotely correct. The V6's have a very bright, harsh high end, and a bloated bass. They are quite efficient and well made, and are good for remote recording monitoring, perhaps, but come up way short for audiophile use.

You have to realize that most portable equipment of the 1990's roll off the high end quite sharply - especially from their headphone outs. And using what you call "accurate" headphones on those particular portables will produce muddy sound that's rolled-off severely at both extremes. In the worst cases, you'll hear nothing but midrange. Today's portable players, on the other hand, tend to be on the bright side. And using "accurate" headphones on today's portables will produce somewhat thin sound.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Scarpitti V900, CD2000, CD3000.

Though none of those three are ideal for portable use, I'd reckon that the V900 would work best of those three on a portable player. The CD2000 and CD3000 both need a fair amount of power to avoid sounding too thin.

 

[gloco]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve999 My two cents, it should offend everyone, but if I miss someone, I apologize, I must have gotten something wrong: The Sony V6 is an awesome bargain. If Mike doesn't like the sound of it, he's not alone at all, and that's legit. The V6 is found by many very knowledgeable folks to be objectively and subjectively very accurate. If nothing else, owning a V6 can be a fascinating and valuable audio learning experience. Different audio companies have different ideas of accurate. For example, Senn produced the HD280 to be very accurate (read the materials that come with the HD280), but it sounds quite different than the V6. WmAx and PeterR are awesome, my advice is read their posts carefully. Major differences in equipment are really a silly red herring here and a common misconception at head-fi... what's driving the dispute is that some people don't like the way the V6 sounds. There's no such thing as a headphone being fast or slow. That's silly audiophile people talk, IMHO. IMHO, neutral is always bright (though bright is not necessarily neutral). If you don't like bright, you won't like neutral. See Sony V6 and Senn HD280. There's nothing bad about not liking a neutral sound, but it's at least an interesting learning experience to hear it. The idea that the V6 is a relatively inaccurate phone is a significant factual error, IMHO, and indicates that the particular individual holding this belief has some learning to do (as we all do, by the way). As an aside, my subjective impression is that the Beyer pads reduce the accuracy of the V6. I'm not sure if this is correct though. Have a nice day.

Well said.

What annoys me is when someone completely trashes a good quality headphone and doesn't even attempt to put up a good argument as to why. Many folks will agree that the V6's are a best bang for the buck headphone, such as is the case with the portapro's and ksc35's. You get a lot for what you paid, albeit it's not perfect, it's pretty damn good.

 

[SilentServices]

the V6 would be a bargain at 30$ ... they are harsh sounding for normal use...