Yamaha hph mt220 thread (Merged)
Sep 11, 2015 at 3:29 AM Post #1,982 of 3,295
   
No, what I meant was that you very clearly stated that you do not want your audio gear (for listening purposes) to be accurate; you want it to be colored, to produce an inaccurate, but pleasing (to you) sound. Therefore, using the listed definition, you are not an audiophile in the sense of wanting high-fidelity reproduction of the recording. I am not saying anything else, and certainly not claiming that you are incompetent in the studio or anything like that. But personally, I don't see the point of studios doing everything they do if the end user isn't going to hear what they do accurately.


"Therefore"
"listed definition"
You define yourself by an online definition?
 Stop being so silly and go and enjoy your headphones. No ill will here, mate.
Valves are nice for producing music - mids and lows distort in a way you can only witness on an oscillograph but they make this tiny "character" change that we as humans like. Like vinyl is compared to CDs. You know? Which one is coloured? They both are Neither are real they are a representation. The real thing is long gone and sounded NOTHING like the recording NOTHING AT ALL like it.
 
I'm pretty bored talking about this now mate.
 
Seeya.
 
Off to enjoy this
http://www.slunq.com/temps/SheenaRingo-song.mp4.zip
 
(the track that wouldn't play in USA)
 
It'll certainly be challenging for many systems or would be if I could find a Flac of it anywhere. Meanwhile, enjoy the MUSIC not the bloody encoding - it's good enough to enjoy it at youtube's 192k I think.
 
By Shina Ringo, no idea what it's called (that'd help for buying it)
 
I tell you, this track... I hear very few faults on the 220 wonderful, fulfilling.
I have a whole load of fun on the Mofi even more so.
Bit bored on the nice but bassy MM400.
Why is it way over there? on the Fidelio X2.
AArrgh It's inside my ears! on the T51p.
Jeez I thought beats were bassy but at least we have nice highs, on the UE600.
 
I'm only listening to an mp3 192 though. It doesn't cripple your music, just not ideal.
 
I'm sure a decent audio of this will be mind blowing.
 
Sep 11, 2015 at 3:35 AM Post #1,983 of 3,295
ANYWAY.....MT220....listening experiences and impressions......go!

Lor, is this what you use?

 
Sep 11, 2015 at 3:37 AM Post #1,984 of 3,295
  I answered otherweise back up there, but do you actually hear a difference between a 500 dollar amp and a 1500 dollar amp? Just curious because I want to get something decent rather than my audio interface for listening, which I don't do much. If so, where does the difference stop in terms of headphones? I mean at what point does say, a sennheiser momentum on ear (the crappy one) not sound any different?

 
 There are slight differences-mainly to soundstage, but they're not the overwhelming spectacular differences that people are claiming. There are some amps that sound a bit thinner, while others a bit warmer, but as far as actual "quality", when you get past all that things are very similar. The big differences are going to come from power output. 
 
Take the £5000 Technics HA5050H for instance, while it certainly sounded great, it wasn't noticeably better than my £600 Audeze Deckard with the same headphones. On the other hand, when I'm directly comparing the Deckard with my £120 Aune T1 mk2, the sound quality is extremely close, only distinguishable by the smoother highs of the T1.(probably due to the tube) And at Can Jam London this year at the Schiit Desk, Schiit had Ether C (£1500) and Ether (£1500) on their Ragnarok (£1400) while they had the Audioquest Nighthawk (£499) on their £200 Asgard. Problem with me though is i have an Asgard and I know how it sounds with other headphones, and the Nighthawk sounded spectacular, so I bought that sucker on the spot. But that seemed to be the trend with the high end amps; HE1000's (£2999) on almost all of them. Put the same headphones on the lower priced amps and the main difference is going to be power output and the ability to power sensitive headphones.
 
Sep 11, 2015 at 3:39 AM Post #1,985 of 3,295
  i think you two got off topic. End this, please...

 
I've been trying to. Just one more point to make...
 
  Like vinyl is compared to CDs. You know? Which one is coloured? They both are Neither are real they are a representation. The real thing is long gone and sounded NOTHING like the recording NOTHING AT ALL like it.

 
If the recording/master is digital, then an audibly identical (not colored at all in the context of deviation in sound) copy can be put on a CD (or download), which is vastly technically superior to vinyl in every way. But yes, the recording can never be a copy of real life.
 
Lor, is this what you use?

 
Those look like the angled NVX XPT100 pads I mentioned and used to own, but have not used on the MT220.
 
Sep 11, 2015 at 3:43 AM Post #1,986 of 3,295
They look just like the Alpha Pads I put on my MT220's that increased the soundstage.
 
Sep 11, 2015 at 3:48 AM Post #1,988 of 3,295
Yeah, Grizzly has images at the beginning of this thread with the Alpha pads fitted and they are EEeeeeeenormous!
 
Sep 11, 2015 at 4:10 AM Post #1,989 of 3,295
   
I've been trying to. Just one more point to make...
 
 
If the recording/master is digital, then an audibly identical (not colored at all in the context of deviation in sound) copy can be put on a CD (or download), which is vastly technically superior to vinyl in every way. But yes, the recording can never be a copy of real life.
 

*YAWN*
 
Done, right?
 
Sep 11, 2015 at 4:20 AM Post #1,990 of 3,295
  I've been trying to. Just one more point to make...
 
If the recording/master is digital, then an audibly identical (not colored at all in the context of deviation in sound) copy can be put on a CD (or download), which is vastly technically superior to vinyl in every way. But yes, the recording can never be a copy of real life.

BTW it's not 'a point to make', it's 'something to say'. Big difference. Like solid state and valves, respectively :wink:
 
Who says it's recorded or mastered digitally? Many people don't do that - the sound is HARSH so we have colouration even there.
 
I did mention a while back it'd be fun to do a remix which is EXACTLY what the mics recorded for everyone over a few days and no one touches anything. That'd be too funny. Especially Metallica who are up th.. well whatever.
 
I hope we are done on this now.
 
I like valves, you don't, I see benefits, you see compromise, I say potato, you say potato, no one on this planet says potaaato...
 
Sep 11, 2015 at 4:37 AM Post #1,993 of 3,295
   
Judging from photos I've seen, the Alpha Pads are way larger.


Aren't they the just the hm5 pads? Or, failing that resolution, I thought Mr Speakers made 2 different pads - one angled and one not. I dunno which is which though. Alpha = normal pads? Then the other one much thicker at the back? Or did I dream this? Yeah exciting dreams here.
 
Sep 11, 2015 at 4:40 AM Post #1,995 of 3,295
  Aren't they the just the hm5 pads? Or, failing that resolution, I thought Mr Speakers made 2 different pads - one angled and one not. I dunno which is which though. Alpha = normal pads? Then the other one much thicker at the back? Or did I dream this? Yeah exciting dreams here.

 
That Sonic Electronix photo looks like the angled NVX XPT100 pads. The HM5 pads are by Brainwavz. All I know about MrSpeakers pads is that the Alpha Pads are larger and that some people say they make the MT220 sound better.
 
https://mrspeakers.com/shop/3-accessories/alpha-pads-genuine-lamb-leather/
 
There don't seem to be any options; just one version.
 
MrSpeakers do have two different pads, though. The other is called the Leather Dog Pads.
 
https://mrspeakers.com/shop/3-accessories/leather-dog-pads-pair-for-any-mad-dog-with-dog-pads-or-t50rp-applications/
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top