Finally got a chance to hear the HD800, it certainly has the best soundstage I have heard in a headphone.

 just another dynamic, otherwise.

Well, even  if I overlook the sibilant female vocals and overall lean signature, there is that typical dynamic 'grain' from top to bottom that I find hard to ignore

A lot of that grain is from upstream gear. Stats cover it up. HD800 also beats ALL stats on detail retireval and plankton. You're just hearing a less than stellar upstream rig.

Where stats stop scaling, the HD800 keeps going.

If I felt any stat could compete with resolution and detail retrieval I would have sold them for a 009 long ago. I didn't cuz I couldn't give up the information on the tracks.

The only thing I think the 009 or some planars do better is low bass resolution and texture which is where the HD800 distorts and rolls off.

 the rest is subjective preference like 'out of the way'/'ethereal' presentations.

Disagree with basically everything Anax has said RE: HD800 vs stats.  If stats cover up the grain of upstream gear, you'd think there would be a single time I didn't hear grain on HD800.  You won't hear it unless you're acclimated to listening to planars for a while.  There are amps that make the HD800 more tolerable, but I've yet to hear this magic amp that gets rid of the grain.  A huge part of the HD800 scaling has as much to do with its difficult load as anything.  The headphone-amp coupling dynamic has so much to do with what ends up pairing well together and I rarely see it mentioned anywhere.

 And don't get me wrong, the HD800 certainly has way less grain than most dynamics, but it's still obviously a character of the headphones.  The HD800 FR also lends itself to sounding "detailed" which often tricks noobs (not that Anax falls into this category, I know he knows the difference).  EQ both headphones to the same FR to make it more obvious which has more true detail.  A voice coil will never be able to compete with such a thin membrane in digging up detail, what the HD800 has going for it is an excellent cup design.

 I don't hear grain with stats, I hear some grain with HD800, I hear lots of grain with DT48.  Is it more likely that the DT48 is a grain digging monster (ie more capable somehow) or that the grain is inherent to those drivers?  There's a correlation I hear between amount of grain in a dynamic and technical capability of that dynamic.

anax,I did the comparison on a setup I know fairly well and the limitations. My home rig is better and would have suited the hd800 better.But I am sorry to say that I was fairly certain that hd800 driver is grainier than the best planars I have heard.

 I know, just saying that I knew the limitations of that setup and even taking that into account, it did have that grain.I didn't comment on det ail retrieval but I would expect it to do well in that area since it is probably closest to critical damping I have heard in a stock headphone. A bit overdone but close.

Agree there can be a correlation because if that's the case it's revealing more of a digital upstream's inadequcies. I come from the opposite perspective where I hear grain on certain tracks with the HD800 and far less on other well contructed tracks. At the same time the grain tends to go away with some of the more popular stats and planars even when it's in the recording. Plus I think dynamics can cover up grain too. Some fabled Sonys and even IEMs can sound smooth but it's just as colored as is having grain. It's just more pleasing. Best way to tell is run a ToTL HD800 digital rig versus a vinyl rig and compare. The grain always goes away w/ the HD800 on vinyl. On the stats being aclaimed here (ESP950 IS grainy) the difference will be less notable if at all. We've heard stats on the best rigs out there including DIY T2, BHSE, Electra and Liquid Gold, etc., etc. None of them can extract information as well as the HD800's ring radiator from the  upp mid- bass onward. Even some of our CSD's posted from way back point to that if you know where to look at them. So there might be a quantifiable objective correlation to what some of us here wrt the HD800 v. stats/planars. It really doesn't matter to me which people enjoy more, I'm just commenting based on my experience and interpretation of those experiences. As always, like n3rdling and many of us have always said, the HD800 is NOT a plug and play affair. It's plug and pray.

Well, usually goes away with vinyl, I'm not an authority enough on vinyl to promise how well a vinyl record was mastered or what phono someone is using.

My .02C, YMMV, yada yada. If absence of grain is a priority, it only makes sense to not get a HD800 as it's not going to do any favors for a poorly mastered track. For dynamics I can say my old Logitech speakers are devoid of grain, tape hiss, background noise and all that yet are dynamics.

No, there's plenty of amps and DACs that have grain that would not show any worthy IMD. I don't buy that as a comprehensively accurate and universal observation.

Yeah, that thin membrane is part of the problem which is why you don't that fullness and presence which IS on the recording. Regardless, it's probably irrelevant to the digging deeper resolution factor. Speed isn't everything and can be a detriment IME if it has to give something up to get that fast. I still haven't heard a single planar speaker compete with the best dynamics in that regard either, so it's not just a headphone disucssion.

 not being resolving enough is a good way to mask something.

 It's a good way to make amps and DACs sound similar or the same.

Yeah when we did side by side, the 009 on the DIY T2 got rick rolled for inner resolution and plankton by the HD800 on a pimped out BA with proper tube selection. It's really one of those things some might need to have another point out to them in A/B the first time.

I hear the SR009 and HD800 as being more or less on par with each other in terms of detail retrieval. Bigger issue with the stats are certain macro qualities that they give up. Mainly realistic bass dynamics and overall "authority". The ethereal coloration is real

Resolution whores will disagree with me of course. People who listen to small overly compressed jazz bands at 30dB will also disa gree.

The Stax are a very much an "audiophile" sound. It's super clean but it's a synthetic clean

 At the same time I do think the HD800 might be adding a slight grain itself. So I get what our planar friends are trying to say. It's hard to be certain.

By all means, the HD800 isn't perfect, that's why I mod them. Tastes are tastes, but as a resolution whore I'd easily ditch them for a 009 if I felt those were superior in that regard. I've never been able to match the HD800 with any stat in that regard. That's all I can say IME.

 Agreed. It's real clean and fake clean at the same time. Have to give it some credit.

 Really two or three different things going on we are talking about as one.

 I can pretty much remove grain from an HD800 just by cramming as many teflon caps into a cricuit as possible...and pay the price for doing so. But that's crazy talk, all caps sound the same so.....

 Actually on OJs, point. I would say the HD800 is a worse performer for detail retrieval than most flagship stats at low volumes. It needs some juice to open up among other things. So if you listen at a delicately low volume, I would not recormmend the HD800 unless the air and space are that appealing to you.

I agree to a point. I've always said all phones are colored. I just find IME the planars and stats will cover up more than the HD800 would add under optimal conditions. For example, I can tweka the acoustics of the driver or change upstream gear to mitigate that or even make it negligible depedning on the recording. I can't tweak the planars or stats to unhide what IMHO is there on the track.

Like I said, I've heard grain with every HD800 system.  That includes super amps like the BA as well as vinyl rigs.  Good/great amps can certainly make the HD800 signature more enjoyable to my ear, but that small layer of grain still lays on top of everything (all frequencies for all recordings for all amps for all sources) that I've used them with.  The DT48 example still sticks out to me as a good argument I haven't seen addressed.  If the HD800 has this magical ability to resolve the grain of upstream faults, then does that mean the DT48/iBuds/airplane HPs/etc are way better at resolving this information?  In general, the shittier the HP, the more grain I hear.  In the case of the HD800 it's nowhere near as severe as basically any dynamic, but it's still not like a stat.  I'd like to know if another primarily stat user hears what I'm talking about.

I don't have much experience with high end stats but in general I would agree with the assessment that less capable drivers tend to have higher grain

sure, less capable drivers tend to have more grain. But you can also have a less capable, lo-fi 'phone that subtracts all information/dynamics/life out of the music. Maybe something like an Ety MC5. Or maybe an AKG 701. You can't claim those are somehow more capable drivers because they're amazingly grain-free

Like I said, you mostly heard those with grainy DACs too.

 Lol, I don't need to answer an equivocation about ibuds. That's beneath a response.

007 is fucking boring, sorry. I just pissed off 80% of the stat world but I don't care. Fucking hate it.

My answers to the last couple of comments can be found in my earlier comments. If you don't want to read them or think about what I said and respond directly then nothing else i can say will make a difference. Whatever makes people happy.

 Of course I'm open to any empirical data to show the HD800 driver quality is on par with iBuds. Specificly pointing to the grain metric of any CSD or graph comparing the HD800, iBuds and 009 would be more than welcome.

I've heard HD800 grain on really high end vinyl rigs tho.

 I think it's kind of an overgeneralization to say all vinyl rigs smooth information.

I didn't say they smooth. I implied they are less prone to digital hash is what I beleive I said.

If people don't feel Stax or some planars impart a synthetic smoothness that can color all recordings too then we'll just agree to disagree.

 Perfect example. Last weekends meet. EC phono had pretty much little to nil grain. Schiit Mani was drier and grainier using the same rig. If the HD800 is a grain monster, where did it go on the EC?

And how resolving was that EC phono? When I went in the HD800 was plugged into some sony cdp and a Yamaha NS?550 amp and it sounded less grainy than on the dac/amp we took there but on that sony/yamaha combo one hardly make out the differnce between a lcd-2 and the hd800 apart from bass quantity. Do you guys think that I should have rather kept that as a reference since it seemed to obliterate some of hd800 grain.

 Also nobody's compared hd800 to ibuds, n3rdling was clearly referring to the trio of dt48.ibud/airplane hp as an example of the grainiest headphones he has heard.

And I should probably reiterate here that regardless of a drivers' technical capability(which IMO is related to level of grain), its ability to extract information is ultimately limited by how close to being critically damped it is.The ability to start and stop when the signal commands it.

The HD800 is exceptional in regard that it makes the the best use of a driver which IMHO is not as technically capable as the best planars.

The current ongoing discussion would be much more useful if it didn't center on an inherently ambiguous term, "grain." I have no idea what anyone means by that term, and i assume that everyone who uses that term has something slightly different in mind.

Right Paul, there's like 2-3 different types of grain so it can be confusing as to which and where one looks fo r it. I also agree with Romy that the 007 is by far the more agreeable and that's the primary reason most people like it. I think I get better micro and macro performance from the 009 which makes it more involving to me despite being less agreeable under less than optimal conditions. I really don't think grain being discussed here is inherent to dynamics as I've heard it with stats and orthos too so not sure where that idea comes from. I've also heard dynamics and IEMs sound synthetically smoothed over like some Stax and orthos too. I'd say those smooth phones have a similar timbre to something like a Shure IEM (e.g. 500). My modded HD800 is closest to my converted or a demo UERM where it has more 'texture'. I call it the mannequin effect. I think it looks ideal and pretty on first blush but not quite accurate or real. Missing the warts, scars and other imperfections. Suffice to say, if you like that effect the HD800 probably isn't the best candidate to start with.

Anax, those DACs being 'grainy' doesn't really matter.  As I said, I've heard it with every rig I've ever plugged a HD800 into, which far precedes any mini meets we've had...and you know I barely listen to anything at meets anymore anyways. :p  The HD800 was in consumers' hands the day before CJ LAX and I made note of the grain in my impressions that weekend.  Through SS/tube/DS/R2R/vinyl/reel the grain has always been present.  As guru said, I wasn't equating the HD800 to the iBuds - quite the opposite if you reread my comment.  I'm basically laying out a heirarchy in terms of grain, with iBuds, etc being at the bottom and the HD800 being closer to the top but still not grain free.  If planars gloss over grain of upstream equipment, then that must mean ibuds etc are the masters of revealing this isue with upstream gear.  Seems more like you're listening to the HD800 and attributing any metrits to the HP while blaming anything wrong on the rest of the chain though.

And this comment, which I'm sure you see as clarifying, is still basically unhelpful, because none of know with any precision what you're describing when you use the word "grain."

Which means it's impossible to know what you're hearing that you find objectionable, or to know whether we're hearing it too.

 If you want to pontificate, that's fine.  If you want to communicate, that would be much better.

By 'grain' I'm talking about this kind of hash over the sound, though I guess that isn't helpful.  I don't think it's your typical distortion...it's like a small lack of clarity but not what one would describe as veil either.  I hear it more in dynamic headphones and IEMs than in most planar HPs, speakers and the real world.  I think it's linked to clarity but not the same thing - for example I don't think the LCD-2 is clear sounding but it's not grainy either.

Its kind of hard to put into words.For me grain is a certain coarseness of texture.A lack of smoothness and clarity across the band, not the kind that's due to glossin g over of details but the kind that you appreciate in a good tube amp, a well calibrated vinyl rig or a nice r2r DAC.

(smoothness that is )

i'm of the opinion that the 'ethereal'/'smoothed-over' quality of stats is mainly a get-out-of-the-way neutrality. by comparison dynamics and some planars sound encumbered. i'm not sure if i would call this grain, but that's a relative term. stats still allow texture through despite not having the physicality of the others. i can see dynamics as being thought of as more natural in some circumstances, since the fairly neutral low-distortion specimens have that very relaxing quality at the cost of decreased instrument separation (thinking hd600). the 800 is an odd duck, if eq'ed to neutral then it has a lot of the qualities of a stat.

good orthos offer the best of both worlds until you get to like ~4khz & up

detail retrieval/plankton-wise the best specimens of the three techs sound surprisingly close, closer than most impressions would indicate. the differences are in the presentation of these details, where dynamics typically squash them too close to the 'macro' sounds. part of this has to do with the tonal balance of the dynamics, which messes up the sense of proportion. orthos can have a more neutral (or at least smooth-slope) response than stats and don't have any dynamic compression to speak of when driven well, but it's tought to get good headstage (left to righ continuum, depth, etc.)

The only part I disagree with is the "less grain = higher fidelity". Ethereal or smoothed over quality of stats is not part of their neutrality, it's a coloration in the opposite direction

And this LCD3 i have on hand is definitely grainy.

I should make a little drawing. HD800 would be 2 ticks away from correct grain amount. SR009 (and most other stats I've heard) would be 3 ticks away but in the opposite direction

Never said that less grain was equivalent to higher fidelity.Fidelity needs a host of other things to get right before we come to grain. But ya, if all else was equal and we had two headphones equal in terms of fr,plankton retrieval , dynamics etc then I am always going to lean towards the one having lesser 'grain'

 Also, most orthos have grain in treble region but they are usually quite smooth in bass/mids region. The He-400 being a notable exception as it was grainy throughout.We had a discussion back in the day when RD started a thread on treble grain of orthos.

Even OJ suggests it's inherently grainy.

I don't have much experience with high end stats but in general I would agree with the assessment that less capable drivers tend to have higher grain

Inherently grainy to an ever so slight extent. As I said in the shoutbox, the Stax go in the other direction. Pick your poision.

To respond to gurub, no you didn't explicitly say that less grain was equivalent to higher fidelity but you did imply it:

Therein implying that the HD800 is less capable than the Stax because it (allegedly) adds a slight grain

FWIW I find the HD800 to be more spatially (soundstage, imaging, etc) capable than any other headphone I've listened to. Now that I think of it, it's not even close. The HD800 blows everything away in this regard. Most agree (I think even n3rdling mentioned this) on this point due to the unique enclosure design.

Certain others believe that the HD800 is also more resolution (microdetail, microdynamics, plankton, low-level ambiance, etc) capable than stats like the SR009. For me it's a toss up. Things will probably be dominated by quality of upstream components. Only resolution whores will pine over this. As I said before, it's not the (allegedly) marginally less resolution, but rather the other qualities that destroy any desire for me to live with the Stax sound.

Falling into the "less grain" trap is easy because most entry headphones have an obvious grain (or something similar). We all heard this in the cheapo comparison last Saturday. Once you start moving up the chain you start getting a more refined sound that doesn't have obvious colorations like "grain", cupped-hands coloration, annoying bass distortion, and other glaring problems. Then you get to the Stax level which seem to (allegedly) subtract that grain away and you might think "it's teh hi-est f1deliteee evar!!!". Not the case in my view. It's simply a coloration in the other direction. Other headphones can do the same thing just like other headphones can add grain.