[Zoide]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbritton /img/forum/go_quote.gif keeping things in perspective of them being based upon one's own system and listening apparatus and preferences keeps these from becoming unassailable pronouncements of ultimate reality and truth.

Wow! Your writing style sounds very very much like that of Sam Harris. Have you read his book The End of Faith? There are some very interesting parallels.

 

[spacemanspliff]

Primus is flooring me tonight. The detail found in Pork Soda is plentiful. I never heard so much texture in music. Electric guitar/bass sounds best on a SQ-84 my friends.

This amp smokes the amps I have had and with the 2500 = oooooooooooooooooooh yes.

Lovely sound. Living sound.

 

[tbritton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by boomana /img/forum/go_quote.gif Terry, Who are the vultures? I have only read one outright negative post of the Ultasones. The frustrating thing is that we DO hear these good qualities, and we're glad the Ultrasones are getting respect, but why can't we post the flaws that we also hear? Why is posting impressions that differ from your own not allowed? Why should we go away? Why should we be called vultures, or have statements made that what we hear is made up? Elphas, SACD lover, and I, as well as others, are simply trying to bring in our views, not discredit yours, yet we are accused of attack and/or told to leave. I'm glad you and others like these headphones. I like much about them, but prefer others. So what? Does the make me a vulture? Am I circling now?

Oh... the "circling vultures" reference was to another post at another time by another person who could feel the tremors of the inevitable advance of critics as the Ultrasones began to garner popular acceptance. Just used as a figure of speech, not as a direct reference to anyone nor to their posts. I apologize for using the quoted figure as if everybody else had seen the reference and for assuming everyone would understand the tongue-in-cheek nature of the thought.

Sure, posting flaws is a fine thing to do. I previously wrote that I saw your issue as being possibly a "problem" issue, and I still have to suspect a "burn-resistant" pair of headphones may exist on your end, since similar reports of such metallic twinge have "burned away" on other people's sets - that is, they did not imagine the twinge, they heard such a twinge, but they also heard it go away, myself included.

I certainly do not want you to leave. You, Elephas, and SACD Lover, whom you mention, and others here are all very good head-fiers. Please do not go away! I think it has been misunderstood what I did object to - it was not taken very clearly, and indeed, FJ took some of my steam away making it seem like I was being "another of those Ulrasonistas" just being a dork. Nobody who reacted strongly has gotten my point.

Posts sometimes come across with statements as if they define a headphone's traits - definitively - when they are really just impressions from certain ears on certain systems of certain mixes made of certain music played on certain sets of headphones! It is this tendency towards a formulaic "authority" being lent to such posts I'd been seeing so much of recently, and one small aspect of Elephas' review set me off by reminding me again of that tendency.

I didn't want to see Elephas or anyone else feeling like their feet were being held to the fire to qualify their remarks beyond them being merely subjective impressions - ones that could be in agreement with other people's findings or not. But in his post, Elephas seemed to be buckling under this kind of peer pressure to present himself as an "expert", or so it seemed to me.

I want less "objectivity" expected from us to qualify our remarks, but I also want any overtones of our impressions being "unassailable, expert opinions" to be felt to be unnecessary around here. Gaah... I'm making matters worse now... ummm...

"Audiophile-speak" makes me nauseas.

Is that clearer? No-one should feel they have to do that!

Honesty is the only policy!

(I have "bad hear days" when my headphones, my Polk speakers, my own music or a favorite recording sounds simply terrible! Then, the next day, it somehow sounds great again! Heaven forbid that I should ever make a definitive statement about the sound of anything! We'll not count those bad days as being meaningful for anything... But I have learned a lesson there about the variability of my own hearing. I have hated the sound of certain recordings till I've gotten used to their sound. Performed before and again afterwards, which "review" would have been accurate? Both and neither. Because accuracy is not what we are talking about, only subjective impressions. When I hear reviews being stated as if they were accurate impressions, and those impressions do not match what I have been able to hear or appreciate, that's what I mean by "hearing things that aren't even there." Not audio hallucinations! Rather "things that are not even there" when I listen to the headphones, on a subjective impression level. When I hear detailed bass and another person reports "one-note bass", which report is true? Both and neither. Why do we hear this differently? That is the question to seek an answer to.)

In you... I see a beautiful blue-winged bird with magnificent green sparkling eyes - as sharp-sighted as an eagle, able to fly to stupendous heights, capable of seeing echos off of mountain tops and reflecting between white, puffy clouds, whose sweeping flight adds to and enhances the music of the winds surrounding her as she careens off of air currents amidst jewels of light reflected from her multi-hued, iridescent wing tips as she flies across a placid lake far below.

I see similar beautiful visions of the others writing here. Call me a bird lover. You're all very special people to me here. That's why I read your writings and that's why I write - though I am not always easy to understand, as I can see. Within that fresh context, I hope I am easier to understand, even in retrospect.

Terry

 

[si_fu]

I must say this thread has evolved from informative to entertaining to a mish mash of both. From tbritton and Dexdexter's informative yet articulate posts to spacemanspliff's 'well thought out' 3 line Haiku type posts. Needless to say, these dare I say controversial/scandalous 2500's are going to be in my incoming listening stable very soon.

 

[tbritton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jpelg /img/forum/go_quote.gif It appears as if our "little" group is following the classic Tuckman group dynamic model...again. When are we gonna to start performing? Anyway, my Proline 750's are from the good batch, so I'm pretty happy.

Geesh!!! You are so... right!!!

Happy Headphones!

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoide /img/forum/go_quote.gif Wow! Your writing style sounds very very much like that of Sam Harris. Have you read his book The End of Faith? There are some very interesting parallels.

Sam Harris and I are practically clones of each other. No, really, I mean that! We come from the same basis of thought and outlook, though arrived at by different means.

(I'll share more of my writings and thinking on "even bigger issues" via my website when it is up and running at some nearby future date.) Thanks for that comment, Zoide - I consider it very flattering (though somewhat inevitable!) to be compared in that way to Harris' writing and thought.

Terry

 

[Zoide]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbritton /img/forum/go_quote.gif Sam Harris and I are practically clones of each other. No, really, I mean that! We come from the same basis of thought and outlook, though arrived at by different means. (I'll share more of my writings and thinking on "even bigger issues" via my website when it is up and running at some nearby future date.) Thanks for that comment, Zoide - I consider it very flattering (though somewhat inevitable!) to be compared in that way to Harris' writing and thought.

I'm glad you got the Harris reference; I was a bit afraid that people would go "huh?" at my comment

I can't wait to read your stuff!

On the topic of headphone impressions, I really think that your comments are heartfelt and well-intentioned. Nevertheless, I can see how others might mis-interpret them and feel offended or pissed off by them. Clearly, you are very passionate about audio reproduction, so these things mean a good deal to you.

But just try to let others say whatever they want to say about the headphones they own; as long as there's no defamation or libel, we're all entitled to our opinion on XYZ product. If I wanted to say my PROline 2500 sound like crap, well, that's my right! Maybe they do sound like crap to me; it's up to others to wonder why it sounds like crap to me.

 

[Elephas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by spacemanspliff /img/forum/go_quote.gif Apologies for the hard words. I was in a bad mood and it is not Elphas fault that he has an opinion. I happen to agree with Elphas. I believe he's speaking sincerely about what he hears and have no issue with that. Just got tired of the repetition of the discussion. Now that I've said I am sorry I would also like to say: NIN sounds lovely on the 2500

No hard feelings.

One thought did occur to me though. I'm in agreement with your original post. I would hate to think what might've happened to someone who disagreed.

Other members, particularly boomana, have summed up my views in the preceding posts. I don't have much more to add.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbritton /img/forum/go_quote.gif Well, they are not. Your evaluative apparatus is flawed. It is a human being. It is not suited for producing such descriptions with any reliable accuracy. Up to a point the info may be useful, but not ultimately. The human evaluation apparatus is, however, well suited to gaging emotional reactions based upon aesthetic experiences. How those occur - and the background describing the environment and circumstances of those - would be more interesting and much more useful, I think. Like tube-rolling experiences, for instance. *snip*

I think it's contradictory to say "audiophile-speak" is subjective and therefore not very useful and to also claim that emotional reactions would be more useful in headphone discussions. The emotional reactions are important, of course, being the primary reason we listen to music. I think they're even more unreliable and subjective than the "audiophile-speak" due to differences between individuals and even within one individual at different times.

I'm not a big fan of "audiophile-speak." The terms we use to describe sounds (such as the Stereophile glossary) seem inadequate to me. I don't know of better alternatives, though.

Music engages us and taps an emotional response in ways that are not well-understood by ourselves. In a forum such as this one, I think the descriptive properties of what I hear from a headphone are more useful to readers than the emotions I'm feeling as I listen. To someone who has never heard the 2500 and is wondering how it compares to other headphones, which is more relevant?

I often feel the same types of emotions when listening to the same song with two different headphones. How am I to compare the headphones, then, by the degree of emotional response?

I agree the associated gear should be discussed when comparing headphones. They form a system.

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbritton /img/forum/go_quote.gif I was referring to the use of the term "one-note bass" as the chief offender.

I posted, "Bass details are a bit lacking, though, and can sometimes be a bit too one-note."

This is compared to the bass details of other headphones. It is relative to the greater amount of bass details and texture that the other headphones produce with the same song.

Overall bass quality can be difficult to evaluate. The difference may not be great, or one headphone might have greater impact while the other has more textured bass. One might perform extremely well with well-recorded source material and poorly with low-quality tracks, while the other does less well with the good recordings and better with the low-quality tracks. Which headphone has better bass?

I think it depends. On the music, the listener's preferences, changes associated gear may make, etc. This is why I use multiple pairs of headphones. No one headphone is "best" for me, including the 2500, K701, HD650, RS-1, AD2000 or W5000.

Hmm, there's the R10 that I've never heard. And the HE90, and Qualia, PS-1, HP1000, Edition 9... a balanced amp, a better source...

 

[tako_tsubo]

Head-fi is nothing compared to some audio/video forums out there...found this at another site...

Peace

BTW the 2500's I have are a keeper

 

[tbritton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephas /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think it's contradictory to say "audiophile-speak" is subjective and therefore not very useful and to also claim that emotional reactions would be more useful in headphone discussions. The emotional reactions are important, of course, being the primary reason we listen to music. I think they're even more unreliable and subjective than the "audiophile-speak" due to differences between individuals and even within one individual at different times. I'm not a big fan of "audiophile-speak." The terms we use to describe sounds (such as the Stereophile glossary) seem inadequate to me. I don't know of better alternatives, though.

I'm hoping we can find such alternatives, though!
Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephas /img/forum/go_quote.gif Music engages us and taps an emotional response in ways that are not well-understood by ourselves. In a forum such as this one, I think the descriptive properties of what I hear from a headphone are more useful to readers than the emotions I'm feeling as I listen. To someone who has never heard the 2500 and is wondering how it compares to other headphones, which is more relevant?

I think it is not a matter of which is more relevant, or that analysis be excluded. We can have an aesthetic experience that is satisfying, and describe why it is so, and perhaps look into why it is so differently with one pair compared to another. All the usual descriptive areas remain.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephas /img/forum/go_quote.gif I often feel the same types of emotions when listening to the same song with two different headphones. How am I to compare the headphones, then, by the degree of emotional response? I agree the associated gear should be discussed when comparing headphones. They form a system.

Keeping it in the "subjective (and that does not only imply emotional) realm" keeps it out of the "god realm" where pronouncements of truth are made, only to be challenged by other "gods". Subjective accounts include comparative analysis to other headphones, but are blatantly personal observations.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephas /img/forum/go_quote.gif I posted, "Bass details are a bit lacking, though, and can sometimes be a bit too one-note." This is compared to the bass details of other headphones. It is relative to the greater amount of bass details and texture that the other headphones produce with the same song.

Again, it was merely the use of the term "one-note" that threw me. I think that if that statement had been qualified a bit more by when and where you heard it occur and maybe even defined the term, it would have softened the impact it had on me personally. I don't want other readers coming away from your review thinking it authoritative, and therefore a pronouncement of "one-note" being accepted as reflecting the 2500's bass - but for a reader to discover that you felt that quality came on certain songs with a certain setup (defining your "sometimes") might be more useful, as an example of the usefulness of subjective vs. objective in just one situation.

Stated as an "objective analysis", any analysis begs to find those having a different experience who will protest. And that is my point exactly. Experiences are not objective, though the background behind what caused them may be discussed objectively.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephas /img/forum/go_quote.gif Overall bass quality can be difficult to evaluate. The difference may not be great, or one headphone might have greater impact while the other has more textured bass. One might perform extremely well with well-recorded source material and poorly with low-quality tracks, while the other does less well with the good recordings and better with the low-quality tracks. Which headphone has better bass?

Exactly. Thus, the background needs qualification for the statement to be plausible, and the situation - the music, type of bass "sound" preferred, recording quality, etc. - is part of that background.
Quote:

Originally Posted by Elephas /img/forum/go_quote.gif I think it depends. On the music, the listener's preferences, changes associated gear may make, etc. This is why I use multiple pairs of headphones. No one headphone is "best" for me, including the 2500, K701, HD650, RS-1, AD2000 or W5000. Hmm, there's the R10 that I've never heard. And the HE90, and Qualia, PS-1, HP1000, Edition 9... a balanced amp, a better source...

Right - that is why there can be no pronouncements of "truth". It is only your truth. That is why.

We can gain more insight from each other when we can identify with each other, find people with similar preferences and focus, and then those people's impressions, when describing what "sends them", will be more closely relevant to our own experiences than anyone attempting to give an over-arching objective analysis, for instance.

What I called "audiophile-speak" tends to attempt to lump evaluations into an authoritative "god-mode" series of pronouncements of truth. The terminology is not what I take issue with - it is the attitude of unassailable expert opinion - "snootiness" - that is offensive and unnecessary, in my view. I think we are pressured by societies to adopt these attitudes as being necessary, but they only create divisiveness instead of understanding, coherency and cohesiveness, IMO.

I hope you all understand that I only found a tendency towards that in some posts now and then, and seriously do not think it is epidemic here, or I would stay away! Elephas' review had the tiniest amount and merely acted as a trigger to me writing about the subject. I just don't want to see what already is a good thing become pressured by societies outside of ourselves into a more "professional acting" sort of role-playing. This place is cool because everybody is open and honest with their impressions. That definitely includes you, Elephas!

I'm just being a little "group-wise self conscious" in bringing this up at all.
These posts will drift off anyway, but this is good practice for me towards perhaps in the future being able to say all this much more clearly - and briefly! Thank you for indulging me in my process here.

Terry

 

[tbritton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoide /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm glad you got the Harris reference; I was a bit afraid that people would go "huh?" at my comment I can't wait to read your stuff!

Soon!
Quote:

Originally Posted by Zoide /img/forum/go_quote.gif On the topic of headphone impressions, I really think that your comments are heartfelt and well-intentioned. Nevertheless, I can see how others might mis-interpret them and feel offended or pissed off by them. Clearly, you are very passionate about audio reproduction, so these things mean a good deal to you. But just try to let others say whatever they want to say about the headphones they own; as long as there's no defamation or libel, we're all entitled to our opinion on XYZ product. If I wanted to say my PROline 2500 sound like crap, well, that's my right! Maybe they do sound like crap to me; it's up to others to wonder why it sounds like crap to me.

Duly noted. I hope what I just wrote to Elephas clears things up a bit more.

Terry

 

[bimmer116]

well, seems like everything is good and things turned out fine. I just have to add, for the past 5 weeks I have owned this headphone, I loved its bass and SOMETIMES its presentation. However, I was never 100% satisfied with it, half the time the bass will be over powering and the presentation sounded muddy and hazy? The other half of the time everything will be great but the treble to metallic and piercing.

I agree with everything Elephas, and Kees and some other members pointed out. (actually I was surprised that Elephas pointed out they are in fact detail phones)

WELL, I don't know how but I think just 2 days ago it completely transformed itself after lending it to a fellow head-fier and friend. After getting them back and a short listening, I was literally SHOCKED at how good they sounded.

The details are present, very detailed actually, this was an area that I never felt and was confused when others mentioned its detail. But now, all the details are there, and the highs although sometimes still the tiniest bit shrill but I think thats from bad recordings. The bass is definitely not one noted and over powering right now, and the mid is perhaps a tad recessed but I don't really notice it, and I suspect its due to different music styles. And this was out of a dynahi which somehow was smoother with the ultrasone than my 332i. The 990 is still smoother and seems more detailed than the ultrasone on the 332, but, the presentation of the ultrasone is pretty addicting and vocal seems more intimate. I have to say, the whole S-logic surround thing is not as surround for me when compared to the 990.

Oh yea, I almost forgot, I later found out that the transformation was due to me wearing the cans forward. My ear is touching the front edge of the pad rather than in the middle of it. I tried switching back and all the muddiness came back, so I guess 2500 owners can try listening this way. Definitely big difference for me. All in all, I think the 2500 is definitely a solid headphone and does deserve most of the praise it receives. I don't think it's the end to all flagships, I still enjoy my 990 immensely, as do my RS-1s. For me, it's simply a change of flavor in my music presentation, I just change headphone and get lost in the music and don't worry about upgradetitis.

It's all about the music after all, let us get back to talking about the good and bads about this headphone!

Mike

 

[slwiser]

At times the 2500 is a very contradictory headphone for me. Great, wonderful then I move onto a mix that is very different. Other headphones may seem more stable in their presentation but at same time provide less WOW factor. So I get a trade-off with my Proline 2500s. But I do find myself listening to them more and more. Maybe that burn-in factor does go on for a much longer time than previously thought.

BTW, I like the term "reflective" as opposed to "muddy" or "congested" with those tracks that are mixed when the music gets much fuller bodied than I am used to hearing from the same tracks with different headphones. It may very well be that S-logic thing working for those particular tracks that reveal a certain less than accurate mixing or maybe a more accurate detail of the mixing that did occur.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bimmer116 /img/forum/go_quote.gif well, seems like everything is good and things turned out fine. I just have to add, for the past 5 weeks I have owned this headphone, I loved its bass and SOMETIMES its presentation. However, I was never 100% satisfied with it, half the time the bass will be over powering and the presentation sounded muddy and hazy? The other half of the time everything will be great but the treble to metallic and piercing. I agree with everything Elephas, and Kees and some other members pointed out. (actually I was surprised that Elephas pointed out they are in fact detail phones) WELL, I don't know how but I think just 2 days ago it completely transformed itself after lending it to a fellow head-fier and friend. After getting them back and a short listening, I was literally SHOCKED at how good they sounded. The details are present, very detailed actually, this was an area that I never felt and was confused when others mentioned its detail. But now, all the details are there, and the highs although sometimes still the tiniest bit shrill but I think thats from bad recordings. The bass is definitely not one noted and over powering right now, and the mid is perhaps a tad recessed but I don't really notice it, and I suspect its due to different music styles. And this was out of a dynahi which somehow was smoother with the ultrasone than my 332i. The 990 is still smoother and seems more detailed than the ultrasone on the 332, but, the presentation of the ultrasone is pretty addicting and vocal seems more intimate. I have to say, the whole S-logic surround thing is not as surround for me when compared to the 990. Oh yea, I almost forgot, I later found out that the transformation was due to me wearing the cans forward. My ear is touching the front edge of the pad rather than in the middle of it. I tried switching back and all the muddiness came back, so I guess 2500 owners can try listening this way. Definitely big difference for me. All in all, I think the 2500 is definitely a solid headphone and does deserve most of the praise it receives. I don't think it's the end to all flagships, I still enjoy my 990 immensely, as do my RS-1s. For me, it's simply a change of flavor in my music presentation, I just change headphone and get lost in the music and don't worry about upgradetitis. It's all about the music after all, let us get back to talking about the good and bads about this headphone! Mike

 

[tbritton]

Quote:

Originally Posted by bimmer116 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Oh yea, I almost forgot, I later found out that the transformation was due to me wearing the cans forward. My ear is touching the front edge of the pad rather than in the middle of it. I tried switching back and all the muddiness came back, so I guess 2500 owners can try listening this way. Definitely big difference for me. Mike

Yes, definitely - most music seems to benefit from the headphone position being pulled back. Some songs or recordings do very well with the headphones pulled more forwards, but many do not.

I really think these headphones reflect the mic angle, height and position amazingly. Symphony recordings done with mics setup lower to the stage (like at standing head height) seem to sound best with the headphones pulled forwards for me, as do binaural recordings. Higher mic positions absolutely require the headphones be pulled backwards like you describe, as do many other recordings.

So, play around with that - depending on the recording, they may be idealized in different positions.

Terry

 

[spacemanspliff]

that's the neat thing about the 2500. they are absolutely unique in their characteristics. you never know what you might find out about them tommorow.

someone on Hardforum said they had the "new toy" flavor. what he meant is that it is like gettting a new headphone everyday. this is true in a sense b/c from recording to recording you never know what you might get out of them good or bad.

mostly good!

 

[Elephas]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tbritton /img/forum/go_quote.gif I'm hoping we can find such alternatives, though! *snip*

Thanks for taking the time to respond.

I think we might agree on some aspects of headphone and audio gear discussions, though maybe not everything about the 2500.

Looking back, I realize I haven't really said all that much about the 2500. There's definitely a lot more ground to cover in order to gain more understanding, and I'll need more time with the 2500 and do direct comparisons with other headphones.

I understand what you mean by the "authoritative tone." Please note that I'm writing with the understanding that all my statements are qualified with the usual IMO, IME, in my system, with my ears, etc.

Personally, I read every post here as being qualified with IMO, IME.

Quote:

Originally Posted by slwiser /img/forum/go_quote.gif At times the 2500 is a very contradictory headphone for me...

For me as well. It's good with some tracks and not so good with others. But then other headphones can be like this too, though maybe to a lesser degree than the 2500.

I haven't given up on the 2500 yet.