[majkel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT /img/forum/go_quote.gif too much PRaT sometimes makes thing sound unreal

Very interesting statement. Can headphones be too fast? Faster than music? They are not only slow but also congested, with overwhelming, canny bass and colored trebles. The HD600 are more true and transparent. If I had to order the Sennheisers by sound quality, it would be HD25-1>HD600>HD595>HD650.

 

[Agnostic]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Pinna /img/forum/go_quote.gif No, MaloS, It's not the end of the story just because you say it is. I completely disagree with you. Whether or not I have heard the "absolute best of the best" headphones is completely irrelevant. I have heard the AKG K701, as one example and I think the Pro 750 sounds better. The Pro 750 does not have a recession in it's midrange, it has an accurate sounding midrange, IMEO. There are some headphones that you probably prefer that have an exaggerated midrange, IMO. I choose to ignore nothing. I choose to and do listen to everything. I am known for having a very "good ear" when it comes to audio related matters. I'm not saying that I am the world's greatest authority on headphones but I know what I hear. It truly annoys me that you and others express your opinions as if they are actual facts. To say that the Pro 750, when fully burned in, sounds "tinny" is nothing more than absolute nonsense, IMO. My opinion on this matter is backed up by several audio professionals, a few of which I know personally. The Pro 750 is growing in popularity in recording / production facilities both in the United States as well as Europe. I have been criticized for posting so much about the Pro 750. But, as long as someone, such as yourself, keeps posting what I consider to be untruths about the Pro 750, I will continue to post and refute these, IMO, completely erroneous comments, whether you or anyone else likes it or not!

Yes please keep bringing us the gospel according to Peter. It's a pleasure to keep hearing the same well informed statements argued so elegantly. To be honest your fundamentalist Ultrasone routine is getting pretty old pretty fast.

The 750 isn't bad but it has recessed mids and a particularly big dip in upper mids. That's not a matter of opinion. Just look at the frequency graphs, it doesn't get any clearer. If you prefer to ignore that, that's your choice but it's an obvious fact.

It also has somewhat tinny artificial highs, partly I think because of that upper midrange dip which more or less "detaches" the highs from the lower frequency range. The detail that this makes you hear in the highs is in a sense faked. If you leave out part of the sound spectrum it's no wonder that what's left seems to sound clearer and gets more emphasis, it also makes it sound artificial if you know what to listen for.

Many people who have heard it here on Head-Fi have independently described it in a similar manner as I just did (even people like Contrastique who actually like it the 750) because - well - surprise - surprise, that's what it sounds like.

Now I can imagine that it has some qualities that you like or that it suits your ears but that doesn't make it a great headphone as far as reference class headphones go. And regarding your insincere imo's, your opinion is in fact neither accurate nor interesting enough to hear it endelessly restated for weeks at a time.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by majkel /img/forum/go_quote.gif If I had to order the Sennheisers by sound quality, it would be HD25-1>HD600>HD595>HD650.

No offense but you should use something better than portable to give these phones justice, otherwise your opinion on them is not worth much.

 

[Andrew_WOT]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnostic /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just look at the frequency graphs, it doesn't get any clearer.

Picture speaks a thousand words. Try to guess which one is PL750.

 

[Sovkiller]

To the original poster:
For the kind of music of your preference I strongly reco the Prolines, I like more or less the same kind of rock, and I have sold twice the HD650, they are in my book not appropriate at all for rock, or electronic, or bass heavy music...Simply they show an extremely emphasized bass, that will ruin the fun, also they will sound dull in comparison to the Prolines, they are laid back, and veiled, and with a portable, you will need a very powerful amp...

The Prolines are easier to drive, they have a lot better high freq extension, and better bass. About sibilance as we have discussed many times, after owning some of the so called sibilant headphones, what I have indeed noticed is that they will never show you anything that is not on the recording, the sibilance is a defect of the recording, there is no driver able to create sibilance where there is none, even less a headphone that was designed for studio and professional use...they are IMO a very musical and fun heapdhones...

 

[jpelg]

After looking at the OP's source & amp, I'm thinking that the Ultrasone Proline 650's would be a better choice than the two previously mentioned.

The Proline 650's are a tad less detailed in the highs than the 750's, but with similiar bass characteristics, and more forgiving of sources. That is my reco.

 

[Peter Pinna]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Agnostic /img/forum/go_quote.gif Yes please keep bringing us the gospel according to Peter. It's a pleasure to keep hearing the same well informed statements argued so elegantly. To be honest your fundamentalist Ultrasone routine is getting pretty old pretty fast. The 750 isn't bad but it has recessed mids and a particularly big dip in upper mids. That's not a matter of opinion. Just look at the frequency graphs, it doesn't get any clearer. If you prefer to ignore that, that's your choice but it's an obvious fact. It also has somewhat tinny artificial highs, partly I think because of that upper midrange dip which more or less "detaches" the highs from the lower frequency range. The detail that this makes you hear in the highs is in a sense faked. If you leave out part of the sound spectrum it's no wonder that what's left seems to sound clearer and gets more emphasis, it also makes it sound artificial if you know what to listen for. Many people who have heard it here on Head-Fi have independently described it in a similar manner as I just did (even people like Contrastique who actually like it the 750) because - well - surprise - surprise, that's what it sounds like. Now I can imagine that it has some qualities that you like or that it suits your ears but that doesn't make it a great headphone as far as reference class headphones go. And regarding your insincere imo's, your opinion is in fact neither accurate nor interesting enough to hear it endelessly restated for weeks at a time.

There is a difference between the idea of the way sound is perceived by the average human ear and brain vs. the idea of how the sound of audio is graphed from a pair of headphones.

I've said this before: there are differences when comparing one headphone to another. But, the question is which one sounds more accurate when heard by the human ear?

How the average human ear and brain perceives sound is not as simple as you are making it out to be.

The Pro 750 does not sound artificial, IMO. I know you think it does but I don't agree.

If by "reference" headphone you mean an absolutely "flat response" headphone, no the Pro 750 is not that (I never said it was that.) But the sound of audio being played through the Pro 750 is more similar to the sound of that same audio being played through flat response studio monitors than any other headphone I've ever heard. (There is an article regarding this that I posted in another thread and kwkarth responded and agreed with me. I don't want to look for it right now but later I will post a link to it that will explain this in greater detail.) And, no, I'm not saying that there is not another headphone that sounds even more similar to the sound of "flat" response studio monitors than the 750. I'm saying that I haven't heard such a headphone.

I want to point out that, in my opinion, most of your third paragraph is worded in such a way as to cause the reader to think you are presenting known facts, when in actuality you presented opinions. I reiterate: opinions. And, they are, in my opinion, highly debatable opinions at that.

It makes complete sense that an "Agnostic" would not enjoy reading "the gospel according to Peter".

 

[parhelictriangle]

Quote:

Originally Posted by majkel /img/forum/go_quote.gif I completely don't understand talking about the HD650's in this thread. The OP wrote Besides not balanced HD650's are mediocre headphones, doing many things wrong and being perfect match for rigs that need some flaws to be hidden, they completely don't fit the aforementioned music genres. Ultrasones will be great choice but with proper amplification in mind - dedicated for low impedances, so SS output stage comes to mind, no matter it's a solid state or hybrid amp.

I disagree with you with ever fiber of my being.

 

[Palantiri7]

Well he'd better be wrong or they'll be much weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth by yours truly when my new HD 650 arrives next week! That, and by the hair of my chinny chin chin I'm going to make it to 100 posts tonight, dammit.

 

[dookiex]

I find it funny how many people strive for a neutral sounding headphone when in fact the neutrality is usually due to balancing the headphones to closely match the equalization done to recordings at the recording and production stage so that the sound will match well with SPEAKERS. If you consider that, these balanced and neutral headphones are in fact artificial in their reproduction of sound, however musically, they tend to sound better because of that adjustment to match the equalization in recordings. This brings me back to my original comment, if you are using them for musical enjoyment, it's a matter of preference between the Senns and the Ultrasones as they are both in my honest opinion equally good but have different sound signatures. If you are using them for monitoring purposes for recording and what not, then the Ultrasones will win in that situation.

 

[Peter Pinna]

Please take a look at posts #'s 35 (My reply to Shahrose) and 37 from Kwkarth via this link:

Looking for ~$300 reference, untouched, neutral, transparent, "artist-intended" headphones - Page 4 - Head-Fi: Covering Headphones, Earphones and Portable Audio

 

[MaloS]

Hehe...exaggerated midrange...I tested the resulting FR I perceive, no exaggerated midrange here. Find a better argument - right now you are pulling **** out of your ass.

Besides, you are not even trying to hold up to my challenge of trying more stuff for an extended period of time. What about those engineers that you are backed by? You want to tell me they have golden ears? Most recordings coming out these days are done so poorly, that is clearly not the case. Did I mention I talk to recording engineers too? Some totally swear by HD600 as best headphone for the job...they also come with perfect pitch, great skills at the piano, electric engineering education, background in classical music, and working in prestigious places with great people who have a name in the industry, and a heck of a good name (I won't name who, but we are not talking small flies).

Sorry, but so far none of your arguments hold any useful substance. You are just using 'popularity syndrome' and some basic ideas (like entitlement to opinion!) to try to prove your opinions (as it stands now - poorly formed) the right ones. If you can seriously prove to me that you are right (I am a mathematician, don't try playing logic with me), give me data for your claims, at least 100 data points, from verifiable sources, which have no personal reference to you or Ultrasone...or for that matter don't know who the hell you or Ultrasone are. Then you may have a claim.

If this is not enough end of story for you, I recommend a rope or a gun, as you are failing at basic principles of debate.

 

[majkel]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Andrew_WOT /img/forum/go_quote.gif No offense but you should use something better than portable to give these phones justice, otherwise your opinion on them is not worth much.

LOL!

What's the best amp you have thoroughly auditioned? For me last week it was ASL Twin Head MkII w/DACTs, replaced caps, rolled tubes, gold pin ceramic tube sockets. <- Tara Labs Air 1 <- Cairn Fog v.2 modded <- power cord... I don't remember. We had HD600's, HD650's, Grado GS1k's, RS2's, UE9's, K1000 + dedicated SS output stage (ASL TH as preamp). We had a couple of tube sets like 45 Emission Labs, 2A3 Full Music and the like. What the owner said about my rig? Slight difference. I'm using a better (IMHO) DAC now than the Cairn Fog v.2. My amp is directly connected to the DAC PCB, so no IC (best IC in other words). Sure my amp is slightly worse than TH but we also had RudiStor NX-33. I'd never say it sounds better than mine, nor stated it any of the participants. I think mine is more transparent. And so on... Do I really need to write all of this to prove I can say something? I can add long auditions of complete O2 system driven by Accuphase DP800/DC801. I'll just repeat basing on what I heard and on what I can hear each day - the HD650 with the stock cable are great headphones to "fix" rig imperfections as they can hide or dampen many things, add their own, artificial but pleasant timbre and make people happy that way. The Pro 750's are better headphones no doubt but not suitable for tiny OTL's as they are low impedance. Saying they have recessed midrange is a big mistake and shows only the headphone setup flaws to be directed outside of the 'phones. Listening to drum'n'bass on the HD650's would be a torment for me, these are lullaby-dedicated headphones.

 

[jpelg]

Quote:

Originally Posted by majkel /img/forum/go_quote.gif the HD650's...are lullaby-dedicated headphones.

Great description.

 

[silverrain]