What are the best headphones for mixing Electronic Music?
Jul 6, 2008 at 6:52 AM Post #31 of 67
Quote:

Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif
funny. i think the 750 are overall better listening experiences compared to the dt770 but for monitoring, i would choose the dt770. it is not as mid oriented and does not tame the raw bass. the dt770 show bass but they do not overblow it at all.

for mixing, truly dt770 are amazing but for listening, the 750 are so far ahead.




Please take a look at my reply to Philco (#25) and specifically my discussion of the different models of the DT770. Thank you.
 
Jul 6, 2008 at 7:01 AM Post #32 of 67
Quote:

Originally Posted by demoNMaCHiN3 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
thanks_for_the_info.jpg



Your welcome. Amen.
 
Jul 6, 2008 at 7:21 AM Post #33 of 67
Quote:

Originally Posted by DoomzDayz /img/forum/go_quote.gif
electronic music is the worst because many people master them on so many different types of headphones/speakers and some just end up sounding so bad and basically the opposite of what the headphones they were using to make it in order to compensate.

i'd imagine those mastered with dt770's would have little bass and lots of mids in peculiar places.



So, what I gather from your comment is that you think the DT 770's you've heard have heavy bass and diminished mids. Is that correct?
This whole discussion is causing me to be curious about the sounds of the models of the DT 770's I haven't heard.
Regarding the DT 770 I did hear, I remember thinking that the bass was slightly exaggerated (which actually sounded good on some recordings) but I don't remember thinking that it had a diminished mid frequency.
Interesting.
 
Jul 6, 2008 at 6:06 PM Post #35 of 67
Quote:

Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif
funny. i think the 750 are overall better listening experiences compared to the dt770 but for monitoring, i would choose the dt770. it is not as mid oriented and does not tame the raw bass. the dt770 show bass but they do not overblow it at all.

for mixing, truly dt770 are amazing but for listening, the 750 are so far ahead.



Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Pinna /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Please take a look at my reply to Philco (#25) and specifically my discussion of the different models of the DT770. Thank you.


Quote:

Originally Posted by shigzeo /img/forum/go_quote.gif
i did read your comments, that is why i posted.


Oh, OK, I understand now.
So, what I'm understanding from your comments is that you are of the opinion that the Pro 750 is more "mid oriented" and "tames the raw bass" more than the DT 770 does. And, that the Pro 750 is more apt to "overblow" the bass as compared to the DT 770 which simply will "show" the bass. And that you generally prefer the DT 770 for mixing but you prefer the Pro 750 for listening. Is that a correct understanding of your comments? If it is correct, this is most interesting because, in some respects, it indicates to me the probability that the different models of the DT 770 sound quite different from one another. I would like for you to clarify a few things, if you don't mind. What do you mean by "mid oriented"? Do you mean the mids are louder, or not louder but more prominent somehow, or what exactly? Also, please tell what you mean by "tames the raw bass".
In some ways, from what I gather from your comments, it seems as though you are saying that the model of the DT 770 you've heard is generally more accurate then the Pro 750. Is that correct? As I wrote previously, I've heard only one model of the DT 770 and specifically regarding the model I heard, this idea (of the DT 770 being more accurate than the Pro 750) would definitely not be true, IMO.
As I wrote previously, when I have the opportunity, I plan on doing some investigation of the other models of the DT 770 as the dialog in this thread has me very curious.
 
Jul 6, 2008 at 7:04 PM Post #36 of 67
Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Pinna /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Oh, OK, I understand now.
So, what I'm understanding from your comments is that you are of the opinion that the Pro 750 is more "mid oriented" and "tames the raw bass" more than the DT 770 does. And, that the Pro 750 is more apt to "overblow" the bass as compared to the DT 770 which simply will "show" the bass. And that you generally prefer the DT 770 for mixing but you prefer the Pro 750 for listening. Is that a correct understanding of your comments? If it is correct, this is most interesting because, in some respects, it indicates to me the probability that the different models of the DT 770 sound quite different from one another. I would like for you to clarify a few things, if you don't mind. What do you mean by "mid oriented"? Do you mean the mids are louder, or not louder but more prominent somehow, or what exactly? Also, please tell what you mean by "tames the raw bass".
In some ways, from what I gather from your comments, it seems as though you are saying that the model of the DT 770 you've heard is generally more accurate then the Pro 750. Is that correct? As I wrote previously, I've heard only one model of the DT 770 and specifically regarding the model I heard, this idea (of the DT 770 being more accurate than the Pro 750) would definitely not be true, IMO.
As I wrote previously, when I have the opportunity, I plan on doing some investigation of the other models of the DT 770 as the dialog in this thread has me very curious.



and what model dt770 was that?
 
Jul 6, 2008 at 7:04 PM Post #37 of 67
Peter, it doesn't matter if the cans are plugged straight into the mixing board. If you don't use crossfeed, you can't properly judge the phasing issues that exist between the left and right drivers.

Is it possible to mix on cans without crossfeed? YES! but getting good results will take much more time and care.

I guess the particular recordings you always refer to had not much bass content or at least, not many phase issues with the bass. I'm more into mainstream pop/rock music where I have to use lots of compression and effects to get the sound required for the genre. These effects induce phase changes that I need to hear properly, hence the use of crossfeed.

B0dhi has it right ! I suggest you read his reply again !

It doesn't matter if you have perfectly flat cans, indeed, flat cans are not recommended, because anyways, the transfer function between the head and the cans is not linear across the frequency range (as compared to speakers). Headphones NEED to be colored in order for us to hear them as flat. But that's another issue...

Also, seriously, do you work for Ultrasone ? Are you affiliated with them in any way ? I've seen very few "objective" people defend a particular brand so much.

I love Beyers, but I also quite like AKG. It's just that I think Beyers (I used DT770 and DT250 in studios) are more useful to point out the deficiencies. Not because they are flat, but because they are accurate, which is different. Accuracy is presenting things as they are, flatness is an even frequency response. Those are different things you should be aware of.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Pinna /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I'm not a recording engineer but I have been involved in recording production (among other musical related projects) over a period of several years. Here's what I know for certain about the two projects I mentioned in a previous post that were mixed with headphones: a crossfeed filter was never used. It might have had something to do with the idea that the headphones were plugged directly into the soundboard. Also, there are some situations where using crossfeed will actually diminish the sound of the bass and detract generally from the accuracy of the recording as it is heard during mixing through the headphones.
I'm not an expert in this particular field but what I've come to understand is that the Crossfeed emulation (you mentioned) involves signal processing which can be the cause of inaccuracy of the sound.



 
Jul 7, 2008 at 4:11 AM Post #38 of 67
Quote:

Originally Posted by Philco /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Peter, it doesn't matter if the cans are plugged straight into the mixing board. If you don't use crossfeed, you can't properly judge the phasing issues that exist between the left and right drivers.

Is it possible to mix on cans without crossfeed? YES! but getting good results will take much more time and care.

I guess the particular recordings you always refer to had not much bass content or at least, not many phase issues with the bass. I'm more into mainstream pop/rock music where I have to use lots of compression and effects to get the sound required for the genre. These effects induce phase changes that I need to hear properly, hence the use of crossfeed.

B0dhi has it right ! I suggest you read his reply again !

It doesn't matter if you have perfectly flat cans, indeed, flat cans are not recommended, because anyways, the transfer function between the head and the cans is not linear across the frequency range (as compared to speakers). Headphones NEED to be colored in order for us to hear them as flat. But that's another issue...

Also, seriously, do you work for Ultrasone ? Are you affiliated with them in any way ? I've seen very few "objective" people defend a particular brand so much.

I love Beyers, but I also quite like AKG. It's just that I think Beyers (I used DT770 and DT250 in studios) are more useful to point out the deficiencies. Not because they are flat, but because they are accurate, which is different. Accuracy is presenting things as they are, flatness is an even frequency response. Those are different things you should be aware of.



As I said previously, I am not a recording engineer. So, there are technical situations which would better be addressed by a sound engineer. The two tracks in which I was involved where the mix was done with headphones was Jazz music. Both of the tracks included, among other instruments, the String Bass. The rest of the instrumentation varied with the tracks. One was a big band with a vocalist and the other was a smaller group consisting of a rhythm section and 4 horns.
I have no doubt that a crossfeed filter would be necessary for mixing pop/rock music with headphones, especially considering the exaggerated effects that are utilized in some of these recordings. But, wouldn't it be true to say that the more accurate the headphone, the less need there is for crossfeed? I know that is an overly simple question that could probably be answered from several different perspectives, but is there not an element of truth to that idea?
No, I do not work for nor am I affiliated with Ultrasone in any way, other than, of course, owning a pair of Proline 750's. No, I just really like the Proline 750 and, when I have defended it in these forums, it has usually been because people have written negative things about it that, I know from a lot of personal experience, are absolutely not true or there were extenuating circumstances that affected the way they heard the Pro (Proline) 750's. In some situations for example, people were judging the Pro (Proline) 750's sound before it was "burned-in". In other situations, they did not have the headphones positioned correctly on their ears and some did not have the cable attached correctly. There were also some who just didn't like the sound of the S-Logic effect. I don't understand why but I accept it.
I couldn't name all of them but over a period of several years, I've heard several different headphones. About a year ago, I started attempting to make a deliberate study of the most recent "audiophile" headphones. Over the span of approximately 30 years, intermittently, I would be involved in different studio productions and during that time I heard a number of different headphones used mostly by musicians and vocalists in recording studios. I couldn't name the headphones I heard, for the most part, because I rarely paid attention to what brand of headphones I was using (I didn't own them). I do remember noticing the names on some of them such as Sennheiser and Koss but I couldn't, now, tell the model numbers because I didn't pay attention to that. My attitude was I could either hear clearly through them or I couldn't.
About 6 months ago, I was set to buy a pair of Beyerdynamic DT 770's. Overall, I found their sound, if not accurate, but pleasant. Then while at the store, I "discovered" the Ultrasone line and, to make a long story short (if that's possible at this point) decided I much preferred their sound.
I hope that answers your question.
Your production involvement in pop/rock music interests me because I've only once been involved in that genre. The situation included a vocalist (I won't tell you who) and it was a mess because this person didn't sing well and there were a lot of "special effects" such as pitch adjustment that were used on the track (not by me). The sessions were annoying, to say the least. The whole situation caused me to feel anxious to go back to the "purity" of jazz and classical recordings.

By the way, when I was adolescent, my family owned one of your televisions.
biggrin.gif
 
Jul 7, 2008 at 4:17 AM Post #39 of 67
Even the most accurate headphone on the planet will not be able to convey phase relationships from the left to the right channel without crossfeed.

Having that said, with or without crossefeed, it is TRUE that one should seek for the most accurate headphones available.

In my case I find headphones such as the DT770 more accurate than other popular headphones such as the Sennheiser HD600 because they present the sound as is, without much coloration. If the recording is not bassy, then it will not sound bassy on the DT770. If it is overly bassy, then it will be on the DT770. With headphones such as the K701, I fear one cannot know if something is overly bassy or not, hence I find this type of bass lean headphone less useful for my purposes.

What's your opinion of the Ultrasone Proline 2500 ? I'd rather get an open model than a closed model.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Pinna /img/forum/go_quote.gif
But, wouldn't it be true to say that the more accurate the headphone, the less need there is for crossfeed? I know that is an overly simple question that could probably be answered from several different perspectives, but is there not an element of truth to that idea?


 
Jul 7, 2008 at 6:18 AM Post #40 of 67
Quote:

Originally Posted by demoNMaCHiN3 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
and what model dt770 was that?


I will have to get back to you on the exact model number. I can tell you it had a volume control on the cable. Does that help or do they all have that?
 
Jul 7, 2008 at 6:19 AM Post #41 of 67
i wish i could update my opinion on the 2500 but i have not heard them in a long time.

by mid oriented i mean the sweet sort of sound that is a bit more hyped on just about every headphone than the dt770. they don't overblow anything. someone up there said the same thing. they are not the most controlled phones but they are not made for hifi, they seem to be made for monitoring whereas the 750 being so pleasant i would take as a listening phone but not as monitor.

both are favourites of mine. my dj1pro i would probably consider to be more accurate than the 750 though they do tweak up the treble a bit and the mids are sweetened up tidily.

my studio friends tend to prefer the dt770 if they are using phones for certain mixes.

the one i use is the older 80ohm pro model
 
Jul 7, 2008 at 6:21 AM Post #42 of 67
The DT770 that you tried are the drummer-oriented version of the DT770. They are reputedly "bad" sounding compared to the regular DT770-250 or DT770-80. They were purposely made bassier and with less highs in order for drummers to perform better. They are NOT meant for anyting else than that.

That might explain your opinion.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Peter Pinna /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I will have to get back to you on the exact model number. I can tell you it had a volume control on the cable. Does that help or do they all have that?


 
Jul 7, 2008 at 6:43 AM Post #43 of 67
Quote:

Originally Posted by Philco /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Even the most accurate headphone on the planet will not be able to convey phase relationships from the left to the right channel without crossfeed.

Having that said, with or without crossefeed, it is TRUE that one should seek for the most accurate headphones available.

In my case I find headphones such as the DT770 more accurate than other popular headphones such as the Sennheiser HD600 because they present the sound as is, without much coloration. If the recording is not bassy, then it will not sound bassy on the DT770. If it is overly bassy, then it will be on the DT770. With headphones such as the K701, I fear one cannot know if something is overly bassy or not, hence I find this type of bass lean headphone less useful for my purposes.

What's your opinion of the Ultrasone Proline 2500 ? I'd rather get an open model than a closed model.



I want you to know as I start writing this post that I am not, generally, an argumentative person. There is something odd going on here regarding our opinions of the DT 770.
I learned only very recently that there is more than one model of the DT 770. I have only heard one model of the DT 770. Someone else just asked me which model that was and I'm not sure but I will try to find out. It had a volume slider control on the cable, if that helps to identify it (all the DT 770 models may have that, I don't know).
The one model I heard was somewhat more "bassy" sounding as compared to the Pro 750 and certainly compared to the AKG K701 (obvious, I know). It (the DT 770) also sounded slightly "muffled" compared to the other headphones. I can only guess that the other models somehow sound vastly different than the model I heard. I don't know. I remember that I thought it was a pleasant sounding headphone that presented a nice relaxing sound. It did not seem accurate to me, in the sense of a comparison of it's sound to that of a studio monitor. Whereas the Pro 750's sound seems much more accurate in this regard. When I have the opportunity, I will try to investigate these other models because it is hard for me to accept the idea that our opinions are so different about this headphone.
I like the Pro 2500 very much. I prefer the sound of the Pro 750 but the Pro 2500, to my ears, is a very close second. Have you seen MaloS review and description of the sound of the Pro 2500? It is excellent and very much mirrors my opinion. Here's the link to that review:

http://www.head-fi.org/forums/f4/rev...2500-a-252836/
 
Jul 7, 2008 at 6:55 AM Post #44 of 67
Quote:

Originally Posted by Philco /img/forum/go_quote.gif
The DT770 that you tried are the drummer-oriented version of the DT770. They are reputedly "bad" sounding compared to the regular DT770-250 or DT770-80. They were purposely made bassier and with less highs in order for drummers to perform better. They are NOT meant for anyting else than that.

That might explain your opinion.



So, apparently, this "drummer-oriented version" is the only one with a volume control on the cable? Interesting. That does explain things. I thought it sounded OK, I didn't think it sounded "reputedly bad". The slightly muffled, somewhat "bassy" sound was kind of relaxing, actually.

By "drummer-oriented", does that mean that the drummer has to be asian to use these headphones?
biggrin.gif
tongue.gif
rolleyes.gif


Sorry, it was a pun that I couldn't resist.

Thanks for helping me straighten this out.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top