Upgrading to a new pair of cans, and need the most neutral and accurate available. Please advise.

[Lunatique]

Hi, it's been a while since I was last here. I recently had my Sennheiser HD555's right side blow out on me (my monitor controller has been sporadically overloading by itself for no reason, and it also blew out a subwoofer of one of my monitor sets too). So, this is the perfect excuse for me to get a new pair of open-back cans (I already have closed-back cans that I like and use for tracking, but I prefer open-back cans for everyday listening since it allows me to hear my wife calling me or the phone ringing).

As I usually do when I post a question here in the past, I'll give some background on my taste and past experiences with audio so you can better help me pick something suitable for my needs. So, here we go:

1) I'm a musician/composer/sound designer, so I'm after the most neutral and accurate sound, with no hype, no scoop, no coloration--just transparency. Although for pure leisure listening, I don't mind some musical coloration that's more hi-fi-ish (kind of like my old Denon AH-D950, with the bass and treble noticeably more prominent in the "disco-smile" curve, but never irritatingly overwhelming in the coloration), I don't exactly have the luxury to buy separate audio gear for audio/music production and leisure listening, so I logistically must default to my more serious needs--which are professional neutral and accurate sound, with as little coloration as possible.

2) My reference system is a pair of Klein + Hummel O 300D's, placed in optimal position in an acoustically fully treated studio. Those that know K+H's reputation knows how amazingly accurate, neutral, and detailed their monitors are. I usually use the K+H, and only use headphones when it's really late at night or I want to check how my mix sounds on headphones.

3) I quite liked my Sennheiser HD555. I had tested it against the HD600 in the past and they sounded remarkably similar, except the HD555's treble is a little rolled-off with a warmer sound. But, as much as I liked my HD555, I found the bass sometimes lacking clarity. I can hear the slight muddiness when I compare it to the K+H, but it's really not fair to compare a $150 headphone to $7,000 professional monitors. The HD555 is also one of the most comfortable headphones I've ever worn--I often forget they are on my head.

4) My tracking headphone of choice is the Audio-Technica M-50, and I think it's great for the price--accurate and neutral enough to me, and compliments the HD555 well since neither have that bright shrillness that many other headphones have. But I only the M-50 for tracking since I prefer open-back cans for normal listening. I also don't like pleather or any kind of non-fabric based ear-cushion that will make my ears sweat. This is especially important during the summer.

5) I have second pair of tracking headphones--the Equation RP-21, and it's an amazing sub-$100 pair of cans. It's not all that comfortable, but it sounds remarkably neutral for the price, and just a tad bright on some material--such as sharp hitting snare drums. Pleather ear-cushions are not that great either, but I think all sealed cans have them to help with isolation.

6) I had a pair of Shure E4C, and I found them a bit bright, and the bass was anemic. I had to EQ the sound to tolerate the E4C.

7) When the E4C died, I replaced it with the Westone 3. It had the opposite problem of the E4C. The W3's treble was too rolled-off, and the bass was too bloated. I have to EQ the W3 to get it more neutral.

8) During my headphone shopping in the past, I had tested the Beyerdynamic
DT880 and DT770, and they were too bright for me on some material.

9) In general I have a hard time tolerating any kind of over-brightness and shrillness, as I find it fatiguing, irritating, and uncomfortable. If I absolutely had to settle for either shrillness or bloated/muddy bass, I would grudgingly pick bloated/muddy bass as the lesser evil, mainly because it doesn't bore into my skull like sharp shards of sonic knife that shrillness does (it's more like getting pounded on the head with large pillows--still uncomfortable, but not as painful).

10) I don't bother with any of that dedicated headphone amp complication. Full-sized cans plug directly into my monitor controller (which has a separate headphone volume control), and my IEM's plug directly into my mp3 player (Creative Zen 32GB). I don't believe in over-complicating things in life. If manufacturers of professional reference grade headphones designed their products to only sound good with expensive dedicated headphone amps, then all of their designers and engineers should be fired. That's just my opinion.

So, with that out of the way, you should have a pretty good idea of what my preferences are. My ideal full-sized open-back headphone would have to have:

1) Cloth-based ear-cushion (like velour)
2) As neutral and accurate and detailed as possible, without any hint of unwanted coloration, hype, scoop...etc.
3) Very comfortable to wear over long period of time.

The open-back cans I've been researching and trying to decide on are:

AKG K702 - I like that it's got a detachable cable over the 701, since I'm a klutz and often trip over/pull out stuff by accident. I like that the AKG has auto-adjusting headband, since I'm a little annoyed with accidentally altering the headband size when I pull on the cans. I'm a little concerned that they might be too bright since some people have said that they sound a lot like the Beyerdynamic DT880, and I thought the DT880/770 were too bright. Some also said the bass is lacking, but I have to wonder if it's really lacking or it's simply not bloated/hyped.

Sennheiser HD650 - I'm very comfortable with the Sennheiser signature sound, and I loved my HD555. Based on frequency response curve charts, it seems the HD650 has more prominent bass, but the treble is a bit rolled off just like the HD555?

Sennheiser HD600 - I've tested it against the HD555 years ago, and they were so similar, with the HD600's treble a bit more clear. I would have no problem with the HD600 since I'm so comfortable with the HD555 already.

I'm in China right now, and I can get the K702 for roughly $313, the HD650 for roughly $354, and the HD600 for roughly $315.

My heart is leaning towards K702 since I'd like to try a different brand just to experience a wider variety, and also I like the auto-adjusting headband. I know all three cans sound amazing, are very comfortable, and all are worthy reference quality cans, so it's really hard to pick.

Your advice? (EDIT: I should mention that I'm trying to keep the budget around $300~$400 street value. Some of the suggestions are way over my budget. I already have a $7,000 pair of reference monitors--I don't need an ultra-expensive set of headphones to compliment them. )

 

[Cool_Torpedo]

IMHO, considering that you've already tried them and you know first hand you can live with them, I'd get the HD600. The 650 aren't as neutral, their mid bass has a bit of bloom which makes treble softer. On the long run you might find them "dark" and not up to the neutrality you're seeking.
The 702 are good phones too, but they're harder to drive than the HD600 and to my ears, show a tendency to make treble brilliant and over-detailed which I find fatiguing. Furthermore their stage presentation is kind of faked IMO. Every single recording has a huge wide deep stage which other phones can show differently among recordings. However for my head shape/size, I find the K70x more comfy on long listening sessions. The bad part is the rubber bands adjusting the fit get a bit loose with time, so the "auto fit" doesn't work so well.

A friend of mine is sound engineer working in the recording studio and at live performances. He much prefers monitor loudspeakers to phones for mastering, but if he needs to use cans, his reference are still the HD600 if no isolation is required, and the HD-25-I-II if he needs closed cans. I mostly agree with his preferences, maybe if I were to monitor recordings, I'd use the HD800 instead

 

[MrGreen]

The DT880 and ER4S/P are much more neutral than the ones you have mentioned.
In terms of the ones you have listed I would say the HD600 is probably the most neutral, however if you plan to mix around and stuff the K702 would be a better choice (because mixing with 'dull' headphones = harsh recordings)

 

[Ashirgo]

Wanna try DT 150? From headphones already mentioned, HD 600 are probably the most neutral (IIRC), if you like to sit in 10th row. If its 2nd, then some AKGs or DT880 would do. I often wonder how people come into believing that such bright sounding headphones as these can be called neutral, while the "truth" is that in a natural listening environment much of that brightness gets tempered by the distance that high tones have to make to human ear, losing lots of their energy on the way. Unless it is one of the first rows.

 

[Cool_Torpedo]

Looks like my ears are more sensitive to the treble peaks the DT880 and ER4S show than yours I find the 2KHz peak of the Etys really nasty.

If a neutral sound correlates with a flat frequency response, the HD600 and K701 are more neutral then, though not that much in the mid-upper bass. In any case I agree that if you try to equalize the 5-10KHz area using the HD600, you might end up with a bright recording, which would be worsened by the listener using the Etys or Beyers hahaha.
There are no perfect phones, and one must know his weapon's weaknesses to make a good job.

 

[lejaz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrGreen /img/forum/go_quote.gif ...if you plan to mix around and stuff the K702 would be a better choice (because mixing with 'dull' headphones = harsh recordings)

I agree with this. Much better to hear every bit of the highs in the headphones...in case there's harshness or sibilance... than to get a nasty surprise later.

 

[insyte]

HD600 for you

because you already like its sound signature. The K701/K702 is very different, and from your preferences, I would say this wouldn't suit you. When I had the K701, I only used it for classical music. This was my tendency because of its huge headstage. The K701 can sound bright with some recordings.

The HD650 is really different, and as most have said, not neutral.

 

[Bullseye]

The most "neutral" can I have heard so far is the Precide Ergo 2 that has been equalized following Fletcher & Munson curves of equal loudness (or seems to be done so as mentioned by one of Precide people) No frequency stands out. They are quite comfortable for long periods of time. They are huge, but it is all about the music, no?

 

[bhanja_trinanjan]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunatique /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hi, it's been a while since I was last here. I recently had my Sennheiser HD555's right side blow out on me (my monitor controller has been sporadically overloading by itself for no reason, and it also blew out a subwoofer of one of my monitor sets too). So, this is the perfect excuse for me to get a new pair of open-back cans (I already have closed-back cans that I like and use for tracking, but I prefer open-back cans for everyday listening since it allows me to hear my wife calling me or the phone ringing). As I usually do when I post a question here in the past, I'll give some background on my taste and past experiences with audio so you can better help me pick something suitable for my needs. So, here we go: 1) I'm a musician/composer/sound designer, so I'm after the most neutral and accurate sound, with no hype, no scoop, no coloration--just transparency. Although for pure leisure listening, I don't mind some musical coloration that's more hi-fi-ish (kind of like my old Denon AH-D950, with the bass and treble noticeably more prominent in the "disco-smile" curve, but never irritatingly overwhelming in the coloration), I don't exactly have the luxury to buy separate audio gear for audio/music production and leisure listening, so I logistically must default to my more serious needs--which are professional neutral and accurate sound, with as little coloration as possible. 2) My reference system is a pair of Klein + Hummel O 300D's, placed in optimal position in an acoustically fully treated studio. Those that know K+H's reputation knows how amazingly accurate, neutral, and detailed their monitors are. I usually use the K+H, and only use headphones when it's really late at night or I want to check how my mix sounds on headphones. 3) I quite liked my Sennheiser HD555. I had tested it against the HD600 in the past and they sounded remarkably similar, except the HD555's treble is a little rolled-off with a warmer sound. But, as much as I liked my HD555, I found the bass sometimes lacking clarity. I can hear the slight muddiness when I compare it to the K+H, but it's really not fair to compare a $150 headphone to $7,000 professional monitors. The HD555 is also one of the most comfortable headphones I've ever worn--I often forget they are on my head. 4) My tracking headphone of choice is the Audio-Technica M-50, and I think it's great for the price--accurate and neutral enough to me, and compliments the HD555 well since neither have that bright shrillness that many other headphones have. But I only the M-50 for tracking since I prefer open-back cans for normal listening. I also don't like pleather or any kind of non-fabric based ear-cushion that will make my ears sweat. This is especially important during the summer. 5) I have second pair of tracking headphones--the Equation RP-21, and it's an amazing sub-$100 pair of cans. It's not all that comfortable, but it sounds remarkably neutral for the price, and just a tad bright on some material--such as sharp hitting snare drums. Pleather ear-cushions are not that great either, but I think all sealed cans have them to help with isolation. 6) I had a pair of Shure E4C, and I found them a bit bright, and the bass was anemic. I had to EQ the sound to tolerate the E4C. 7) When the E4C died, I replaced it with the Westone 3. It had the opposite problem of the E4C. The W3's treble was too rolled-off, and the bass was too bloated. I have to EQ the W3 to get it more neutral. 8) During my headphone shopping in the past, I had tested the Beyerdynamic DT880 and DT770, and they were too bright for me on some material. 9) In general I have a hard time tolerating any kind of over-brightness and shrillness, as I find it fatiguing, irritating, and uncomfortable. If I absolutely had to settle for either shrillness or bloated/muddy bass, I would grudgingly pick bloated/muddy bass as the lesser evil, mainly because it doesn't bore into my skull like sharp shards of sonic knife that shrillness does (it's more like getting pounded on the head with large pillows--still uncomfortable, but not as painful). 10) I don't bother with any of that dedicated headphone amp complication. Full-sized cans plug directly into my monitor controller (which has a separate headphone volume control), and my IEM's plug directly into my mp3 player (Creative Zen 32GB). I don't believe in over-complicating things in life. If manufacturers of professional reference grade headphones designed their products to only sound good with expensive dedicated headphone amps, then all of their designers and engineers should be fired. That's just my opinion. So, with that out of the way, you should have a pretty good idea of what my preferences are. My ideal full-sized open-back headphone would have to have: 1) Cloth-based ear-cushion (like velour) 2) As neutral and accurate and detailed as possible, without any hint of unwanted coloration, hype, scoop...etc. 3) Very comfortable to wear over long period of time. The open-back cans I've been researching and trying to decide on are: AKG K702 - I like that it's got a detachable cable over the 701, since I'm a klutz and often trip over/pull out stuff by accident. I like that the AKG has auto-adjusting headband, since I'm a little annoyed with accidentally altering the headband size when I pull on the cans. I'm a little concerned that they might be too bright since some people have said that they sound a lot like the Beyerdynamic DT880, and I thought the DT880/770 were too bright. Some also said the bass is lacking, but I have to wonder if it's really lacking or it's simply not bloated/hyped. Sennheiser HD650 - I'm very comfortable with the Sennheiser signature sound, and I loved my HD555. Based on frequency response curve charts, it seems the HD650 has more prominent bass, but the treble is a bit rolled off just like the HD555? Sennheiser HD600 - I've tested it against the HD555 years ago, and they were so similar, with the HD600's treble a bit more clear. I would have no problem with the HD600 since I'm so comfortable with the HD555 already. I'm in China right now, and I can get the K702 for roughly $313, the HD650 for roughly $354, and the HD600 for roughly $315. My heart is leaning towards K702 since I'd like to try a different brand just to experience a wider variety, and also I like the auto-adjusting headband. I know all three cans sound amazing, are very comfortable, and all are worthy reference quality cans, so it's really hard to pick. Your advice?

recabled K702 with Phonitor/ XCANV8 / Headroom Max (Ultra Micro will do too)...

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/gra...80/index3.html
^^
Post # 33 for my take on the K701


If you found the E4C bright, then the stock K701 is brighter....

But I find the E4C to be really good with a proper amplifier.

Properly amped they sound way better than they do with an iPod.

HD800?? why don't you consider that?

 

[LingLing1337]

AKG K240DF, contest over. I wouldn't believe you if you said there were a more accurate pair of cans.

 

[lejaz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LingLing1337 /img/forum/go_quote.gif AKG K240DF, contest over. I wouldn't believe you if you said there were a more accurate pair of cans.

You will hear every bit of treble and great detailed mids, but no harshness, unless coming from your source. But they are not at all fatiquing. My only problem with them is the low end, which may be an amp issue. They are 600ohms and require proper amplification. A fellow head-fi'er tells me the low end improves with better amping. I prefer them to my monitor speakers except for the lows. Since the OP doesn't want to go with a dedicated amp, perhaps they wouldn't be the best choice.

 

[Lunatique]

Quote:

Originally Posted by LingLing1337 /img/forum/go_quote.gif AKG K240DF, contest over. I wouldn't believe you if you said there were a more accurate pair of cans.

Just curious--shouldn't the 701/702 be just as accurate s the older 240 design? It's not like AKG caved in to the popular mainstream taste of wanting a bloated mid-bass like Sennheiser did with the HD650? (I just read the PDF brochure on the HD650, and I'm kind of disgusted. Westone did the same thing with the W3 and I think it's a really bad direction these companies are taking. You shouldn't let the uninformed mass public with mediocre to bad taste decide for you--the experts, how your product should sound. If anything, the experts should produce what they think is the best and then educate the uninformed public.)

 

[Ashirgo]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunatique /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just curious--shouldn't the 701/702 be just as accurate s the older 240 design? It's not like AKG caved in to the popular mainstream taste of wanting a bloated mid-bass like Sennheiser did with the HD650? (I just read the PDF brochure on the HD650, and I'm kind of disgusted. Westone did the same thing with the W3 and I think it's a really bad direction these companies are taking. You shouldn't let the uninformed mass public with mediocre to bad taste decide for you--the experts, how your product should sound. If anything, the experts should produce what they think is the best and then educate the uninformed public.)

AKG's marketing motto is "Newer is better", which means that they usually discontinue their best designs in favor of more accessible and popular equipment.

HD 650 was meant to sound more "life like" with that additional boost in bass register. You have to apply some boost with headphones to compensate for their obvious "not being speakers", allowing them to come closer to the ideal... As it was at least supposed to be. The sad truth is that some people like that bass, some are offended. And it is not about popular mainstream taste, we are not talking about Bose or Skullcandy.

 

[lejaz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunatique /img/forum/go_quote.gif Just curious--shouldn't the 701/702 be just as accurate s the older 240 design? It's not like AKG caved in to the popular mainstream taste of wanting a bloated mid-bass like Sennheiser did with the HD650? (I just read the PDF brochure on the HD650, and I'm kind of disgusted. Westone did the same thing with the W3 and I think it's a really bad direction these companies are taking. You shouldn't let the uninformed mass public with mediocre to bad taste decide for you--the experts, how your product should sound. If anything, the experts should produce what they think is the best and then educate the uninformed public.)

I'd love to read a comparison of the 701 and the 240DF. FWIR, the lows will be a bit better on the 701, assuming proper amplification....perhaps even more clarity and detail than the DF. As far as neutrality, I would think they should be about equal. The DF was specificly engineered to be as flat/neutral as possible for engineering use. Comparing the DF to the RP21 you will be surprised to hear how much more treble and detail the DF gives you....but without any harshness.

 

[MrGreen]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cool_Torpedo /img/forum/go_quote.gif Looks like my ears are more sensitive to the treble peaks the DT880 and ER4S show than yours I find the 2KHz peak of the Etys really nasty. If a neutral sound correlates with a flat frequency response, the HD600 and K701 are more neutral then, though not that much in the mid-upper bass. In any case I agree that if you try to equalize the 5-10KHz area using the HD600, you might end up with a bright recording, which would be worsened by the listener using the Etys or Beyers hahaha. There are no perfect phones, and one must know his weapon's weaknesses to make a good job.

Just to clarify regarding the peak a in the Etys. It's rather odd to consider it "nasty", especially since there is a significant dip in human sensitivty at about 1.5-2.5khz, and a higher sensitivity due to the resonance of the auditory canal at around about 3000-4000 hz (which is shown as one of the lower values of the y axis in the graph).

By all senses of the word the ER4S is more neutral through an A weighting (i.e. what we actually hear)... Maybe you're just not used to hearing what "neutral" is (pretty common).

The graph stops before the third harmonic of the resonance of the auditory canal (which would be ~~13.5khz) which is where a truly neutral headphone should drop off to actually sound 'neutral'. The other headphones are dropping off before this (suggesting a roll-off for the sake of pleasantries rather than accuracy or being true to source). I'm not sure what is up with the Ety graph in this case (as to my ears they are slightly brighter than the DT880), however I suspect it may have somethign to do with differences in how you would measure an IEM to a fullsized headphone (as a quick scroll through some iem graphs at headroom show them all rolling off).

I'm not to sure on how headroom gets their graphs (because it should be much more jagged than what they are). I suspect they apply a smoothing mechanism which results in the curve up/curve down you see on the phones which puts the location and contours on each into doubt with using them as a reference tool imo.

The above is assuming that you are listening between 50 and 80 of course, and not 90-120 or 0-40.

*snip*

I wouldn't recommend comparing canalphone graphs to fullsize graphs, anyway.