CHANGSTAR: Audiophile Headphone Reviews and Early 90s Style BBS
Lobby => Headphone, IEM, and Other Audio Related Discussion => Topic started by: hucifer on March 31, 2015, 06:05:23 PM
-
Anyone at CanJam get a good enough listen on these babies to give their feelings on them?
I've been gently following their progress for the last six months or so and have heard reports from their latest public outing that they sound something akin to a HD600 & HD800 love child, which makes me giddy indeed.
Would love to hear other opinions, if available.
-
I've heard the final prototype at my job in a silent room on a decent but not extraordinary amp and it was really good. It's a very romantic sound, and it destroys the hd650. It's very very good for the price, but it's not hd800 on tube amp good. It's good with any style of music, i would say that it is lush, smooth, and the openness is somewhere between the hd650 and hd800. It's good on an iPod/ipad, but i would recommend an amp to hear the full potential. It's the best sub 1000$ headphone i've heard. I think the lcd2 would be better though.
-
There are impressions in the CanJam thread if you scroll through it. I was only able to hear it off of Audioquests demo rig (WA7/WA7tp sourced by a Dragonfly 1.2), and it was awful - very colored and muddy. Level 40 pyrates got access to a sample, ran it off of Marv's rig, and seemed much happier with it. I was told that despite being colored, the technicalities were decent. I can say with absolute certainty that it sounds nothing like an HD600/HD800 love child, nor like the HD650, all of which are more neutral/linear based on the sample I heard...definitely their own thing.
-
Thanks guys. Having read your thoughts and some from Reddit users it's looking like the colouration might make these a love it or hate it type of deal.
My level of hype has been brought down to earth somewhat but I still look forward to trying them out as part of my quest to find a true successor to my HD600.
-
The current tuning is more for the general populace than audiophile. Recommend a neutral or leaner setup. Resolution wasn't the greatest, but I thought it was sweet sounding from the EC 2A3 custom / Yggy. But then again, a lot of stuff sounds great from that setup.
-
Over beers and delicious house made Russian vodka Anetode told me he fucking hated the lack of detail if you're looking for an alternate opinion.
-
I had the same impression, it's coloured and very different from the hd600. Depends on your taste.
-
Wouldn't settle on any one opinion yet, Skyler will be retuning before the production run.
I found the current rev moderately muffled sounding, something somewhere in the treble is gone missing.
-
Wouldn't settle on any one opinion yet, Skyler will be retuning before the production run.
I found the current rev moderately muffled sounding, something somewhere in the treble is gone missing.
I believe there will be no further changes from the current model, I asked Skyler about any sonic changes and he said it's pretty much done, aesthetic changes only at this point. But then, plans can change all the time.
-
Really light and cool looking headphone with a sound designed to lull unsuspecting audiophiles into a coma.
Yes there are treble problems/gaps, but also the warmish lower mids & bass are a mired in a sludge. Slowness? Distortion? Something's fucky
-
I believe there will be no further changes from the current model, I asked Skyler about any sonic changes and he said it's pretty much done, aesthetic changes only at this point. But then, plans can change all the time.
That's not what he told me.
-
So, Tyll, there's hope? I like the way it looks
-
I think there is. Lot's of potential and they've placed it at a nice price. The tuning is close, just not close enough IMO. I think he might dial it in. Fingers crossed.
-
That's not what he told me.
Very glad to hear it. A little bit more brighter, it will be very damn perfect for the price it is asking.
-
I wonder how often this type of thing happens at a show:
pirate: "Sounds a bit thick and warm. You guys still working on the tuning?"
AQ: "Nah, tuning is final. We're just fixing a few cosmetic things before we ship."
Tyll: "Sounds a bit thick and warm. Nighthawk, as is, will be a tough sell and hard to recommend.
You guys still working on the tuning?"
AQ: "Oh yeah, the tuning is in flux. We're definitely working on that before we ship."
-
I wonder how often this type of thing happens at a show:
pirate: "Sounds a bit thick and warm. You guys still working on the tuning?"
AQ: "Nah, tuning is final. We're just fixing a few cosmetic things before we ship."
Tyll: "Sounds a bit thick and warm. Nighthawk, as is, will be a tough sell and hard to recommend.
You guys still working on the tuning?"
AQ: "Oh yeah, the tuning is in flux. We're definitely working on that before we ship."
Reminds me of my El8 conversation at CES. That obviously went over well....
-
Reminds me of my El8 conversation at CES. That obviously went over well....
I wonder how often this type of thing happens at a show:
pirate: "Sounds a bit thick and warm. You guys still working on the tuning?"
AQ: "Nah, tuning is final. We're just fixing a few cosmetic things before we ship."
Tyll: "Sounds a bit thick and warm. Nighthawk, as is, will be a tough sell and hard to recommend.
You guys still working on the tuning?"
AQ: "Oh yeah, the tuning is in flux. We're definitely working on that before we ship."
Yeah....I find myself in a pretty weird position at times.
-
Reminds me of my El8 conversation at CES. That obviously went over well....
Anax, did you put down your thoughts on the EL8 after CES? I am not able to find them.
-
There is a lot of potential with the Nighthawk. I hope they tune it more toward the ear of experienced listeners.
-
Anyone at CanJam get a good enough listen on these babies to give their feelings on them?
I've been gently following their progress for the last six months or so and have heard reports from their latest public outing that they sound something akin to a HD600 & HD800 love child, which makes me giddy indeed.
Would love to hear other opinions, if available.
you should slap whoever told you that for lying to you the nighthawk sounds nothing like that. here is my impressions from canjam thread:
it was the most comfortable headphone I ever used and the best looking but as for the sound?
I dont know why people keep saying that the nighthawk is a step up from the hd650, the tremble is still there it doesn't fade away. The bass is so strong that it kind of hides the mids and the highs so that every now and again it peaks thru kind of like a kidnapped person screams. I keep telling people that it felt like the sound wave was inversed the bass hit you first, then the mids, and finaly the tremble. And this was out of a hugo. Hugos aren't know for their strong bass.
Its a shame when the tremble and mids did peek thru they were pretty good, if they fixed it I wouldn' just recomend the headphone I'd buy it day 1.
I keep looking at there internals and I think if they get rid if the bass port covers, take out the rubber, and added more foam. it might work.
I wasn't lying I would really like to buy these but as they are its a waste of money. I hope Tyll is right.
-
Anax, did you put down your thoughts on the EL8 after CES? I am not able to find them.
Canjam thread, page or two back. At CES I just told Sankar my thoughts and felt they should look into damping the cups. Obviously didn't happen per Canjam impressions.
-
Has anyone here had a chance to listen to the production version?
-
Has anyone here had a chance to listen to the production version?
Heard it out of Concero HP, thought it was defeated by Audio Technica M70x
-
Heard it out of Concero HP, thought it was defeated by Audio Technica M70x
On the one hand, that's too bad. I'm interested in this can. On the other hand, I can save the money. Saving money isn't bad.
-
On the one hand, that's too bad. I'm interested in this can. On the other hand, I can save the money. Saving money isn't bad.
I think I need to clarify things a bit.
I heard the production unit in a rather private setting about two months ago (so count my failing memory) - in a local hifi shop with the owner, a rep from Audioquest, and another guest. Kind of like an informal Nighthawk Canada debut listening session. Their original setting was JRiver - some sort of Audioquest USB filtering device prototype (just the chip, without even a casing. The rep said it's inspired by Schiit Wyrd), Dragonfly 2.0. I was not famaliar with the setting so I switched to Concero HP with materials that I'm familiar with.
Very comfortable! Dark and warm. Made me think this is the kind of sound sig that caters to the general population than say it's aiming to be neutral. It's colored but without distinctive characteristics. Fairly good soundstage depth but maybe lacking height. Kind of OK clarity. No comments on plankton since the rep was hyping about cables allllllll the time. I also recall the rep said the cable of NH was constructed with the same geometry of one of Audioquest's higher end cable that the cable of NH was ~200 CAD (given the NH retails for 700 CAD).
-
Got these to test cable fit. On the plus side, they fit the Eidolic 2.5mm mono plugs if anyone wishes to re-cable them. On the not so plus side, they sound like dog shit. Ridiculously dark and thick and echoey.
-
I think I need to clarify things a bit.
I heard the production unit in a rather private setting about two months ago (so count my failing memory) - in a local hifi shop with the owner, a rep from Audioquest, and another guest. Kind of like an informal Nighthawk Canada debut listening session. Their original setting was JRiver - some sort of Audioquest USB filtering device prototype (just the chip, without even a casing. The rep said it's inspired by Schiit Wyrd), Dragonfly 2.0. I was not famaliar with the setting so I switched to Concero HP with materials that I'm familiar with.
Very comfortable! Dark and warm. Made me think this is the kind of sound sig that caters to the general population than say it's aiming to be neutral. It's colored but without distinctive characteristics. Fairly good soundstage depth but maybe lacking height. Kind of OK clarity. No comments on plankton since the rep was hyping about cables allllllll the time. I also recall the rep said the cable of NH was constructed with the same geometry of one of Audioquest's higher end cable that the cable of NH was ~200 CAD (given the NH retails for 700 CAD).
Thanks for the follow-up. I've been looking for a general, all-purpose, casual listening headphone that I can use at my computer, on the couch or in bed with my iPhone, etc. The comfort and sensitivity looked right. If the sound isn't there, however, especially if it's lacking in clarity, then the headphone will probably frustrate me. The lack of clarity is what killed the Z7 for me. The comfort was certainly there, build quality too. But the sometimes muffled, veiled sound practically compelled me to cut the crap and do some serious listening on other headphones. That defeats the purpose of a headphone that supposed to fill the gaps between serious listening sessions. I think that because the Z7 was almost there as a decently serious headphone, it was ill-suited for casual listening. Its flaws were made more obvious by what it did well.
-
I'm a Z7 fan. These make Z7 sound like unmodded HD800
-
rumor has it that audioquest is planning to release different pads that are supposed to make these less dark (lets more tremble thru). will test again then because as i said these are confortable and pretty.
-
Pulling an Oppo I see. You can pop the bottom peg of the pad out from the baffle to reduce the bass, but it just makes a screwy headphone sounds screwier. It needs a total re-tune just to rise to the level of being a tolerable lower-mid-fi dynamic.
-
I'm a Z7 fan. These make Z7 sound like unmodded HD800
Too bad. I was hoping for a more comfortable version of the HD650...
-
I'm going to pop down my local audio store soon to give these a go.
There's been some conflicting impressions but the majority are saying these are on the darker, lusher side. Some have even been saying these are very detailed. That conflicts a bit as detailed headphones are usually on the neutral to bright side.
I think the problem Audioquest may face is that there's already a reliable lush sounding headphone, the HD650; which is half the price and already competes with headphones like the HE-500.
Then when the new pads come out, you already have the X2 at £230 which is less than half the price and does everything right with zero trade offs. It's a tough sale and I can personally see these coming down in price pretty quickly.
-
I'm going to pop down my local audio store soon to give these a go.
There's been some conflicting impressions but the majority are saying these are on the darker, lusher side. Some have even been saying these are very detailed. That conflicts a bit as detailed headphones are usually on the neutral to bright side.
I think the problem Audioquest may face is that there's already a reliable lush sounding headphone, the HD650; which is half the price and already competes with headphones like the HE-500.
Then when the new pads come out, you already have the X2 at £230 which is less than half the price and does everything right with zero trade offs. It's a tough sale and I can personally see these coming down in price pretty quickly.
Bright doesn't equall detailed. True that many headphones attempt to give a laib back sound by reducing the drivers response to higher frequencies, high frequencies are not solely responsible for detail.
The hd650 can get you some good detail from the right setup. The Nighthawk has strong bass but is still has good detail. The only problem is that the bass overwhelms the rest of the audio range in a distracting manner.
My theory is that this is due to the rubber enclosure around the driver itself.
-
Bright headphones actually are, in general more detailed. Bright is simply the opposition of dark. It is a headphone geared towards the high frequencies which show more detail. Show me one bright headphone in it's price range that isn't a detail monster..
I wouldn't really call the HD650 dark to be honest. It's warm, lush sounding. Of course if a setup has enough power and the opposit sound signature it will slightly change the sound.
-
Closed back el-8 bright and pointless
-
I was thinking more along the lines of open backs but I agree, the headphone sucks.
-
Just to clarify what would you define as dark?
-
Dark implies a headphone where the treble is the weakest aspect of the sound i.e LCD-2 pre fazor. So basically linear bass to mids with a rolled off treble as an example.
These types of headphones are never the top pick for anyone looking for detail. The Q701 is a good example of a detailed headphone, it's fairly linear with a bright sound. If it was linear and had a neutral sound or a dark sound, it wouldn't have the detail that it has. The trade off though, it's not going to sound natural or smooth although, some like that sound.
I'm not saying a warm or darker headphone can't have good detail at all. The LCD-2 and HD650 have a super focus in the mids due to it's lack of treble focus. What I meant is brighter headphones will always almost be able to sound more detailed of course, there's exceptions like the DT990 that has a huge mid-bass hump which can affect how immediate we see the detail so it also depends on other factors.
As a headphone gamer, this has been very important in my previous headphone journey so obviously I've had to gain this information by tests.
Very Best
-
The LCD-2.2 (pre-fazor) has been my reference for awhile now. FWIW, from my listenings, I've thought that the resolution of detail on the LCD-2.2 equals or exceeds every other headphone I've heard save the HD800. This holds for the resolution of treble detail in particular. Maybe I have an top-notch token LCD-2.2; maybe I'm massively deceived. But the LCD-2.2 isn't a bright headphone.
-
@musical_element
Oh ok. When I say something is dark I usually mean bass that ovepowers the mids and highs regardless of their accuracy. For warm I usually think of bloom in the bass that doesn't over power the rest of the audible band.
-
The LCD-2.2 (pre-fazor) has been my reference for awhile now. FWIW, from my listenings, I've thought that the resolution of detail on the LCD-2.2 equals or exceeds every other headphone I've heard save the HD800. This holds for the resolution of treble detail in particular. Maybe I have an top-notch token LCD-2.2; maybe I'm massively deceived. But the LCD-2.2 isn't a bright headphone.
I heard bills lcd2 at canjam and it was pretty good in detail
-
Dark implies a headphone where the treble is the weakest aspect of the sound i.e LCD-2 pre fazor. So basically linear bass to mids with a rolled off treble as an example.
These types of headphones are never the top pick for anyone looking for detail. The Q701 is a good example of a detailed headphone, it's fairly linear with a bright sound. If it was linear and had a neutral sound or a dark sound, it wouldn't have the detail that it has. The trade off though, it's not going to sound natural or smooth although, some like that sound.
I'm not saying a warm or darker headphone can't have good detail at all. The LCD-2 and HD650 have a super focus in the mids due to it's lack of treble focus. What I meant is brighter headphones will always almost be able to sound more detailed of course, there's exceptions like the DT990 that has a huge mid-bass hump which can affect how immediate we see the detail so it also depends on other factors.
As a headphone gamer, this has been very important in my previous headphone journey so obviously I've had to gain this information by tests.
Very Best
I find the HD600 and 650 able to provide more detail than something like a Q701. The problem I find with the likes of a Q701 is that some aspects of the treble come forth at the expense of other aspects of the same treble. The 650 may not bring certain things to focus like the Q701, but it does not throw away some others like the AKG does. The Q701 also sound a little more synthetic to me.
IMO the DT990 does not present a huge mid-bass hump. It brings forth a huge and painful treble which I could not stand. I would pick a Q701 over a DT990 any day for this reason. Fixable or not, a stock DT990 is a mistake.
So the NightHawk is a bit bass heavy but nice and smooth every were else? Any issues with edginess?
-
It really can depend. A headphone that has a mid-bass hump like the DT990 or PRO900 could be said to be warm based on that but due to their treble, very metallic and cold sounding doesn't make the headphone sound warm at all. They sound cold and harsh. I usually call headphones warm that actually sound warm, this is always a smooth treble and mid-bass combination.
-
The DT990 has one of, if not the biggest mid-bass humps out of any headphone. I know what you mean though, it's treble spike is so overpowering and that gives it that cold, shrill sound..just ewww.
The Q701 is certainly more detailed but the HD650/600 are an easy listen and they certainly sound more natural. I don't doubt the Q701 is more synthetic so to speak but it's detail whoring nature is a standout. I use them for gaming mostly as they are great are positional ques, almost on par with the AD700X.
I'm going to listen to the hawks tomorrow so I'll give impressions asap.
-
I think an M50 and headphones with similar signature have more mid-bass hump than the DT-990. It didn't bother me that much. The treble was literaly ear numbing though.
As far as the HD650 vs Q701, the 650 to me it's more detailed. This can be asessed when listening to live recordings with plenty of background and venue dependent signature. The Q701 tends to color those. For gaming, it proly depends on how things were encoded and what one is used to.
-
The DT990 has one of, if not the biggest mid-bass humps out of any headphone. I know what you mean though, it's treble spike is so overpowering and that gives it that cold, shrill sound..just ewww.
The Q701 is certainly more detailed but the HD650/600 are an easy listen and they certainly sound more natural. I don't doubt the Q701 is more synthetic so to speak but it's detail whoring nature is a standout. I use them for gaming mostly as they are great are positional ques, almost on par with the AD700X.
I'm going to listen to the hawks tomorrow so I'll give impressions asap.
BTW, be aware that you don't have to agree with me in what I say or think at all. You don't have to like HD6x0 to fit here AFAIK. It is true however, that many folks around here think highly of the HD6x0, HD800, KSC-75s and other stuff. Someothers are declared Stax whores and that alright too.
What I feel I can say based from your comments is that if you think the HD6x0 are sort of dark in signature, perhaps you might want to consider HD800s which maybe better at retreiving detail (vs the Q701) w/o some of what many consider shortcommings in the Q701. The Q701 is however much more affordable @ $200 a pop and is not a bad headphone IMO, unlike the DT-990 which you can probably guess I dislike a fair bit. I can see it being a great choice for gaming as well.
The nighthawk seems a bit pricier, but it does look intersting. Just found out it also uses a 3-D printed cup:
http://www.crutchfield.com/p_703NHTHAWK/AudioQuest-NightHawk.html?tp=60828&awkw=135832351945&awat=pla&awnw=g&awcr=72581587105&awdv=c
-
In the CES interview with Skylar, Tyll described the treble as "wonderfully articulate", although he said he was withholding final judgment until he's able to measure them and to give them a serious listen. I don't know what tuning iteration that was. I'm holding out hope these aren't finally woefully dark and lacking in detail.
-
I think the HD650 are warm but they can sing at top so I wouldn't call them dark.
I don't like bright headphones for music, I prefer slightly warmer than neutral. I've owned the HD800 and it's too lean and dry for my taste. For gaming the only thing I noticed over the AKG's was that it had a bit better depth and more sub bass but other than that; soundstage width was maybe slightly in the Q's favour but both close. I couldn't really justify the price for a gaming headphone so sold it. I would of kept the Audeze LCD-2 but it was again, hard to justify the price.
I agree with some of your points. I think before the X2 came out, the HD600 series was the best value.
-
K812 was bright as hell and detailed as ass. In that it wasn't detailed. Just ass. You can have dark and detailed. Best thing to have, IME, is a smooth response (dark, bright, or neutral) with low distortion and quick decay. Plus some other magical elements that may be impossible to measure. AKG K7XX was nowhere near as detailed as the HD650 from a good DAC and amp even though it was technically brighter. Just had a weird FR up top and wasn't the most technically competent even when not considering FR.
-
No one said you can't have a detailed warm headphone. The point was a brighter headphone without a warm hump is generally better are more immediate detail than say a warm/lush headphone. My HE-500 was kind of slightly warm with an extension up top yet it wasn't as obviously detailed as say a Q701.
I also didn't like the K812. That headphone flopped hard IMO.
-
Usually brighter sounds more like false detail to me, especially when you get a bumpy or ragged upper-end response (ala K812 or K701/2 family to a much lesser extent). But, hey, I ain't got a problem if you hear things differently. There are smooth and not-at-all detailed headphones too.
-
No one said you can't have a detailed warm headphone. The point was a brighter headphone without a warm hump is generally better are more immediate detail than say a warm/lush headphone. My HE-500 was kind of slightly warm with an extension up top yet it wasn't as obviously detailed as say a Q701.
I also didn't like the K812. That headphone flopped hard IMO.
In your first post you stated "There's been some conflicting impressions but the majority are saying these are on the darker, lusher side. Some have even been saying these are very detailed. That conflicts a bit as detailed headphones are usually on the neutral to bright side." The putative conflict, I take it, is between darkness and detail. If neutrality or brightness "usually" correlate with detail retrieval, and darkness apparently precludes detail retrieval, then it would be natural to understand you as having initially claimed that you can't have a detailed dark headphone. I think people - myself included - are pointing out counterexamples to that claim. As well as pointing out that brightness or neutrality doesn't suffice for detail retrieval.
-
I completely agree that it is false detail. That's why I never listen to them for music. I actually think the HD600 and X2 are among the most natural sounding headphones I've heard.
To the other guy, I stated that people mentioned these were lush and dark. Lush is a very thick, bloomey sound that will never be associated with detail.
-
When I think "lush", I think thick, full-bodied sound. There's no reason a headphone that's considered lush can't also be considered detailed, unless we're going to fix our terms so that "lush" excludes detail. But that strikes me as a bit ad hoc. It would seem that, going by ordinary usage, what lushness excludes is (perhaps, excessive) separation. You can have a signature lacking in separation but not lacking in detail. It might be the case that it is more difficult to appreciate individual details when they're close together, but that doesn't entail that they aren't there. But claiming that lushness "will never be associated with detail" strains belief.
-
Since I started my journey lush has always been a thick slow sound. Quicker headphones go hand in hand with more dryer and leaner sounding headphones which is the opposit of Lusher and slower. It's kind of like saying I want a HD650 midrange and upfrobt vocals with a Q701 soundstage.. Not going to happen. It's also like saying I want a headphone to be as competitive as the AD700 in gaming but with a nice full sound..again not gonna happen. What do you think makes a lush sound? It's a rolled off treble with a mid bass hump. That's what makes a full sound. That type of sound isn't going to be a detailed headphone..yes of course it can show up detail and when you adapt to that sound you will pick up detail but moving to let's say a AD900x detail will sound more obvious and so will micro detail because it's dry and doesn't have that rolled off, mid bass bloom.
-
Say, thanks for explaining that to me.
-
I'll try to go to the local hifi shop this weekend to give the NH another shot. Double checking ain't gonna be bad.
-
Lush is unconditionally full fundamentals with every frequency after tilted down or equal. Midbass hump optional--lcd 3/2 vs HD650.
Zero tilt gives you varying degrees of neutrality, depending where it rolls off. Any bump or rise is false, distracting, ear-hurting detail. Including bass bumps. A recession somewhere in the middle of the FR ( he 560) or a bump anywhere from high mids up (HD800) will lend to an analytical or cold sound.
Veiled/congested/warm is when the tilt is too fast. M80. Sometimes HD650.
As you extend from the mids, and have reasonably low distortion, the soundstage opens up. I can hear bass decay and its soundstage, since the fundamentals are well presented. From treble I can hear breathing in voices and distance from the microphone. Not ouch siblance. Siblance like the difference between a normal voice and whispering and sighing. Pleasurable. Dynamics and timbral density increase as well, as you can now hear more of the FR given flat areas now have the same dB range to use.
Lush is the starting point for listenability because its the most common, basic source of audio emotion: Voices.
Flat from end to end with roll off one or two dB (edit: via physical damping, no eq) is where magic happens. First octave of thunderous, non vomiting bass. Last octave of tactile treble. Not to say nothing of attack, distortion, and decay. But on the way to end to end neutrality, those things are partly solved.
-
I'll try to go to the local hifi shop this weekend to give the NH another shot. Double checking ain't gonna be bad.
What was your first issue with them?
-
What was your first issue with them?
Nothing of it was outstanding to me. At 700 CAD I'm expecting some redeemable quality. Otherwise it's another great $200 headphone. Sounding OK + luxury materials&designs&big brand name ain't gonna justify such a premium price. I'm not interested in paying $700 for sub-HD650-level drivers enclosed in carefully-selected wood housing with titanium headband wrapped in a CNC-machined aluminm case. This is just painfully stupid.
As HD650 can be had at around 350 CAD used/500 all new (DT880 for 100 less), the NH must have something outclassing HD650 by a considerable margin to claim its price point. Say TH900 bass. Say the euphonics of low-end STAX. Beyond the price point of HD650, in terms of full-size cans, by far I've yet to be impressed aside from TH900, HD800 and STAX 2170.
-
I get that with a lot of headphones. The £200-700 price point is just full of flavours and not really any upgrades overall.
-
Hey there seems to be some confusion on terminology we have a thread for it here
http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,2468.msg68830.html#msg68830
-
OK I've got back an the impressions of NH just got worse.
1. There's definitely a strange dip somewhere in the upper midrange, which makes female voice almost unlistenable;
2. The NH isn't very revealing of source quality, which is a bad thing in my book;
3. It echoes and doesn't have a sense of air of open-back headphones
-
Boy, it sure would be nice if the marketing people at Audioquest could organize a NightHawk loaner to send around to some of the more experienced SoCal pyrates. It would be so easy given the proximity! I think that could clarify the somewhat mixed impressions that are out there on the internet. I for one am excited to sit down with the Nighthawk in my own listening environment and be able to run it through the gauntlet.
popcorn if you agree
-
Boy, it sure would be nice if the marketing people at Audioquest could organize a NightHawk loaner to send around to some of the more experienced SoCal pyrates. It would be so easy given the proximity! I think that could clarify the somewhat mixed impressions that are out there on the internet. I for one am excited to sit down with the Nighthawk in my own listening environment and be able to run it through the gauntlet.
popcorn if you agree
popcorn
-
I had a very brief listen at my local headphone store.
I wasn't very impressed. It sounded quite lush and somewhat congested. I couldn't imagine buying it over say the Shure SRH1540, which has a somewhat similar tonality but with a less confused midrange. It also had a weird adjustment mechanism that felt like it was constantly pulling 'up' on my head. Fresh out of the box though.
-
I probably shouldn't be involved in the loaner I'd want to test my theory the the sonic imperfections are due to the rubber enclosure around the driver. I think it's causing inflections and distorts the bass.
-
Did they ever tweak it to have less bass? I believe a few people here, including Tyll, had mentioned to Skylar directly that the NightHawk had too much bass / warmth that intruded into the mids.
What I heard had some serious potential.
-
Still didn't get to hear these. The impressions are still all over the place. Some say lush and thick and others say detailed and natural. Will definitely have to try these. One aspect that seems common in peoples impressions is they upper mids seem recessed.
-
They did appear to have different synergy with different amps.
-
I couldn't imagine buying it over say the Shure SRH1540, which has a somewhat similar tonality but with a less confused midrange.
Hmm, 1540 sounded kinda confused and low-fi to me. Just lacked clarity and refinement even when not considering the FR. So, if the NightHawk is worse in that regard...I dunno, would still be curious to try and maybe mod.
-
Hmm, 1540 sounded kinda confused and low-fi to me. Just lacked clarity and refinement even when not considering the FR. So, if the NightHawk is worse in that regard...I dunno, would still be curious to try and maybe mod.
Yeah from my brief listen it was much more refined and hi-fi than any full-sized Shure I've heard. I think Lachlan might be confusing tonal issues with technical qualities. Good thing we're working on a thread to clear that up :D :
http://www.changstar.com/index.php/topic,2468.msg68724.html#msg68724
-
Some say lush and thick and others say detailed and natural.
It's both as they are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Get rid of that excess bass and warmth that intrudes to the mids, and might have something wonderful.
-
Interesting stuff
http://personal.audioquest.com/nighthawk-measurements
-
Interesting stuff
http://personal.audioquest.com/nighthawk-measurements
Yeah man, incredibly interesting stuff even if you don't care about the Nighthawk at all. Huge props to AudioQuest for putting together such a comprehensive website explaining how they arrived at the Nighthawk. Does it mean you'll like them? Nope, but it does explain everything about them.
I have a loaner set right now that is almost fully burned in. They are very smooth and cause absolutely no fatigue. I enjoy listening to some genres tremendously on them (classical and jazz in particular). They aren't as fun as my Fostex TH600s, but I can wear them forever. Would I buy them at $600? Tough call. I'd definitely buy them at $400, but I'm still forming impressions of them and I don't know if I'd go full retail on them just yet.
-
Did they say what "flagship" headphone they're comparing it to?
-
Interesting stuff
http://personal.audioquest.com/nighthawk-measurements
I'm not reading all that summarize it in one word
-
I'm not reading all that summarize it in one word
"Interesting."
-
Thank you.
-
Terrible and ugly are the two words that come to mind
-
I'm not reading all that summarize it in one word
Actually, this is worth discussing at Headphone Measurements section of this forum. Basically, these guys choose a way that similar to Audeze went; essentially a flat-response disregarding DF nor FF. I will make a new thread now...
-
I got my headphone from bay bloor radio in toronto (http://https://baybloorradio.com/headphones/over-ear/nighthawkheadphone from bay bloor radio in toronto). They are very light and comfortable.I think they are extremely balanced , warm with a very rich and detailed sound reproduction. I didn't want to take them off my head. They were very light on the noggin and so comfortable. One could easily wear these for a very long listening session without any discomfort.
-
I hope some other manufactures use the liquid wood thingymajjiger, it's pretty cool. walk the plank2
-
while I didn't find these horrible, they aren't too impressive either...
a little congested, too much warmth from bass bleed etc etc.
upper mids lacking too much for my tastes.
however worth mentioning is positioning for these are very important.
just moving them a little too much to the back of your head will change the sound a lot. clarity and such while not great in any position is greatly improved when you find the right spot.
-
Golden Ears has AudioQuest Nighthawk measurements up:
http://ko.goldenears.net/board/5772639
I took the liberty of making a gif comparing their measurements to AudioQuest's. I stretched their plot to match:
http://gph.is/1iuJp4V
-
Wow, that is some fat bass!
-
Yeah, that 200-500hz bump is pretty 'speshal'.
-
I'm glad a second source isn't showing a 15dB dip at 1kHz. People kept using a couple of horrible graphs as ammunition.
-
I took the liberty of making a gif comparing their measurements to AudioQuest's. I stretched their plot to match:
http://gph.is/1iuJp4V
neat ... looks like the measurements are rather closely the same.
When looking at those GE plots I know I can remove them from my 'to audition when I see them' list.
These are definitely not headphones for me.
The AQ plots suggest it is quite position sensitive as well.
Below the plots of the Denon AH-D600 as measured by GE.
(http://i837.photobucket.com/albums/zz296/solderdude/AH-D600_zpsbea05aae.png) (http://s837.photobucket.com/user/solderdude/media/AH-D600_zpsbea05aae.png.html)
There is some resemblance in the bass response... looks like the AQ drivers do not only look exactly like the Denon drivers they measure similar as well.
Own 'design' ?
-
I wouldn't say the Denon AH-D600 sounds even remotely similar to the Nighthawk (I've owned both).
The Denon has less upper bass (they did a good thing dropping at 25Hz). It also dips at the heart of the mids, and the Nighthawk doesn't.
If the AH-D600 didn't dip there in the mids, I would have really liked them, to be honest. With the Nighthawk, if they didn't bloat in the upper bass, I would like them a lot more.
If you were to combine these two headphones and make them fit on my giant ears, I'd love them. The closest to that is the Fostex TH600/TH900 with the piercing 5500Hz peak that I want to bug you about so I can put together a notch filter in a cable.
(http://i837.photobucket.com/albums/zz296/solderdude/AH-D600_zpsbea05aae.png)
(http://cdn.head-fi.org/5/5a/900x900px-LL-5a76ea4e_5b914a417fd53d56a7d21ae68927e028.png)
-
Well, they are biocellulose fwiw.
-
I got a Nighthawk after seeing all the hype about them. Can't say I'm that impressed, sure it's a nice to listen to headphone: smooth, warm and inoffensive. But I don't find it particularly special, it doesn't really seduce me and I'd call it mid fi at most. And don't even get me started on its looks 8)
-
I like the looks and ergonomics but the the sound poo
To each their own I guess
-
As always...would be curious how they respond to mods...Personally, I find it easier to bring a thick, warm, smooth headphone up to where it needs to be tonally compared to a bright one (yes, exceptions to be found everywhere, just a broad generalization).
-
From the info they posted it sounds to me that the problem is in the driver not the housing. Ofcourse I could be wrong so go for it hanz
-
Yeah, maybe. I just have to imagine there's some way it can be modded to change the tuning. I ain't dropping the money on it to try.