Ross
500+ Head-Fier
- Joined
- Jun 22, 2001
- Posts
- 844
- Likes
- 105
I now own all four of these headphones, so I thought it is time to post some impressions and comparisons.
Let me get the obvious stuff out of the way first, so you don't have to skip to the end:
Okay, with that out of the way, a bit of introduction. I grew up on the Sennheiser sound, starting with some HD450s over ten years ago (which I still have), followed by the 560II, 580 and then 600 (with some A-T 911s along the way). The way Sennheiser produce music sounded "normal" to me, especially the 580/600 which I have always considered to be a headphone reference, in terms of both sound quality and comfort.
A couple of years ago I bought some Grado 325s. Out of the box they sounded horrible, gritty, colourless, boomy - I couldn't understand why anyone liked them. Over the next few months they ran in, and so did I - meaning that I got used to their sound, which was so different to the Sennheisers I was used to. I began to like them for some types of music, because they went loud and had a lot of impact, so for rock or dance music they were ideal. For classical or jazz I still preferred the Sennheisers.
Over the next couple of years they gradually grew on me, and when I loaned them to a friend for an extended period, I decided to buy some SR80s to tide me over until they returned. The SR80s were an interesting comparison. They arrived a week or two after the 325s had gone, so I couldn't compare them directly. Unlike the 325s, they sounded just fine out of the box, even with the bowl pads they came with. I was surprised by how similar the SR80s sounded to the way I'd remembered the 325s. The same liquid midrange, if not quite the same bass impact.
When the 325s returned, I was able to do a more detailed comparison. The 325s were clearly more extended at both ends, more neutral and with more three-dimensionality - there was more space around instruments. However, the differences (apart from the bass) were not all that huge. And the trade-off for the 325s neutrality was that the SR80s sounded a little "sweeter" than the 325s, possibly due to the plastic earpieces.
(Around this time I ordered some RS-1s for comparison. I spent a week with the RS-1s and then returned them. They sounded so dark, muddy and coloured that I couldn't listen to them, although I tried repeatedly. It was always a pleasure returning to the 325s with their neutrality and their ability to differentiate tonal colours, which the RS-1s were lacking.)
Lately I've been listening more and more to the Grados, especially the 325s, for their lush midrange and liquid sound. They were still a little coloured compared to the Sennheisers, and weren't nearly as comfortable, but they have a musicality which is very engaging and seductive. However, I had two issues with the 325s: the first was the thumpy bass (especially with bowl pads), and the second was that I was missing the slight sweetness that the SR80s had and that I suspected came from the plastic housing. I was also aware that some people - notably Headroom - believe that the 225s are better than the 325s.
A couple of weeks ago I decided to order some 225s to see if they would address these issues - i.e. produce the liquid musical sound of the 325s but without the bass boom, and with a little extra "sweetness" from the plastic earpieces. Simultaneously, VKA advertised a mint pair of HP-2s, so I decided to buy these as well.
Both headphones arrived on the same day, so I left them running in over a couple of nights on my Maxed Out Home (old version), while listening in occasionally to see how they were developing. I have now been listening to both headphones for several days and can offer some views, although these are still preliminary.
First, the 225s: are they better than the 325s? You will see from my summary above that I thought the 325s still had the edge, although the 225s do benefit from a less insistent bass and a slightly sweeter presentation. However, they don't have either the frequency extension or the three-dimensionality of the 325s. The 325s are also tonally more neutral, although the slight colouration of the 225s is pleasant and euphonious, appearing as a kind of enrichment of the midrange; it is not overwhelming and muddy in the way that the I felt that the RS-1 (and, to a lesser extent, the W2002) suffered from a "woody" colouration. (Obviously, very few others seem to be as sensitive to this form of colouraton as I am.)
I should add that I do not think that the 325s are bright compared to the 225s (as some have suggested); in fact, I find the 225s a little brighter than the 325s. I also do not regard the 325s as fatiguing or harsh.
The 225s were actually very similar to the SR80s, and until I did a direct A/B comparison I was not able to tell the difference. They certainly look identical, apart from the badge with their model number on it. I was expecting the 225 to have a bigger earpiece like the 325s, but it has exactly the same dimensions as the SR80. Both the SR80 and 225 have the same tonal balance, the same sweetness, the same liquid midrange, and slight smearing of details (compared to the 325). The only real difference was slightly deeper bass and a slightly greater sense of "fullness" in the 225s.
The HP-2s are a completely different style of headphone, both in appearance and sound. I won't spend much time on the appearance of the HP-2s (there is plenty of information on this elsewhere), except to note that VKA had maintained these in excellent condition. They were the least comfortable of the various headphones. Their additional heaviness and the stiffness of the headband, as well as the slightly abrasive quality of the flat pads meant that they were not as pleasant to wear as the lesser Grados, and certainly nowhere near the comfort level of the Sennheisers.
The comparison between the HP-2 and other Grados was interesting. All four Grados had a definite family sound, and there was no doubt that they came from the same source. However, the SR80, 225 and 325 sounded tonally very similar, with some slight differences in presentation; the HP-2, although similar in some ways, was in others quite different. The best analogy I can give was that the SR series Grados sounded like children of various ages, while the HP-2 was grown up, a mature version of the others. The SR series were fun, but the HP-2 took the sound to a new level, maintaining the musicality but adding detail, presence, balance and greater neutrality.
Even compared to the 325s, the HP-2 had a great deal more detail,with a natural perspective and pinpoint imaging. Tonal colour was as close to perfect as I've heard - every instrument was clearly differentiated, not only spatially, but timbrally. The HP-2s had good high frequency extension without emphasising that region. The bass was not as deep as the Sennheisers, and the image was a little smaller than the 600s, but the bass went deeper than the 325s, and without the boom - it was a tuneful bass, in correct proportion. The midrange is not emphasised as it is in the SR series, but it is more realistic. Voices have a sense of realness and presence that they do not have through the SR series.
A comparison with the CD3000 was also interesting. The CD3000 is a very good headphone, but my initial enthusiasm for these has waned. There is a certain insubstantiality to the sound, and an "artificial" quality, especially compared to the Sennheiser 600 and, now, the HP-2. The HP-2 sounds so real and natural, the CD3000 sounds like a cartoon version of reality by comparison.
As well as the Maxed Out Home, I also tried the HP-2 with the Earmax Pro, but liked this less than the Maxed Home (but I generally like tubes less than solid state, so this was expected). The sound was more controlled and not as soft with the Headroom amp.
It is a pity that the HP-2 is no longer made because it - and presumably the HP-1 - are undoubtedly the best headphones Grado have ever made. However, to reiterate, I love all of these Grado headphones, and could happily live with any of them without much complaint. While some are better than others in various respects, all convey the essence of the music, and that to me is more important than conveying the last degree of detail, the deepest bass note, or the highest, quietest cymbal sound.
Apologies for the length of this post (hey, it could have been a lot longer!), and I hope it is interesting for a few other people.
Ross
Let me get the obvious stuff out of the way first, so you don't have to skip to the end:
- I love all of these headphones. They are all musical and fun to listen to.
- The HP-2s sound better than the SR 325.
- The SR325 sounds better than the SR225 (with some minor qualifications).
- The SR225 sounds better than the SR80, but not all that much.
- I like all of these headphones better than the W2002 or the RS-1.
- I like the HP-2 better than the Sony CD3000 in terms of sound quality, and possibly on a par with the Sennheiser 600 (subject to further review).
- Both the CD3000 and the Sennheiser 600s are much more comfortable than the HP-2. The newer Grados are marginally more comfortable than the HP-2, but not as comfortable as the Sennheiser 600s, CD3000s or Beyer 770/990.
Okay, with that out of the way, a bit of introduction. I grew up on the Sennheiser sound, starting with some HD450s over ten years ago (which I still have), followed by the 560II, 580 and then 600 (with some A-T 911s along the way). The way Sennheiser produce music sounded "normal" to me, especially the 580/600 which I have always considered to be a headphone reference, in terms of both sound quality and comfort.
A couple of years ago I bought some Grado 325s. Out of the box they sounded horrible, gritty, colourless, boomy - I couldn't understand why anyone liked them. Over the next few months they ran in, and so did I - meaning that I got used to their sound, which was so different to the Sennheisers I was used to. I began to like them for some types of music, because they went loud and had a lot of impact, so for rock or dance music they were ideal. For classical or jazz I still preferred the Sennheisers.
Over the next couple of years they gradually grew on me, and when I loaned them to a friend for an extended period, I decided to buy some SR80s to tide me over until they returned. The SR80s were an interesting comparison. They arrived a week or two after the 325s had gone, so I couldn't compare them directly. Unlike the 325s, they sounded just fine out of the box, even with the bowl pads they came with. I was surprised by how similar the SR80s sounded to the way I'd remembered the 325s. The same liquid midrange, if not quite the same bass impact.
When the 325s returned, I was able to do a more detailed comparison. The 325s were clearly more extended at both ends, more neutral and with more three-dimensionality - there was more space around instruments. However, the differences (apart from the bass) were not all that huge. And the trade-off for the 325s neutrality was that the SR80s sounded a little "sweeter" than the 325s, possibly due to the plastic earpieces.
(Around this time I ordered some RS-1s for comparison. I spent a week with the RS-1s and then returned them. They sounded so dark, muddy and coloured that I couldn't listen to them, although I tried repeatedly. It was always a pleasure returning to the 325s with their neutrality and their ability to differentiate tonal colours, which the RS-1s were lacking.)
Lately I've been listening more and more to the Grados, especially the 325s, for their lush midrange and liquid sound. They were still a little coloured compared to the Sennheisers, and weren't nearly as comfortable, but they have a musicality which is very engaging and seductive. However, I had two issues with the 325s: the first was the thumpy bass (especially with bowl pads), and the second was that I was missing the slight sweetness that the SR80s had and that I suspected came from the plastic housing. I was also aware that some people - notably Headroom - believe that the 225s are better than the 325s.
A couple of weeks ago I decided to order some 225s to see if they would address these issues - i.e. produce the liquid musical sound of the 325s but without the bass boom, and with a little extra "sweetness" from the plastic earpieces. Simultaneously, VKA advertised a mint pair of HP-2s, so I decided to buy these as well.
Both headphones arrived on the same day, so I left them running in over a couple of nights on my Maxed Out Home (old version), while listening in occasionally to see how they were developing. I have now been listening to both headphones for several days and can offer some views, although these are still preliminary.
First, the 225s: are they better than the 325s? You will see from my summary above that I thought the 325s still had the edge, although the 225s do benefit from a less insistent bass and a slightly sweeter presentation. However, they don't have either the frequency extension or the three-dimensionality of the 325s. The 325s are also tonally more neutral, although the slight colouration of the 225s is pleasant and euphonious, appearing as a kind of enrichment of the midrange; it is not overwhelming and muddy in the way that the I felt that the RS-1 (and, to a lesser extent, the W2002) suffered from a "woody" colouration. (Obviously, very few others seem to be as sensitive to this form of colouraton as I am.)
I should add that I do not think that the 325s are bright compared to the 225s (as some have suggested); in fact, I find the 225s a little brighter than the 325s. I also do not regard the 325s as fatiguing or harsh.
The 225s were actually very similar to the SR80s, and until I did a direct A/B comparison I was not able to tell the difference. They certainly look identical, apart from the badge with their model number on it. I was expecting the 225 to have a bigger earpiece like the 325s, but it has exactly the same dimensions as the SR80. Both the SR80 and 225 have the same tonal balance, the same sweetness, the same liquid midrange, and slight smearing of details (compared to the 325). The only real difference was slightly deeper bass and a slightly greater sense of "fullness" in the 225s.
The HP-2s are a completely different style of headphone, both in appearance and sound. I won't spend much time on the appearance of the HP-2s (there is plenty of information on this elsewhere), except to note that VKA had maintained these in excellent condition. They were the least comfortable of the various headphones. Their additional heaviness and the stiffness of the headband, as well as the slightly abrasive quality of the flat pads meant that they were not as pleasant to wear as the lesser Grados, and certainly nowhere near the comfort level of the Sennheisers.
The comparison between the HP-2 and other Grados was interesting. All four Grados had a definite family sound, and there was no doubt that they came from the same source. However, the SR80, 225 and 325 sounded tonally very similar, with some slight differences in presentation; the HP-2, although similar in some ways, was in others quite different. The best analogy I can give was that the SR series Grados sounded like children of various ages, while the HP-2 was grown up, a mature version of the others. The SR series were fun, but the HP-2 took the sound to a new level, maintaining the musicality but adding detail, presence, balance and greater neutrality.
Even compared to the 325s, the HP-2 had a great deal more detail,with a natural perspective and pinpoint imaging. Tonal colour was as close to perfect as I've heard - every instrument was clearly differentiated, not only spatially, but timbrally. The HP-2s had good high frequency extension without emphasising that region. The bass was not as deep as the Sennheisers, and the image was a little smaller than the 600s, but the bass went deeper than the 325s, and without the boom - it was a tuneful bass, in correct proportion. The midrange is not emphasised as it is in the SR series, but it is more realistic. Voices have a sense of realness and presence that they do not have through the SR series.
A comparison with the CD3000 was also interesting. The CD3000 is a very good headphone, but my initial enthusiasm for these has waned. There is a certain insubstantiality to the sound, and an "artificial" quality, especially compared to the Sennheiser 600 and, now, the HP-2. The HP-2 sounds so real and natural, the CD3000 sounds like a cartoon version of reality by comparison.
As well as the Maxed Out Home, I also tried the HP-2 with the Earmax Pro, but liked this less than the Maxed Home (but I generally like tubes less than solid state, so this was expected). The sound was more controlled and not as soft with the Headroom amp.
It is a pity that the HP-2 is no longer made because it - and presumably the HP-1 - are undoubtedly the best headphones Grado have ever made. However, to reiterate, I love all of these Grado headphones, and could happily live with any of them without much complaint. While some are better than others in various respects, all convey the essence of the music, and that to me is more important than conveying the last degree of detail, the deepest bass note, or the highest, quietest cymbal sound.
Apologies for the length of this post (hey, it could have been a lot longer!), and I hope it is interesting for a few other people.
Ross
