Headphone Suggestions - Take 3!

[Empathy]

Email the guys at headphones.com.au and ask them if they will help you out with your situation. Tell them you're making a blind purchase and highlight the fact that you're looking for an extremely specific sound; in the store they'll give you a 30 day grace period to return your purchase for store credit, you might be able to get the same thing dealing with them online.

 

[Ermz]

Thanks mate, that's good in theory, but their prices are awful, and dealing with the whole subsequent delivery charges on further pairs of cans is just not really a hassle I'm looking for at the moment. I do really appreciate the suggestion though.

Sort of leaning toward the K-702s, but I'm almost positive based on what people here have said that I'll dislike them. Problem is that I can't seem to find a set in a sub-ridiculous price range that are all-rounders.... suppose it's much like monitors. You only really get a decent set after forking out $3k+

 

[Agonal]

Yamaha RH10MS headphones are very good for detailed mixing. I like the ATH M50's as well but those do have an exaggerated mid range while the RH10MS's do not. The Yamaha phones are a little bright and scooped sounding but I tend to make better mix decisions with them that sound good on all systems. I read a reviewer compare them to NS-10's. Makes sense because if you get your mix sounding good on these it will sound good on all systems much like NS-10's. The best thing about them is they are cheap i got mine for 100 bucks, definitely worth it.

 

[Strachan of D]

Im loving my set of sennheiser HD25's good thing is every part of them is replacable and the sound great

 

[gabriel g.]

found an artical about headphones on the thomann homepage.
They messured a lot with a neumann dummy head for frequency balance, impulse behaviour and phase.

I was shocked when I saw the frequence pics......linear my ass

The beyerdynamic DT-990 PRO cut out extremly well.

Its german but check out the pictures:

http://www.thomann.de/de/prod_review_9056_AR_217575.html

click the "pdf jetzt anzeigen" bottom and you download the file, and can check out the pics

 

[jipchen]

^ Yeah I was about to post this, too. You can also see why I feel the M50 is crap compared to my AKG K-271 and the Beyerdynamic DT 990 Pro. Speaking of which, the 990 Pro is indeed a very good pair of headphones. Balanced but with a little more low end than most AKG headphones. Soundwise, the 271 were the closest thing to how my Adam S3A sound in the treated controlroom, though. I have yet to thoroughly test the K-702 in my room but from what I heard when I tested them (not in the studio), they are the best headphones I've heard.

I'm surprised you didn't like the 990 Ermz, but I guess the Opals sound very different and you want something closer.

 

[Ermz]

Thanks guys. I may go in and try the 990 Pros again. They're good on paper... the impedance works for me too.

Those Denons seem to have a bloody FLAT low-end in every test though. Shame they are so low impedance I literally won't be able to use them at all.

 

[Ermz]

Just bought the DT 990 Pros.... will report back. Have a perfect mix opportunity to try them for critical low-end balancing.

 

[Wisheraser]

I have both of them and, honestly, I greatly prefer the M50's. To me, the Beyer's are both tubby in the low mids and piercing in the highs. This makes them great for exposing any trace of sibilance and bass/kick overlap, but horrible if you're looking for midrange clarity. I find the M50's much more balanced overall.

 

[Ermz]

... hooray . Spose I'll find out for myself soon.

 

[Melb_shredder]

I have both of them and, honestly, I greatly prefer the M50's. To me, the Beyer's are both tubby in the low mids and piercing in the highs. This makes them great for exposing any trace of sibilance and bass/kick overlap, but horrible if you're looking for midrange clarity. I find the M50's much more balanced overall.

Good thing he will own both after this lol.. shouldn't have an issue! maybe that's a good thing too? Being able to work on the strengths of either etc...

 

[jipchen]

I have both of them and, honestly, I greatly prefer the M50's. To me, the Beyer's are both tubby in the low mids and piercing in the highs. This makes them great for exposing any trace of sibilance and bass/kick overlap, but horrible if you're looking for midrange clarity. I find the M50's much more balanced overall.

Interesting because I also have the M50s and the 990s. And both my ears and (more objective than any listener) the frequency response tell a whole different story. My concern with the M50 was actually the very tubby, muddy and MUCH overpowered low mids, in comparison to AKG K-271 mkIIs, Beyerdynamic DT 990 Pro, and the old HiFi but pretty good K-301 (not the current headphones labelled 301) - and of course my monitors.
But I guess what's balanced, honest and still good sound to everyone differs a lot since the M50s are so popular on here yet I hate them.

 

[Wisheraser]

Do you mean this frequency response?

Looks like much more low mids and highs on the Beyers than the M50s to me. In fact, it looks like there is a 10 dB difference between 2k and 10/0.2k on the Beyers. When quickly switching between them, that scooped high mid/exaggerated low mid sound of the Beyers is VERY apparent.


edit: Neither of them are all that accurate though of coarse. I'm eager to try out a pair of Denon AH-D5000's one of these days. Their frequency response seems almost too good to be true.

 

[jipchen]

Do you mean this frequency response?

[picture]

Looks like much more low mids and highs on the Beyers than the M50s to me. In fact, it looks like there is a 10 dB difference between 2k and 10/0.2k on the Beyers. When quickly switching between them, that scooped high mid/exaggerated low mid sound of the Beyers is VERY apparent.


edit: Neither of them are all that accurate though of coarse. I'm eager to try out a pair of Denon AH-D5000's one of these days. Their frequency response seems almost too good to be true.

Nope, I haven't seen the graphic before. I don't know how the frequency response you posted was measured, but I have seen the frequency curves tested in a professional lab by a german audio-engineering magazine - also linked in the article Gabriel posted one page before this one.

Left one is the 990, the one on the right is the m50.
Sorry for the really small and crappy picture, couldn't find a better one and scanning the article didn't get me a better version. The article also said the M50 has a +8db emphasis from 80Hz on, and it has phase issues visible because of the channel differencies.

I was not trying to be an ass, just stating my experience of course and I was being serious when I said we all have different opinions and expectations on what's an honest / linear / balanced headphone - sorry if that seemed like sarcasm.

 

[Wisheraser]

S'all good man. The 2 graphs for the M50's look fairly similar (cept the German one seems to have more detail). It's amazing how different the 2 graphs for the Beyers are though. Going by the German one, you'd think the Beyers would be nothing but treble. They seem plenty bassy over here. Strange. I find the upper mid scoop that my 990's have is enough to actually push the guitars back in the mix quite a bit. I guess we'll have to wait for Ermz's verdict to break this stalemate.

Here's the site where I got the graph: http://www.headphone.com/learning-center/build-a-graph.php

Apparently they use a pricey head mic (must be that Neumann head mic) and take 200 samples across the spectrum to make the freq. response plots. They also have charts for harmonic distortion, degree of isolation across the spectrum, as well as a couple other things for a shit tonne of different headphones. It's a "go to" site for this cat.

 

[Skaldir]

The thing is you its almost impossible to measure frequency response of a headphone. Its not like with a speaker, because of the ears (your ears), the distance and everything.
So I wouldn't give too much on graphs in the case of headphones. Must be tried by yourself in the end.

 

[Ermz]

They just arrived, and I've taken to burning them in.

Have to say at this stage though - if after the burn-in these don't attenuate the sibilance frequencies by at least 10dB, I'll be passing them right along. The way they sound out of the box is borderline intolerable.

Also, their low-end frequency response presently sounds much closer to what Wisheraser posted. There is a huge bump across the midbass frequencies. They are NOT flat down there.

 

[Wisheraser]

I think the peaky high end has subdued a bit since I got mine. Either that or I've just gotten used to it. They were downright painful when I first got them.

 

[KillFrenzy]

Really, consider the Denons even though they are closed back and low impedance. I have the D2000 but I'd love to have the D5000 if I could afford those. They blow the M50 out of water in detail, soundstage and you'll never hear that annoying mid-high the M50 has. If the D2000 is that good, I can only imagine the D5000.
I tested all Beyers and didn't like any of them. Nasty highs and strage mid-lows.
Try to find the Shure 940. Based on a quick first impression, it's a very nice set of cans for only about $250

 

[Ermz]

I'd love to try the Denons but I literally don't think I'd be able to feed them from anything. That's the biggest hurdle there.

I've not got great feelings about these Beyers. They're sounding really hollow and weird. I think I should've had more conviction in my own conclusions during testing, and not have bought into some graphs that mean nothing.