Latest Thread Images

Upgrading to a new pair of cans, and need the most neutral and accurate available. Please advise.
Nov 8, 2009 at 6:45 PM Post #16 of 48
Huh? The frequencies where the human ear is most sensitive is the range between 1.5 and 4.5KHz, as demonstrated by the Fletcher-Munson studies and curves:

clip_image010.jpg


That peak at 2KHz is way more annoying than anything above 7KHz and below 80Hz. To my ears it is, and you won't argue that
wink.gif
 
Nov 8, 2009 at 8:05 PM Post #18 of 48
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.


joe grado HP1000. easily
 
Nov 8, 2009 at 8:20 PM Post #19 of 48
Quote:

Originally Posted by rhythmdevils /img/forum/go_quote.gif
joe grado HP1000. easily


Highly debatable. And completely dependent on how you define "accurate". If it is "showing all available/possible/existing details", then it would be true. Unfortunately, it is uncommon for live performances to exhibit that level of detail. And hence the verdict: overdetailed.
 
Nov 8, 2009 at 9:11 PM Post #21 of 48
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 should try the DT48/CD900ST/K1000/HP1/HD800 before making such a statement.. Never heard the 240DF, but I know they are one of the most accurate headphones ever created, but for you to say most accurate, you need to experience more headphones known for accuracy & neutrality..
 
Nov 9, 2009 at 12:10 AM Post #22 of 48
Quote:

Originally Posted by Ashirgo /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Highly debatable. And completely dependent on how you define "accurate". If it is "showing all available/possible/existing details", then it would be true. Unfortunately, it is uncommon for live performances to exhibit that level of detail. And hence the verdict: overdetailed.


overdetailed? have you ever heard them? That is exactly the opposite of what I would expect anyone to say. Because their magic lies in the fact that they are so linear, they do not have the peaks in treble that make most phones sound extremely detailed. like the k701, the audio technicas, denons. this means that there is a wide dynamic range of detail.

No other headphone (should mention that I haven't heard the dt48) is so revealing of recording quality, source, amp, etc. They almost don't exist.
 
Nov 9, 2009 at 12:34 AM Post #24 of 48
Quote:

Originally Posted by lejaz /img/forum/go_quote.gif
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.


It's not only a better bass, it's the resolution of the sound, and the sound stage. The sound of the K701/2 is very depend on the your amp.
wink.gif
 
Nov 9, 2009 at 3:18 AM Post #26 of 48
The K240DF is OK but not great. It lacks real-life treble sparkle and extension and isn't very resolving.
 
Nov 9, 2009 at 4:16 AM Post #27 of 48
I think I get were you are going with this.

I'm by no means a pro, but I do some small engineering work from time to time. I've also had the luxury to listen to a wide range of closed headphones as well as audiophile systems.

I've come to the conclusion that you could have two headsets. One for tracking, ENG, monitoring and another for musical enjoyment and composition.

Many studio monitoring headphones can be fatiguing (MDR-7506 for example) but they have their uses.

I used to have an HD-555, and I wish I kept it for its enjoyment/comfort factor. It was by no way a neutral headphone. Ideally, you'd have an HD-800 along with an amp. Of course, thats $$$. I have heard of studios using the HD-650/600/580 series. Although more veiled than the 555/595, they are more dynamic. these seem like the natural choice. I don't think you could go wrong with the K701/702 either. All are great headphones.

Sounds like you have a great setup. I don't even have studio monitors anymore (moved to a condo). For now, my primary cans are the SRH840. I would recommend them if you are looking for a premium studio monitor. They are also very enjoyable and I will be using them at work like I used my HD555s. Everything I liked about my HD25 and HD555, the Shure has it... its quite the can considering its price.
 
Nov 9, 2009 at 4:31 AM Post #28 of 48
Quote:

Originally Posted by Lunatique /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I should mention that I'm trying to keep the budget around $300~$400. 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.


The Adams S3-A will be your monitors?
 
Nov 9, 2009 at 6:26 AM Post #29 of 48
Quote:

Originally Posted by Donald North /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The K240DF is OK but not great. It lacks real-life treble sparkle and extension and isn't very resolving.


I can't imagine wanting more treble than the DF gives you. But it's possible I don't hear the super high frequencies well. They have better highs than my monitor speakers, and as far as amount goes, they have way more treble than almost all the headphones I've heard...far more than the RP21 for example. To my ears, any more treble would be very unrealistic. But maybe you're referring more to treble extension, not amount. It seems very realistic to my ears, which I admit may be flawed. But I've been a musician for over 30 years and they sound very true to the way live acoustic instruments (in jazz, for example) sound to me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top