[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gloco 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.

'Bang for the buck' is not the only criterion. Don't forget, I bought the V6's TWICE because they do have some merits, but smooth sound isn't one of those. In the past, I did recommend this phone to some folks here, but I have changed my opinion after the second pair. In the 10 years since I bought the first pair, my standards have gotten higher, I guess.

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

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

Cough....cough. Of course there is. Why does Sony make those fancy-material diaphragms such as biocellulose, and evaporated diamond and saphire? They repond quicker, because the stiffness/weight ratio is improved. The heavier the diaphragm, the blurrier the transients become.

 

[raif]

I am actually a big fan of the v6 and have defended it on numerous occasions, but I don't fully agree with most of the supporters on this thread.

The big issue I have is with the sound signature. Either the v6 is boosted on the highs and lows, the mids are sucked out, or every other high quality headphone I have owned(sony cd3k, senn 650, grado ps-1,sr80, audiotechnica a100ti) has a great big hump in the midrange.

I don't have any issues otherwise, but I would hate for someone to read some of the responses in the thread and not understand what type of sound they will get out of the v6 when they buy one.

 

[greyhorse]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eagle_Driver 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.

While the CD3000s may not sound good when played back on current generation portables, I've never heard them sound better than when played back on my old D-321. The CD3000s don't necessarily need a power house to play well. The V900s when played back thru the same portable, sounded sluggish and uninvolved. I think all of the Sony studio monitors need amplification with a lot of control to sound thier best.

As for headphones sounding "fast" or "slow", this definitely DOES exist, but has nothing to do with notes being played faster or slower. In that sense, the terminology may be misleading, but it isn't a bad description of what we hear.

*Pure speculation starts here* I generally get the impression that when the whole frequency spectrum has similar transient response characteristics, the :"speed" of the sound is normal. When the frequencies that are used for percussive sounds have faster transitent response than the other frequencies, the sound seems fast. I used to own a pair of Mordaunt Short MS30i Classics, and these speakers had a very lean presentation, and everything played thru them sounded fast. I think this largely had to do with the complete lack of muddiness in the bass. The MDR-CD900STs played on a D-E777 has bloated, muddy bass, and sounds very slow indeed. The reason why I mention this, is that even soft sounding speakers can sound quick. Fast transient response therefore can't be everything.

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by raif I am actually a big fan of the v6 and have defended it on numerous occasions, but I don't fully agree with most of the supporters on this thread. The big issue I have is with the sound signature. Either the v6 is boosted on the highs and lows, the mids are sucked out, or every other high quality headphone I have owned(sony cd3k, senn 650, grado ps-1,sr80, audiotechnica a100ti) has a great big hump in the midrange. I don't have any issues otherwise, but I would hate for someone to read some of the responses in the thread and not understand what type of sound they will get out of the v6 when they buy one.

Huge, sloppy wet-kiss bass, in-your-face highs, and recessed midrange.

 

[joelongwood]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Scarpitti Huge, sloppy wet-kiss bass, in-your-face highs, and recessed midrange.

So I take it you don't like 'em.

For another take on this venerable headphone, I thought it would be interesting to see what another Mike (Walker) posted awhile ago:
Quote:

The Sony MDR-V6 can legitimately (unlike most phones) claim to be a "studio monitor", as many studios across the US (and elsewhere) use this model, or it's IDENTICAL (other than model number) brother from Sony's pro line, the MDR-7506. The MDR-V6 is an incredibly revealing headphone, with all that this implies. This is why I use it for tracking and mixing in my radio production studio. But this analytical, hear every wart quality can be a bit too much when you just want to get into the music. For that, I turn to my trusted Sennheiser HD-580. It's a good deal more "laid back" in the midrange than the Sonys. Although the Sony's midrange is quite smooth, and flat, it is also elevated slightly in absolute terms, making everything appear "closer" and more "in your face" than it actually is. This is valuable for making subtle adjustments in mixes...you can really hear TINY fader moves. And it's also useful to keep audio producers/engineers from using excessive equalization in the mids and highs. Turn the hf eq up too much with the MDR-V6, and you'll burn your ears! Not so with the more accurate, but less "analytically revealing" HD-580. Which 'phone is more accurate? The HD-580, without question. Which one is BETTER? Well THAT has to do entirely with the intended use! Again for tracking and mixing, I wouldn't even consider the HD-580. For music listening? The MDR-V6 is still the best choice in it's price range, and one of the best under 200 dollars. But if you can spend more than 200 dollars, and can afford the REQUIRED amp to properly power them, the Sennheiser HD-580 or the newer HD-600 provide(s) more accurate overall sound, and a less fatiguing long-term experience. MOST headphones out there, even from the best names in the business, are simply awful! A few, such as the Sony MDR-V6/7506, Sennheiser HD-580/600, Beyerdynamic DT-150, DT-990, DT-770 Pro, and DT-990 pro are GEMS! By the way, all of the Sennheiser and Beyer models mentioned need an amp! ENJOY!

 

[archosman]

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by archosman Or slipped...

No, in the meantime I acquired the D-77 Eggos. They're very hard to match, and the V6 does not come up to them. I am just now listening to Trick of the Tail on them. I have been going back and forth between the V7's and the D77's, listening with my MZ-R50 minidisc. The D-77 Eggos are clearly superior to the V7, and the V7 are clearly superior to the V6, so.....logically....

 

[Steve999]

More from Mike Walker...

The HD580s and V6s are two of my ultimate gems too. And I notice from other of his posts that he preferred the HD580s to the HD600s, just as I do. Interesting.

I do disagree with him slightly, I feel that the V6 measures significantly flatter overall than than the HD580s (though I would have thought the opposite judging by ear; my understanding of this is based on measurements I have seen and expert opinions I have read).

To whom it may concern, 7506 = V6.

An excellent read in any event:

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Walker Actually fmunoz01 the 7506 is among the flattest measuring 'phones out there. NONE measure perfectly flat. It just happens that the 7506's deviation from flatness is on the "bright/analytical" side of neutrality. The HD-580 and HD-600 deviate on the "distant/recessed" side of neutrality. But the 7506, HD-580, and HD-600 are all VERY flat/accurate headphones. I find the analytical nature of the 7506 EXTREMELY valuable in hearing tiny details in a mix before they become a problem. This would be far less easy to do with less "analytical" 'phones. In fact I'll say it, I believe there WILL BE more mistakes in your mix (slight distortions, rustling music pages, toe tapping, popped plosives ("P" sounds), tiny ticks and clicks in your mix if you mix with something less analytical than the 7506. While you may well "prefer" (as do I) something less analtical for listening to music, the requirements for recording and mixing are COMPLETELY different. You want details in your mix "in your face" so you will hear mistakes before your listeners do! This is why the tonal balance of professional monitoring and consumer devices is quite different. If you think the 7506 is too bright for music listening, then buy TWO pairs of headphones...one for monitoring, and one for listening. That's what I do! In fact most audio pros that i know have completely separate rigs for LISTENING! Don't let your personal biases for what sounds "pleasing" to you get in the way of what you NEED for mixes. The truth is not in how the 'phones sound with your recording rig. It's in how your mixes sound on a variety of systems! In my experience, your mixes WILL sound better, and "travel better" (from high end home system to boom-box to mono table radio) if you mix with an "analytical" monitoring system! Take my advice or not. The cost is the same!

 

[Steve999]

LOL... Wow, this is good stuff... okay, one more, I can't resist...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Walker There's a term for someone who thinks the mids on the MDR-V6 are "recessed", because in fact the mids and highs are elevated by a couple of db. What was that term? I had it on the tip of my tongue. Oh yeah, there it is....DEAF! By the way, the MDR-V6 (7506) has among the most extended bass response(s) of ANY transducer. But the bass is not boosted as with the KSC-35, so it doesn't screan "I'm doing bass now!" I don't fault the KSC-35 for it's elevated bass, however. Far from it. The KSC-35 is a remarkable device IN IT'S PRICE RANGE! But it certainly doesn't beat the MDR-V6 for bass EXTENSION! Run some test tones on 'em, guys! GEEZ! Unlike "sound quality", which is subjective, "bass extension" isn't! It is an absolute! The MDR-V6 absolutely, demonstrably, and repeatedly beats the KSC-35 (PLEASE!) and most any other 'phones on the market regardless of price! Note I said MOST any other 'phones on the market! I AM aware of others which go as deep, including certain models from Beyerdynamic!

 

[joelongwood]

Nice find, Steve! Where the hell is Mike Walker??? He should know he's been missed.

 

[zeplin]

Mike said:
Quote:

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

1. In your opinion, and...
2. In your opinion.


Steve,
In response to your red hering comment about different equipment and their effects they have on sound, I have to say I highly disagree! You'de be surprized about how much of a difference there is between a budget Sony cd player and a Rega Planet 2000. The latter being almost worlds better. The same can be said about amps. I use to think I could get by never thinking or acknowledging that a better source could yield me with much better results. But that all ended when I heard a Rega Planet 2000 at a friends house. I then brought my headphones over to plug them into the Rega and it was all over!!

greyhorse,
Wait until you hear the CD3k's out of a player like the Rega Planet 2000. It is a whole other world compared to the really good Sony vintage portables, of which I mainly use for my Ety setup (so I know where you are coming from). The CD3k's especially come alive when you not only use a high end source, but to also use a source that has perfect synergy with them! I apologyse for seeming like I am plugging the Rega to no end. I'm just using it as an example because one; I own one, and two; I am very familiar with its sound and step up in quality that it provided me over my old sources.

 

[Eagle_Driver]

Mike Scarpitti,

I am still thinking that it's your gear talking there, despite my criticism of the V6/7506. For your home source, you don't own anything better than an older-generation mid-fi Sony CDP. And mid-fi Sony CDPs are already notorious for being on the bright side, in terms of the overall sound presentation. In fact, I had already listened to a CDP very similar to yours, and got put off by the sound being a bit too bright. (This was with stock-cabled Sennheiser HD600 headphones, reputed to be on the laid-back side, by the way.)

 

[Mike Scarpitti]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Eagle_Driver Mike Scarpitti, I am still thinking that it's your gear talking there, despite my criticism of the V6/7506. For your home source, you don't own anything better than an older-generation mid-fi Sony CDP. And mid-fi Sony CDPs are already notorious for being on the bright side, in terms of the overall sound presentation. In fact, I had already listened to a CDP very similar to yours, and got put off by the sound being a bit too bright. (This was with stock-cabled Sennheiser HD600 headphones, reputed to be on the laid-back side, by the way.)

How does that explain the bass-heaviness I experience with this phone on ALL sources? This is in addition to the brightness. Also recall, I listen to the Stax Lambdas through the same CDP, and they have NONE of this characteristic. I also own Sony MDR-84 and MDR-85, which do not share this characteristic either. It's the V6 phones! Don't even TRY to tell me otherwise!

 

[Eagle_Driver]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mike Scarpitti How does that explain the bass-heaviness I experience with this phone on ALL sources? This is in addition to the brightness. Also recall, I listen to the Stax Lambdas through the same CDP, and they have NONE of this characteristic. I also own Sony MDR-84 and MDR-85, which do not share this characteristic either. It's the V6 phones! Don't even TRY to tell me otherwise!

Well, your hearing is very different from that of many people. If anything, I found the V6 to be thin on the upper bass and lower midrange. But maybe the mid-bass is emphasized on that 'phone. As a result, it sounded hollow in the lower ranges.

The V600 phones, on the other hand, are very much the polar opposite of the V6 phones: There is no bass whatsoever, way too much output in the upper bass and lower midrange, and is uneven, dull and muddy at the high end. Both of those "extremes" are not good.