[pbui44]

I m surprised with that L700 is more detailed than the HD800.

My L700 is doing very good with a KGST but I m still curious of the HD800, mainly for its out of the world soundstage. How about the low impact and the transient speed between this two? Thanks.

The speed of the HD800 almost matches that of the L700, and if you mean “low impact” by bass impact, the HD800 bass impact is very slightly thicker than the L700.

 

[491838]

So what would be the most optimal way to connect a 353X energizer to an NFB-28.38? I'm thinking of purchasing the latter before going for a complete Stax setup (likely comprising L300 limited, L700, and the 353X energizer). Technically the XLR line outs should have the least amount of distortion but the amp measurements seem really good as well and it would be a hassle to keep sharing the XLR outs with the speakers and switching from them to the Stax energizer.

 

[tigon_ridge]

I m surprised with that L700 is more detailed than the HD800.

My L700 is doing very good with a KGST but I m still curious of the HD800, mainly for its out of the world soundstage. How about the low impact and the transient speed between this two? Thanks.

Dynamic headphones have to accelerate a lot of mass in order to push air. From now until the end of time, dynamics will never have the transient speed of electrostatics, because physics.

 

[catscratch]

Dynamic headphones have to accelerate a lot of mass in order to push air. From now until the end of time, dynamics will never have the transient speed of electrostatics, because physics.

Then how do you explain the fact that the measured impulse response in many dynamic headphones dies down faster than it does in many electrostatic headphones?

I used to think this too, but after experience with Focals I'm starting to have my doubts.

 

[tigon_ridge]

Then how do you explain the fact that the measured impulse response in many dynamic headphones dies down faster than it does in many electrostatic headphones?

I used to think this too, but after experience with Focals I'm starting to have my doubts.

Not sure what "dies down faster" means? The rising and falling slopes of the initial attack was what I was referring to. I haven't yet seen an impulse response graph of dynamics that seem faster than electrostatics or some orthos, which is not to say no such graphs exist. I'm also speaking from experience, having heard three capable dynamics (AD1000x, HD600 and HD650) and two capable orthos (HE400 and HE560), albeit none of those dynamics mentioned really stands out in transient response. Orthos can also have speedy attack, according to measurements, but my L300 sounds cleaner than those orthos mentioned, indicating quicker decay. As far as orthos go, I'm going from audio memory, so take that with a grain of salt.

This graph of the Utopia shows a really disappointing transient response for such an expensive headphone, but maybe your ears disagree with the graph.

Also, having heard so many demos of dynamics from Z Reviews and compared them to the Stax lambdas, I haven't heard one dynamic that didn't sound slow, muddy, imprecise and veiled in comparison to all four lambdas demoed. I still can't get over how holographic/binaural Z's L700 sounds in the demo. Still befuddles me.

 

[catscratch]

Also, having heard so many demos of dynamics from Z Reviews and compared them to the Stax lambdas, I haven't heard one dynamic that didn't sound slow, muddy, imprecise and veiled in comparison to all four lambdas demoed. I still can't get over how holographic/binaural Z's L700 sounds in the demo. Still befuddles me.

I would advise against judging a headphone's performance based on a youtube recording through god knows what microphone.

My EQ'd Clear outresolves my L700, especially in the bass and a little bit in the highs. The L700 is more holographic sounding however. But the combination of liquid lushness and resolve, which is what I love about 'stats and good sound in general, the Clear has even more than the L700, at least once you get the highs to behave. I didn't think dynamics could do this after listening to nothing but 'stats for 15 years, but they can.

 

[tigon_ridge]

I would advise against judging a headphone's performance based on a youtube recording through god knows what microphone.

I've read this flawed logic so many times. The quality of the microphone is not so relevant, as long as it isn't so garbage that you can't tell one headphone from another, as it isn't the totality of the headphones that the recording is meant to reproduce—it's their sonic quality relative to other headphones that can be easily heard. You mentioned the L700 has holographic soundstage, which Z's equipment was at least good enough to pick up. Weirdly enough, I was actually enjoying some of the music recorded through the L700 as much if not more than when played directly. Played directly, you get a bit more resolution, but the awesome holographic effect of the L700 recording isn't there. This is something I find most confounding.

My EQ'd Clear outresolves my L700, especially in the bass and a little bit in the highs. The L700 is more holographic sounding however. But the combination of liquid lushness and resolve, which is what I love about 'stats and good sound in general, the Clear has even more than the L700, at least once you get the highs to behave. I didn't think dynamics could do this after listening to nothing but 'stats for 15 years, but they can.

That does sound interesting. Looking at its measurements, its FR looks stellar. Impulse response looks clean, though still not as fast as, say, a Stax or Hifiman's orthos. Decay doesn't look bad; it looks about as good as the L300's.

If we're talking about resolution, I honestly can't imagine headphones getting much more resolving than the L300, so to read that a slower dynamic can outdo the L700 in resolution brings up doubt in me. But then again, I've read many times people saying HD800 has more resolution than competing Staxes...but much more often I've read the complete opposite impression. My L300 is not what I would describe as "lush" or "liquid." To me, it's just very transparent. When people say "lush," what comes to my mind is a sound that has an extended decay, or slight bloat, in the lower mids and upper bass. It's a coloration that I dislike. Maybe a little is fine, as long as it doesn't becoming distracting.

 

[highfilter]

What do you think of L700 vs HD800?

I have a L700, thinking of getting the HD800 too.

I just sat down for another comparison between L700, HD800, HD800s, Clear.

HD800/s seem to have a little more width in the soundstage compared to L700... very open sounding, but in multiple tracks I hear more depth/front to back action on the L700. HD800/s sound is a little further away, L700 more intimate. Also the HD800/s tend to just project sound to the hard left and right sometimes, whereas the L700 seems to project more steps in between, leading to a not so artificial picture. Both are engaging listens and very open sounding. HD800/s soundstage is very unique and worth keeping around if you dig it, but if I had to keep one it would be L700.

HD800/s does have more low/sub bass impact than L700. It's noticeable on tracks that have very low sub bass (Jimmy Edgar - LBLB Detroit... oh baby), the HD800/s digs deep and you can hear the variations in sub bass more clearly - whereas the L700 seems to have a limit of how deep it can dig and articulate that low. You can still hear the bass on the L700 but it's not as deep and doesn't seem to have that low low extension. I prefer the L700 midbass impact, texture and decay compared to the HD800s and especially the HD800 (even leaner). Even though the HD800/s is very fast, the L700 seems limitless in comparison and just flows, never seeming congested. Some electronica tracks are hard to beat on the HD800/s, as the combination of deep sub bass extension, wide soundstage, and sparkly highs creates a super dynamic experience. Other headphones have more bass volume and/or are thicker sounding, but the contrast between lows and highs is pretty damn engaging depending on the track/music you are into.

As far as detail, I would say HD800/s and L700 are very detailed and reveal detail/nuance within music effortlessly. Saying one is more detailed than the other is too general without going into specifics in my opinion, also depends on how you define detail as it's a general term. HD800/s is a leaner sound signature and some of the detail/high frequencies can stand out more but I generally prefer the tonality of the L700 - often sounding more natural and consistent between tracks, whereas there can be a slight metallic/sharp sound on the highs with the HD800/s with some material. Detail does seem to be more effortless and immediate with the L700.

The L700 doesn't ever seem to get congested, no matter how much crap is going on with the track - I love it. Only real limitation I've found is the lack of deep low bass extension, but it never renders a bad listening experience or anything.

The Clears used to be one of my favorite cans to listen to, but the small soundstage sounds very limiting in comparison to L700, HD800/s. It renders some music very "flat" and not engaging in comparison, IMO. I come from loving 2-channel speaker listening, so I might value soundstage/the open sound more than other characteristics.

Just my thoughts. Off to dig in some more!

 

[organ_donor]

I just sat down for another comparison between L700, HD800, HD800s, Clear.

HD800/s seem to have a little more width in the soundstage compared to L700... very open sounding, but in multiple tracks I hear more depth/front to back action on the L700. HD800/s sound is a little further away, L700 more intimate. Also the HD800/s tend to just project sound to the hard left and right sometimes, whereas the L700 seems to project more steps in between, leading to a not so artificial picture. Both are engaging listens and very open sounding. HD800/s soundstage is very unique and worth keeping around if you dig it, but if I had to keep one it would be L700.

HD800/s does have more low/sub bass impact than L700. It's noticeable on tracks that have very low sub bass (Jimmy Edgar - LBLB Detroit... oh baby), the HD800/s digs deep and you can hear the variations in sub bass more clearly - whereas the L700 seems to have a limit of how deep it can dig and articulate that low. You can still hear the bass on the L700 but it's not as deep and doesn't seem to have that low low extension. I prefer the L700 midbass impact, texture and decay compared to the HD800s and especially the HD800 (even leaner). Even though the HD800/s is very fast, the L700 seems limitless in comparison and just flows, never seeming congested. Some electronica tracks are hard to beat on the HD800/s, as the combination of deep sub bass extension, wide soundstage, and sparkly highs creates a super dynamic experience. Other headphones have more bass volume and/or are thicker sounding, but the contrast between lows and highs is pretty damn engaging depending on the track/music you are into.

As far as detail, I would say HD800/s and L700 are very detailed and reveal detail/nuance within music effortlessly. Saying one is more detailed than the other is too general without going into specifics in my opinion, also depends on how you define detail as it's a general term. HD800/s is a leaner sound signature and some of the detail/high frequencies can stand out more but I generally prefer the tonality of the L700 - often sounding more natural and consistent between tracks, whereas there can be a slight metallic/sharp sound on the highs with the HD800/s with some material. Detail does seem to be more effortless and immediate with the L700.

The L700 doesn't ever seem to get congested, no matter how much **** is going on with the track - I love it. Only real limitation I've found is the lack of deep low bass extension, but it never renders a bad listening experience or anything.

The Clears used to be one of my favorite cans to listen to, but the small soundstage sounds very limiting in comparison to L700, HD800/s. It renders some music very "flat" and not engaging in comparison, IMO. I come from loving 2-channel speaker listening, so I might value soundstage/the open sound more than other characteristics.

Just my thoughts. Off to dig in some more!

Thank you and I appreciate your feedback very much.

KGSSHV improves the soundstage and slam noticeably too if you craving more for these.

I will get a HD800 some times to cure my dynamic curiousity .

 

[makne]

Detail, resolution... it kinda depends on how you define them, what you focus on, how your hearing is etc... I think the people who say HD800(S) is more «resolved» or has «better detail retrieval» has that impression because of the headphones’ tuning. The forwardness in hd800’s low treble-y region makes certain small «pops» and «clicks» stand out in particular, for example a guitarist sliding his fingers across the frets. Imo that does NOT make them more resolved, but it’s easy to be «fooled» into thinking that they are.

The Clear has great resolve and detail retrieval, on par with hd800(S) to my ears. It’s also extremely well balanced in frequency response so you get that sense of «detail retrieval» through the entire spectrum, not just elevated parts of it. The Clear also has VERY good imaging/precision both in left/right and front/back, but it is confined within a small space (small soundstage). Big brother Utopia pushes this precision even further, to the point where I’ll say with almost full certainty that it’s the best I’ve heard in that regard (beats sr-009 and Susvara from memory).

Now the L700 also has amazing resolve, to the point where you get a feeling of intimacy although it’s not necessarily the in-your-face kind. Definitely a step up from the L300 in every way imo (in fact it’s closer to the sr-009 to my ears). What the L700 does so well is that it delivers this great resolve while still sounding so effortless, maybe that’s the (presumably) superior transient response kicking in? I don’t think I’d use the word «clean» about it, but again that’s a term that can mean a lot of different things.
The L700 does effortless and pleasant, and MAYBE even resolve, better than the Clear for sure. But the Clear to my ears has superior imaging (although in a smaller soundstage), and that AWESOME dynamic impact that none of the Stax I’ve heard even come close to replicate

 

[nishan99]

How the L700 response to sub-bass EQ ?
sorry if the mention of EQ irritated anyone

 

[Hi-Fi-Apricity]

How the L700 response to sub-bass EQ ?
sorry if the mention of EQ irritated anyone

It can take quite a bit of EQ down below. Not a crap tonne or you'll reach its excursion before you reach a point where distortion is bad. Better alternative is to seal the porting and get the extention back naturally Imho

 

[catscratch]

Re: more L700 vs Clear,

The L700 definitely presents its detail in a more lifelike and natural way. The Clear is like a photograph with the contrast and saturation turned up too high. Everything has immediacy and really pops, but the more you listen the less realistic it all starts to appear. Though I think the main culprit is the slightly metallic tone that the Clear has which the L700 lacks. Take that away and the Clear would probably be about as realistic. Also, in my system the L700 not only has a larger soundstage than the Clear but also significantly better imaging. The Clear does left/right very well but the L700 does depth and height better and is also better at separating layers spatially as well as audibly. I would say that both headphones are about as good at keeping up with complex music. In the past, I always heard dynamics as kinda falling apart with complex music and blending separate sounds together when the music became very dense, but the Clear seems to resolve everything just fine, as does the L700. The Clear is substantially more tactile, with the sound having a solid physicality. The L700 is also tactile, far more so than many electrostats, but not to the same degree as the Clear.

Really, the biggest flaw in the L700 is that the bass is a bit loose. Sometimes it gets downright boomy. It also has slightly tipped up highs but it's easy to EQ them down and make them more neutral. Otherwise it's a great all-rounder that does everything else really well. The Clear's chief problems are the slightly metallic tone, the uneven highs that can sound a bit rough and unresolved if you don't EQ them properly, the somewhat 2d imaging, and the fact that the driver runs out of excursion with loud deep bass sometimes. However the fluid resolve, the dynamics, the tactile punch, and vivid immediacy of it all makes it a very engaging headphone. If you were to put a gun to my head and force me to pick one, I'd say the L700 is better overall mainly because of its spatial abilities but both headphones are excellent... and both are not without their problems.

Anyway, that's enough about this from me.

Spoiler

Also, let me just say that reading people's experiences re: HD800 vs L700 vs Clear and other similar headphones has been interesting and very helpful! We're giving tons of consumer advice even if we're contradicting each other constantly, lol...

 

[tigon_ridge]

Spoiler

Also, let me just say that reading people's experiences re: HD800 vs L700 vs Clear and other similar headphones has been interesting and very helpful! We're giving tons of consumer advice even if we're contradicting each other constantly, lol...

These are the kind of impressions I really enjoy reading. Please keep them going, folks!

 

[Rhamnetin]

Re: more L700 vs Clear,

The L700 definitely presents its detail in a more lifelike and natural way. The Clear is like a photograph with the contrast and saturation turned up too high. Everything has immediacy and really pops, but the more you listen the less realistic it all starts to appear. Though I think the main culprit is the slightly metallic tone that the Clear has which the L700 lacks. Take that away and the Clear would probably be about as realistic. Also, in my system the L700 not only has a larger soundstage than the Clear but also significantly better imaging. The Clear does left/right very well but the L700 does depth and height better and is also better at separating layers spatially as well as audibly. I would say that both headphones are about as good at keeping up with complex music. In the past, I always heard dynamics as kinda falling apart with complex music and blending separate sounds together when the music became very dense, but the Clear seems to resolve everything just fine, as does the L700. The Clear is substantially more tactile, with the sound having a solid physicality. The L700 is also tactile, far more so than many electrostats, but not to the same degree as the Clear.

Really, the biggest flaw in the L700 is that the bass is a bit loose. Sometimes it gets downright boomy. It also has slightly tipped up highs but it's easy to EQ them down and make them more neutral. Otherwise it's a great all-rounder that does everything else really well. The Clear's chief problems are the slightly metallic tone, the uneven highs that can sound a bit rough and unresolved if you don't EQ them properly, the somewhat 2d imaging, and the fact that the driver runs out of excursion with loud deep bass sometimes. However the fluid resolve, the dynamics, the tactile punch, and vivid immediacy of it all makes it a very engaging headphone. If you were to put a gun to my head and force me to pick one, I'd say the L700 is better overall mainly because of its spatial abilities but both headphones are excellent... and both are not without their problems.

Anyway, that's enough about this from me.

Spoiler

Also, let me just say that reading people's experiences re: HD800 vs L700 vs Clear and other similar headphones has been interesting and very helpful! We're giving tons of consumer advice even if we're contradicting each other constantly, lol...

Well said. There is just something effortlessly realistic about Stax sound versus the rest.