[kai_yip]

You want your headphone to:
1. Show the truth performance of your equipment(good or bad)
or
2. Hide the wakeness of your equipment and enhance the sounding

Which headphone(s) is / are suitable for either 1 or 2?

 

[Braver]

I just my headphones to reproduce the music in the most convincing way, making the instruments sound as they're supposed to sound and just sound good to my ears. if it would stop showing me how bad the rest of my system is, I wouldn't be craving for an amp and a source upgrade

it's just impossible to show everything thats on the disc without also showing whatever it passes through as well.

so, hiding my systems (lack of) qualities, also hides aspects of the music. not acceptable. so I guess seeing the true performance of my equipment just comes with owning a good pair of headphones.

 

[dngl]

I just look for the headphone that draws me into the music the most. Accuracy be damned (well, to a point), I want to feel the music. And that's why I like my modded CD1700s more than my HD580s. Neither one shows my system's weaknesses but the basic characters of both are different.

 

[Xevion]

I don't mind if my headphones or speakers show my system's weakness.

What I care about most is probably comfort, tonal balance, and fautige. My ears seem to be easily tired/overepowered, particularly when listening to headphones, so I don't like a very bright sound.

If the side effect of having better tonal balance is a headphone that will play all the hissing too, Ill live with it. I need a CD player anyway. Imaging is really only important to me in Classical music, in other types I prioritize tonal balance as much more important.

Well, in actuality, I judge a headphone by how much I enjoy it. My HD600s have no major flaws, and their minor flaws are my sources

. The fact that they have no major flaws makes them very enjoyable.

My KSC-50s on the other hand, have manhy flaws. Comfort - not great but alright, also they can fall off easily. Sound - bass is somewhat boomy and not very deep compared to the HD600s, mids just sound off and high end extension seems to be lacking to me.

 

[Flumpus]

The best headphones I've heard for both of these tasks (sounding musical yet revealing) are definitely my Ety ER4S. Check my profile to see the headphones I've gone through trying to find something like these. I got these and everything else as blah...

Anyway, they're the most neutral, transparent, revealing, and musical headphones I've heard. I use them to hear any and all differences between different components, and they portray those differences better than anything I've heard. My guess is the only headphones better for this task would be something along the lines of the Sony R10s, AKG K1000s, or Stax Omega IIs...

 

[Mike Walker]

1-Tonal Balance...octave to octave, and note to note within each octave, particularly the midrange. I search for neutrality of tonal balance above all else. Failing that (and all 'phones do fail "absolute neutrality" to some degree), I seek SMOOTHNESS of response. Response variations are FAR easier (for me) to accept if they are smooth (low q) rather than sudden (high q).

2-Frequency extension. There's music down there, folks! True "sub-bass" response to at least 30hz, preferably to 20hz or below IS IMPORTANT! And it's not being a "dumb-bass" either! Most of the "bass" which so impresses "dumb-basses" is actually mid-bass in the 50-100hz octave. That "boom, boom, boom" stuff is not REAL bass! The "real bass" lives in the octave below 50hz! And it's IMMENSELY important not just for the musical content ("notes" and overtones), but for the information conveyed about the acoustic environment in which a recording is made!

3-Low distortion to high volumes. The reason is obvious, of course. A headphone (or any transducer) shouldn't add anything to the signal. It should only reproduce what's there.

4-Comfort. Although in order of absolute importance it seems (to me) to come in fourth, in truth you may as well put it in first place, because who the hell is going to wear uncomfortable headphones for extended listening sessions no matter how good they sound?

5-(For mixing ONLY in my production work, NOT for music reproduction for enjoyment) a slightly "analytical" quality, such as that provided by the Sony MDR-7506/V6. This slightly over-emphasized detail makes it much easier to hear tiny details in a mix. It does, however, slightly over-emphasize these details, which is why I prefer a more "laid-back" perspective (such as that provided by the Sennheiser HD-580 or HD-600) for simply listening to music for the fun of it. On an absolute scale I have no doubt that the HD-580 is more "accurate" than the MDR-7506. But I would never, NEVER use the HD-580 (or 600) as a monitoring device for critical recording/mixing!

 

[Beagle]

The weakest link in my stereo system is me.

Simply because I have no explanation why one day it can sound wonderful, then suck the next.

So my solution is this: If it sounds good, I listen to it; if it sounds bad, I go do something else, and wait for myself to get in the correct "mode".

Unfortunately, I usually feel like listening to music the most when I am unable to (at work, in a book store, visiting relatives)

In my mind, I compile a list of things I'd love to hear as soon as I get home, then when I get home, I pull them all out, then there's no time, and the next day I don't want to listen to those choices anymore.

It's frustratiing...

Anyway, I find Grado good for providing impact and getting intimate with the music. K501 for overall accuracy, presentation, detail and balance. HD600 is sort of a warm comfy too civilized K501 but I enjoy those too.

 

[dngl]

Mike Walker has some darn good criteria.

 

[a1leyez0nm3]

Walker says it all

 

[kerykeion]

Quote:

Walker says it all

Not really. There is no mention of the importance of high frequency.

 

[Mike Walker]

"Octave to octave" and "note to note" extension and smoothness includes ALL audible frequencies. But high frequency extension is hardly rare in headphones! (although high frequency NEUTRALITY is pretty rare...with peakiness causing certain tones to "jump forward", while others are "recessed"). Some VERY CHEAP headphones can reproduce sounds octaves ABOVE the limits of human hearing. Rare indeed is the headphone that properly reproduces the bottom octave...from 50hz down. Which is why I singled this out. Unlike high frequencies which are sometimes not reproduced in proper proportion (to the rest of the spectrum), but are nevertheless "there", deep bass is quite often missing altogether!

I am bothered by so called experts who say that this component or that one lacks "high frequency extension", when usually what they mean is that high frequencies are recessed. Recessed response doesn't have a damn thing to do with extension! It simply means that the frequencies in the "recess" are reproduced a few db lower in level than the average for all octaves. "Recessed" audio is still there. A headphone lacks "high frequency extension" only when due to a rolloff (gradual or steep), highs are no longer reproduced beyond a certain frequency, or are reproduced at such an extremely low level that they contribute nothing audible to the sonic "picture".

When I spoke of "extension" in the previous post, I meant at both ends of the frequency spectrum, but emphasized deep bass since, as stated earlier, it is TOO OFTEN completely missing in action! And to these ears, headphones with weak, or NO bottom octave extension are NOT high fidelity devices, no matter how well they may perform elsewhere (in the frequency spectrum).

Sorry Dude. I didn't realize it was necessary to state the RIDICULOUSLY obvious in order to avoid criticism, only the MERELY obvious!

 

[kwkarth]

I have to agree with Mike Walker’s criteria.

I would like to add that the reason that I would never use the HD-600’s for monitoring and mix-down for a couple reasons. The most obvious one is that they of course do not attenuate ambient noise at all, but additionally they’re slightly too bloomy in the bass and have an absolute hole in their reproduction around 6-8kHz. This is why many have characterized their sound as “polite.” Polite it may be, but one needs to be able to hear very clearly in that region for monitoring and mix-down.

Cheers!

 

[tktran]

Depends the purpose of your headphones, and your mission.

Listening for enjoyment?
Then I'd want my headphones to give me a damn good listening experience. Doesn't matter if they color the sound, veil the recording flaws, hide the weakness of my equipment etc.

Monitoring your mix?
Mike said it first. Unfortunately I can't get my hands on a pair of V6/7506, so I makedo with AKG 240 DF.

 

[Dusty Chalk]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike Walker I am bothered by so called experts who say that this component or that one lacks "high frequency extension", when usually what they mean is that high frequencies are recessed.

They're probably just speaking shorthand. I've always taken it to mean the same thing -- that they're rolled off enough to not contribute to the bigger picture. Quote:

Sorry Dude. I didn't realize it was necessary to state the RIDICULOUSLY obvious in order to avoid criticism, only the MERELY obvious!

Hmmm...speaking shorthand?

 

[kwkarth]

Agreed tktran. Your avatar pictures a pair of HD-25's though?? What's up with that??