[The Monkey]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Faust2D /img/forum/go_quote.gif What Grado do you like Monkey?

I actually like a lot of Grados. I would say, in roughly descending order:

PS-1
HP-1000
RS-2
HF-1
SR-225

Grados I don't like that much:

GS-1000
SR-325
RS-1
SR-60

I'm not sure if there's any consistency in the likes and dislikes above.

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Originally Posted by roy_jones /img/forum/go_quote.gif After waiting with baited breath for early HF-2 reviews during CanJam, this is the first review that I feel starts to paint a clearer picture of where these cans fall in the greater Grado lineup. Thanks- In terms of your impressions, the only thing that surprised me a bit was the comments comparing the woodied/re-cabled HF-1's to the RS-1. Personally, I didn't find that the modded HF-1's were that close to the RS-1, and in fact I ended up feeling that the modded HF-1's were one of the poorer values in the Grado lineup from a cost/performance perspective. I'm not surprised to hear that the HF-2's have a greater bass emphasis than a stock RS-1. Also, I remember that my HF-1's bass tightened up quite a bit with burn in, so hopefully you'll find the same thing with the HF-2's. From your description, it sounds like they do share the same familial sound signature. I definitely heard the "bass cloud" that you mentioned with my fresh HF-1's. My dilemma is whether to look for a used pair of RS-1's or to go for a pair of HF-2's. I will probably wait to hear more reviews that compare the two, but as I'd anticipated, it's likely to be a tough decision, with both cans being in the same ball park in terms of overall quality. I could see myself liking the bass of the HF-2's, but I fear that they might lack refinement compared to the RS-1.

Let me preface this with saying that until this weekend I had never heard a stock RS-1. I bought mine from Alex with APS V3 cable already installed. I have the same issue with the HF-1 that I bought from Alex already re-cabled. I do think the cable makes a big difference and narrows the gap between some of these phones. I recently heard my old HP-1000 with an SAA Equinox cable and if they had sounded the way they do now I would have kept them. The HP-1000 with stock cable were not that much better than a re-cabled RS-1 or woodied recabled HF-1 with flats. Now they are.

So, I just posted more RS-2/RS-1/HF-2 thoughts in the reviews thread: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/gra...ml#post5730105

That expands upon my previous postings about the differences between various Grados - my main finding was that the HF-1 have more recessed mids and a further back soundstage, and they go more in the direction of the RS-1 or SR-325i than the upfront in your face mids of the RS-2. The wood cups helped the mids suckout a lot. But the RS-1 are still better because they are not too forward like RS-2, or too distant like HF-1. In fact, I could not enjoy rock music with the HF-1 unless I installed the flats, but with classical and jazz I could enjoy the HF-1 as much as the RS-1.

Let's say my woodied HF-1 were a baby GS-1000 and my metal HF-2 are a baby PS-1000. Also, I like the stock HF-2 more than the stock RS-1 (or PS-1000) that I tried this weekend, and only with an APS V3 cable do my RS-1 more cleanly pull away from the HF-2. How's that?

I think the detail, refinement and bass control will improve with burn-in, so I am not worried.

 

[keyid]

Quote:

Originally Posted by roy_jones /img/forum/go_quote.gif My dilemma is whether to look for a used pair of RS-1's or to go for a pair of HF-2's.

Im also in this situation and ordered hf2 early last week. Did so cause I can take comfort knowing I can return them in 30 days and get a used rs1. I am seeking to "borrow" a rs1 for some comparison hopefully.

 

[roy_jones]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif Let me preface this with saying that until this weekend I had never heard a stock RS-1. I bought mine from Alex with APS V3 cable already installed. I have the same issue with the HF-1 that I bought from Alex already re-cabled. I do think the cable makes a big difference and narrows the gap between some of these phones. I recently heard my old HP-1000 with an SAA Equinox cable and if they had sounded the way they do now I would have kept them. The HP-1000 with stock cable were not that much better than a re-cabled RS-1 or woodied recabled HF-1 with flats. Now they are. So, I just posted more RS-2/RS-1/HF-2 thoughts in the reviews thread: http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/gra...ml#post5730105 That expands upon my previous postings about the differences between various Grados - my main finding was that the HF-1 have more recessed mids and a further back soundstage, and they go more in the direction of the RS-1 or SR-325i than the upfront in your face mids of the RS-2. The wood cups helped the mids suckout a lot. But the RS-1 are still better because they are not too forward like RS-2, or too distant like HF-1. In fact, I could not enjoy rock music with the HF-1 unless I installed the flats, but with classical and jazz I could enjoy the HF-1 as much as the RS-1. Let's say my woodied HF-1 were a baby GS-1000 and my metal HF-2 are a baby PS-1000. Also, I like the stock HF-2 more than the stock RS-1 (or PS-1000) that I tried this weekend, and only with an APS V3 cable do my RS-1 more cleanly pull away from the HF-2. How's that? I think the detail, refinement and bass control will improve with burn-in, so I am not worried.

That's an excellent breakdown...much appreciated. I should qualify my earlier post by mentioning that the woodied/re-cabled HF-1's I'd heard were headphiled, and from what I've gathered, the APS cable is a definite upgrade on the headphile version.

Rumour has it that you were able to sample the demo pair of UE4's and came away feeling it was a good value. I'm going to be on the lookout for those comments. The JH13 were a hit, it seems, and I wondered whether you had a chance to audition them, but I'll keep that discussion on the IEM board.

I will check that review of the HF-2/RS2/RS1 that you linked to. Your comments on the impact of a re-cable on some of these Grado's makes me wonder if the RS1i and the other models containing the upgraded cable may actually have a greater impact on performance than I'd initially believed. I'm sure it won't be on the scale of the APS, but is still food for thought.

Your comment about the difference in the mid-range between the HF-1 and the HF-2 has got me intrigued. If the HF-2 maintains some of the bass quantity of the HF-1, while having a more forward mid-range, it sounds like it would be one heckuva fun headphone.

I'd be curious to see how the treble performance of the HF-2 ends up after burn-in. I found the treble of the HF-1's to be un-Grado-like, and in that respect I would have a harder time grouping them into the RS1/325 family. I recognize, though, that your inclusion of the HF-1's with the RS1/325 was more a function of their soundstage and mid-range presentation.

You're not the first person to make the seemingly counter-intuitive claim that they liked the HF-2's better than the PS-1000. That has been something of a shock to me. Very encouraging about the HF-2.


I will admit that I was a little skeptical about the HF-2, given the need for JG to maintain value consistency within the lineup. I figured he would resist having them able to compete with the RS-1, given their price difference and some of his comments about the prices the HF-1's have fetched in the used market-

 

[rds]

I also wonder about the limited edition status of the hf2. A lot of people are counting on these appreciating value. But with the high price tag and potential flooding of the market, this may not pan out.
If we knew there would only be 500 sold the story would probably be different, but it seems they may just be sold until interest dies out.

Anyways, it would be nice to hear some details on the limited edition game plan.

 

[kg21]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rds /img/forum/go_quote.gif I also wonder about the limited edition status of the hf2. A lot of people are counting on these appreciating value. But with the high price tag and potential flooding of the market, this may not pan out. If we knew there would only be 500 sold the story would probably be different, but it seems they may just be sold until interest dies out. Anyways, it would be nice to hear some details on the limited edition game plan.

So far it doesn't seem like they are limiting orders they might just do it by timeframe. I think someone mentioned they might sell till end of July or something like that. My guess is they will appreciate after a long time, but not like hf1 where they pretty much doubled in price which is fine by me.

 

[grawk]

The first one sold until interest died out too

 

[emelius]

if it's great, i hope they sell a million...

go ahead & flood the market...maybe it'll ease prices on older models

...

one can dream...

 

[kugino]

some may pick these up merely because of its "limited edition" moniker with the hope that they will appreciate in value. that's fine, and i do believe that eventually they will command a higher sell price. but i think the majority of us are buying these because they are specifically made for the head-fi community, look nice, sound good (based on initial reports), and will support head-fi. their limited edition status and potential for increase in value are perks, but not the main reason we are buying these.

 

[MadMan007]

I highly doubt I would ever sell mine unless they just don't work for me whatsoever. If they retain their value that's good enough for me and somewhat of a rarity in the audio world

 

[reorx]

Quote:

Originally Posted by HeadphoneAddict /img/forum/go_quote.gif Let's say my woodied HF-1 were a baby GS-1000 and my metal HF-2 are a baby PS-1000. Also, I like the stock HF-2 more than the stock RS-1 (or PS-1000) that I tried this weekend, and only with an APS V3 cable do my RS-1 more cleanly pull away from the HF-2. How's that? I think the detail, refinement and bass control will improve with burn-in, so I am not worried.

So if stock HF-2 beats stock RS-1, then an APS v3 recabled HF-2 should similarly beat the APS v3 recabled v3 RS-1?

Does this transitive property logic apply or make sense?

 

[1UP]

Quote:

Originally Posted by reorx /img/forum/go_quote.gif So if stock HF-2 beats stock RS-1...

Can't agree with this premiss at all

 

[reorx]

im sure a LOT of rs-1 owners would disagree with HPA's opinion...but then again they're entitled to. I just want to know what exactly the stock hf-2 does better than the rs-1 ACCORDING TO HIS EARS. care to help us out HPA?

 

[HeadphoneAddict]

Quote:

Originally Posted by reorx /img/forum/go_quote.gif So if stock HF-2 beats stock RS-1, then an APS v3 recabled HF-2 should similarly beat the APS v3 recabled v3 RS-1? Does this transitive property logic apply or make sense?

Quote:

Originally Posted by reorx /img/forum/go_quote.gif im sure a LOT of rs-1 owners would disagree with HPA's opinion...but then again they're entitled to. I just want to know what exactly the stock hf-2 does better than the rs-1 ACCORDING TO HIS EARS. care to help us out HPA?

I didn't plan ahead for the comparisons you are asking for, or I would have not left the flats on the stock RS-1, while the HF-2 had bowls. Many people use "flats for wood - bowls for plastic" or some such thought, and I didn't give second thoughts to the stock RS-1 having flats because my APS RS-1 have flats.

Treble: The stock RS-1 was darker than the HF-2 and I don't know if it was due to the flats or bowls. So, I liked the slightly brighter presentation of the HF-2 more. I didn't have time to be changing pads all the time, when I would normally wait to do that at home. Incidentally, I put the bowls back on the HF-2 about 20 minutes after my earlier experiment because flats are okay but bowls are better. With flats they sound closer to the stock RS-1 (and not better) if my memory serves me right.

Bass: Also, the HF-2 were able to match the RS-1 bass levels despite bowls giving less bass than flats, but I did say the HF-2 bass was less controlled and less detailed.

Mids: The HF-2 have slightly more involving and forward mids than the RS-1, but not as forward as the RS-2 (too much) or as distant as the HF-1 (too little). Goldilocks thinks these mids are just right.

Detail: My APS V3 cabled RS-1 have more micro-detail and transparency, letting the drivers get out of the way better. But, the HF-2 has much better detail than I recall my RS-2 having (either one using bowls), which was what led me to send the RS-2 to APS to be re-cabled very quickly (used and already burned in).

 

[myk7000]

I have to say that when comparing the HF-2 to the RS-1 on the same system (both with bowls and both with the stock cable) I preferred the sound on the RS-1 without a doubt. This obviously goes against what hpa is saying and others but these were my opinions as i compared them side to side at canjam.

That "bass cloud" that HPA mentions rings clearly true for me, and the detail was just plain better on the RS-1. I heard every little thing that the music provided with the RS-1 while I seemed to be compromising with the HF-2. Bass was similar but I'd say HF-2 wins a little in that area but the difference I felt was very minute.

Soundstage, detail, extension in the highs, airiness all seemed to go to the RS-1 and the HF-2 really wasn't as exciting to me. I could see the HF-2 being a bit more "neutral" in its presentation but maybe my preferences differ from alot of other people.

Also when I compared the RS1i to the RS1, i ended up liking the RS1i substantially more as well so that says something about how it compares to the HF-2 in my book.